Does anyone know of any fundraisers where 100% of the monies raised actually go to where its needed. Keep hearing too many stories of fundraisers set up and most of the money goes to Admin costs etc.. and barely any of it goes to where its needed. No fires up this way despite what the media would have you believe...
Bushfire Fundraisers
#1
Posted 16 January 2020 - 04:12 PM
#2
Posted 16 January 2020 - 05:20 PM
Good point, Brad,
I think the smaller ones run by volunteers might be better so I donated directly to a few of those. I also volunteered by delivering some medical supplies from Sydney to Canberra so at least I know that those items did get to the intended recipients.
I spoke to an economics consultant who said that the Red Cross is so huge that it now is quite a disorganised organisation, which eats up money in many levels of admin.
I've also been told that only 2% gets to the end users...
Cheers,
Liz
#3
Posted 16 January 2020 - 06:51 PM
Last big Victoria bushfires the money disappeared.
#4
Posted 16 January 2020 - 06:55 PM
#5
Posted 16 January 2020 - 09:05 PM
Don't trust any of the large "charitable" organisations. Have had some involvement in the past and seen good amounts of money disappear with very little money making the cause.
#6
Posted 16 January 2020 - 09:43 PM
#7
Posted 16 January 2020 - 09:56 PM
I will donate clothes and food but not money for that reason
Interesting how one of the large organisations a couple of weeks ago were asking people to donate cash not clothing or food......I suppose its harder to take a cut of the food or clothing ??
I mainly donate to the local Lifeline. I buy new clothing on special and donate them.
Edited by Max's SS, 16 January 2020 - 09:58 PM.
#8
Posted 17 January 2020 - 12:16 PM
I think it's just the logistics of hard goods donations?
Needs to be picked up, sorted, packed, trucked, unloaded, stored etc etc.
Then the 20 size L T shirts (e.g.) don't fit anyone at the other end..so they end up as rags?
Cash is just EFT'd around and a click of a button gets it where it is needed...theoretically.
Hopefully it gets spent in the local town/area, so it does double good.
The "neccessary" skim off for the organisation's "management etc, is just the way it goes I guess.
I just hope those bales of Hay that I bought last year turned u p on a farm somewhere as full bales, and not 1/2 bales by the time the "fees" came out ( assuming there were any)
#9
Posted 17 January 2020 - 12:45 PM
I just hope those bales of Hay that I bought last year turned u p on a farm somewhere as full bales, and not 1/2 bales by the time the "fees" came out ( assuming there were any)
Yep, I bought some hay bales last year too and some fencing this year as well as direct cash donations to a couple of small volunteer wildlife vet hospitals. Hope it got to where it was needed.
I think that big fundraiser of over 50mil is going to a government run department...not sure how many people realise that.
Cheers,
Liz
#11
Posted 23 January 2020 - 12:40 PM
I see already claims are being made by politicians in NSW that 3 of the major charities (Red Cross, St Vincent de Paul and Salvation Army) have only released a small proportion of the donations. They are being accused of holding back most of the donations to be used for future disasters and earning a bit of interest on their bank accounts.
Edited by Max's SS, 23 January 2020 - 12:41 PM.
#12
Posted 23 January 2020 - 02:02 PM
as above what steve has said..peeps need it now not over 3 years..when the floods come and they will, they will then ask for more donations//so what are they then going to do with that cash?
and they pocket 10 cents from every dollar they get..red cross was given 115 million so thats a huge skim from red cross
#13
Posted 23 January 2020 - 02:03 PM
Absolute criminals its like legal stealingI see already claims are being made by politicians in NSW that 3 of the major charities (Red Cross, St Vincent de Paul and Salvation Army) have only released a small proportion of the donations. They are being accused of holding back most of the donations to be used for future disasters and earning a bit of interest on their bank accounts.
#14
Posted 24 January 2020 - 09:38 AM
After 1994 east coast fires, just as it is now, there were multiple agencies raising money.
The government stepped in and had them all pool the funds into a single place, and I think the Sydney Lord Mayor administered it.
Been a long time so Im not quite sure of the last bit.
It reduced the number of agencies, and had a single point for making a claim.
With multiple agencies, there is a lot of scope for some to make multiple claims for assistance.
Rorting the system in other words.
Apparently it has already happened with people making claims for stupid stuff like smoke smelling clothes.
Hopefully common sense will prevail and the same thing will happen.
But not sure that leaving anything that the muppet Clover Moore could access is a good idea.
Many thought that their donations would help out the fire brigades as well.
But that wasnt the case really back then.
Our council area brigades ended up with less than 1k per brigade at the end of it.
I personally had issues with the way it was administered, but I guess those who needed it got what they needed.
First bites of the cherry went to those without insurance, and those who were underinsured.
I saw a young couple, in their 20s I guess, who lost a very large house in the fires.
They had no insurance.
They got a nice little sum to rebuild and stock up their home.
Later on they complained that they didnt get enough.
Fire services back then were funded about 50% from levies on insurance, which this couple didnt have.
Any major lender that gives out a loan for a house requires that the borrower has full house insurance.
Why didnt this young couple have insurance?
Had they already paid off their very expensive house?
If they had, then they had access to rather large sums of money to do so.
Or they had borrowed from an alternative source.
I had issues with those not contributing getting the first bite.
I had spent a lot of very long days fighting the fires at the time, including a couple of away missions of 5 days each.
But that is just my own personal views.
Other stories that came from that period was a recorded call of someone wishing to insure their house and contents.
The insurance person was asking if they were in danger from fire at the time.
The caller said no, the fires were nowhere near her, she just thought that it would be a good idea.
Just as she answered there were loud bangs heard in the background.
Police were evacuating her as she was on the phone trying to insure.
One other thing that came out was the dilemma faced by the under insured and the way the insurance system worked.
Just using rough figures to make it easy.
Say you had your contents insured for 10k.
In most cases it wouldnt matter, but after a fire you have incurred a total loss of everything it matters.
The insurance assessor comes out and looks at the remains of your home.
There is already a guide figure they use, based on the number of rooms and the number of occupants.
The assessor looks around for remains particularly of electrical and electronic devices.
Te assessor then determines that you had contents valued at 20k, twice the insured value.
You think okay, I will get the 10k.
Wrong.
You get 5k only, as you had underinsured by 50%, you get 50% of the face value of the policy.
The months ahead will no doubt have some similar stories.
On a sad note, yesterday afternoon we lost 3 americans on a C130 that crashed into terrain while doing firefighting operations.
Its a dangerous job, even from the air.
And thousands of men and women gladly do it for free.
Cheers
Rob
#15 _Lazarus_
Posted 24 January 2020 - 01:01 PM
Maybe they inherited the house ?
#16
Posted 24 January 2020 - 03:11 PM
I worked in the finance industury for 20+ years. When we approved a housing loan one of the conditions was that the property be insured. We would require a copy of the insurance policy to confirm.
The renewal of the insurance policy each year was the responsibility of the home owner.
We would from time to time follow up with the customer to ensure insurance was still in place.
On average I estimate nearly a third of the borrowers would let their policies lapse.
Reasons.......to save money or can't afford it or it won't happen to me attitude
I do get p#ssed off when people loose their property cry no insurance and expect other to bail them out.
Another thing that annoys me is people blaming Scott Morrison for the fires.....I suppose if Bill Shorten was Prime Minister these fires would never have happened.????
End of rant.
Edited by Max's SS, 24 January 2020 - 03:13 PM.
#17
Posted 24 January 2020 - 03:18 PM
#18
Posted 24 January 2020 - 04:32 PM
On a sad note, yesterday afternoon we lost 3 americans on a C130 that crashed into terrain while doing firefighting operations.
Its a dangerous job, even from the air.
And thousands of men and women gladly do it for free.
Cheers
Rob
Agree. Condolences to their families and friends for their loss.
These people need to be recognized and congratulated for their selflessness and courage.
#19
Posted 24 January 2020 - 05:08 PM
I worked in the finance industury for 20+ years. When we approved a housing loan one of the conditions was that the property be insured. We would require a copy of the insurance policy to confirm.
The renewal of the insurance policy each year was the responsibility of the home owner.
We would from time to time follow up with the customer to ensure insurance was still in place.
On average I estimate nearly a third of the borrowers would let their policies lapse.
Reasons.......to save money or can't afford it or it won't happen to me attitude
I do get p#ssed off when people loose their property cry no insurance and expect other to bail them out.
Another thing that annoys me is people blaming Scott Morrison for the fires.....I suppose if Bill Shorten was Prime Minister these fires would never have happened.????
End of rant.
i have borrowed twice for a mortgage with no insurance at all, easy done.
#20
Posted 24 January 2020 - 08:59 PM
i have borrowed twice for a mortgage with no insurance at all, easy done.
Thats fine....so long as you don't expect someone to bail you out if you loose it through some disaster.
#21
Posted 24 January 2020 - 09:29 PM
Agree. Condolences to their families and friends for their loss.
These people need to be recognized and congratulated for their selflessness and courage.
Being close to an air port, you see the pilot's doing lots of hours of flying to save Properties, not many people acknowledge the effort they give aswell.
#22 _LONA-CK_
Posted 25 January 2020 - 07:29 AM
I would rather be scammed by a sad( go fund me ) story on the net that I can spend time looking into by the click of a button, to me that is better than giving and never knowing,,,
Cheers gong
#23
Posted 25 January 2020 - 10:47 AM
Mark, there was more than one in the same situation.
The bulk of the money raised went to those who were not insured.
The particular house was only newly built which meant it was unlikely to have been inherited.
No doubt there were elderly who couldnt afford insurance in the mix as well.
But I think it was only around 300 bucks to insure my olds house at the time. And around the same for contents.
My mum always over insured the contents anyway. Just the way she was.
It wasnt a huge amount of money in the scheme of things particularly if you lost everything.
My personal point being is that they hadnt contributed to running the fire services.
At the time some of them reckoned the fire services should have done more to save them, yet they hadnt contributed?
Agree with you Steve.
There were those back in 94 who had no insurance who were whinging about various things.
Then there were those who had their houses burn down after the main bushfire event that reckoned they should share in the pot as well, and whinged when they were told they didnt qualify for money from the bushfire fund.
Cheers
Rob
The start of fire services in pommy land was apparently done by the insurance companies.
If you had insurance, you displayed the shield of the insurance company at the front of your house.
The brigades would turn up, and if you werent insured with them, they turned around and went back to their station.
You needed to wait for your insurance company's brigade to turn up to help you.
Hopefully the money gets spread around wisely and quickly to help those in need.
But there are already those who donated that arent happy that the money isnt going where they thought it would.
#24
Posted 25 January 2020 - 01:43 PM
Red Cross are thieves to
#25
Posted 26 January 2020 - 12:08 PM
In 1994 the flow of money took a while to start as well.
One of the reasons was weeding out those wanting to rort the system.
That was probably the main reason they dumped it into a single fund as well.
Cheers
Rob
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users