Madeleine Fund - End of Year Accounts 2016-2017.

[G-Unit]

Madeleine McCann's parents may pay £750,000 for private search if police hunt is axed

ByTom PettiforTracey Kandohla
 8 FEB 2018
The cash is in the Find Madeleine fund, made up mainly of donations and profits from mum Kate’s bestselling book on the disappearance.


Madeleine McCann’s parents have nearly £750,000 to pay for a private search for their daughter if the police hunt is axed.

The cash is in the Find Madeleine Fund, made up mainly of donations and profits from mum Kate’s bestselling book on the disappearance.


It is showing a profit of £793,516, but nearly £65,000 has been set aside to pay for expenses and a failed libel battle against a Portuguese ex-detective who accused the parents of accidentally killing Madeleine and hiding her body.

Kate and dad Gerry, both 49, have seven weeks left of guaranteed funding for Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange, due to end after a £11.3million hunt.

Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “The Madeleine Fund gives Kate and Gerry the option to pick up their own inquiries again, if they choose, with private investigators.”

Madeleine, three, vanished from an apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in May 2007 while her parents were eating tapas with pals at a restaurant nearby.

She would now be nearly 15.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-pay-750000-11995167

There's an amount owing to creditors of £65,008. Part of it is to pay what they owe to the lawyer they used in the trial. No provision has been made for any other sums owed in Portugal.

Ms Duarte is owed £ 51,718
Trade Creditors     £   1,030
Tax                      £   1,436
Accrued expenses £  10,834

Total                    £ 65,008

[Brietta]

There's an amount owing to creditors of £65,008. Part of it is to pay what they owe to the lawyer they used in the trial. No provision has been made for any other sums owed in Portugal.

Ms Duarte is owed £ 51,718
Trade Creditors     £   1,030
Tax                      £   1,436
Accrued expenses £  10,834

Total                    £ 65,008

That's these tabloids for you, isn't it?  Can get nothing right 

[faithlilly]

Madeleine McCann's parents may pay £750,000 for private search if police hunt is axed

ByTom PettiforTracey Kandohla
 8 FEB 2018
The cash is in the Find Madeleine fund, made up mainly of donations and profits from mum Kate’s bestselling book on the disappearance.


Madeleine McCann’s parents have nearly £750,000 to pay for a private search for their daughter if the police hunt is axed.

The cash is in the Find Madeleine Fund, made up mainly of donations and profits from mum Kate’s bestselling book on the disappearance.


It is showing a profit of £793,516, but nearly £65,000 has been set aside to pay for expenses and a failed libel battle against a Portuguese ex-detective who accused the parents of accidentally killing Madeleine and hiding her body.

Kate and dad Gerry, both 49, have seven weeks left of guaranteed funding for Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange, due to end after a £11.3million hunt.

Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “The Madeleine Fund gives Kate and Gerry the option to pick up their own inquiries again, if they choose, with private investigators.”

Madeleine, three, vanished from an apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal, in May 2007 while her parents were eating tapas with pals at a restaurant nearby.

She would now be nearly 15.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-pay-750000-11995167

Ah another opus from Kate’s spin partner.

[Mr Gray]

Interesting  that, Kate's book is, still earning  a substantial  amount

[barrier]

Interesting  that, Kate's book is, still earning  a substantial  amount

Think so,over two years ago the fund supposedly had 750 grand ready for a private investigation,the more things alter the more they stay the same.

Madeleine McCann's parents to launch new private search with appeal fund's remaining £750k

ByMatthew Drake
19:06, 19 DEC 2015UPDATED19:11, 19 DEC 2015

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-launch-new-7041769

[Mr Gray]

Think so,over two years ago the fund supposedly had 750 grand ready for a private investigation,the more things alter the more they stay the same.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccanns-parents-launch-new-7041769

84 K donated to the fund this year from  proceeds from Kate's book

[Alice Purjorick]

84 K donated to the fund this year from  proceeds from Kate's book

It does not say when the 84k was earned; merely in which FY it was posted to the CLG account.

[slartibartfast]

It does not say when the 84k was earned; merely in which FY it was posted to the CLG account.

It’s never what is said, it is what isn’t said.

[Alice Purjorick]

It’s never what is said, it is what isn’t said.

Indeed, some one has to dig for and some is irrelevant:
Assets increased in value by ca 1.4% over the last FY.
For the last two FYs the company has traded at a loss.
The company has not achieved its objectives despite spending >£4MM. since inception.
The royalties from the book are apparently "restricted funds".
Two directors lost a libel action they brought.
In 2018 £84K in royalties was paid into the companies coffers but mentioned in the 2017 directors report.
[the last two items falling into the irrelevant category].
I suppose Joe Public reading the report might raise his eyebrows at the potential wording of one particular paragraph if one chose to rewrite it whilst conveying the same message:
"Discredited cop wins in abortive libel action brought against him".
Joe might well ask "If he was discredited how come he didn't lose?"

[Mr Gray]

Indeed, some one has to dig for and some is irrelevant:
Assets increased in value by ca 1.4% over the last FY.
For the last two FYs the company has traded at a loss.
The company has not achieved its objectives despite spending >£4MM. since inception.
The royalties from the book are apparently "restricted funds".
Two directors lost a libel action they brought.
In 2018 £84K in royalties was paid into the companies coffers but mentioned in the 2017 directors report.
[the last two items falling into the irrelevant category].
I suppose Joe Public reading the report might raise his eyebrows at the potential wording of one particular paragraph if one chose to rewrite it whilst conveying the same message:
"Discredited cop wins in abortive libel action brought against him".
Joe might well ask "If he was discredited how come he didn't lose?"

Joe might well ask "If he was discredited how come he didn't lose?...joe might ask that but that would be because joe does not understand how the law works.

[Alice Purjorick]

Joe might well ask "If he was discredited how come he didn't lose?...joe might ask taht but that would be because joe does not understand how the law works...you claimed you did

Yeah well we can't all be Einsteins.

[Angelo222]

Does anyone know why the last Maddie Fund accountants resigned?

The derogatory comment made in the recent tax return gives us an insight into the type of people employed by the McCanns, thoroughly unprofessional imo and deserves to be reported to the Institute of Chartered Accountants.  The inference that Maddie was abducted is also legally false.

[Mr Gray]

Does anyone know why the last Maddie Fund accountants resigned?

The derogatory comment made in the recent tax return gives us an insight into the type of people employed by the McCanns, thoroughly unprofessional imo and deserves to be reported to the Institute of Chartered Accountants.  The inference that Maddie was abducted is also legally false.

then report them and tell us what response you get

[jassi]

Does anyone know why the last Maddie Fund accountants resigned?

The derogatory comment made in the recent tax return gives us an insight into the type of people employed by the McCanns, thoroughly unprofessional imo and deserves to be reported to the Institute of Chartered Accountants.  The inference that Maddie was abducted is also legally false.

I don't think that accountants would be responsible for those petty remarks  as they are irrelevant to the financial report. Sounds more like a disgruntled director.

[Angelo222]

I don't think that accountants would be responsible for those petty remarks  as they are irrelevant to the financial report. Sounds more like a disgruntled director.

Isn't that the function of the accountants, to make the return?