|
|
|
The Setting up of the Fund Revisited |
| |
|
THE FUND REVISITED |
|
Guest Enid O'Dowd has revised and
extended her analysis of the Fund
accounts. This is a much-needed review
- many thanks to Enid O'Dowd |
| |
|
The Setting up of the Fund Revisited |
| |
|
'from the outset everyone agreed that,
despite the costs involved, it (the
Fund) must be run to the highest
standards of transparency' |
| |
|
-Dr Kate McCann in her book madeleine |
| |
|
In 2012 I published a report
http://www.mccannfiles.com/id405.html
about the background to the
incorporation of the limited company
Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone
Unturned just 11 days after she went
missing.
My report upset an unknown McCann
supporter so much that he or she
complained to my professional body, the
ICEAW (Institute of Chartered
Accountants in England and Wales).
This happened in November 2012 but I
only learned of it recently when by
chance I came across a post which the
person concerned had made on the
Internet.
I was never contacted as the complaint
did not meet the standards required by
the ICEAW to warrant asking to hear my
side of the story. The ICEAW reply to
the complainant included the sentence:
‘Mrs O'Dowd is entitled to her opinions
and views and freedom of speech’.
Exactly!
I imagine that this vexatious complaint
caused some amusement at the ICEAW, and,
on a more positive note, will have
brought my report on the Fund to the
attention of the staff at the ICEAW who
may have discussed it with family and
friends.
At the time I published the first report
on the Fund, I did not understand why
the situation warranted a limited
company set up with such speed. I still
don’t understand this four years later,
having reviewed the subsequent audited
accounts now available. |
| |
|
The Fund Timeline |
| |
|
2007
|
Event
|
Comment
|
|
Thursday 10pm
May 3
|
Madeleine
reported missing
|
|
|
Weekend Friday
May 11 - Sunday
May 13
|
Unnamed
barrister and
paralegal (from
International
Family Law
Group -
IFLG) meet with
McCanns in
Portugal
|
Decision taken
to set up
limited company
(the Fund).
|
|
Monday May 14
|
McCanns set
launch date for the
Fund
|
Not clear when on
Monday the
launch date was
set. Not clear
why they did not
get company
incorporated and then set
media launch
date.
|
|
Monday afternoon
May 14
|
Solicitors Bates
Wells and
Braithwaite (BWB)asked
to incorporate
the new company
|
BWB inform
Charity
Commission in
email on Monday
evening May 14
that launch of
new company set
for May 16.
|
|
Monday afternoon
May 14-
lunchtime
Tuesday May 15
|
Communications
between BWB and
Charity
Commission re
possible charity
status for the
company yet to
be incorporated
|
|
|
Tuesday
afternoon May 15
|
The Fund
incorporated
after charity
negotiations
dropped.
|
Documents
obtained under
FOI show charity
status might
have been
possible with a
little
compromise
|
|
Wednesday May 16
|
Press launch of
the Fund with
celebrity guest
Martin Johnson
|
Apparently not
having to change
the date of a
press launch was
more important
than getting
charity status
|
|
Thursday May 17
|
Fund Bank
account opened
|
|
|
Thursday May 17
|
Auditors to the
Fund appointed
|
The McCanns were
in Portugal and
could not have
actually met the
auditors. Why
the rush to
appoint them so
quickly?
|
|
Friday May 18
|
BWB apply for
British and EU
trademarks and
given ref:
245601
|
This
protects
fundraising,
internet and
print
promotions. Why
the rush as
before?
|
|
|
| |
|
According to the book
madeleine, charity experts
BWB were hired on the advice of the
paralegal. It is surprising that
Kate did not let them have a day or
two more to explore charity status.
This slight delay would not have
reduced the chances of finding
Madeleine, alive or dead. And it is
also surprising that the McCanns
have apparently not revisited the
charity status issue.
In Chapter 9 of madeleine Kate
describes her activities on May 14;
she does not mention any dealings
with BWB, nor does she mention
dealing with the paralegal or anyone
else at IFLG. There must have been
emails and phone calls that day from
her advisors. She just states that
charity status would not be
forthcoming as it was deemed that
the 'public benefit' test would not
be met, and adds that it (the Fund)
'was set up with great care and due
diligence by experts in their
field.'
It would be more accurate to
state it was set up with great haste
and with no apparent reason for that
haste.
Rather than describing the busy day
she must have had dealing with her
lawyers, and why she made the
decision to proceed with
incorporation and abandon the
negotiations for charity status, she
talks of going for a run, her
first since Madeleine went missing.
She doesn’t mention the cost of
getting a top legal firm to set up a
limited company. The donations
coming in were for finding Madeleine
and not for lawyers. The legal pair
would presumably have informed her
of the ongoing compliance costs of
operating a limited company such as
the audit fee. The audit fees for
the accounts from commencement to
March 2014 total £50,085. The audit
fee for the year ended 31 March 2015
is not known.
|
| |
|
The Audited Accounts |
| |
|
When the first set of
audited accounts for the period from
15 May 2007 to
31 March 2008 became
available at Companies House, much
information was provided but it
raised many issues, one of which was
that apparently only 13% of
expenditure had gone on searching
for Madeleine.
The Fund directors
had two choices:
-
to answer
questions about the accounts
both from the media and from
members of the public, to put
financial information on the
official website, and to provide
clearer accounts in future.
or
-
to ignore the
questions and reduce the
information provided in
subsequent accounts, in the hope
of reducing or eliminating
questions, while adhering to
statutory disclosure
requirements.
They went for the
latter option. Subsequent accounts
provided much less information but
still raised questions! The accounts
for the most recent year available,
the year ended 31 March 2015,
provide even less information than
in previous years which is why the
my summary of accounting results
2007-2015 later in this article
contains (?) in the 2015 column.
It is quite
reasonable that an ordinary trading
company would not reveal more
information than legally required in
its filed accounts because some
information could be commercially
sensitive and of use to a trade
competitor. However, this argument
would not apply to a company such as
Madeleine's Fund where it would
logically be to its advantage for
the public to see where the money
was going.
I contacted the
company auditors who passed my
questions on the accounts to
Clarence Mitchell, their PR
spokesman. I received the following
response:
‘I have now been authorised to
issue the following brief statement
from Madeleine's Fund in response to
your approach:
"Madeleine's Fund - Leaving No
Stone Unturned Limited" fulfils all
of its legal requirements through
the filing and public declaration of
all the information that is legally
required of it. It exists to support
the search for Madeleine and remains
entirely dedicated to finding her
through everything that it does,
fully in line with its published
objectives."
I appreciate that this does not
directly address your specific
questions but this is all that the
Fund wishes, or needs, to state at
present. I hope it is helpful
nonetheless.
Kind regards,
Clarence’
|
| |
|
Filing of the Fund’s Accounts |
| |
Good
practice demands the filing of accounts
as soon as practical after the
accounting year end before the
information becomes to some extent
irrelevant. Prompt filing is necessary
for genuine ‘transparency.’ Prompt
filing costs nothing but even if it did,
the commitment in madeleine promised
transparency ‘despite the costs
involved.’
The audited accounts were filed as
below: |
|
Accounts year
ending
|
Date Accounts
approved by
Board
|
Statutory
deadline for
filing
|
Date Accounts
filed
|
|
31.3.2008
|
12.11.2008
|
31.01.2009
|
23.01.2009
|
|
31.3.2009
|
06.01.2010
|
31.01.2010
|
27.01.2010
|
|
31.3.2010
|
09.11.2010
|
31.01.2011
|
4.12.2010
|
|
31.3.2011
|
22.12.2011
|
31.12.2011
|
30.12.2011
|
|
31.3.2012
|
21.12.2012
|
31.12.2012
|
Filed after deadline Fined £150
|
|
31.3.2013
|
20.12.2013
|
31.12.2013
|
31.12.2013
|
|
31.3.2014
|
16.12.2014
|
31.12.2014
|
31.12.2014
|
|
31.3.2015
|
18.12.2015
|
31.12.2015
|
23.12.2015
|
|
| |
|
The statutory filing date
was 10 months after the
accounting year end to 2010
but was changed to 9 months
from 2011 |
|
| |
|
Summary of Audited
Accounts 2007 – 2015 |
| |
|
Madeleine's
Fund
|
|
Audited
accounts
from
commencement
|
| |
Total
|
31.3.2015
|
31.3.2014
|
31.3.2013
|
31.3.2012
|
31.3.2011
|
31.3.2010
|
31.3.2009
|
31.3.2008
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
4,233,899
|
?
|
421,264
|
70,250
|
856,393
|
177,534
|
233,099
|
629,181
|
1,846,178
|
|
Interest
receivable
|
56,213
|
?
|
258
|
323
|
149
|
101
|
373
|
21,585
|
33,424
|
| |
4,290,112
|
?
|
421,522
|
70,573
|
856,542
|
177,635
|
233,472
|
650,766
|
1,879,602
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Merchandise/Campaign
Costs
|
3,212,141
|
?
|
63,638
|
115,109
|
476,813
|
487,193
|
421,236
|
974,786
|
673,366
|
|
Admin.
Expenses
|
299,234
|
?
|
21,005
|
23,910
|
24,909
|
26,930
|
29,868
|
30,865
|
141,747
|
| |
3,511,375
|
?
|
84,643
|
139,019
|
501,722
|
514,123
|
451,104
|
1,005,651
|
815,113
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oper.
Surplus/Deficit
|
778,737
|
?
|
336,879
|
-68,446
|
354,820
|
-336,488
|
-217,632
|
-354,885
|
1,064,489
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxation
|
-25,681
|
?
|
0
|
9,756
|
-5,128
|
-8,371
|
-2,598
|
-6,878
|
-12,462
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surplus/deficit
for year
|
753,056
|
?
|
336,879
|
-58,690
|
349,692
|
-344,859
|
-220,230
|
-361,763
|
1,052,027
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audit
|
50,085
|
?
|
5,900
|
6,300
|
6,300
|
6,300
|
6,169
|
5,750
|
13,366
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash at
bank
|
|
763,772
|
765,363
|
441,169
|
528,267
|
173,321
|
516,968
|
719,723
|
572,344
|
|
Debtors
|
|
0
|
0
|
4,523
|
1,778
|
4,760
|
3,718
|
19,795
|
585,369
|
|
Creditors
|
|
17,620
|
12,307
|
29,515
|
55,178
|
52,906
|
50,652
|
49,254
|
105,686
|
| |
|
746,152
|
753,056
|
416,177
|
474,867
|
125,175
|
470,034
|
690,264
|
1,052,027
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrestricted
Funds
|
|
185,507
|
174,966
|
197,240
|
158,953
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Restricted
Funds
|
|
560,645
|
578,090
|
218,937
|
315,914
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
|
Accumulated
Reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
470,034
|
690,264
|
1,052,027
|
0
|
|
Income
and
Expenditure
Account
|
|
|
|
|
-344,859
|
-220,230
|
-361,763
|
1,052,027
|
| |
|
746,152
|
753,056
|
416,177
|
474,867
|
125,175
|
470,034
|
690,264
|
1,052,027
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Note 2
|
|
|
|
Note 1
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 1:
The
debtors
figure
includes
£563,152
for
donations
committed
but not
received
at
31.3.2008
|
|
|
|
|
Note 2: There
was a
change
of
accounting
policy
in 2012;
money
available
was
divided
as
restricted
and
unrestricted
funds
|
|
|
| |
|
All we can see from the 2015 accounts is
that there was £763,772 in the bank at
the year end, a figure similar to the
cash at bank in the previous year and
that there were creditors of £17,620
leaving the company net worth just under
£750,000 as at 31 March 2015. |
| |
|
The
Fund now |
| |
So, close to nine years
after the Fund was
incorporated, and given the
commitment in madeleine to
transparency, whatever it
cost, we have -
· No financial information
on the official website
AND
· audited accounts which
tell us, in effect, nothing
What is the reason for the
reluctance to give financial
information?
The website still requests
donations from the public,
one that is becoming
increasingly suspicious of
charities and not for profit
organisations which
request support yet do not
provide clear information as
to why they need
money and what it is spent
on.
The Fund’s raison d’être and
its income and expenditures
remain a mystery.
Enid O’Dowd FCA
www.enidodowd.com
1 February 2016 |
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
