Jump to content

When is a charity not a charity?


Midnight

Featured Posts

27 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

Especially as. in the case of an unlimited organization, each Trustee will have a 'joint and several' liability. This is oft misunderstood (until it is too late) As: Say thyere are 10 trustees and the org owes £100. The creditor seeks a judgement. It is oft assumed that this would mean each Trustee paying one tenth ie £10. However J&S means that any one or more of the Trustees can be required to meet the whole debt, usually selected by the creditor on the basis that they are the most solvent.

 

 

Rather than speculating, the actual situation .................................

 

 

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

5. Liability of Members

 

5.1 The liability of the Members is limited.

 

5.2 Every Member of the Trust promises, if the trust is dissolved while he, she or it is a Member or 12 months after he or she ceases to be a Member, to contribute such sum (not exceeding £10) as may be demanded of him or her towards the payment of the debts and liabilities of the Trust incurred before he, she ceases to be a Member, and of the costs, charges and expenses of winding up, and the adjustment of the rights of the contributories among themselves.

 

6. Indemnity Without prejudice to any indemnity to which a Trustee may otherwise be entitled, every Trustee of the Trust shall be indemnified out of the assets of the Trust in relation to any liability incurred by him or her in that capacity but only to the extent permitted by the Companies Acts; and every other officer of the Trust may be indemnified out of the assets of the Trust in relation to any liability incurred by him or her in that capacity, but only to the extent permitted by the Companies Acts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 

 

Rather than speculating, the actual situation .................................

 

 

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY AND INDEMNITY

5. Liability of Members

 

5.1 The liability of the Members is limited.

 

5.2 Every Member of the Trust promises, if the trust is dissolved while he, she or it is a Member or 12 months after he or she ceases to be a Member, to contribute such sum (not exceeding £10) as may be demanded of him or her towards the payment of the debts and liabilities of the Trust incurred before he, she ceases to be a Member, and of the costs, charges and expenses of winding up, and the adjustment of the rights of the contributories among themselves.

 

6. Indemnity Without prejudice to any indemnity to which a Trustee may otherwise be entitled, every Trustee of the Trust shall be indemnified out of the assets of the Trust in relation to any liability incurred by him or her in that capacity but only to the extent permitted by the Companies Acts; and every other officer of the Trust may be indemnified out of the assets of the Trust in relation to any liability incurred by him or her in that capacity, but only to the extent permitted by the Companies Acts.

Members, in this case, means the Council of Members who are the not-for-profit equivalent of share holders.

No doubt A de E is now scanning the governing document (i.e. Articles of association) to find out if the SoS (Defra) as 'B' member has the ability to prevent dissolution as suggested ONS as an example of CRT being under the control of government.

(clue its towards the back)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C&RT is a charity because the charities commission have accepted they are. Their guidance on whether you are/need to be a charity goes along the following lines: if you think you might be a charity, you must apply to become one and then we will decide if you can/need to be one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ianws said:

C&RT is a charity because the charities commission have accepted they are. Their guidance on whether you are/need to be a charity goes along the following lines: if you think you might be a charity, you must apply to become one and then we will decide if you can/need to be one. 

It is the "Charity Commission for England and Wales" not the "charities commission".

Other than that I agree with you.

However, the Charity Commission has a duties under  section 34(1) of the Charities Act 2011. It must remove from the register any institution which it no longer considers is a charity and any charity which has ceased to exist or does not operate.

It CRT's case it is "no longer considers is a charity and any charity" that applies.


The Commission needs to consider if CRT was placed on the register of charities by mistake.

This could happen if -

1. the Charity Commission was provided with incorrect information at the point of registration
2. the organisation is shown to be a sham
3. the Charity Commission made an error

Whatever the reason for mistaken registration, once it has been discovered, the organisation must be removed from the register. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry fot the shorthand re. Charities Commission, its been a busy day and I couldn't be bothered getting it right.

 

Unless anything material has changed since they were registered, it would be an embarrassing climbdown to admit registration was wrong in the first place. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Rambling Boater said:

So is the 'Charity Commission ' misrepresenting the word 'charity' then?

They interpet and implement the laws around charities and make decisions around what is and isn't a charity, and oversee how charities operate. Like other regulatory issues relating to CRT, any question about their charitable status isn't probably top of their inbox. Who's really bothered about what  30,000 boaters might think in the grand scheme of things. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rambling Boater said:

So is the 'Charity Commission ' misrepresenting the word 'charity' then?

The Charity Commission is using the word 'charity' in accordance with the relevant law. Just because somebody else uses 'charity' to mean something slightly different doesn't make the Charity Commission's use of the word 'misrepresentation'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Mack said:

The Charity Commission is using the word 'charity' in accordance with the relevant law. Just because somebody else uses 'charity' to mean something slightly different doesn't make the Charity Commission's use of the word 'misrepresentation'.

 

The Cambridge dictionary definition basically says 'charity,' is helping those in need. The legal definition is far more complex and open to interpretation (it's quite an interesting read! See link below).

 

The question is, are C&RT helping those in need? I suppose it could be argued that their stance on 'well being' is helping those in need?

 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/charity

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/25

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rambling Boater said:

 

The Cambridge dictionary definition basically says 'charity,' is helping those in need. The legal definition is far more complex and open to interpretation (it's quite an interesting read! See link below).

 

The question is, are C&RT helping those in need? I suppose it could be argued that their stance on 'well being' is helping those in need?

 

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/charity

 

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2011/25

 

 

But more relevantly, from "How Charities Work" ( https://howcharitieswork.com/about-charities/what-is-a-charity/😞

 

 

What is a charity?

There are rules that all charities have to follow:

    • A charity’s aims have to fall into categories that the law says are charitable. These are things like preventing or relieving poverty, or advancing the arts, culture, heritage or science.
    • It has to be established exclusively for what is known as public benefit (see below). That means its only purpose must be charitable.
    • Charities can’t make profits. All the money they raise has to go towards achieving their aims. A charity can’t have owners or shareholders who benefit from it.

 

P.S. 

Note, the list does not include "providing cheap accommodation services for people who have no interest in the canals".

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

 

But more relevantly, from "How Charities Work" ( https://howcharitieswork.com/about-charities/what-is-a-charity/😞

 

 

What is a charity?

There are rules that all charities have to follow:

    • A charity’s aims have to fall into categories that the law says are charitable. These are things like preventing or relieving poverty, or advancing the arts, culture, heritage or science.
    • It has to be established exclusively for what is known as public benefit (see below). That means its only purpose must be charitable.
    • Charities can’t make profits. All the money they raise has to go towards achieving their aims. A charity can’t have owners or shareholders who benefit from it.

 

P.S. 

Note, the list does not include "providing cheap accommodation services for people who have no interest in the canals".

 

Providing cheap/affordable accommodation -- like social housing -- for people who need it so they don't end up sleeping on the streets or in hellhole Rachmann rentals is (or should be...) the job of government, not charities... 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MtB said:

 

 

But more relevantly, from "How Charities Work" ( https://howcharitieswork.com/about-charities/what-is-a-charity/😞

 

 

What is a charity?

There are rules that all charities have to follow:

P.S. 

Note, the list does not include "providing cheap accommodation services for people who have no interest in the canals".

Nor does it include providing a playground for people play boats. Nor maintaining a navigation. Nor accommodation for people who like canals. Nor etc etc.

Be careful for you wish for.

Heritage is just something old. It doesn't have to work. Not many people live in old castles.

But,  as I've said before, the canals in their heyday did provide cheap accommodation, so you could argue that's part of the heritage aspect. And, of course, providing cheap housing is charitable in anyone's definition - as, in fact, many charities did and do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could the CRT be philanthropists? 

 

Avoid tax by pretending you care. 

 

Or maybe go back a hundred yars and they could imitate the Artisans who felt it was their duty to build houses for the poor. What a laudable aim it would be to enable the unfortunate to live in tiny little shed like boats on shallow ditches. Such joys would move one's conscience to a better place while resting in the West wing with a pleasant beverage and a lady admiring the sunset in the distance over one's lake. 

 

Philanthropy must be a beautiful thing.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, magnetman said:

Could the CRT be philanthropists? 

 

Avoid tax by pretending you care. 

 

Or maybe go back a hundred yars and they could imitate the Artisans who felt it was their duty to build houses for the poor. What a laudable aim it would be to enable the unfortunate to live in tiny little shed like boats on shallow ditches. Such joys would move one's conscience to a better place while resting in the West wing with a pleasant beverage and a lady admiring the sunset in the distance over one's lake. 

 

Philanthropy must be a beautiful thing.

 

 

I think you have to be a Quaker to be a proper philanthropist, otherwise you're just a rich bloke with more money than you can think of what to do with, avoiding tax.

CRT can't be one anyway, any more than they can be any other anthropomorphic projection, cos they're a business, not a person. But there's a business case to be made for providing cheap residential moorings, even if it annoys the landlords. Possibly, especially if...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tim Lewis said:

Just picked up a copy of Tony Hales’s book on the formation of CRT, notes this on a potential charity:

E84D53A3-94A9-4920-B74F-C2BF70EFBCE8.jpeg

"The National Trust provided a good benchmark model and came from a very well respected organisation "

However, we thought that members might interfere with our sell off and bonus process so decided that Friends With No Say for £3 was a better business model, even if it costs us £9 for every 3 generated.

  • Greenie 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, magnetman said:

Could the CRT be philanthropists? 

 

Avoid tax by pretending you care. 

 

Or maybe go back a hundred yars and they could imitate the Artisans who felt it was their duty to build houses for the poor. What a laudable aim it would be to enable the unfortunate to live in tiny little shed like boats on shallow ditches. Such joys would move one's conscience to a better place while resting in the West wing with a pleasant beverage and a lady admiring the sunset in the distance over one's lake. 

 

Philanthropy must be a beautiful thing.

 

 

Then maybe you should try it. 😉

 

Anyway, it's not just about money, it's more about doing things to help people. That's usually a lot harder.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Tim Lewis said:

apart from CRT and BW logos there is no publisher noted so I assume that it was published by them 

 

 

How weird!

 

I don't think I've ever seen ANY book without the publisher, author, edition, ISBN etc noted on a flyleaf inside right at the start.

 

ISBN is sometimes on the back of the hardback cover, too IIRC.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MtB said:

 

How weird!

 

I don't think I've ever seen ANY book without the publisher, author, edition, ISBN etc noted on a flyleaf inside right at the start.

 

ISBN is sometimes on the back of the hardback cover, too IIRC.

 

 

 

13 minutes ago, Tim Lewis said:


apart from CRT and BW logos there is no publisher noted so I assume that it was published by them 

 

5E2443B8-9096-4E61-86C2-14251CC08516.jpeg

Never published due to incorrect title. It should have been -

 

"From Corporation to Public Non-Financial Corporation"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.