Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
R.M.V.F.
Does anyone know anything about the new R.M.V.F. second-hand shop at 473 Green Lanes?
I've been told it's in support of whistleblowers and is indeed run by one. R.M.V.F. stands for "Raising My Voice Foundation", and it also says "Working for Charity" on the sign.
I'm just wondering where the money generated actually goes. I'm not in any way casting aspersions -- I'm just curious.
Tags for Forum Posts: raising my voice foundation
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
MzMoore has been trying to find this out too, without success. A couple of comments here.
-
Permalink Reply by Liz on
-
Chatting to a friend, who knows someone who runs a charity shop he was dubious that this was a bona fide charity. Apparently the charity number should be displayed prominently on their signage.
-
-
I popped in to say hi the other day, had a chat and made them aware of this thread. Apparently the boss is away, but once she's back her attention will be drawn to this conversation.
-
-
Yes, absolutely no criticism intended of you. MzMoore.
I had a mail from RMVF's boss today:
Hi Hugh,
Thank you for bringing it to my attention the local community's interest in RMVF.
Our application for registration with the Charity Commission is MJ/5024823. The Senior case officer dealing with our registration is Mr. Mike Jones.You can contact him directly on: 0182 3345 488.
As you may be aware registration is a stringent process. It has also been made clear to the organisation, that whilst we await registration it is in order for us trade.
Thank you for you kind attention in this matter,
Ms. Nevres Kemal
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
It may be "in order" but I'm not convinced it's entirely honest given that the average passer-by would assume from the shop frontage that this was a standard charity shop. If their registration is turned down, what happens to all the money they've made? And would you trust a charity that traded out of a shop for several months before it even bothered to register as a charity? I'll stick with using the Marie Curie shops thanks.
-
Permalink Reply by 0eoqscvsq0uo0 on
-
Well, quite a few organizations operate some shops as franchises. Mencap for one. I'd be inclined to look at the integrity of the people running a shop rather than its legal framework.
-
-
I don't quite understand the fuss. Seems to me that underneath the surface, people are more hot and bothered by the politics and reasons behind the shop setting up. I would have thought that anything that might force councils and authorities to be more transparent and honest is to be applauded. If people only knew whats being hidden from us by officialdom, there would be far more rioting on the streets.
-
-
The only thing that's been concerning people is to be reassured that the shop is bona fide.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
I know nothing about this particular shop, nor it's charitable purposes. And if and when an organisation becomes a registered charity I wish them well. But I do know that many organisations like to associate themselves with charitable giving by using pictures and phrases which suggest charitable purposes.
A big problem comes from the so-called charity-bag collectors. Some are bona fide charities. Others have an agreement to donate part of their earnings to a charity. But sometimes they are simply commercial companies.
What they all have in common is presenting themselves as pursuing "good causes". So they might refer for example to "the Third World"; or have pictures of small children. Anyone interested in this issue can visit the website Charity Bags which is run by volunteers.
I've looked into this a little and think it's vital that the charity sector is protected by having transparency and clarity about which organisations are/are not charities. This should include accurate information on their leaflets, website, and premises. It's not enough just being able to check with the Charity Commission. (Incidentally, last year there was a strong protest against a cut in the Commission's funding by the Government, with the danger this would weaken its effectiveness in regulating charities.)
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Alan like you I can't comment on this shop. But I feel I can comment on the Charity Commission, with which I've had a some contact in recent years.
Questions about the Commission's effectiveness is not a recent matter. It has been a regulator of dubious effectiveness for years.
They are happy to come down like a ton of bricks on a little charity for minor transgressions – but with a big, politially well-connected charity exhibiting glaring faults, they can turn a blind eye.
They can be easily pushed around by bullying, well-funded solicitors, acting on behalf of charities with severe governance issues.
Probably the biggest legal defeat in their history, was as Defendant in the High Court action of October 2007. The Judge (Justice Sir Jeremy Sullivan) excoriated the Commission's conduct.
The Commission has probably long been the weakest regulator of all and I think that, whatever their budget is, they need a big shake up (and possibly their enabling legislation for good measure).
-
-
Point taken. I would certainly agree with all of you re 'Big Charity', 'Big Bizness' etc. There used to be a franchise on Stroud Green Rd which claimed to support Mencap but whose owner was a millionairess and owned a whole chain of these places. Their vibe and general atmosphere was quite oppressive. I make a difference, tho, between a multi-employee/worker big-name outfit, and a one-person outfit with a burning mission. But in principle you are quite right.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
