Independent Leyton Orient Forum

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:41 am

Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:16 am Kids Company charity founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh, dies aged 61.

Is that her that was under investigation for her alleged misuse of charitable funds for her own use & had to step down from that Charity?

Yes. Although, according to todays Guardian article she was investigated by the police who found no evidence of wrong doing:

"In 2015, Batmanghelidjh and the charity’s trustees closed Kids Company after its growing financial troubles were exacerbated by a BBC report claiming sexual abuse had taken place at the charity. This triggered a public and media backlash. Police subsequently investigated the allegations, and found no evidence of wrongdoing."

It seems there were still some concerns/intentions to investigate certain aspects further.
In this instance it seems genuinely difficult to unpack whether it was an unfair targeting of a charity or whether they were successful at arse covering.
My revised guess is that they were well meaning and probably did really good work to some extent, but were much more suited to the kind of relaxed “phew, they’re taking care of this so we don’t have to!” attitude that could surround some organisations, rather than the intense scrutiny that can come into play now, and requires (quite reasonably) high standards of practice, policy, records etc)

Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:09 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:41 am

Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:16 am Kids Company charity founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh, dies aged 61.

Is that her that was under investigation for her alleged misuse of charitable funds for her own use & had to step down from that Charity?

Yes. Although, according to todays Guardian article she was investigated by the police who found no evidence of wrong doing:

"In 2015, Batmanghelidjh and the charity’s trustees closed Kids Company after its growing financial troubles were exacerbated by a BBC report claiming sexual abuse had taken place at the charity. This triggered a public and media backlash. Police subsequently investigated the allegations, and found no evidence of wrongdoing."

Wow 8 years ago - thought in my mind it was more like 18 months ago


That link refers to sexual abuse, not the financial wrongdoing that I made reference to

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:41 am

Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:16 am Kids Company charity founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh, dies aged 61.

Is that her that was under investigation for her alleged misuse of charitable funds for her own use & had to step down from that Charity?

Yes, with no evidence found of wrongdoing.

And you being the legal eagle on this board, throwing around unsubstantiated allegations.

Who would have thought you would come across as a hypocrite?

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:54 am

Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:09 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:41 am

Is that her that was under investigation for her alleged misuse of charitable funds for her own use & had to step down from that Charity?

Yes. Although, according to todays Guardian article she was investigated by the police who found no evidence of wrong doing:

"In 2015, Batmanghelidjh and the charity’s trustees closed Kids Company after its growing financial troubles were exacerbated by a BBC report claiming sexual abuse had taken place at the charity. This triggered a public and media backlash. Police subsequently investigated the allegations, and found no evidence of wrongdoing."

Wow 8 years ago - thought in my mind it was more like 18 months ago

That link refers to sexual abuse, not the financial wrongdoing that I made reference to

The link does also provide some commentary on the accusations of financial wrongdoing:

"The official receiver launched a high-profile and expensive attempt to ban her from holding senior roles in public life, finally culminating in a 10-week court case in 2021.

The high court exonerated Batmanghelidjh, and rejected the claim that Kids Company had been mismanaged and charitable funds misspent. The judge praised her for the “enormous dedication she showed to vulnerable young people over many years” and her achievement in building a successful charity that did “incredible work”.

Batmanghelidjh was outraged by a subsequent Charity Commission report into the collapse of Kids Company, which claimed the charity had been administratively mismanaged. A year ago she won permission to go to the high court to try to overturn the report but ill-health meant she could not progress her case."

ChorizO wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 10:02 am

spen666 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:41 am

Dunners wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 7:16 am Kids Company charity founder, Camila Batmanghelidjh, dies aged 61.

Is that her that was under investigation for her alleged misuse of charitable funds for her own use & had to step down from that Charity?

Yes, with no evidence found of wrongdoing.

And you being the legal eagle on this board, throwing around unsubstantiated allegations.

Who would have thought you would come across as a hypocrite?

I have not accused her of anything. I asked if it was the same person who was investigated for financial irregularities at the charity.

Where is the evidence she was given a clean bill of health? The clean bill of health re sexual matters is irrelevant and a complete red herring to the allegations regarding financial irregularities. The Charity Commission finding of mismanagement seems very different to being given a clean bill of health

As for unsubstantiated allegations - that is complete nonsense. She/ the charity was investigated which is what I said, so the point i made is substantiated. There was an investigation and guess what the Charity Commission did make a formal finding of Mismanagement at the Charity

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ds-company




Oh dear ChorizO, you seem to be wrong on just about every count.

The unsubstantiated allegations that were substantiated

No evidence of wrongdoing despite the finding by the Charity Commission of Mismanagement?

I'll await your apology given you are wrong in your accusations, but I suspect you will not be big enough to admit you were wrong

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:50 am It seems there were still some concerns/intentions to investigate certain aspects further.
In this instance it seems genuinely difficult to unpack whether it was an unfair targeting of a charity or whether they were successful at arse covering.
My revised guess is that they were well meaning and probably did really good work to some extent, but were much more suited to the kind of relaxed “phew, they’re taking care of this so we don’t have to!” attitude that could surround some organisations, rather than the intense scrutiny that can come into play now, and requires (quite reasonably) high standards of practice, policy, records etc)

Not really charity related but "relaxed attitude" always makes me think of the time a colleague and I were given a bag full of money to distribute to people during the response to a particular emergency and basically handed out notes to anyone who came forward under strict instructions not to ask any questions and with absolutely zero record keeping. Would be highly amused if any inquiry ever started asking questions about some of that.

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 10:25 am

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:50 am It seems there were still some concerns/intentions to investigate certain aspects further.
In this instance it seems genuinely difficult to unpack whether it was an unfair targeting of a charity or whether they were successful at arse covering.
My revised guess is that they were well meaning and probably did really good work to some extent, but were much more suited to the kind of relaxed “phew, they’re taking care of this so we don’t have to!” attitude that could surround some organisations, rather than the intense scrutiny that can come into play now, and requires (quite reasonably) high standards of practice, policy, records etc)

Not really charity related but "relaxed attitude" always makes me think of the time a colleague and I were given a bag full of money to distribute to people during the response to a particular emergency and basically handed out notes to anyone who came forward under strict instructions not to ask any questions and with absolutely zero record keeping. Would be highly amused if any inquiry ever started asking questions about some of that.

FTC has already told the enquiry that the money was just resting in his account.

Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 10:25 am

CEB wrote: ↑Wed Jan 03, 2024 9:50 am It seems there were still some concerns/intentions to investigate certain aspects further.
In this instance it seems genuinely difficult to unpack whether it was an unfair targeting of a charity or whether they were successful at arse covering.
My revised guess is that they were well meaning and probably did really good work to some extent, but were much more suited to the kind of relaxed “phew, they’re taking care of this so we don’t have to!” attitude that could surround some organisations, rather than the intense scrutiny that can come into play now, and requires (quite reasonably) high standards of practice, policy, records etc)

Not really charity related but "relaxed attitude" always makes me think of the time a colleague and I were given a bag full of money to distribute to people during the response to a particular emergency and basically handed out notes to anyone who came forward under strict instructions not to ask any questions and with absolutely zero record keeping. Would be highly amused if any inquiry ever started asking questions about some of that.

Similar to that but when the MB’s own Janie Jones and I worked at the same charity, there was a crazy period after the entire senior leadership team left when, for about a year, there was an uninterested agency director and a services manager who was childlike in his desire to be liked. He basically ignored the history of carefully planned groups/activities and ran sh*t loads of trips to theme parks and cinemas, and pretty much gave full time staff carte blanche to do whatever the f*** they wanted as long as they were present for the face to face groups they worked. (This was during the first great era of boardin’, too - and also meant I was pretty much able to say to my boss “ah sh*t, the libertines are playing a pub gig tonight” and he’d be like - “tell you what, I’ll do that if you get the beers in on Friday)

It also led to one of the greatest bits of honesty I’d ever seen, when a new director came in and made it clear that she was making changes, the caretaker/general driving/maintenance guy said to her “hi Alex - im 35 and to be honest, the only way I’ve been able to justify my wages to myself is if I see it as for the 8 hours work I actually do per week, rather than the 40 hours I’m paid for. I can see that that is unlikely to be possible anymore, so here’s my resignation letter. Thanks!”

Derek Draper, 56. Put up a brave fight following C19.

David Soul

The Mindsweep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 2:45 pm David Soul

Ah

The Mindsweep wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 2:45 pm David Soul

Don't Give Up on Us

Orient_Man_And_Boy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 12:44 pm Derek Draper, 56. Put up a brave fight following C19.

What was his claim to fame apart from being married to a tv presenter? I remember some Labour infighting few years ago about lobbying or something and that was it .

David Soul took up British Citizenship, I read. Interesting.

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 3:03 pm

Orient_Man_And_Boy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 12:44 pm Derek Draper, 56. Put up a brave fight following C19.

What was his claim to fame apart from being married to a tv presenter? I remember some Labour infighting few years ago about lobbying or something and that was it .

Detesting Conserutives ?

I'm surprised no one has mentioned actress Glynis Johns aka Mrs Banks in Mary Poppins. Got to the ripe old age of 100. Still acting into her 80's.

Joe315 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 4:21 pm

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 3:03 pm

Orient_Man_And_Boy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 12:44 pm Derek Draper, 56. Put up a brave fight following C19.

What was his claim to fame apart from being married to a tv presenter? I remember some Labour infighting few years ago about lobbying or something and that was it .

Detesting Conserutives ?

Yes , whilst being a champagne socialist, lobbyist, bragging ability to get access to politicians for payment whilst breaching planning laws for his home building works.

This is a private matter and I cannot see why it has been plastered all over the news all day .

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 7:51 pm

Joe315 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 4:21 pm

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 3:03 pm

What was his claim to fame apart from being married to a tv presenter? I remember some Labour infighting few years ago about lobbying or something and that was it .

Detesting Conserutives ?

Yes , whilst being a champagne socialist, lobbyist, bragging ability to get access to politicians for payment whilst breaching planning laws for his home building works.

This is a private matter and I cannot see why it has been plastered all over the news all day .

Weird to pretend you didn’t know anything about him and then use it to slag off a bloke who’s still warm.

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 7:51 pm

Joe315 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 4:21 pm

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 3:03 pm

What was his claim to fame apart from being married to a tv presenter? I remember some Labour infighting few years ago about lobbying or something and that was it .

Detesting Conserutives ?

Yes , whilst being a champagne socialist, lobbyist, bragging ability to get access to politicians for payment whilst breaching planning laws for his home building works.

This is a private matter and I cannot see why it has been plastered all over the news all day .

Nothing wrong with champagne or socialism, plenty wrong with being a Conservative.

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 8:17 pm

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 7:51 pm

Joe315 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 4:21 pm

Detesting Conserutives ?

Yes , whilst being a champagne socialist, lobbyist, bragging ability to get access to politicians for payment whilst breaching planning laws for his home building works.

This is a private matter and I cannot see why it has been plastered all over the news all day .

Weird to pretend you didn’t know anything about him and then use it to slag off a bloke who’s still warm.

I didn’t pretend anything. I do not wish anyone bad either.

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Sat Jan 06, 2024 2:18 am

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 8:17 pm

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 7:51 pm

Yes , whilst being a champagne socialist, lobbyist, bragging ability to get access to politicians for payment whilst breaching planning laws for his home building works.

This is a private matter and I cannot see why it has been plastered all over the news all day .

Weird to pretend you didn’t know anything about him and then use it to slag off a bloke who’s still warm.

I didn’t pretend anything. I do not wish anyone bad either.

Yeah you did

Is it really appropriate to be having petty squabbles on this thread which is about births, deaths and narriages.

It's not a thread for political point scoring, bullying or trying to massage your ego at the expense of someone else

Joe315 wrote: ↑Sat Jan 06, 2024 6:35 am

Daily Express bot wrote: ↑Sat Jan 06, 2024 2:18 am

Rich Tea Wellin wrote: ↑Fri Jan 05, 2024 8:17 pm
Weird to pretend you didn’t know anything about him and then use it to slag off a bloke who’s still warm.

I didn’t pretend anything. I do not wish anyone bad either.

Yeah you did

I never wish bad on anybody or pretend, please explain?

What was his claim to fame apart from being married to a tv presenter?

A few hours later

champagne socialist, lobbyist, bragging ability to get access to politicians for payment whilst breaching planning laws for his home building works.