Compensation and the WOC Issue.

[Victoria]

Of course you can. You can set the structure up in exactly the same way.  What you can't get is the tax relief enjoyed by charities.

No, you can't.

[jassi]

No, you can't.

Ok, what prevents such a structure being implemented?

[Victoria]

Ok, what prevents such a structure being implemented?

Well, start with the obvious. When you refer to 'such a structure' what do you mean?

[jassi]

I was thinking along structural  lines whereby any monies spent had to be related directly to the search for Madeleine and not for the general benefit of members of the family and friends, whether it be in salaries or expenses.

I think Rachael was some sort of corporate lawyer, so maybe she was involved in setting the system up.

[Benice]

I was thinking along structural  lines whereby any monies spent had to be related directly to the search for Madeleine and not for the general benefit of members of the family and friends, whether it be in salaries or expenses.

I think Rachael was some sort of corporate lawyer, so maybe she was involved in setting the system up.

As someone who has donated - I find nothing wrong at all with the present structure of the fund.   It seems to me the only people who are criticising it are people who have not donated - and never will,  but who seek to find fault with every single thing the McCanns say or do - as a matter of course.   

If they don't agree with the fund - then don't donate to it.  Simples.

 

[stephen25000]

As someone who has donated - I find nothing wrong at all with the present structure of the fund.   It seems to me the only people who are criticising it are people who have not donated - and never will,  but who seek to find fault with every single thing the McCanns say or do - as a matter of course.   

If they don't agree with the fund - then don't donate to it.  Simples.

 

The pertinent points are these.

1. How many people would ave donated knowing that the mccanns would use the money for their personal 'expenses', when both were working doctors and pulling in substantial salaries.

2. Likewise, if people had been presented with the FACTS of what the mccanns were doing on those evenings, i.e. DRINKING as well as eating; leaving their children for prolonged periods by themselves when they could have hired a babysitter; and the classic, leaving them in 'unlocked' accommodation for several successive nights in a foreign country.

3. For the latter READ THE POINTS LISTED ON 'MARK WARNER'.

[Brietta]

I was thinking along structural  lines whereby any monies spent had to be related directly to the search for Madeleine and not for the general benefit of members of the family and friends, whether it be in salaries or expenses.

I think Rachael was some sort of corporate lawyer, so maybe she was involved in setting the system up.

I am a bit bemused.

When did “Ward of Court” transmogrify into “Madeleine’s Fund”? 

The Fund has nothing to do with either "compensation" or the "WOC issue" as far as I can see and I would have been interested in some discussion into the finer points of that. 

I realise there is not a lot going on at the moment apart from MI6 demanding to know what MI5 are up to.

The Fund discussion imo is just another opportunity to deflect us in a particular direction, perhaps, and flog a particular hobby horse to death. 

As pointed out on the official website for all to see:- 

(7) What is the money being spent on ?

The majority of the fund money has been and continues to be spent on investigative work to help find Madeleine. Additionally money continues to be spent on the wider 'Awareness Campaign' – reminding people that Madeleine is still missing and to remain vigilant. None of the directors have taken any money from the fund as remuneration.

Anyone who wishes further information with regards to the financial details of Madeleine's Fund and its professional advisors, please refer to the accounts filed at Companies House. Crown Way Maindy Cardiff CF14 3UZ
http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_us/madeleines-fund.html

So anyone … really interested … can access information with little effort, but not as much fun.

[faithlilly]

I am a bit bemused.

When did “Ward of Court” transmogrify into “Madeleine’s Fund”? 

The Fund has nothing to do with either "compensation" or the "WOC issue" as far as I can see and I would have been interested in some discussion into the finer points of that. 

I realise there is not a lot going on at the moment apart from MI6 demanding to know what MI5 are up to.

The Fund discussion imo is just another opportunity to deflect us in a particular direction, perhaps, and flog a particular hobby horse to death. 

As pointed out on the official website for all to see:- 

(7) What is the money being spent on ?

The majority of the fund money has been and continues to be spent on investigative work to help find Madeleine. Additionally money continues to be spent on the wider 'Awareness Campaign' – reminding people that Madeleine is still missing and to remain vigilant. None of the directors have taken any money from the fund as remuneration.

Anyone who wishes further information with regards to the financial details of Madeleine's Fund and its professional advisors, please refer to the accounts filed at Companies House. Crown Way Maindy Cardiff CF14 3UZ
http://www.findmadeleine.com/about_us/madeleines-fund.html

So anyone … really interested … can access information with little effort, but not as much fun.

We are told that the majority of the money is spent on investigative work yet from March 2012 the fund has employed no private investigators, so how can that possibly be and as to the awareness campaign, what money is being spent there as apart from a cheap website which is rarely updated and a free Facebok page I can see no awareness campaign being conducted ?

[Mr Moderator]

According to the Company Articles of Association the Madeleine Fund can be used for anything in the search for Madeleine and that includes litigation where necessary.

Madeleine became a Ward of Court on 02 April 2008 as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.  The decision to include Madeleine within the list of plaintiffs might have been an ethical one but it certainly wasn't a legal one, in as much as without the agreement of the English Court, this was incompetent.  Why they have never sought the permission of the Court earlier is open to much speculation.

The Portuguese Court in Lisbon has rightly decreed that as it stands, the McCanns cannot sue Amaral in Madeleine's name, this raises all sorts of questions as to the competency of the libel action, issues which will no doubt be played out in Lisbon in a weeks time.

[Carana]

According to the Company Articles of Association the Madeleine Fund can be used for anything in the search for Madeleine and that includes litigation where necessary.

Madeleine became a Ward of Court on 02 April 2008 as the result of proceedings which started on 17 May 2007.  The decision to include Madeleine within the list of plaintiffs might have been an ethical one but it certainly wasn't a legal one, in as much as without the agreement of the English Court, this was incompetent.  Why they have never sought the permission of the Court earlier is open to much speculation.

The Portuguese Court in Lisbon has rightly decreed that as it stands, the McCanns cannot sue Amaral in Madeleine's name, this raises all sorts of questions as to the competency of the libel action, issues which will no doubt be played out in Lisbon in a weeks time.

I asked the question before but go no answer. When did the judge decide this, as opposed to requesting further informaton on the issue?

[Victoria]

I asked the question before but go no answer. When did the judge decide this, as opposed to requesting further informaton on the issue?

It's Amaral spin. There is no truth in it as far as I can see.

[ferryman]

It's Amaral spin. There is no truth in it as far as I can see.

Here is what Jean-Pierre had to say on the subject of ward-of-court in a post in January:

There are two things which puzzle me:

One is the many references by posters to Madeleine being declared dead because she has been missing for 7 years.  What possible reference does this have to the case?  And what would this achieve?  Utterly pointless.

The second is that the McCanns being unable to bring an action on Madeleine's behalf because she is a ward of court.  To anyone with a modicum of (real) legal knowledge this is clearly absolute nonsense - It was they who made the original application, they remain her parents, and have all of the usual parental powers - but with the added protection of the court which could be helpful if she were to be found.     Again - this line of argument is utterly pointless.

(Jean-Pierre)

[jassi]

This is obviously something for the court to decide, not armchair lawyers.

[ferryman]

This is obviously something for the court to decide, not armchair lawyers.

Well, one thing beyond doubt is that the McCanns have already brought legal action in the Portuguese courts in Madeleine's name.

In the judgment overturning the injunction on Amaral's book, costs were awarded against the McCann couple and their three children ...

[Carana]

Well, one thing beyond doubt is that the McCanns have already brought legal action in the Portuguese courts in Madeleine's name.

In the judgment overturning the injunction on Amaral's book, costs were awarded against the McCann couple and their three children ...

And that went to the Supreme Court... No one brought up this issue during all that time?