Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Charity collections at home
Last night we had a charity collector knock at the door at 9.15. He explained he was collecting for tear fund. I explained that this was not an appropriate time and he left. I think that this is a worrying trend that has recently started happening. In the last two weeks we have had four different charity collectors call, all at night.My wife has stated that if she was in the house on her own she would feel threatened by this unnoticed visit. Im sure the elderly or vulnerable would also feel the same.
Has anyone else had similar experiences? I am obviously not against giving to charity but this means of collection I feel is totally inappropriate
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Lauren on
-
I was called out to by a charity caller when walking up to my front door the other afternoon. I responded with my usual 'no thank you' and he then insulted me for being 'miserable'. Can't remember the charity but he was wearing a red jacket with white logo.
-
Permalink Reply by Abi on
-
That will almost certainly be the Red Cross - they were chugging in my area yesterday. Fortunately the one I met was polite and didn't try to win me over when I said I didn't sign up to charities on the doorstep, but others have been crashingly rude when challenged. I would personally complain if someone made that sort of comment, highly unprofessional and potentially damaging to a cause that is presumably a very worthy one.
-
Permalink Reply by Philip on
-
Yes we have had a couple over the last few weeks. I think people are wise to the street chuggers now so they are going door to door. I know this is an efficient way for charities to collect but the first 6 months usually goes direct to the company that runs the service so I just am not interested. Also the chuggers are trained to guilt trip you though God knows, they aren't earning a fortune. I agree that door to door cold calling is no longer acceptable and should be firmly discouraged. If in doubt, just don't answer the door.
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
What happens is that a charity you already give to by direct debit sells your contact details to a company selling the contact details of "charitable people". So by definition when they come to your door you are definitely NOT miserable.
-
-
Oh this guy just appeared to be going door to door. I don't think they sent someone out especially to visit me, on the off-chance I might be in and might not be feeling miserable. I know that what you said works with phonecalls though.
-
-
That makes it even worse that the actual charity isn't getting all of the money the company doing the collection is.
It really is a unacceptable
-
-
I know what you are saying Guy, but it's not as simple as that... yes, the company does make money, but they do so on the basis that they are professional charity fundraisers who are nothing to do with the charity so therefore can devote more time and expertise to raising money so that the charities get more donations in the long run - why else do you think the charities use them? Whatever you think of their methods, they are succesful in their aims and have to pay their staff somehow. They also have to tell you that they are working on behalf of the charity and are not from the charity.
-
-
The mailing lists are far more valuable to them than any token £3-a-month donation. That's really what they're doing it for.
-
-
the first 6 months usually goes direct to the company that runs the service
Is this true or is it just one ofthose things people say? How do you know?
-
-
Yes, it's true. The deal the agencies do with the charities can vary. The figure quoted in this article is between 40 and 60 quid for each person signed up, but it is also common to base it on the first six months' (or sometimes a year's) donation. So if you cancel after less than that period (a very common occurence) the charity have received nothing and these distasteful agencies are the only ones to have benefitted. (I have noticed that the chuggers are always very keen to stress that you can cancel anytime - all they really care about is getting your signature on the forms).
However, charities also raise funds by paying for ads in the press or on TV and they find chugging more cost effective. So what is wrong with it? Well, I think it wrong for a very specific reason. It is deception. We have a long tradition of flag days and the like in this country. They have always been staffed by volunteer supporters of the charity in question. One of the motivations to donate is a sort of guilt; you think 'if they can go to all the effort of standing in the cold all day for a good cause, the least I can do is stick a pound in the box'. I think many people - perhaps older people in particular - still think that these people are volunteers campaigning for the Red Cross (the VERY worst offenders) or whoever and would be shocked to discover that this sincere young person extolling the charity's work is actually just being paid to spout a script.
Personally, I think it is revolting. In fairness, I also think that most of the British professional charity industry is utterly repulsive now, so maybe I am not the best person to look to for an opinion. As a bald statement of fact however, yes this is true.
http://www.theguardian.com/money/2007/mar/31/charitablegiving.volun...
-
-
And don't even start me on PETA, who ask people for donations to their animal homes, then quite simply KILL the animals. (83% of PETA animals are put down; you've got a better chance of survival in a Stafford Trust Hospital).
They spend the money instead jetting their top bods around the world to the various 'fashion weeks' to hang out with celebs and models doing the 'far more valuable' (and coincidentally glamorous) campaign work. Admirable, isn't it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2552518/Animal-house-horror...
-
Permalink Reply by Finsbury Park Ranger on
-
Door to door is still a huge earner for new givers these days. Saying that they get much less results these days (6 max, 2 on average per person per day ) compared to the heady days of 1999 when a chugger could pull in 27 max, 7 on average new givers in one day.
Still the thing you have to appreciate is that people annoying people to give to charity by direct debit generated a huge sum of money for the charities and in turn redistributed a heck of lot of wealth, even after the fundraisers and fundraising agencies were paid out which in turn has had enormous ramifications all over the world.
It's fecking annoying though I know. But if you went back in time and banned it from happening in its uk inception in 1998 and stopped those first Greenpeace fundraisers from having the cheek to ask for a direct debit instead of shaking the can in the streets of Brighton and stopped all the other charities that have copied the idea ever since, the world would be a much worse place.
The 6 month concept is true. Sometimes it's the first 12 months. The terrible secret is that this was even worse before face to face fundraising came along. The energy spent coaxing people to give has always been enormous.
The way to give really is once you're earning to decide on a percentage of your earnings to give away and give it direct, the problem is, not many people ever do without a life time of people egging them on.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
