Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To wonder why there has STILL been no donation?

999 replies

kewtogetin · 29/03/2015 20:05

This has probably been done, I know there was a long running thread about this very subject but I can't find it?
So, several months on I see Dax's parents have still not made the promised donation to Ronald McDonald hospice. On March 2nd they updated the Facebook page to say they works be making the donation 'very soon', but still nothing.
Am I the only one thinking they have no intention of donating any money out of the tens of thousands donated to them? That in fact they intend to keep it all and deny the very charity that provided them with so much support in the early weeks of their Childs life?
In fact, I don't think im the only one judging by the comments on the Facebook page.
I think they're hoping it will blow over and if they keep quiet long enough people will forget.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
60
fourteen · 13/04/2015 20:32

It's a shame that there was no mention of RMH in the recent DM article. I think if they really wanted to support the charity they'd be shouting it from the rooftops DNS getting it some free publicity.

youarekiddingme · 13/04/2015 20:53

Abbey if he's ill enough to need that much care they can claim dla and carers to cover costs. I don't think Dax is that I'll though. Hope your friends baby gets strong enough soon for transplant. That must be worrying for their parents.

I'm intrigued to know what's brewing.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 21:02

The DM article seemed to say he was going as well as can be expected.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 21:05

doing

AbbeyRoadCrossing · 13/04/2015 21:08

That's the thing that annoys me so much is that there are so many parents in similar situations that could do with cash - Bliss worked out how much a preemie costs in the UK in terms of travel, parking, meals etc and it's over £2k and thats with free healthcare www.bliss.org.uk/parents-of-premature-and-sick-babies-face-crippling-costs-press-release

I really hope a journalist picks this up, it would be good to highlight the risks of donating to individuals on the internet, but unfortunately I doubt anyone will

fourteen · 13/04/2015 21:26

I don't think anyone's interested, to be honest.

Some people gave money, that they were entitled to give. The couple receiving the money were also entitled to do what they wanted with it once they received it.

Non story really.

DragonWithAGirlTattoo · 13/04/2015 21:37

" don't think anyone's interested, to be honest."

yup, a 908 comment thread, plenty of other comments on the facebook sight, - yeah, no ones interested...

is that you Richard?

ScamBuster1 · 13/04/2015 21:40

Seeing that they had Dax on a train from Skegness to London a couple of days after his discharge, to do the This Morning interview, one can only assume he was in tip top health, otherwise they wouldn't have taken him on public transport surrounded by all those germs.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 21:40

The wider world isn't interested.

If they were, the DM would have run with a different angle. If they were, they'd have been asked about the money on This Morning.

The press and the wider world thinks there's no story here. And there isn't really. They haven't actually done anything illegal.

DragonWithAGirlTattoo · 13/04/2015 21:41

I for one am ABSOLUTELY disgusted with L&K, to pretend they have made a donation, by showing a screen shot of the 'click here to donate; page,

I hope they are reading this, they had SO much help from RMHs and they are treating them like scum, hoarding their funds they promsied to donate, to help other families in trouble. If i lived anywhere near them, and needed a personal trainer, i wouldnt go near either of them with a 10ft barge pole, they have acted in a dispicable manner and should be totally ashamed

DragonWithAGirlTattoo · 13/04/2015 21:42

"This morning" known for their hard hitting journolism.......

DragonWithAGirlTattoo · 13/04/2015 21:43

No story.....? why are you here then?

fourteen · 13/04/2015 21:44

Pardon? Are you asking why I'm on mumsnet?

ILoveOnionRings · 13/04/2015 21:45

Fourteen

I beg differ, lots of people are interested, this thread is only an indication of public interest.

I would also disagree with your statement The couple receiving the money were also entitled to do what they wanted with it once they received it. If the couple and co had not stated that they were going to donate and continue to raise funds from the donation page for RMH then yes they would have been entitled to spend it as they wished but this was not the case.

This thread has lots of screenshots showing evidence of the backtracking of statements from the FB admin, the delay of updating the Gofundme page of over 24 hours once it was announced that the medical bills were being covered.

In my opinion the campaign was shoddy, manipulative, grabby, immoral and furthermore, again in my opinion the actions of the FB page admin since is truly disgusting. I found some of their comments to be abusive, posts that did not go with 'how wonderful are we' theme of the page deleted, lack of transparency and may I suggest, honesty completely shocking.

DragonWithAGirlTattoo · 13/04/2015 21:45

no, i'm asking why you're on this thread if 'theres no story' there must be something drawing you in

fourteen · 13/04/2015 21:56

I don't disagree with you at all OnionRings.

All I mean is, that legally they were entitled to do what they wanted with the money. There is no fraud here.

Crowd funding is a very new way of raising money and legislation tends to be slow to catch up. Essentially, if you ask someone for a tenner, for ANY reason, and they give it to you, you are a tenner richer and that is your money to do what you like with.

I'm not saying it's right or wrong, it just is.

So they received the money, and once it's in their account they can do what they like with it.

They could post a giant fuck off on the facebook page and say that they've spent the lot on jelly babies. There wouldn't be anything illegal there.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 22:01

A large part of the "fault", if you want to look at it like that, lies with those who readily give their money away to complete strangers over the Internet.

Either you're an idiot who gives away money you can't afford to people you don't know, or you take a calculated view of it, donate your fiver, and accept that the fiver is gone and you can't care that much what happens to it.

From what I saw on the fb page, most people who donated fell into the latter category. In which case, they don't care if their money was used to buy jelly babies, and neither should you.

I can't really fathom those who didn't donate but nevertheless seem extremely invested in the outcome here.

Wantapony · 13/04/2015 22:01

Plenty more folk watching this thread and waiting to see what happens than have actually posted, I'd guarantee that, Fourteen.

JoanHickson · 13/04/2015 22:04

The Barrister thinks a crime was committed.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 22:04

I'm sure wantapony. I'm talking nationally.

Well hopefully I'm wrong, but I think if there was a backlash story here it would have been printed already.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 22:04

Which barrister? What have I missed?

ILoveOnionRings · 13/04/2015 22:18

I agree that legally there is more than likely nothing that can be done but most people have morals, or so I believed.

I do wonder what possible 'bright idea!' they may come up with next and question whether their 5 minutes of fame (or £10K of cash) has been worth it.

Would I like my child to be known as the one whose parents were scammers, that # is probably something I would of avoided

ScamBuster1 · 13/04/2015 22:23

Fourteen - think again. The general public feel mislead into believing they were donating for medical bills. You might find the following excerpt rather interesting:

Mother-of-two Danielle Watson, 24, courted publicity on social media and made local headlines as she announced she had late-stage cervical cancer to claim donations, freebies and cut-price deals for her wedding worth almost £10,000.

She gave regular updates on the treatment she was receiving and how her apparent condition was progressing to continue the deceit, Basildon Crown Court heard today.

The then 21-year-old admin assistant even brought forward her wedding by several months to April 2012 claiming she wanted to walk up the aisle before radiotherapy and chemo made her hair fall out.

But while Watson, from Colchester in Essex, had undergone minor surgery for a treatable gynaecological condition, she was never actually diagnosed with cancer.

Watson admitted six counts of fraud by false representation at an earlier hearing and appeared for sentencing today.

She sobbed in the dock today as Recorder Gerard Pounder sentenced her to 12 months in prison suspended for two years, as well as 200 hours of community service.

fourteen · 13/04/2015 22:32

I don't think you can compare the two cases.

Using that case and making the Dax case analogous, there would have to have been no trip to the U.S, and no baby.

Fact is, there is a baby, who was prematurely born in the us. The papers, when they very first reported it, stated that the medical bills might not be covered by travel insurance. It was not definitely said in the news (the method by which most people came to know of the couple) that the medical bills weren't covered.

People who donated, it could be argued, gave generally to "the baby who was born in New York", rather than for any specific medical bill which turned out to be a lie.

It's simply not as cut and dried as the other case.

The differences that for there to be fraud you have to be able to prove a representation that was made which was knowingly false. You'd have a struggle to do that here.

JoanHickson · 13/04/2015 22:36

The advertising on gofundme was for medical bills after they knew the insurance was paying. There is the crime.