[Closed] Any legal bods in here. Do i have a case ?

That's a rubbish thing to happen to a volunteer who's giving up their time, but are you really sure you want to sue a charity? 😯

They said it would be OK. Their submission of a claim almost admits responsibility.

I think you can sue them. Otherwise you are making a pretty big donation 😉

That is really rubbish but ultimately you are responsible for your own items, unless you specifically asked if the room would be kept locked and only staff could ever have access you really dont have a leg to stand on IMO. But I'm not a lawyer.

When my other half was working at the Edinburgh festival she had her bag stolen in very similar circumstances, but as the room was not locked she should have known better than to leave it there, it was just what everyoen did. Much like speeding 😀

Not a lawyer so can't help you there, but morally I don't think I could take that sort of action, especially if there was a way to use your own insurance.

Make a positive out of a negative and explain to them that you had considered taking this action but won't if they can show they have made measurable improvments for others in the same situation in future (a couple of lockers, signs up saying not to leave valuables etc).

i think the charity is taking the p@ss, these guys gave up their time over xmas (i'll really bet they are innundated by volunteers at that time 'he says sarcastically') and now they are being fobbed off.

make no mistake, charity is a very good business to be in. only a few years ago the nspcc were discovered to be taking something like 88p+ in every £1 donated for 'admin'.

this charity, whoever they are, can easily afford to reimburse you!

p.s. threaten them with a story in the local paper.

It doesn't sound as if your items were left in what is classified as a public place as the door was clearly marked Staff Only therefore only staff should be in there locks or no locks. I would ask to see the policy small print and for them to establish what basis they are refusing the claim on. My experience with claims in customer service is that this would be covered (although I am talking from experience of lost/stolen mobile phones). It all comes down to policy exclusions.

p.s. what is with chicks and bags? I'm guessing your valuables (wallet & mobile) were stuffed into your back pocket and were absolutely fine!

We wouldn't be thinking of taking legal action other than the fact that they have not been very helpful with the situation since their insurance company kicked the claim out.
They were all nice as pie when they wanted our help and time but their stance since the decision by the insurers has been 'tough' which i find very disturbing for an organisation who bill themselves as 'a caring charity'.
The claim was for just over £600 (not a made up claim as everything was priced allowing for replacement value and taking in to account wear & tear etc) but they haven't even offered to make a partial payout without prejustice (or what ever its known as).
Thought about going to the local papers with this but don't really want to put other people off giving up their time to help.

only a few years ago the nspcc were discovered to be taking something like 88p+ in every £1 donated for 'admin'.

this charity, whoever they are, can easily afford to reimburse you!

What's your source for that figure? From every pound the NSPCC currently spend around 80p on activities to end cruelty to children. Either they've turned their business around in a rather implausible way, or you're spouting some bollocks urban legend. I know which I think it is...

WTF do you take to a charity dinner cooking that could be valued at £600?! If I were going to a homeless shelter to cook meals the LAST thing I'd take would be my wallet or my phone?!

I worked/ran homeless hostels fro about 8 years. What on earth were you thinking taking £600 of stuff into a homeless hostel?
tuff tits imo

'legal head on' you do not have a case, as it was your possessions, and you were ultimately responsible for where you left them.

You left your handbag in an unoccupied room, in a place where you knew nobody, and then when it gets nicked you try and claim 600 quid for the loss, it was your negligence, and yours alone, hopefully the homeless people had a good few nights.

What was worth £600?

JLV handbag?

project - Member
You left your handbag in an unoccupied room, in a place where you knew nobody, and then when it gets nicked you try and claim 600 quid for the loss, it was your negligence, and yours alone, hopefully the homeless people had a good few nights.

It was left in a staff room where we were told to leave it by a member of staff, its not ike we slung it in a corner where anyone could get to it, or that was the impression we got from the member of staff 🙄

Pieface - It was the contents of the handbag that had most of the value, PAYG Mobile Phone, makeup personal effects,,,, I'm not going to post the full list as its not relevant to the original question.

600 quid for a handbag, never heard of matalan, why take something that expensive to a centre for homeless people who dont own anything, have no privacy or family.

How do you know it wasn't a member of staff that stole it?

Yes you were told it was fine to leave your posessions in this office. Technically he may have been giving you permission to do so, possibly not giving you any assurances that it was safe & secure to do so. (Devils advocate)

Also, maybe it could be said that you did not furnish him with the full facts that you had £600 worth of items in the purse and as such the person was unknowingly 'duped' into giving a response which was not in accordance. How about if you had said "Is it safe for us to leave this purse with £600 in it here?" I bet his response would have been "Are you fcin mad!!"

project, you seem to be fixated by the amount which is not the point. The bag was not flash or anything and did not give anything away of what was inside it, infact it was one of my other halfs older handbags. It was the contents that had the value but again that is not the point.

The question is do they (the charity) have a liability? You have made your opinion known so is that your professional legal opinion or just an opinion?

At a guess unless it was in a locked room or cupboard you're going to struggle whichever route you choose.

If the £600 contents included a PAYG mobile and make-up (as you claim), suppose a normal PAYG mobile is £100: how much does your gf spend on make-up?

only a few years ago the nspcc were discovered to be taking something like 88p+ in every £1 donated for 'admin'.

Why are people so credulous when it comes to the belief that other people's jobs are cushy and luxurious? Charity workers, civil servants, teachers, prisoners...

I know it's crap ( the charity I do work for had a volunteer have a laptop stolen from the place recently; they have funded a replacement, even though this means less money spent on projects), but think of it this way:

When youse went home, you had a home to go to.

konabunny - second what you've put in your post. Charities have to function to be able to do the work that they are set up to do. This requires a certain number of staff with expertise, that might not be tied to particular projects - whether it's termed as 'admin' or 'overhead' costs isn't really relevant. A move towards the short-termist view that 'admin' costs need to be kept to a minimum and that the charity just has to chase the grantmakers current fad ultimately undermines the ability of the charity to do good quality work over a sustained period.

Why are people so credulous when it comes to the belief that other people's jobs are cushy and luxurious? Charity workers, civil servants, teachers, prisoners...

Grass is always greener?

 

How much is your no claims bonus worth? 😯

I pay insurance premiums so that I am insured. The idea of avoiding claiming on my insurance just because I could sue a homeless shelter instead doesn't really appeal to me...

I think the problem is the locked/unlocked room. I had a laptop stolen from a room i had locked but it had been opened by another member of staff. The insurance would not cover it as the room had not been locked BUT there had been a lack of XXXX(duty of care not quite the correct statement) on behalf of my employers.

If they said it was safe then you can assume it's safe, therefore their liability BUT i'd try you own insurance first and £600!?!

I am a lawyer and I think you have a claim.

The employee (agent) voluntarily assumed responsibility in telling you it would be ok to keep the bag in the room - with the implication that if would be safe (why else would you ask?) - I suspect the terms of this conversation are where the nun of the matter is.

As for the moral side, it's easier to be self righteous behind a keyboard when you've not just lost £600, which you are otherwise effectively donating.

It's probably not watertight legally so I'd write a lot or raise a claim then accept a lower settlement.

[i]The employee (agent) voluntarily assumed responsibility in telling you it would be ok to keep the bag in the room - with the implication that if would be safe (why else would you ask?) - I suspect the terms of this conversation are where the nun of the matter is.[/i]

Agree with this. Does OP have proof they told them it was safe to leave belongings in the room?

IMHO I wouldn't say the charity has complete liability as I would say that its still the responsibilty of the owner to ensure their belongings were left somewhere safe and do find it strange that you'd leave objects to the value of £600.

"I am a lawyer and I think you have a claim"

But not morally. Suck it up,learn from it and take responsibility for your own stuff in future.

"I am a lawyer and I think you have a claim"

But not morally. Suck it up,learn from it and take responsibility for your own stuff in future.

This.

Don't think lawyers are qualified to give moral advice really cynic-al. 😛

just lost £600, which you are otherwise effectively donating.

How does that work?

brant - Member

just lost £600, which you are otherwise effectively donating.

How does that work?

In my view he probably has a legal right to claim the £600, and is therefore owed it by the charity. If he doesn't claim it he's effectively giving it to them by writing off the debt.

For the moral high-ground inhabitants, would you take a different view if the bag had been left in identical circumstances in someone's house or in premises belonging to a business? If you had a business that suplied goods ro services, would you write of debts to charities more easily than other businesses?

Same question as brant.

And, al is not going to get away with [i]where the nun of the matter is[/i]! 😆

If you claim against them you're going to cost them a lot more than £600, unless they roll over straight away. In reality I expect they will instruct solicitors to defend the claim, you will have to do the same, and you will walk away with even less money than you started.

£600 is a ridiculously small amount to be pursuing a disputed claim over - in legal terms it's three or four hours work. After that there is a good chance that you will be operating in the red.

Why don't you strike a compromise and have the charity send over some homeless bods to cook your xmas dinner this year?

Jamie. You've not thought that through. They'd nick everything in his house!

I think there's a couple of points to the "moral high ground".

1/ - if I left my manbag in a spare room at my friends' house I'd not be too worried about it being snaffled by a passing festive crackhead. But if it was I still wouldn't sue them unless my insurance company made me.

2/ - because of the small matter of the high incidence of crackheads in homeless shelters, it is harder to pin the responsibility for it on them. It's not like the charity nicked it (they may have done, of course, dunno)

3/ - you aren't really "donating" something you've lost in any meaningful sense. Someone has it, but again, it seems implausible that the shelter's fundraising officer pinched the bag to sell on ebay to raise funds to help the homeless, it seems altogether more likely that the enterprising homeless nicked it to hjelp themselves.

4/ - the bag is insured and there is no suggestion that the OP's insurer denies liability. [i]That[/i] is the real "nun" of the matter. So rather than "donating" £600 the OP is proposing to screw them for the difference between £600 and the value of his no-claims bonus.

You are no doubt right as a matter of law, but it is the sort of being right that gets the law into disrepute. 🙂

🙂

#
cynic-al - Member

Jamie. You've not thought that through. They'd nick everything in his house!
Posted 38 minutes ago # Report-Post

...and that is why your the lawyer and I am not Al 😉

Ah. I missed the bit about the OP's insurance.

It just seems a bit off to me that the Charity can offer someone a safe place to keep their stuff (and therefore assume a duty of care) and then get off scot-free...just because they are a charity...who is incidentally taking a hard-nosed commercial line on things!

And FWIW I take no responsibility for my typing "nun" on my ipod while waking up in the bath!

I am a lawyer and I think you have a claim.

Ooh, I dunno. A mate of mine went into a shop once, had his bike with him, but din't have a lock. Asked a member of staff if ittud be all right to leave it in a corner, inside. They told him ittud be ok, and that they'd keep an eye on it. Of course, he finishes his shopping, and the bike's gone. He tried kicking up a stink with the manager, no joy. Took advice from a solicitor, they told him that no firm guarantees had been given, as to the safety of his bike, so he din't really have a case. Just being told 'oh yeah, ittul be ok', is not adequate. There needs to be some firm guarantee given, that the items will be secure. does not in any way sound like there was, in this case, just a vague suggestion that it would be ok. And there was something about the fact that my mate failed to ensure that his bike would indeed be secure; you'd have to have reasonable confidence that the security was indeed adequate, not just rely on a vague statement from a member of staff (they weren't security officers or managers, and therefore had no authority to assure security of the bike anyway).

Then there's proving said items were inside the bayg anyway. I mean, I could do the same thing, then claim I left a £20,000 diamond ring in the bayg. Or anything, for that matter. I once was involved in a situation, as a youth worker, where a kid's bayg had been nicked, and he claimed a brand new pair of Nike trainers, costing £80, were in the bayg. We contacted his parents, prepared to pay for the trainers if they had indeed been nicked, they said he woon't have had £80 for trainers in the first place. Scamming little bugger.

As horrible as it is, and as priceless as personal items are, they are after all only things. Life can go on without them. Not trying to dismiss the significance of the loss, on a personal level, but worse things happen at sea, you know?

To try and sue the charity over this, would simply cause a lot more fuss than it would be worth. have you considered, that someone could possibly lose their job over this? Or that the charity would have less funds with which to provide much needed resources or facilities?

In the long run, is it really worth it? What will you really gain? The 'personal' items are surely irreplaceable anyway, and the other stuff, well, what do you pay insurance for?

I'd put it down to sperience, and walk away. Life's too short...

I think the OP is between a rock and a hardplace on this one. Personally I'd right a letter to both the manager of the centre and the Chief Exec further up the foodchain explaining that you had given up your time, wont be seeking financially redress but feel let down and wont be volunteering in the future.
This isnt a sweeping generalisation, alot of the main/big charities are awash with money/a fair chunk of revenue is eaten up before it even reaches the frontline on administrative costs so to say its uncharitable or unfair to claim any sort of redress is a tad niave. Sorry. Plus, like I said rock and a hardplace- with hindsight (great thing after the event!) you shouldnt leave your bag in an unlocked room near homeless peeps.

What's your source for that figure?

it was a major news story a few years back.

I'm still boggling at the £600 contents. Not being a legal bod, my opinion is pointess, but that won't stop me giving it. It strikes me that someone saying it's ok to leave something somewhere, just means they are giving you permission to put something somewhere, it doesn't imply any sort of contractual agreement where they are guaranteeing that no harm will come to your contents. In much the same way as a company can say it's ok to use their private carpark, doesn't mean that they held liable if your car is nicked from there.

In much the same way as a company can say it's ok to use their private carpark, doesn't mean that they held liable if your car is nicked from there.

But to the same token, if a premises provide coat hooks they are liable for the coats UNLESS they put up a disclaimer notice to the contrary (at least I understand that to be the case - never actually checked legally).

This requires a certain number of staff with expertise, that might not be tied to particular projects - whether it's termed as 'admin' or 'overhead' costs isn't really relevant. A move towards the short-termist view that 'admin' costs need to be kept to a minimum

We had someone at a party once say to my wife, who was working for a charity - "don't you feel guilty taking money from a charity"! He did have a bit of a warped perspective on money I think though, being someone who owned much of Herefordshire or something (and wacky right wing christian views about things to boot.)

I think people are pretty stupid about charities, and don't realise that much of the work they do actually takes skilled people and training, which makes it cost less to hire people with experience than to use volunteers, as volunteers are quite expensive to train up, and have a tendency to bugger off at inconvenient points, thus wasting the money spent on training them.

Joe

cynic-al - Thanks for that, its answered my original question.

As for the moral highground etc well thats down to the girlfriend who's bag it was whether or not she is comfortable in persuing it but the charity have not done themselves any favours in taking such a hard nosed business view on this towards someone who has been helping them out. This on a day when they really struggle to get volunteers & when most of those who are critisising us were, no doubt, tucking into dinner themselves in their homes surrounded by their families & friends having opened all their presents already while getting half cut, not so worried about the state of your local homeless charity then were you?

We went out of our way to help out, not wanting any thanks or reward but because we wanted to hopefully make a small difference to a few peoples lives at least for a few hours and end up get treated like this by a rather large organisation (charity or not) whos staff we were being supervised and who's premises we were on. It's easy to take the moral highground when your not the ones who have suffered the loss, no matter how large or small. Yes £600 of goods does seem like a lot to be carrying around in a handbag but it was a big bag with some specalist make up in it that is not easily available and so is not cheap to buy or replace. This is why the value of the good was so high coupled with the fact that there was a nearly new mobile phone which cost the best part of £200. Whats the reaction you get from your non biking mates when you tell them how much your bike and all the bits cost, same reaction as you have given to the value of my other halfs handbag, in short 'you must be mad'!!

For those of you on here who do charity work then i salute you and thank you for your input, its not something i could do on a regular basis. For those of you who don't, try it sometime 😉

Cheers

Bigsi

Those that think that think most charities are awash with money are deluding themselves with Daily Mailesque naff journalism and naive middle class preconceptions. Yep, there are some big charities with big budgets and large overheads and similarly large remits and reponsibilities but these are in the minority. These have to, quite rightly spend money on staffing and employing the very best people to give the charity direction and essentially operate like a business.

Most charites, and certainly all I have had contact with (I have worked for a chairity that ran a youth project in the past for disadvantaged kids in Coventry and my wife is a director of a charity that provides residential and day care for adults with learning difficulties) that work in the less glamerous sectors (dealing with those with drug dependancy, the homeless, adults with learning difficulties etc - i.e. not fluffy cuddly dogs, cancer which most can relate to, or search and rescue heros) live a pretty hand to mouth existance.

the charity have not done themselves any favours

It sounds like they took it as far as they could with their insurers.

(at least I understand that to be the case - never actually checked legally)

Whats the reaction you get from your non biking mates when you tell them how much your bike and all the bits cost, same reaction as you have given to the value of my other halfs handbag, in short 'you must be mad'!!

Talking of the homeless- Im still miffed at those two scallies who started an arguement with me in the North Quarter Manchester. One was asking me for money as I was trying to get out of my car and the other was banging on the window on the otherside winding up my dog. All I did was say 'please stop doing that' and they both kicked off!

Lets not forget, not all homeless people are innocent kids who have run away from an abusive home.

This isnt a sweeping generalisation, alot of the main/big charities are awash with money/a fair chunk of revenue is eaten up before it even reaches the frontline on administrative costs so to say its uncharitable or unfair to claim any sort of redress is a tad niave.

It [u]is[/u] a sweeping generalisation as well as an idiotic one, and it shows no understanding of the way major charities are organised, funded or scrutinised.

Whats the reaction you get from your non biking mates when you tell them how much your bike and all the bits cost, same reaction as you have given to the value of my other halfs handbag, in short 'you must be mad'!!

I'm a woman and I'm stil struggling to see how it could add up to £600, and if it did, I'd be very careful where I left it, sorry.

£600 - that's a lot of White Lightning

Find who did it, then wee in their shoes. Again.

I am finding it hard to understand how they can be held responsible for something they were cleary misslead about. Take for example this situation

Visitor to my office asks if they can leave a bag in my office for 5 mins
No problem

Visitor asks if he can leave £600 in my office
Not a chance in hell

Of course you didnt intentionally misslead them, but the office although marked for staff, sounds like it was neither signed as a safe or secure environment. They werent charging you for a service either. It was not designed or used as a safe store otherwise i would imagine lockable lockers would be provided. If that were the case, i would back you 100%, but it isnt.

Just like the wrong fuel thread, its all a BIG mistake and we have to learn by them. In the grand scheme of things she has lost a mobile phone (Usually insured) and some makeup.

As a lawyer i think the littlestHobo has the correct answer in law. If any duty of care is imposed on the charity it would be to take reasonable care in all the circumstances . A marked separate room for keeping the usual property that one would expect someone to bring to a shelter seems reasonable . To assume that it is safe to leave £600 in such a room when it is only defended by a bit of paper seems unreasonable and to impose liability on the charity i feel you would have needed to make the member of staff aware of the value of the item.

It may be worth having a professional crack at the insurance company though and not just accepting their word, as this was clearly a burglary and the"no break in" point is essentially a red herring.

usual terms and conditions apply to all advice given in lunch break.

Bigsi, what do you actually want them to do if their insurers say they are not covered?

a lengthy and patronising lecture from Rudeboy, who'd have thought it?

The is similar to a mate - he stayed in a B+B last year and was told it was safe to keep his new carbon full-suss stumpy in the outbuilding. It was stolen and he wasn't insured; he took the loss but wonder if he should have sued the B+B?

mudshark, Ive never ever trusted what a hotel or B&B say. Ever. Bike always stays in the room with me and even then its a worry. If the B&B emailed/put this in writing then its implied laibility IMO.

I assume he just arrived with the bike and he was told to put it there. I usually leave mine in the car covered up which isn't ideal but don't think many places would be happy with a muddy bike in the house. I'm hoping to keep my bike in my hotel rooms on my tour in France next week....

I wouldnt even ask or alert them that there is a bike in the bedroom! Wheels stay in boot of car. Frame/forks come with me in my groundeffect bodybag. Its my luggage/none of their business if its covered up.

I have never, ever, stayed in a B&B where I had serious concerns that the owner might be in league with local bicycle thieves. I think you are paranoid. Or that you choose terrible B&Bs. 🙂

cynic-al - Member

a lengthy and patronising lecture from Rudeboy, who'd have thought it?

How's it patronising?

You're just sore, because your professional legal judgment has been contradicted, and your ego has taken a dent.

Don't worry, I won't be asking you to join my legal team any time soon. 😉

You do it deliberately [i]and[/i] you're doing it now [i]and[/i] you know it. 😉

I do love it how everyone has an opinion on the morality of just about any question asked. What a bunch ejits you get on here.
I am no legal expert, so I ll try some common sense. If you have legal advice cover on your house insurance maybe they might be able to fight the charities insurance company!
p.s. Wouldn't bloody catch me volunteering on xmas day, dont think you ll do it again mind!

Nice use of an italic oper[i]and[/i].

Sorry if this has already been suggested, I haven't been able to read every word of this thread, but if you are intent on recovering something from the charity - did you think about asking them to cover the cost of your insurance premium rise?

And to the original question: unless they explicitly told you the room was SAFE for your valuables I don't think you have a hope anyway.

If they said "It's OK to leave things here", that is by no means the same thing.

I hope this experience doesn't put the charity off having rich people volunteer for them again, as then everybody will lose out.

Don't let that stop you from posting on STW though

How's it patronising?

You're just sore, because your professional legal judgment has been contradicted, and your ego has taken a dent.

I'm quite happy to admit when I#'m wrong, I don't thin kit's clear that I am here and I am not about to spend my spare time researching the point in the caselaw.

As for you being patronising, it's something about your tone, I'd try to explain it but I doubt you'd understand.

No, go on; give it a go. You'd be surprised at just how understanding I can be...

I'm off down the pub to meet WCA, I'll catch up with you later. 😉

You just seem to like the sound of your own voice. Like it's more important than anyone else's. You appear to put alot more effort into your posts than others too. You tend not to let things go.

Yadda.

Yadda

That's what 4 hours in a pub with WCA does to the usually verbose fredbra.

Verbose...sober.v.e....

ha ha

Powned

'Powned'? Don't you mean 'pwned'?

Oh dear..

[img] ?w=500&h=353[/img]

I did...I was using IRONING

If you wanted to push it you'd probably win but, whats the point its a charity ffs. Claim it on your house insurance and swallow the extra £10 on your next policy