BLOG

 
 

Information

Posted on

2 Comments

For all our readers. Before comments can be viewed on this site they have to be approved. If you look at the entry below under my thanks you will see I have approved a comment by Jacquie Peters and one by Terrie Salone. I have done this because to not do so would lead people to beleive that we have something to hide. We have nothing to hide. Anyone you has been following this saga will not be surprised by any of it. I could write all day refuting a lot of this stuff but its all been said. The public will have the last word as it should be. No support means no charity. The only thing we feel very strongly about is the implication by Sallone that we have mishandled the money.  Our accounts are available to anyone who wishes to see them. They have been audited. John the treasurer and I would welcome anyone to examine every cent in and out for the past six years.. I have had offers, yes honestly, of funds to pay for solicitors to challenge some of the lies and allegations. I have said no because I want an end to it but I will defend my honesty if needed so before anyone says we have mishandled money be able to back up what you say.  - Colin

Add a comment:

Leave a comment:

Comments

  1. john

    Thanks Malcolm, gratefully received. John

    Posted on

  2. Malcolm

    I find it so sad that people are resorting to hurtful and, in my opinion, completely unfounded remarks regarding Hovar and it's committee. A genuine charity with many members and volunteers together because of a shared interest in combating the problem of mistreated and abandoned animals. (We have five rescued dogs, all adopted). No one can doubt the genuine love Jacquie has for all animals nor question her dedication however the fall out has not in anyway helped the cause of the dogs. My understanding is that when the kennels were built Jacquie agreed to care for the dogs as a fosterer whilst Hovar would continue to pay all relevant costs in relation to their welfare. Whilst I am not suggesting that the current 'claim' for ?3 per day per dog is excessive I have to ask, had that been the proposal at the outset would Hovar have agreed to fund the kennel project? Is this figure not far in excess of the average monthly food/vet bill paid by Hovar? Also, Jacquie's post reads We are happy to continue with the Hovar dogs we have at 3? per day as stated in my first proposal. If the Hovar Committee are not willing for the present donations raised to be used for the care of these dogs then we will keep them here and continue their care until homes can be found. We will hope to have the support of many of our friends that have supported us so well in the past. This interests me as it suggests that Hovar would simply abandon any duty to the care of these dogs. Perhaps Hovar could confirm if their intention would still be to cover the food, vet costs etc for the Hovar dogs at Barkingside, (which they have done from day one), whilst not agreeing to the ?3 a day proposal, until homes can be found? I think that this is something that has to be made very clear. Either Hovar are failing to continue to care for dogs they have rescued or Jacquie would appear to be asking for donations towards the care of dogs which are already being funded and paid for by Hovar. (This is obviously completely different to Jacquie finding sponsors for other dogs in her care). If the status quo prevails then, whilst commending Jacquie in continuing to care for the dogs, the question then arises, what was achieved in making this fallout so public and involving a solicitor? The only difference would appear to be that Hovar kennels will become Barkingside kennels. I have no wish to fall out with anyone over this. I cannot overstate the admiration I have for the work Jacquie and Roy do however, as I said previously, I also have a great deal of respect for the volunteers and committee of Hovar who devote their time for free. Like so many I hope for an amicable solution through negotiation. I just hope this problem does not result in dissolving either Hovar or Barkingside. One thing I will add, I have complete belief in the honesty and integrity of Colin and the committee and I find it disgraceful that people can imply otherwise with impunity on facebook especially people who by their own admission do not know any of the committee nor probably realise the work Hovar has done over the years. Surely homing 600 dogs speaks for itself.

    Posted on

Add a comment