To be feel that some of the public have been mislead and a charity have lost out?

[JoanHickson]

I just had a look at Dax's tale of New York on facebook. I now see the £13k they promised of the publics money to Ronald Mcdonald House isn't going there now. They raised the money by advising the public, funds were to cover medical bills, then they were going to give to the charity.

slightly different story, but interesting anyway
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-32393208

"A charity that collected £50,000 for brain tumour patient Ashya King but refused to give the cash to his family has said it has refunded £360 of donations following seven requests."

dragon in that case I believe the charity acted in the best way possible.

The funds were raised by a registered charity to pay for a child's treatment. That treatment was then covered by the NHS, unexpectedly. The family then wanted that money for 'legal costs'. The charity could not legally fund a family's legal costs, therefore will be using the funds for other children, and have refunded anyone who placed a request. I don't see how they could have acted any better in this situation.

It was also pointed out that the child's family raised a significant amount through direct donations, and payments from the media.

Yes - agreed, i was just pointing out the number of refunds on the money raised - i too would have wanted my donation to help sick children, not to pay for the familys legal costs

Dragon the money raised in that case is better used for other children needing treatment.

I agree!