8. You’ve got mail | Olive Cooke

   When a 92-year-old poppy seller jumps from a bridge in Bristol, UK, it quickly sparks public outrage towards charities who had been inundating the pensioner for months leading up to her death. And then, there was a call for reform.

Sources
 
1. Daily mail: shame on charities that drove olive to her death

2. British Legion History

3. BBC News: Olive cooke "overwhelmed" by charity requests

4. Bristol Post: Remembering Olive Cooke 2 years on

5. FRSB Report findings

6. FRSB Report

7. RSPCA and BHF Fined after investigation

8. Gov UK New fundraising law introduced 

9. The Guardian: Charity opt out service launched

10. BBC News: Cooke family do not blame charities over their loved ones death 

Liked this episode? Then let us know! you can leave a comment below, rate or subscribe to the podcast. (we cant wait to hear from you!) 

For more information about uncharitable check out our socials on: 

| Instagram

|  X

If you’re on Reddit, consider contributing to the community Here

Thanks for listening! 

Transcript

Odeya: [00:00:00] That starving polar bear, malnourished dog, or ditzy panda you sponsor doesn't handwrite those quarterly updates you receive in the mail. Sorry to burst your fantasy bubble if you told yourself that. No, these responses are written by people like me. I was your friend, your pen pal so long as you continued to pay the subscription.

I was the one who sent air wuss and kisses to your door. Who curated pleasing jargon to make my words feel like a warm hug. The one who shared all those wacky adventures our sponsor dog had that year. Sometimes it would hit me that I was probably the only person certain people connected with for months at a time.

Christmas certainly exposed the loneliness many of them experienced. From late October every year, we would get sacks full of mail, treats, cash, knitted blankets, you name it. When we had the time, we would read each letter. The majority would just wish their sponsor dog a Merry Christmas, and fold money into the card for the staff to purchase treats and [00:01:00] toys, which would last an entire year, there were so many.

Others would ask for more, share how tough their year had been, request extra stories or tell us about their own hardships. I recall one man admit to his guilt about the loss of his own dog. It wasn't his fault but he was there, he couldn't change fate. But the pain scribbled across the paper was stained with what I assumed were his tears.

The letter had creases and the ink was smudged. His vulnerability poured throughout, but it was clear he didn't care whose hands this letter fell upon. He didn't know me, but I was real enough to express his pain to, even better as a faceless response. I could accommodate that. It was certainly more welcome to the doorstep compared to other forms of communication we sent out, which were usually campaigns expressing how pressed we were for funds, or a new appeal for someone to purchase a brick for a new building.

No, luckily that wasn't my department. I was a girl on the ground, and I preferred it that way. But these campaigns [00:02:00] provide greater opportunities many of us don't know about. Its dependence revolves around our arrogance and busy lifestyles. 

We've all been there, the fine print we don't care to read, or confusing words on a form we just skim over because hey, we're busy people.

We have better things to do, so just take our money and be on your way with you. That's fine by them, anything to get you on that list. Because that list is more valuable as data than individual support. Oh yeah, your data is digital gold, a wealth of information that can landscape a more personal approach to your heart and your wallet.

Anything, so long as they can make a fast buck. It can be sold on to others and then sold on again. All because you didn't tick that little box. Or did. They like to change it up from time to time, hoping you don't take notice. 

I'm Host Odeya. This is uncharitable. 

This episode will contain details of suicide, so listener discretion is advised.[00:03:00]

Fun fact. In World War I, across Flanders fields, constant battles, bombings, and blastings saw the countryside turn barren and brown. Mud replaced the grass, and rubble polluted natural beauty scenes. It was a mess, a reminder of human consequences. The scars would take years to fade as the Western Front returned to its original state.

But amongst this depressing chaos sprung a combination of red and black. Their resilience flourished silently, absorbing the lime that laced artillery bombardments, taking the form of a poppy, and staging a victory of their own.

Their presence soon attracted the interest of many, who adopted their appearance as a representation of events that fell before them.

In 1915, Canadian doctor Colonel John McRae wrote the timeless poem In Flanders Fields, which inspired not only my fun sucking sponge of an English teacher, Shout out to Mr. Peers, but also an American academic named Moena Michael [00:04:00] to adopt the flower in memory of those who had fallen in the war. 

Her efforts to persuade the United States to recognize the poppy as a symbol of remembrance encouraged others to seek the same in their home countries, including Canada, Australia, and the UK.

Earl Haig was one of them. Since being appointed as the Royal British Legion's first president after bringing together four organisations that provided support for ex servicemen and their families, Haig launched the Poppy Day Appeal in 1921, ordering 9 million poppies to distribute across the UK, selling out almost immediately.

The factories that produced the emblems employed disabled ex servicemen who benefited from the designs which could be assembled using only one hand, allowing them to partake on the production lines. 

And every year, a sea of red petals floods the streets in the weeks leading up to Remembrance Day.

Members of the public, politicians, royal family and public figures would unite by adding the accessory to their person. Purchased from one of 40, [00:05:00] 000 dedicated sellers, found at every corner in every town and city. 

For Bristol, UK, a familiar face stood shaking that tin for 76 years. Posted outside Bristol Cathedral proudly stood the gentle grace that was Olive Cook.

A retired postal worker who joined the British Legion at 16 following the footsteps of her father who became an active member after serving in World War I. 

In 1939, shortly after the Second War began, Olives mission to the charity found a whole new meaning shortly after meeting her first husband.

Quote, Although I had only been married two and a half years to Leslie, when he was killed he was in my memory every day.

You never forget the lost people, and he was such a good man you wouldn't want to. His words to me were that if anything was to happen to him, to always wear a smile, and I've never got bitter. I never thought bitterness helped. So I wish for everyone to wear a poppy with great [00:06:00] pride, to remember those who died in both world wars.

Olive was the charity. She was the living memory of all those men who fought to ensure a free future for all, something many of us forget about these days. 

Her proud status as a lesion girl educated everyone who dropped a coin to know exactly where it was going to. She insisted on it. So you would hear Olive retell the same stories over and over again to remind the donor of their privilege.

Her deep devotion to the cause did not go unnoticed. Over seven decades, Olive was estimated to have sold 30, 000 poppies. 

In 2014, at the age of 92, she received three separate awards, beginning with the Bristol Post Gold Star, followed by the Point of Light Award, granted by the then UK Prime Minister David Cameron.

Who expressed how pleased he was to recognize the tireless dedication to keeping the memory of our fallen heroes alive. 

Quote, I'm incredibly grateful for your tenancy and diligence over the last [00:07:00] 76 years, he said. Taking to the streets come rain or shine and selling over 30, 000 poppies. 

Concluding the celebrations, Olive was presented with a third and final award from her city's mayor and councilman, Alastair Watson, who invited the pensioner for afternoon tea at the Mansion House.

The following year, however, Olive's smile became faded. Friends would notice she was not herself so much. It appeared her health was in decline and her independence was slowly crumbling beneath her, draining the energy needed to upkeep her routine. 

Well, that and

Sad to say, this is the same kind of intrusion Olive experienced for months. Her phone would ring off the hook constantly. 

When hosting guests in our home, Olive felt the pressure to answer due to her polite nature, which distressed her guests to see her struggle when attempting to disconnect from her calls.

To make matters worse, olive began to become inundated with mail asking for her support as well. When she [00:08:00] felt cornered, she took to her local paper to highlight the harassment she had been experiencing

to the Bristol Post. She confessed. She dreaded the arrival of the morning mail in one month. She counted 267 letters from dozens of different charities. Or asking her for donations to help with fundraising. Quote, I have always donated to charity, but as I'm getting older, I have been told I need to start cutting back. I think the elderly are targeted with this sort of mail on purpose, as charities think they have a lot of disposable money, or they might have donated in the past.

But receiving so much is overwhelming. 

When she confided with her close friend Michael Earley, who had been helping her for months by removing junk mail from her flat, he convinced her to cancel all 27 direct debits to various charities. Unfortunately, this only made the situation worse.

I think she felt she had given so much. She just couldn't give anymore. She felt guilty. She couldn't give it in the same way she [00:09:00] wanted to give. She felt tormented, said Michael. The final blow came when Olive sent her son 250 in cash through the post office, only for it to never arrive.

And so, on a sunny May 6th afternoon, Olive travelled to the city's Clifton Suspension Bridge that spanned the Avon Gorge. Close to the observatory, Olive gently placed a stool under some railings, stepped up to the barrier, appeared over the drop, and jumped. 

At 6. 20pm, Olive was pronounced dead by paramedics, with her grandson identifying her body.

When police traced Olive's steps back towards the bridge, they recovered her walking stick and a bag containing her watch, purple raincoat, umbrella, purse, and a piece of cardboard, requesting the finder to phone the police. Attached to it was a second note with her name on it. When searching her home, a second note was found, addressed to her loving family and step family, which read the [00:10:00]words, 

I find that with these last four months of health and deep depression and little sleep I can take no more. Thank you all for your love and kindness always. 

It was no secret that Olive had battled depression for years. Her low mood had taken her along this path before. 

Quote. As she got older, it became harder to cope. She feared losing her independence, said her granddaughter Louise King. We as a family were aware of this, and we did all we could to support her. Her health declined, and it seemed she was determined to choose her own fate. End quote. 

I'm sorry, did you say depression? Because that's not what I heard.

That's because the media immediately pointed the finger to the charities who had been hounding her the last few years. Her recent connection to the media laid out the assumption that the plague of calls and letters drowned Olive to the point she leapt off that bridge. 

The humanitarian was a quote, soft target.

The [00:11:00] Daily Mail claimed that that's how her family friends saw it too, who allegedly accused the charities of exploiting the poppy seller's kind heart. 

Just days later after her death, the paper claimed to have found Olive's name on a list of donors maintained by shadowy data firms, who sold them on to other charities, which led to her being swamped.

Their investigation reflected from a previous undercover report where journalists posed as cold calling firm workers who discovered they could purchase sensitive details relating to pensions and medical conditions for as little as 5p each, but the real goldmine were charity donors. Their soft touch was a quote, particularly valuable commodity, according to the paper.

A whistleblower claimed that the pressure was really on in those places. 

Quote, I thought it was disgusting the way they had absolutely no compassion. I didn't know who they were talking to, but it could have been anyone. It could have been someone like Olive. 

The final straw came when she was calling on behalf of a [00:12:00] blindness charity.

Quote, The lady I was speaking to said that her son was actually registered as deaf, so she gave all her finances to deaf charities. And I said, oh, that's fine. I'm sorry for bothering you. I hope everything goes well. Then my supervisor came over to me and said, why did you let that call go? You should have kept going.

You should have kept pressing her. I didn't feel comfortable with it, so I left that day. Though there was no way to know how Olive was placed on these lists, it quickly became public interest to understand how exactly this data was processed. 

So, seen as you ask, here's a quick breakdown for you. 

Step 1.

Acquire thousands of personal details from customers or donors. Gold stars for those who are charity minded and have a prime credit rating. 

To qualify, you may have simply entered a street raffle, prize draw, or any other grey market promotion. 

Step 2. Sort these prime candidates into categories based on their interests.

Think [00:13:00] environment, religion, lotteries, concerts, wildlife, and pets. 

Step 3. Share this valuable information with marketing firms, charities, or even companies looking to sell their crappy products. 

And finally, step 4. Watch that money roll in. 

The newspaper claimed the business model had become so lucrative that firms started specializing in donor details alone, with some boasting to be selling up to 45 million names a year and working with more than 200 not for profit organizations, all perfectly legal.

The outcry soon became impossible to ignore, with government officials claiming this opportunity to regulate the public's frustrations. 

Conservatory MP Sarah Wollaston said the, quote, information commissioner, needs to step in and stop this. When you give to a charity, it is responsible to expect that information isn't being sold on.

They have a duty to look after those who are donating. MP Andrew Percy claimed that he was, quote, [00:14:00] shocked that people's goodwill is being harvested in such a clinical and corporate manner, particularly when they are often vulnerable and elderly. 

Ms Cook's grandson believed her name was traded by charities because she was so generous, and to an extent the family would agree.

But claims of their loved ones caused the death, on the other hand, wasn't what the media had stated.

Granddaughter Jessica Doon told the BBC, quote, 'Nam would have wanted the work of charities to be promoted. 

My grandmother believed charities are the backbone to our communities. I think the amount of contact she received was starting to escalate and become slightly out of control, and the phone calls were beginning to get intrusive. But there's no blame or suggestion that this was a reason for her death. 

There was a headline that upset me, that she was killed by kindness. It was not that at all. 

The coroner agreed 14 days later on May 20th, who acknowledged Olive had suffered from long term issues with periodic depression and low mood.

The assistant coroner then adjourned the hearing [00:15:00] until July 16th. Given the media plenty of time to drive that knife in further,

the yearning to drag the practice under the microscope saw the Daily Mail conduct a second investigation, this time sending a journalist into the jaws of GoGen, a London based firm that fundraised on behalf of 40 major UK charities. 

For three weeks, the mole claimed to have uncovered breaches against homes protected under the Telephone Preference Service, a register designed to opt out from receiving unsolicited sales and marketing calls.

A big no no for these guys.

The reporter witnessed superiors encourage their employees to be quote, brutal and ferocious, insisting that no one had an excuse not to give, not even the poor or the elderly. The TPS system can only shield a receiver so much before someone misses the fine print with certain privacy policies, and that was a loophole the company could exploit.

We are now going to take it up a level, said a supervisor. If you are tempted [00:16:00] by any kind of fluffy language, take it out of your vocabulary. Pump more voracity into your ask because let's face it, you know it works. It's time to get the persuader out and hit it hard. 

I'm assuming he was still on topic.

The reporter claimed they were instructed to practice two attempts at the beginning of each call to persuade the person to talk to them. 

If on the first attempt the person says I'm going out or I'm in a bit of a hurry, they must try again saying something like Oh, it'll just be a couple of minutes, is that okay?

If they agree, they are tasked with a further three attempts to get a donation. 

And if you think for a second these professionals know the ins and outs of the charity they are representing, think again. 

Each caller are given only a short briefing before they pick up the phone. Sometimes fundraisers will be switched from one charity campaign to another halfway through a shift.

Something the reporter experienced themselves. Quote. On one occasion, having spent the first 15 minutes of a shift talking to people about the Nepal [00:17:00] earthquake, I was suddenly switched to discussing the cancer care crisis instead. 

The carefully curated scripts were designed to pack the biggest emotional punch possible. Not even the most vulnerable were safe from their antics. 

The journalists claimed the firm were prepared to take money from people who had told them they had dementia or memory problems, provided they could answer a few simple questions. 

Understandably, it struck a nerve with many. The revelation encouraged the public administration to haul charity CEOs to Parliament for answers, who of course insisted they had no idea about the brutality, but for good measure, immediately suspended contracts with the firm.

Information Commissioner Christopher Graham promised to investigate whether any of the charities had broken the law, quote, something had seriously gone wrong when such prestigious organizations were resorting to boiler room operations to hound the vulnerable, end quote. 

Dame Hilary Bloom, Chief Executive of the Charities Advisory Trust, decided to deliver [00:18:00] a more aggressive response. Quote, Bosses of these charities should be sacked. I'd like to dismiss all the people who oversee these big fundraising operations in these big charities. I would say to them, go and develop your careers elsewhere. We want people with higher ethical standards. 

Preach it, sister. 

For GoGen, the backlash discarded their reputation practically overnight.

Despite publicly suspending two of the colleagues recorded in the investigation, the company quickly ceased trading at all four of its offices, making all 485 employees redundant. In a statement, the organization blamed the recent media scrutiny of the agency, which made it impossible to retain customers.

Quote, it is with great sadness that I can confirm that GoGen has ceased to trade. In the past 24 hours, we have had no choice but to make all 485 employees redundant, whilst urgently reviewing the options for the future of our business with financial advisors. But it is likely that GoGen will [00:19:00] enter a formal insolvency process early next week.

The fundraising industry needs to be more responsible in the way it raises money. Then perhaps it has been said that it is vitally important that charities take more responsibility for what happens in their name. The allegations of widespread abuses of fundraising guidelines and data protection rules are simply not true.

Good riddance. 

But it wasn't just about GoGen. The report uprooted existing frustrations the public were already accustomed to. 

And with Olive's face symbolizing the movement, they didn't need that much of a push, something Olive's granddaughter once again tried to disassociate her loved one from. 

But once the wheel started turning, there was no stopping it.

The public had become swayed into believing that the industry was in dire need to be tightened. 

They wanted accountability, they wanted action, and they wanted change. 

Next in line to vent his concern was Prime Minister David Cameron, who released a statement detailing his [00:20:00] dismay surrounding olives death.

He strongly recommended for the Fundraising Standards Board to look at whether anything more could have been done to have prevented this.

Already on it, Chief, 

because the regulator had received over 400 complaints by this point, mostly about the ridiculous amount of mail piling up on doorsteps. 

And in this new era of change, the media decided to piggyback off Olive further, calling for a reform, titling it Olive's Law, which if introduced would prevent the bullying and harassment of the most generous and vulnerable, putting an end to the shadowy practice, something 83 percent of the UK public wanted to.

Aside from the request of a preference service, the public also wanted to know how exactly Olives details had come into the possession of countless organizations. 

So on May 18th, the FRSB launched a two strand investigation, beginning with the particular circumstances that led to Ms. Cook feeling overwhelmed by [00:21:00] communications. And the fundraising practices that led to a spate of public complaints received by the board in the weeks following Ms. Cook's death. 

The report would overlook a total of 1, 442 membered charities and 30 non members who are known to have been in contact. 

It would also be determined how her details were kept, how they had been acquired and how frequently the charities were mailing her.

Furthermore, Civil Society Minister Rob Wilson demanded the regulator, along with the Institute of Fundraising. and the Public Fundraising Regulatory Association to submit an action plan going forward. 

Alastair McLean, the FRSB Chief Executive, acknowledged that lessons needed to be learnt from the recent events and that channeling that back into the sector would strengthen fundraising practices going forward.

And so, without further ado, I present to you these vigorous amendments released in an interim report a few weeks later, 

starting with providing greater clarity about the [00:22:00] rules of gaining donor consent. Meaning, the organizations needed to provide clearer ways for individuals to opt in and out of further communication.

Secondly, a limit on the frequency of approaches per year, as well as the removal of the current code allowing fundraisers to use quote, reasonable persuasion. And finally, a reminder that charities cannot and should not pass personal information onto third parties without permission. The same goes for calling those registered on the TPS.

One would think they already knew this and yet, here we are.

Soon after, the government introduce a new legislation to rein in the circus. 

Under tough new measures, non profits with incomes over 1 million pounds would be forced to publish their fundraising activities in their trustees annual reports, as well as detailing their approach, including their use of professional fundraising agencies, and the steps they take to prevent inappropriate fundraising from vulnerable people.

Should the Charity Commission feel their rules are being broken, new powers would be granted so they could [00:23:00] intervene, a far better foundation to grow from than the previous flimsy self regulation one might agree. 

Although, some were still in favor of the old ways.

To restore Rhythm within their beating hearts, the more compliant charities whipped their marketing departments to draft letters pledging a change of direction and transparency.

Friends of the Earth opened a feedback channel and promised quote, if there is anything we can do to better improve our communications, we'll do it.

Save the Children announced a new safeguard named the Supporter Promise to ensure their donors had quote, Greater control over how they gave to the charity.

The pledge guaranteed that all cold calling to members of the public on their behalf was no longer in operation, as well as allowing their supporters to choose how they were contacted, because apparently, they never had that freedom to begin with. They concluded by vowing to protect their data, shying away from the temptations of sharing or selling it for a fast buck.

Oxfam, on the other [00:24:00] hand, suggested their involvement was not consistent with the allegations, claiming they had undertaken their own investigation into the matter, something they like to do a lot, by the way, which I'm sure will creep up in another episode this season. 

Nevertheless, they still took action, piggybacking off some of the assurances offered by Save the Children, so I'll save my breath from repeating myself.

On July 16th, the inquest into Olives death concluded. 

The verdict recognized that the notes left by Cook expressed her frustrations with insomnia and a long battle with depression, something the pensioner could no longer take. 

A further dig into her health records revealed there have been significant attempts to take her own life, dating back as far as 1999.

From that date, and following her discharge from the hospital, she appeared to have developed a very close and caring relationship with her family doctor, and was throughout that period taking antidepressants.

A toxicology report showed at the time of her death she was still taking that [00:25:00] medication.

Cook's GP, Dr. Diana Foster, first prescribed the pensioner with antidepressants in 2009, The same year Olive twice attempted to commit suicide. 

In 2013, she was diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent surgery and radiotherapy. The next year, she began taking sleeping tablets, as she struggled to get any more than three hours of sleep per night.

Quote, I last saw Ms. Cook on May 1st, five days before her death, said Dr. Foster. She complained of lack of sleep. She had got few hours of sleep as she had a sleeping tablet, so she was prescribed nightly tablets for that. 

From 2014, she was suffering from both depression and sleeplessness and continuous suicidal feelings, said the coroner. I am satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the proper conclusion in this instance is one of suicide.

In a statement read out to the court on behalf of her family, her granddaughter paid tribute to her, saying she was a much loved mother, grandmother, and great grandmother. 

Quote, She lived a full [00:26:00] life and achieved so much, of which we are extremely proud. She loved being independent and doing things for herself. Visiting family and friends and helping those who were less able was important to her. Unfortunately, she had a lifelong battle with depression, and as she got older, it became harder to cope. 

There you have it. 

The charities were never considered as a contributing cause to this heartbreaking situation, but son in law Brian James told the media after the hearing that it certainly had, quote, opened a can of worms.

Whether it was deliberate or not, they still ended up taking advantage of an older person, and that shouldn't be, said James. We want Olive to be known as a person with a big heart who loved life. 

The Mail swallowed the truth and regurgitated the details a week later, something I'm sure was tough to do.

The way they had gone about the situation was all wrong. Olive should never have been the face of it all. She went to the Bristol Post to raise concerns for others in similar circumstances. Even in her darkest hour, she wanted the vulnerable to be [00:27:00] taken care of. That was all. Instead, for the press, the timing between that article and her suicide aligned perfectly. It didn't matter at the time if it was truthful or not. 

But that can of worms definitely needed to be opened. Big Charity had become a monster, whether they themselves could see it or not. 

Which, oops, I almost forgot. 

On January 2016, the FRSB finally released their findings from Ola's investigation, which as expected, unravelled pretty grotesque details about the tactics they used.

Out of the 1, 472 charities that participated, it was established that 99 of them had Cook's name in their database, each had claimed to have sent her an average of just 6 mailings per year, which amounted to 466 in total, something the FRSB believed to be an unlikely representation of the true amount received, suspected it was actually around 2, 800.

24 charities admitted to sharing her details, though only 21 could [00:28:00] confirm they had permission to do so, which is where 70 other charities came to claim her digits. And in most cases, her permission was just assumed. 

Just 14 of the 99 charities provided an opt out box on every piece of communication, 10 included it on their first piece, 2 included it on a tick box just once a year, 56 provided just basic contact information, and 16 had a no opt out option at all.

She was caught in the spider's web the moment she expressed an interest. 

From the year 2000, the volume of mailings had trebled from 119 a year to a peak of 466 in 2014. Before 2000, she was being mailed by 19 of the charities in the sample. Since then, 82 new ones contacted her for the first time, five of whom were within the last five years.

There needs to be a behavioral shift across the voluntary sector in the way that charities view their supporters, said Chair Andrew Hynde. Ms Cook's experiences demonstrate the [00:29:00] inevitable consequences of a fundraising regime where charities have been willing to exchange or sell the personal details of donors to each other and to commercial third parties.

Yes, charities perform an essential role in British society and must continue to have the right to ask for funds, but the poor practices exposed last summer underlines the need for the right to ask for funds to be balanced with the public's right to say no. Four months later, four charities were publicly named after breaching fundraising codes in connection with Gojin's operations, who were found to have used brutal tactics to exploit donors in fundraising calls and putting undue pressure on potential ones.

The British Red Cross, Macmillan Cancer Support, NSPCC and Oxfam all failed to monitor GoGen's fundraising activities appropriately, with Macmillan and Red Cross accused of misleading donors about the way their details would be used. The investigation found the Red Cross monitored just 434 calls being made on its behalf in [00:30:00] 2014, at just 0. 16 percent of the average 668, 000 calls made by the agency at the time. 

Macmillan followed closely, reviewing 0. 15 percent of 60, 000 calls made, a figure that was also found to be insufficient. Both the NSPCC and Oxfam grew too shy to provide their figures which forced the regulator to fine them too in breach of code.

I'm guessing Oxfam's internal investigation was enough for them.

In addition, both the Red Cross and Macmillan's privacy notice did not make it sufficiently clear what type of further contact a supporter might receive, once again misleading supporters. 

The audio submitted by the Daily Mail proved that GoGen trained their staff to master nature of why they were contacting supporters, and placed far too much pressure on individuals to donate, in particular, those with dementia or Alzheimer's.

Well, at least it was just these guys. 

Again? Oh, come on.

In December [00:31:00] 2016, two new charities became the centre of yet another data breach, this time receiving fines from the Information Commissioner, who found the RSPCA and British Heart Foundation to be Wealth screening donors. 

Oh my god. 

The organizations paid companies to track how much money donors would leave in their wills after their demise.

When digging into the financial accounts of 7 million donors, it was suggested that in some cases, they worked alongside financial analysis to estimate the amount they would personally be left. Likewise, the British Heart Foundation was also found guilty of sharing its donor details with an investigative firm, which in turn, secretly snooped into the wealth of their donors.

The RSPCA was consequently fined 25, 000 and the British Heart Foundation 18, 000, with the added warning that if they continued to show disregard for people's privacy, the Commissioner would annul the proximity. 

So you're telling me that few lessons have been learnt after all this? Darn.

In 2017, the [00:32:00] Fundraising Preference Service was finally established, introducing an escape route from the grasp of irritating requests.

Should an individual wish to remove themselves from a database, the charity will have 28 days to comply. If they fail, they face a fine of up to 25, 000.

I wish that could be an ideal end to our story, but I checked that website, and a list from 2019 showed 37 charities hadn't even bothered to look at the requests made by their donors.

Go figure. 

Uncharitable was created by me, Host Odeya, with a vision to illuminate the unethical shadows within philanthropy. 

We are a completely independent podcast. I refuse to be bought, which is more than I can say for these guys, but it can only survive with your help. 

Word of mouth is a powerful thing, so if you like the show, that's your cue to spread the word.

You can leave a review, recommend or rate it's worth wherever you listen. This podcast is slowly growing, and that's thanks to you. [00:33:00]

Before you go, ask yourself, do you know where your donation goes?