Captain Tom’s daughter and her husband pay themselves double previous year’s earnings – as firm £117,000 in the red

22 comments

1. All she needs to do is ask herself one question……

   “Would my dad be proud if this?” This immediately shows how corrupt the behaviour is.

   Means she’ll never ask it of herself and remain ignorant because it’s a bank balance. All her father’s existence has been to her is a bank balance, and lifestyle. And I hate to say it, but this is far too common of an occurrence. And we wonder why society is declining.

2. Remember the guy on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire who was caught cheating cause people in the audience were coughing the answers to him? He’s a relative of this family

   Scammers and cheats through and through

3. I’m almost in awe of just how brazenly corrupt these people are. Like, these are just cartoonish levels of scumbaggery, I mean these people are actual scoundrels

4. While I’d happily piss in their rose bushes, this is a little bit of a hatchet job no? it’s their private business and represents a pay not far above minimum wage. If a bank wants to lend them 117,000 against their “management consultancy” business, that’s got nothing to do with the general public with the exception of the banks shareholders.

5. It is about time limited liability laws are changed so that the shareholders/directors of companies which go “bust” owning money to the taxpayer, are pursued personally.

6. This is clickbait, pure and simple.

   I was expecting to read about six figures but all they took was less than £70K which was about 10% over the previous year. They may not have actually got their hands on it due to the company being in the red.

   So my commentary, is “And?”.

7. Are they sure it’s his daughter? seems like some Farage blood in there

8. Part of a wider problem with charities. I always google a charity CEO’s salary and more often than not they are paying themselves 6 figure salaries. I think British Heart Foundation guy is on about £250k a year. So now I don’t give to any until I know I’m not just funding the lifestyle of someone wealthier than I am

9. What a legacy .. glad my £50 donation has been put to good use

10. Theres gonna be an 8 part Netflix documentary on this lady by the end of the current decade. I guarantee you.

11. i remember my mum absolutely seething over all the captain tom stuff back in 2020 because of this woman, she was absolutely convinced it was all a scam.

    she’s feeling very vindicated at the moment haha

12. I mean they are probably paying themselves dividends so they don’t have to pay NI (ironic seeing as how ger father helped the NHS) .. and then they don’t have to also pay corporation tax because the business makes no “profit” so this significantly reduces their tax bill … Scummy aren’t they .

13. Hate to piss on the chips of this pitchfork party but I’m not sure that’s what it says. 

    The accounts say that £30k was owed to the directors last year, it’s now £60k. They’re exemption accounts so we don’t have info on how much they’re paying themselves or whether that £30k was ever paid. It’s possible they’re just accruing £15k pa each but not taking it until the business perks up a bit. It also could literally be as simple as they’ve loaned the business money to keep it afloat. 

    Appreciate that’s no fun and not a great clickbait headline but this is a non-story. Also, isn’t this their private business so ultimately who gives a fuck how much they pay themselves? 

    Not sticking up for these people but there’s plenty they’ve actually *done* to aim at here as it is. 

14. I’m lazy and not reading the full article I’m just going to guess it ain’t good and she’s a scumbag

15. Why is she allowed to keep getting away with it? Shameless

16. This is why i dont donate to charity . Parasites like this have made me very jaded when it comes to so called Charity.

17. I only ever hear about this guy on r/unitedkingdom (admittedly I’ve lived in the US for a few years) – who is this ‘Captain Tom’?

18. Give any f*cker access to large amounts of money and the ability to make serious decisions in an organisation, without having to answer to board members or share holders and they will do this

19. I am convinced these scoundrels will appear next on our radar as Reform councilors.

20. Most charities have someone earning well off of it

21. Every time I see anything about these two, I try my best not to be judgmental, but it’s really hard. Here’s why:

    1. The money they were dealing with was other people’s money. It was donated for specific purposes, not so that they could feather their own nests with some of it. A lot of people who donated or bought Captain Tom branded items were probably struggling financially themselves, and yet still wanted to get behind Captain Tom and his campaign. Some of these people might have even been put off from donating to other charities and good causes because of this, which is sad but I can’t say I blame them. Many of us don’t have the money to throw at random causes, especially if we can’t trust that it won’t be trousered.
    2. Hannah and her partner work in professional level jobs. People in these fields tend to be very well connected, so even if they themselves didn’t know anything about the laws surrounding charitable donations (and why would they?), the chances are that they or someone they know would have that knowledge, or be able to connect them to someone who did. I know next to nothing about planning regulations, but if I wanted to build an extension, I’m going to sound out one of my colleagues who works in the Planning Department to ask for some advice regarding what kinds of things I would need to consider. It’s hard to believe that these two didn’t have a similar thought process here, especially when the donations really started rolling in.

    I’m afraid that whichever way you spin it, it all comes back to the same thing. When taking donations from the public you are essentially dealing with other people’s money and whether they intended to be fraudulent or not (and really, that’s a question that only they can answer), they should have been more transparent.

22. Person who faced no consequences continued actions

Comments are closed.