MAKE MONEY THE RSPCA WAY

A person I know had 8 german shepherd she needed to rehome because they were her husbands and he was in prison(so obviously couldnt look after them) she rang the RSPCA and the investigator in this are went to see her. despite her saying there is no way she could look after the dogs, control them or anything with them, because they were in a compound and apparently "guard dogs" (softies the lot of um! my dog was bred by the husband) he wouldnt help her and left them there. Then one day 2 of the males had a fight and one got badly hurt. The RSPCA then found out about it, took the dogs away and took her to court for animal cruelty, she got prosecuted, fines and a ban from keeping animals. if they had just helped her in the first place the dog 'Timmy' (my dogs dad) who luckily survived would not have got hurt.
why do they leave it so long? i used to want to work for the RSPCA, but i dont believe in them anymore.

i too have been a volunteer and have seen these "hopeless cases" put to sleep because they need the room (one i even offered to spend everyday with as a volunteer, they put her to sleep on a day i wasnt there).
sometimes they are a good idea, and they do a good job, but most of the time it seems there are too many chiefs and they dont seem to care about the animals, just the money!

the animal ss cant go wrong on this, they throw away the donations that they get on prosecutions, get PR and media from the publicity, they then get public funds whether they win or not, not bad eh ! beats getting up at 4am to milk !

TB wrote:The branches of the RSPCA in the UK are effectively franchises. They are each individual charities who have to pay £15,000 a year to Head Office Horsham for the use of the name RSPCA, the Inspector who they have no choice but to accept and who is appointed by and responsible to Head Office. They must pay this before they spend a penny on animal welfare.
Worse, where individuals have failed to specify the branch they intend their money to go to, if they leave some to the RSPCA in their will, then it automatically goes to Horsham.

what about the PB Bell case a few years ago;

The estimated £50,000 total cost of the case, which includes £12,000 spent by the RSPCA on its own legal costs, will lead to accusations that it has wasted large amounts of voluntary donations and public money.

it seems that the rspca frequently get awarded cost from public funds, THIS SHOULD BE STOPPED !!!

The branches of the RSPCA in the UK are effectively franchises. They are each individual charities who have to pay £15,000 a year to Head Office Horsham for the use of the name RSPCA, the Inspector who they have no choice but to accept and who is appointed by and responsible to Head Office. They must pay this before they spend a penny on animal welfare.
Worse, where individuals have failed to specify the branch they intend their money to go to, if they leave some to the RSPCA in their will, then it automatically goes to Horsham.

i work hard for my wages and the government tke it off me in taxes, if i wanted to donate to the rspca, WHICH I DONT, I would do it directly, i object to the government and courts giving my money to the rspca via the back door, they took out the prosecution case, let they pay for it not the taxpayer.

Below is the post i put on another thread on this forum, I find it sickening that the rspca can be making money out of peoples misfourtune, if you read what happened to by friend I am sure you will agree that ther is NO JUSTICE.
A friend of ours has 3 lovely rotweillers. 2 bitches and a boy. the boy got to the 2 bitches and before long she ended up with 22 pups. not too much of a problem, until she had their tails docked.

she ended up in court prosecuted by the rspca, was found guilty and fined £3000 + £11,000 costs.
as you can see, the costs awarded to the rspca are horrific.the thing is, the courts only given her 14 days to find the FULL £14,000.

Whilst i dont have a problem with the principle of the prosecution, the financial penalty is disgraceful, she could have robbed a post office and would got of a lot lighter.the rspca's attitude to my friend was shocking, they treated her like dirt and splashed her name all over the local papers, they got threats from animal activist nutters, damage to their property, threatening phone calls etc etc.she had to remortgage her house to pay the fine, if you work out the interest on that it must be costing over £25k, WHERE IS THE JUSTICE

But the sas is money well spent

WHATS THE DIFFERNCE ? OH YES THE SAS CARE MORE ABOUT ANIMALS.AND DONT GET AS MUCH PUBLIC MONEY THROUGH THE BACK DOOR

always wanted to be in the rspca, not, or was it the SAS ?

listen here idiotstaxpayers, the rspca are a good bunch of scammerspeople. we want your money and will get it one way or another, bloody donate now, please

mmm new vans, new head office, nice uniforms, big expensive solicitors, lots of advertising. merchandise, endorsements from TV chefs,own radio network, loads of branches paying annual fees, and all they have to do is prat around looking officious and rescue the odd cat now and then and prosecute some pensioners, nice work if you can get it

absolutely amazing, 50 grand straight out of tax payers funds, surley if they are getting government cash they are not a charity, this means that the public are paying for the operation of the rspca, if this is the case they must be publically accountable like any other organisation. this also gives them another motive to prosecute !

Joe wrote:A friend of mine a real animal-lover got a job with the RSPCA and left in disgust, as they did bugger all to help animals, it was all about raising money. There was also a real emphasis on the uniform bit, immaculate appearance etc, it is indeed a scam.

this seems to be the view of most of our members, the rspca are more concerned with finances than animal welfare

A friend of mine a real animal-lover got a job with the RSPCA and left in disgust, as they did bugger all to help animals, it was all about raising money. There was also a real emphasis on the uniform bit, immaculate appearance etc, it is indeed a scam.

A friend of mine a real animal-lover got a job with the RSPCA and left in disgust, as they did bugger all to help animals, it was all about raising money. There was also a real emphasis on the uniform bit, immaculate appearance etc, it is indeed a scam.

Leave it with me I will take a look at it in the budget,

a friend of mine used to foster cats for the rspca, she got about £1-1.50 per cat per day, how could the rspca possibly run up a bill of £54k ? if the trial only lasted 3-4 days that would only be about £10-20K in legal fees.
It makes me wonder how closely this is controlled, do the rspca have to submit a detailed account of their fees or just pluck a rough figure out of the air ?

This is outrageous, how are these costs made up, the case seems to have only been in court for a few days, it must be made up of vets fees and boarding costs, why the blood y hell should the public be saddled with this expense when the rspca took the decision to remove the cats from their owner, they should pay the bill not the taxpayer

RSPCA PROSECUTE PENSIONER BUT IT COST THE TAXPAYER £54,000


The rspca have just prosecuted a Stevenage pensioner, but it turns out that the TAXPAYERwill foot the majority of the prosecution bill out of public funds !!!! Yes £54,000 of our money whilst the rspca get their costs back, get the publicity and subsequent PR revenue from the prosecution, ie donations generated my the media hype that the RSPCA generate by press releases and then doing a PR campaign where they have had a sucessful prosecution. HOW CLOSELY DO THE COURTS SCRUTINISE RSPCA CASE COSTS ????????


PENSIONER TO APPEAL FOLLOWING RSPCA PROSECUTION

A pensioner has been banned from keeping animals for life.Sylvia Bailey, 67, , Stevenage, was found guilty at the town magistrates' court today of eight offences of failing to meet the welfare needs of 22 cats under the Animal Welfare Act.
Immediately after the case her defence counsel Sean Smith QC said an appeal would be lodged against both the ban and the confiscation order.
The prosecution was brought by the RSPCA after inspector Melanie Fisher visited Bailey's home with a vet,
"Bailey denied she had mistreated the cats, saying: "I have never failed my cats."All of my savings have gone on these cats."Bailey was ordered to pay £500 towards the total costs for the case of over £54,000.The remainder will come from public funds.