WPUK have released a financial statement showing money received by source and how it is spent

Quite.
So why on earth did you invite us to make the comparison between the 3 year old WPUK (whose figures we can all see) and the 25 year old Mermaids, (whose figures for the first 20 years We cannot see)?

You make no sense, JJ.

Show us the Mermaids receipts from 1995-2016? Or are you just gonna keep on pulling ‘facts’ from your own arse?

Well thats not possible it it because the Charity Commission have removed the records. There is this, I think the figure would refer to their last accounting period prior to becoming a CIO, so 2014/15.

In 2016 Mermaids total income was about £80k, it much much less in the years preceding that. I don't even think they had any paid staff.

2016 was Mermaids 21st year.
And the time period you specifically referenced was end of 2018, by which time they were up to over 300k and had a very public CEO.

Grasping at straws of misinformation, rearranging goalposts as though they were a vase of flowers.

Hilarious.

Show us the Mermaids receipts from 1995-2016? Or are you just gonna keep on pulling ‘facts’ from your own arse?

The rules around financial reporting for charities has become much more onerous in recent years. One social enterprise I helped setup looked into it and the cost to get the accounts prepared and audited appropriately for charitable status would have wiped out our income so we didn’t go ahead as it wasn’t a good use of member contributions. We’ll revisit it if we grow sufficiently.

Many older Charities were able to set up as charities at an earlier stage in their development not WPUK when requirements were less costly.

In 2016 Mermaids total income was about £80k, it much much less in the years preceding that. I don't even think they had any paid staff.

I might buy some Lush bath bombs as stocking fillers purely because David Paisley hates them now

Seriously has it taken you all day to come up with this? You really could have out a bit more effort in

You seem to miss the point entirely, JJ, so I will spell it out for you.

We don’t know what Mermaids early days turnover was because it wasn’t published prior to 2015, when they became a CIO.

Whereas WPUK have published their figures, even though they aren’t obliged to.

It was you who bought Mermaids up to make a comparison, JJ, not me.

If you can point us towards the evidence of Mermaids turnover prior to 2015, please feel free to share. I’m sure everyone here would love to learn more about the organisation prior to Green becoming CEO in 2016.

Your claim that Mermaids had a similar turnover to WPUK before Glinner raised Mermaids profile is false, by the way. Mermaids had an income of over 300 grand in the tax year ending in Mar 2018, whereas the National lottery/HBomberguy hoo-ha didn’t happen until December 2018/January 2019.

[quote BettyDuKeiraBellisMyShero]Mermaids is 25 years old.

WPUK is 3 years old.

Mermaids became a charitable incorporated organisation in 2015, 20 years after it was founded.

Perhaps JJ has some allegations to make about those first 20 years of Mermiads, if the aim is to drag WPUK into disrepute by comparing it the two?

register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search?p_p_id=uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet&p_p_lifecycle=2&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_resource_id=%2Faccounts-resource&p_p_cacheability=cacheLevelPage&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_fileName=0001160575_AC_20160405_E_C.pdf&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_objectiveId=A8568963&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_mvcRenderCommandName=%2Faccounts-and-annual-returns&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_organisationNumber=5054976[/quote]
Mermaids have been a registered charity since 1999. In 2015 they re-registered as a Charitable Incorporated Organisation meaning they were only regulated by the Charity Commission not the commission and companies house. This is quite common when small charities begin trading.

It just means the groundless accusations of being funding by the far-right have turned into accusations of tax evasion.

On an unrelated note, reading this thread makes me feel so embarrassed that I used to be a TRA.

jj the Labour Party is also an unincorporated associated. Do you think they are a right wing cabal as well? Do you think they are unable to take or be subject to legal action too?

Mermaids is 25 years old.

WPUK is 3 years old.

Mermaids became a charitable incorporated organisation in 2015, 20 years after it was founded.

Perhaps JJ has some allegations to make about those first 20 years of Mermiads, if the aim is to drag WPUK into disrepute by comparing it the two?

register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-search?p_p_id=uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet&p_p_lifecycle=2&p_p_state=maximized&p_p_mode=view&p_p_resource_id=%2Faccounts-resource&p_p_cacheability=cacheLevelPage&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_fileName=0001160575_AC_20160405_E_C.pdf&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_objectiveId=A8568963&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_mvcRenderCommandName=%2Faccounts-and-annual-returns&_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_priv_r_p_organisationNumber=5054976

Mermaids are a registered charity, JJ. That’s why their accounts are published on the Charity Commission website. Prior to them registering as a charity (which is a significant exercise, many charitable organisations choose not to do so for that reason) Mermaids will have been a not for profit organisation just like WPUK are and subjected to the same scrutiny.

How many times have people on this thread said ring them, ask, report it? We're still on 'but its a bit fishy....'

Yes. You said. We know. Go deal with it!

Then report away. But just face facts that the far right nonsense has proven to be just that. Nonsense.

I'd get onto lush if I were you. But something tells me you'd rather scold women for not doing as they are told by men

This is like having Donald Trump on the thread - a deep hatred of women and determination to find fault - constantly moving the goalposts in a manner befitting someone who spends too much time online and lives in a fantasy land.

Photo of a bunch of flowers too maybe?

Please have a look at these flowers as a way to determine how really, literally, truly, literally, literally sorry we are that we had the nerve to spend our money as we saw fit, without first seeking the permission of our customers and staff.

I'm sure jj has had a really busy day examining the incomes of Stonewall and Mermaids etc. to make sure that there isn't anything as dodgy going on. For balance and all that.

I can imagine that would take a while.

If it helps, the kids each took a quid in for Children in Need some of which might have gone to Mermaids. So that's £2 accounted for. And I didn't even pay tax on that money because my part-time, minimum wage job means I don't earn enough to do so. I certainly can't afford to shop in Lush, anyway.

Of course! It probably takes a while.

"loaded"

Photo of a bunch of flowers too maybe?

I wonder when the snivelling apology will come, along with the donation to Sardines 🧜‍♀️ to prove how truly, truly sorry they are.

And need to know so they can return their already bought Christmas presents don’t’ch know 🤣