Parents who raised £100K for their son before he died from cancer sue charity which refuses to hand over donations – because they want the cash to take his terminally-ill sister to Disney World
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14881361/Parents-raised-100K-son-died-cancer-sue-charity.html
Posted by dailymail
18 comments
Feel really awful for the family but I’m not sure what they’re contesting if this is true
> He also told of a contract the couple agreed stating that, if the money was not spent on their son’s treatment before he died, it would go to another DIPG trial or the cause of a child in a ‘similar’ position.
Can’t they go to Eurodisney?
This is horrific luck and really feel for them.
I understand the charities point, and legally they may very well be correct, that’s obviously for the court to decide. But just because the law gives you the right to do something doesn’t mean you should do it. The charity has got to look at the optics here, this is an extreme case and fighting the parents of a terminally ill child in court is hardly charitable. I think the best thing them to do would be to settle by paying for the Disney trip (which won’t cost 100k).
Cases like this should be when companies go over the policies to show care, unfortunately its usually overseen by someone with CEO mentality rather than human compassion
so they get nothing while the charity CEO is on £150k pa, no wonder they don’t want to hand it over!
Yeah that’s not how donations work. You can’t say “actually fuck dem kids”. Literally – it’s illegal. You must use funds for the purpose they were raised.
They donated the money it’s not theirs now, it’s the charity.
They raised money for the charity, not for the son’s care. The charity’s about page says that they provide children and their families “funding for mental health therapy; treats, toys and gifts; respite trips; food shop vouchers; practical help with hospital transport; bereavement support”. If the parents wanted the money to be specifically for their children, they should have collected the money themselves and left the charity out of it. People who gave to their cause do so to support children with cancer and their families, not for an expensive holiday. I know it would be lovely for their daughter to experience disneyworld, but they’d have to raise that money separately, and I doubt they’ll get (or even need) donations anywhere near £100k for that.
I’m a charity trustee, and there is no chance that you could give the money to family. It was never theirs. Best case is give it back to donors, then they can do what they want with it.
For the chap saying the CEO is in £150k, it’s nonsense. No staff there being paid more than £60k, which is the lowest limit of reporting. Another poster suggested the total staff costs was £20k. So not even a full time person.
Charities cost money to run. What would a panda do with cash?
Obviously, the parents don’t really have a leg to stand on. But, I still think the charity should help them and here’s why.
Charities depend on these donations, what’s going to happen to all the parents who want to raise money for a charity because of their child’s illness? When they see that these parents now don’t have access to these funds to help their daughter. I imagine some parents will think twice about raising money for a charity, and will instead raise it by themselves, or indeed start their own charity.
I feel if they don’t help the people who raised that money to begin with. They will have problems raising money in the future.
It’s called charity….
The charity has no choice here. Donations were made for children with cancer, the daughter does not have cancer. You can’t accept donations for one thing and then use it for an entirely different purpose.
I don’t understand why the parents did donations through the charity which obviously was going to go towards their son but also other poorly children.
Why didn’t they do a GFM like these other ones,can’t remember the name but child was going to have treatment abroad but hospital was fighting them.
The money was raised for the charity. They can’t just give it back,surely?
Every sympathy for what they’ve gone through as a family. That’s unimaginably tragic.
Zero sympathy for pulling this nonsense. You raised money for the charity. You don’t get to do a takesies backsies if you change your mind later on. If you’d like to collect funds for your daughter, do a specific fundraising drive for her, not try to claw back money you told donors was going to a different cause.
Horrible card to be dealt. Can’t imagine loosing two kids.
Whilst I am sympathetic to the family, I think I agree with the Charities position. It is not the families money, it is not their daughter’s money – it was raised for their son who has now passed. The money should therefore be passed to others in the same situation.
The parents would therefore need to apply to the charity for funds – as would anyone else. They should get no special treatment/preferences.
Perhaps there should be a “Daily Mail” tag/flair?
🤔 Just how many terminally children do they have????? And who exactly wants to go to Disney World while the money could go to a terminally ill child incapable of going anywhere, even Disney World ?????
Absolutely awful situation for the parents to lose one child to cancer already and have another terminally ill. Truly horrendous. That said, they have absolutely no case here. The publicity will presumably help them with a future GFM etc though so maybe that was the aim?
if they have enough money to sue they probably have enough money for a holiday
Comments are closed.