CHEATING RSPCA FUND RAISERS EXPOSED

Of course this has been spun in a way that eliminates the true thrust of the story - that RSPCA fundraisers were being paid commission by the charity to raise money by knocking doors, and tried to con the public and thereby dishonestly obtain commission.

THESE crooks were exposed after cheating charities out of thousands of pounds.

Armed with application forms, Kathryn Ashcroft and Gregory Cameron were supposed to be knocking on doors to sign up householders wanting to donate towards charity.

But instead the pair, who worked for Marketing North East and were paid commission for each application, resorted to making up names and addresses, pretending to sign up scores more donors.

Ashcroft, 29, had submitted 21 incorrect forms while 24-year-old Cameron sent in 42 applications that were found to be made up.

Charities that were set to gain from their work included the RSPCA.

In total the thieves, who both pleaded guilty to fraud by false representation, received £3,233 and £4,399 respectively from their employer.

Newcastle Magistrates heard yesterday that the pair were only caught out when the banks refused to set up the direct debits and sent out an attention report to their employer, Gary Lewis.

Becky Gibson, prosecuting, said: “Mr Lewis was alerted that two of his staff had a number of forms that were submitted, but rejected due to false details.

“When Mr Lewis received the report, he rang around all the numbers on each of Miss Ashcroft’s forms to ascertain if the householders had subscribed to the charity on the form.

“He discovered that every number was invalid. He called them both into the office and told them he would be ringing the police.”

When Ashcroft and Cameron were interviewed by officers they each admitted the donors were not genuine.

Lewis Pearson, defending Ashcroft, said: “Miss Ashcroft had a son to look after and had tried to leave before due to the intense hours. But because she was Mr Lewis’ best employee, he was extremely persuasive. She is extremely apologetic.”

Michael Gibson, defending Cameron, told the court in mitigation that his client hadn’t even had a police caution in the past.

He said: “It was a high intensity job and employment depends on returning forms. He felt pressure to hand in a certain amount.

“The RSPCA were never in danger and no individuals were ever going to have to pay out money. He knew they would bounce. Now he just wants to put it in the past and get on with his life.”

Mother-of-one Ashcroft, of Orlando Road, North Shields, was handed a four-month custodial sentence, suspended for a year. She was also ordered to do 200 hours’ unpaid work as well as pay £1,500 compensation and £40 court costs.

And the case against IT technician Cameron, of Cartington Terrace, Heaton, Newcastle, was adjourned until next week for pre-sentence reports.

Journal Live Article

Ten firefighters, two engines, police and RSPCA officers sent to rescue... two CROWS

Yet another publicity stunt by the RSPCA to try and convince people they care when they only want more of your money

What a pity the RSPCA didn't show the same compassion towards the 10 GSD's they shot through the head with a captive bolt gun last year after their owner died.

Emergency services launched a massive rescue operation – after two crows were spotted trapped on a restaurant roof.

Ten firefighters, two engines, police and RSPCA officers showed up to free the birds that had been caught in anti-seagull netting.

The exercise, in which an aerial ladder was scaled to reach the roof of the KFC outlet in Exmouth, Devon, was criticised as a waste of taxpayers’ money at a time when public services face severe cutbacks.

Of course KFC would never condone the ill treatment of any birds now would it? The same KFC that introduced halal but had to back down because of public disgust.

Firefighters justified the costly operation by saying it was a ‘humanitarian’ mission to spare members of public having to watch the birds suffer.

But witness Barry Drinkall, 40, said: ‘It was totally ridiculous that so many firefighters turned out.

‘They are funded by the taxpayer and, for a relatively small incident, I thought it was excessive the amount of people who turned up.’

He added: ‘I’m not anti-birds and animals, but it is not like a person was hurt.’

Another angry local resident said: ‘Council tax rates for many areas have increased not so long ago.

‘It begs the question why when you see this type of thing happening.

‘An operation like this could have cost thousands and we're paying for every penny.’

A Devon Fire Authority spokesman said: ‘There was concern that the chicks would die painfully in view of members of the public so one fire appliance from Exmouth attended - as opposed to die a painful death in the back of an RSPCA inspectors van out of sight of the public. But wait, there's a publicity opportunity here!!!

‘They determined that the only safe way to reach the birds was to use a hydraulic ladder platform, which was requested to attend from Exeter, and the chicks were retrieved successfully.

‘Both the fire engine and the aerial appliance would have responded immediately to a more serious incident had it occurred while they were dealing with the birds.

‘Part of our role is to offer humanitarian assistance at the request of other agencies’

The 2009 accounts for the RSPCA show that they killed 63,231 animals last year, an increase of over 3000 on 2008. Why would they give a damn about 2 crows?

Daily Mail Article

RSPCA to turn away unwanted animals - NO REALLY!!!!

The RSPCA is to begin turning away people who bring in stray or unwanted animals, according to a leaked package of documents obtained by Channel 4 News.

Err - haven't they been doing this for years? Isn't it cheaper to turn an animal away or kill it!!

Many of the 75,000 unwanted animals which are taken to RSPCA centres each year across England and Wales could be affected.

This comes after the RSPCA itself complained that the number of abandoned animals is soaring as a result of recession.

The leaked internal documents disclose that from 4 May, 17 animal centres run by the RSPCA's national body should begin turning away people who come to them with unwanted animals. The hope is that the 40 centres run by the charity's branches across England and Wales will follow suit.

Animals that have been "RSPCA generated" - those which have been seized in cruelty or animal protection cases or at immediate risk - will be the only animals taken in after that date.

Pets that belong to people taken into hospital, evicted from their homes, or unwanted or stray animals, will now be turned away. Unless the animal is at immediate risk, the unfortunate visitor holding the animal will be told to contact the police, the council or a vet.

RSPCA staff are being issued with a one-line script to tell the public that the most pressing need of RSPCA animal centres is to care for abused and damaged pets rescued by its officers from neglect or cruelty. They must also make sure they have room for the animals, while "offering advice" to owners of unwanted pets who come to them for help.

The documents say the move will allow the RSPCA to become more efficient, by reducing the need for the organisation to pay to house animals in private boarding facilities.

The RSPCA had an income of £119 million in 2008 and is Britain's eighth largest charity. This latest move is part of its £54 million savings scheme over three years, after donations fell during the recession.

The RSPCA investigated 140,575 cases in 2008. That is up from 110,841 three years earlier. It spent £11.1 million on prosecutions in 2008, compared with £7 million in 2007.

The rise is in part the result of the Animal Welfare Act, which came into effect in 2007 and which was strongly supported by the RSPCA, which introduced new offences of failures in animal welfare, rather than just cruelty.

The move is controversial because it signals a move away from the charity’s role in animal welfare to concentrate instead on policing animal cruelty.

Some vets warn that if the RSPCA turns away unwanted animals, it could result in more pets being abandoned.

The British Veterinary Association President-elect, Harvey Locke said: “I think the concern is that more unwanted pets may be left to fend for themselves, that people will just leave them on the streets or turf them out of their cars on the motorway. I would like to think that that would not happen but that is a risk.

“We need to look at the cause of this. Why are more and more dogs and cats, and exotic pets as well, being taken on by people and then disposed of because they're unwanted?”

RSPCA Chief Superintendant Tim Wass rejected suggestions the policy would lead to more animals being illegally abandoned.

He said: “We will not let that happen. If there is any evidence of that we will be the first to see it and if anything like that happens we will re-focus. We will in each and every case make sure that animals’ welfare is protected.

“Like any organisation at the moment we have to answer some difficult economic challenges. RSPCA has always prioritised which animals it takes in. We are looking to formalise that…and to make sure that our finite resources go to the animals that need them most.

“It is not simply turning people away. We will still be taking animals in from the public where we perceive that there is a risk to those animals’ welfare.”

Mr Wass conceded that the move would put extra pressure on smaller animal charities but said charities could not be expected to deal with the issue of unwanted pets and there was a need for new measures to prevent the problem.

He added: “Owners have to accept responsibility and that starts when they decide to take on the pet in the first place.”

The potential burden of tens of thousands of unwanted animals, many of which will now be turned away by the RSPCA, will now fall on smaller charities devoted to particular animals such as Dogs Trust and Cats Protection, as well as smaller rescue centres such as the Mayhew Animal Home and Celia Hammond Trust in London.

The RSPCA’s 169 local branches are independent of the national charity. Angela Walder, Chairwoman of the RSPCA branch in Isle of Sheppey, Kent, and a member of the charity’s governing Council, said some branches may ignore the new policy.

She said: “I think what the national society is doing with this policy is trying to reduce the number of just animals people don't want any more, for various reasons, coming in to us in order to make sure we've got spaces for the other at-risk animals.

"But I think, when it comes to the branches, they will do what they've always done which is take in as many animals as they can.”