Charity Commission Response

One of the more worrying allegations that was first published on this blog, that the National Bullying Helpline and HR & Diversity Management were "inextricably linked", has been consistently defended by Christine Pratt and her husband and other trustees, and adopted by the now resigned patrons, with the line that the Charity Commission investigated the allegation and found no evidence of wrongdoing. The impression given by this statement is that an investigator from the Charity Commission visited the Helpline's premises, looked at the files, and came to an assessment of their own. That is not in fact how the "investigation" was conducted.

It now seems pertinent, if not long overdue, to publish the Charity Commission's full report on that investigation, as provided to employee X as the final reponse to her complaint, which contained the broadly the same analysis set out in "reasons not to go for an independent investigation" on this website (For a scan of the original, see the bottom of this article.)

Given that the vast majority of people who have no guarded interest in perpetuating this "charity" can instantly tell that something is wrong, it is disconcerting that the Charity Commission gave the response below when presented with broadly the same information. Please note that comments in square brackets are of course from the crew of the Nebuchadnezzar:

Charity Commission Direct
PO Box 1227, Liverpool L69 3UG
t: 0845 3000 218
f: 0151 703 1555
Your Ref:
Our Ref: 1117852/671798.CJH/AU(T)

Date:02 May 2008


The National Bullying Helpline, Registered Charity number [sic]

I am writing following receipt of your letter dated 14 April 2008 and our conversation of 28 April 2008.

As I explained in my letter dated 03 April 2008, your complaint concerning the level of service you received from the charity falls outside of the Commission’s area of regulatory control. This would fall under the discretion of the trustees.  We understand Lynette White Matt and Parveen Sharma were nominated to independently deal with your concerns and have reviewed your complaint and the relevant correspondence.  I understand they will contact you directly. [No trustees have ever contacted employee X]

The issues they identified from your complaint were:
1.That the National Bullying Helpline is not a true charity but a front for gaining access to business for HR and Diversity Management Ltd (HR & DM); and
2.That HR and Diversity Management did not carry out the investigation fairly.

The trustees clarified that the work of the helpline is not carried out in the name of Tim Field. Due to resource constraints the charity provides limited advice and assistance to those who call the helpline.  To enable individuals to follow their grievances the charity refers clients to a number of potential sources of help including solicitors and HR Advisors of which HR and DM is one.  The trustees have concluded that they are satisfied that arrangements for referring individuals onto HR and DM are the same as for other sources of help and advice.  We are told that individuals are clearly informed that they have the option of going to any one of the potential sources of advice.

We are told that the trustees found that you contacted the helpline and received the maximum amount of free advice through email and telephone contact.  We understand that at the time of the referral to HR and DM, it was made clear that the charity had an association with the company.  [So why are they so coy about it?] This was further clarified with your employer in HR and DM’s literature.

The trustees have told us that they will monitor and keep under review arrangements for referring individuals to other sources of advice.  We have also advised that the trustees should collect information about referrals they make to other sources of help and advice.  They will therefore be able to determine that the referrals are in the interests of the charity.

The trustees have also determined that they believe your concerns are outside the remit of the charity and haveasked that you to refer your complaint to the Directors of HR and Diversity Management Ltd.  [The Directors of Hr & Diversty Management Ltd were, of course, the same people, and since that firm did not have any contractual relationship with the complainant, this statement is a very long way of saying "jump through another hoop so we can tell you to f*ck off again"] As we previously advised where an issue cannot be resolved with the trustees and concerns your legal interests and rights, you may wish to consider taking your own legal advice about this matter. [You might be able to sue them for all we know, but the Charity Commission is leaving that up to you]

[this is where the really disconcerting part comes...]
As I explained in my previous letter to you, there are situations into which the Commission cannot intervene.  These include disputes abut contractual issues or in complaints about the standard of service the charity has provided.  Important though these issues are, the Commission has no ‘Ombudsman’ powers to give a ruling.

Given that the trustees are drawing up a clearly defined and robust agreement that is in the interests of the charity, the Commission has no further regulatory role.  We will monitor the actions of the trustees to ensure such an agreement is drawn up.  We have also recommended that the trustees comply with data protection regulations by obtaining permission from the complainant to refer their details on.  We have also recommended that the charity’s website and literature makes it clear to potential clients that they are only able to offer a limited advice and support service due to resource complaints.

I hope this explains our position.

Miss Cora Heal

Assessment Unit

AssessmentUnitWH@charitycommission.gsi.gov.uk"