Madeleine Fund end of year accounts 2016-2017 delayed.

[Lace]

April Jones fund was set up as a charity with her parents playing no part in how the money was distributed. At the time the OFM fund was set up there was a police investigation in full swing which could have borne fruit. There was no need for the McCanns to 'search' for Madeleine. There was no reason to set the fund up as a business. The Charity Commission were willing to work with the McCanns to enable the fund to be given charitable status but interestingly the offer was never taken up.  All the stranger when you consider that the fund could have added 25p for every £1 donated by U.K. tax payers, a tidy amount.

It was probably set up as a charity as it wasn't formed in order to search for April.

snipped - 
Because Madeleine's Fund is currently focussed on searching for one child only, Madeleine McCann it cannot register as a charity. However in the future, if the objects of the fund are fulfilled and subsequently changed to concentrate on multiple similar cases, it may then be possible to acquire charitable status.

[Lace]

When the fund was set up there was a full scale police investigation in progress and therefore no need for the McCanns to fund a search. There really was no need to set up the fund for one person.

People were giving them donations to help the search for Madeleine,   they had to set up a fund because of all the donations.

If Kerry Needham had set up a fund to search for Ben then the fund wouldn't have been a charity either, as they were searching for one child.

[faithlilly]

People were giving them donations to help the search for Madeleine,   they had to set up a fund because of all the donations.

If Kerry Needham had set up a fund to search for Ben then the fund wouldn't have been a charity either, as they were searching for one child.

There was no need to fund a search when the fund was set up. The McCanns at that time had the benefit of a full scale investigation. Very similar to April Jones in fact.

[sadie]

There was no need to fund a search when the fund was set up. The McCanns at that time had the benefit of a full scale investigation. Very similar to April Jones in fact.

But people  were so wanting to help that they kept giving the Mccanns money.

Can you suggest any other way than a fund to look after it?



The differences between what happened with Aprils parents and Madeleines was that the Jones knew that the police were actively searching for April.  It very rapidly became apparent to The Mccanns that the PJ were not looking for a living Madeleine.  That the only purpose for the search by the PJ was to try and find stuff to convict the Mccanns with. imo

[slartibartfast]

the fund could not be set up as a charity as it was for the benefit of only one person...what you are saying is untrue....you have no idea of ny discussion between the fund and the charity commission so that part of your post is pure invention

From the Charity Commission.

“We were first approached for our advice about the possibility of a fund to assist the parents’ search on Monday 14 May,” explained a spokeswoman for the Commission. “We held discussions with the family’s lawyers and in the end they decided not to pursue that route.”

[Mr Gray]

From the Charity Commission.

“We were first approached for our advice about the possibility of a fund to assist the parents’ search on Monday 14 May,” explained a spokeswoman for the Commission. “We held discussions with the family’s lawyers and in the end they decided not to pursue that route.”

They did not persue that route because the fund was to be used solely to look for Maddie and therefore could not be given charitable status...the question that was asked was why the McCanns did not use charitable status ...that's the answer....no discussion with the CC could change that

[slartibartfast]

They did not persue that route because the fund was to be used solely to look for Maddie and therefore could not be given charitable status...the question that was asked was why the McCanns did not use charitable status ...that's the answer....no discussion with the CC could change that

Shame they didn’t wait for the discussions with the CC to finish. They may have arrived at a suitable charity structure.

[Mr Gray]

Shame they didn’t wait for the discussions with the CC to finish. They may have arrived at a suitable charity structure.

Who said they did not finish the discussion...your post is opinion not fact

As I understand it there was nothing further to persue

[slartibartfast]

Who said they did not finish the discussion...your post is opinion not fact

As I understand it there was nothing further to persue

As the CC were approached on the 14th May and the company was setup on the 15th May, it didn’t allow a typical CC consultation.

[Alice Purjorick]

Madeleine McCann's family could not register the fund for their missing daughter as a charity because its activity is not solely charitable.

Specialist charity lawyers Bates, Wells & Braithwaite spoke to the Charity Commission about the issue. "The fund was set up partly to keep the parents in Portugal," a commission spokeswoman said. "We said that if that was the purpose, it would not be charitable because it is not for the public benefit."

The fund may become a charity at a later date.

https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/madeleine-fund-cannot-charity/governance/article/658938

[sadie]

As the CC were approached on the 14th May and the company was setup on the 15th May, it didn’t allow a typical CC consultation.

Set up many charities, have you Slarti ?

[Robittybob1]

As the CC were approached on the 14th May and the company was setup on the 15th May, it didn’t allow a typical CC consultation.

What would be the advantage of it becoming a charity?  Was it no tax?  Is the the McCann fund paying income tax? 

[Mr Gray]

As the CC were approached on the 14th May and the company was setup on the 15th May, it didn’t allow a typical CC consultation.

again...how do you know what consultation took palce...more assumption....the fund is solely for Maddie and therefore could not have charitable status...that doesnt take long to discuss.

[Mr Gray]

What would be the advantage of it becoming a charity?  Was it no tax?  Is the the McCann fund paying income tax?

no company pays income tax.......the company could claw back the income tax paid by the contributers which is around 20 % if it was a charity

[Robittybob1]

again...how do you know what consultation took palce...more assumption....the fund is solely for Maddie and therefore could not have charitable status...that doesnt take long to discuss.

And decide it was the right choice to make it a charity then.  I don't see a reason why surplus funds couldn't be placed in a charity in the future.  There might come a time when the fund is turned into a charity.