animal sanctuary owner evicted

S

shula1517

New User
Joined
3 February 2014
Messages
3
Visit site
The owner of the Rainbow Ark Animal Sanctuary was evicted, leaving over 300 hundred, horses, cats dogs and other animals in the "care" of the bailiffs. Over £40,000 has been raised on "go fund me" this money will be used to transport the animals to their new home with any surplus money being shared by the new homes. This has received very little media cover and is now becoming a welfare issue as the owner is not allowed to see the animals and Redstone Mortgages not hurrying with the disclaimer. 2 animals have been PTS. If you have time please have a look at "go fund me"
 
Hmmm, I saw about it in one of the Dailies over the weekend.

There's always two sides to a situation like this; all so often someone, however well-meaning, takes in animals needing "sanctuary" and then they suddenly realise they haven't got the money, or facilities, to maintain the set-up.

I don't know too much about this; only that I gather the RSPCA are now involved........... god help all involved in that case :(
 
The family managed to keep going for 20 years, The RSPCA have taken some of the animals but as there is very little media interest and cameras they seem to have cleared off. The main concern is getting the animals to their new homes.
 
shula1517 said:
The family managed to keep going for 20 years, The RSPCA have taken some of the animals but as there is very little media interest and cameras they seem to have cleared off. The main concern is getting the animals to their new homes.
Click to expand...

The bias of this shows you have an agenda here and confirms to me that you're only telling one side of the story. I hope the animals are okay but I rather wonder what the story is for them :(
 
Looking it up online the whole thing seems a bit sordid. :( A Facebook group full of obscenities, talk of "haters", melodrama and swearing matches, and another Facebook group saying the whole enterprise was a scam. :rolleyes3:

It does appear that it wasn't a registered charity (after 20 years you would expect it to be) so in fact the animals are privately owned and the owner has run into debt. The RSPCA appeared to helped with the emergency care and checked the health of the animals, then withdrawn as it's not really their concern.
 
FionaM12 said:
Looking it up online the whole thing seems a bit sordid. :( A Facebook group full of obscenities, talk of "haters", melodrama and swearing matches, and another Facebook group saying the whole enterprise was a scam. :rolleyes3:
Click to expand...

Everytime a 'rescue' type thing shuts down for some reason the above happens. Baffling.
 
Elsiecat said:
Everytime a 'rescue' type thing shuts down for some reason the above happens. Baffling.
Click to expand...

Yes it all looks horribly familiar doesn't it?

I'm very put off by the fact that the fundraising page has a huge photo on it, not of the animals but of the owner lying in mud after apparently collapsing. I'm very sorry for anyone taken ill, but if it was me I would not allow my photo to be used in such an intrusive and emotive way. It makes it look very emotionally manipulative.
 
FionaM12 said:
Yes it all looks horribly familiar doesn't it?

I'm very put off by the fact that the fundraising page has a huge photo on it, not of the animals but of the owner lying in mud after apparently collapsing. I'm very sorry for anyone taken ill, but if it was me I would not allow my photo to be used in such an intrusive and emotive way. It makes it look very emotionally manipulative.
Click to expand...

I must admit that crossed my mind when I saw it the other day in the Daily Mail. Very 'woe is me.'
 
to me this doesn't sound like a sanctuary but a hoarder that has took on too much and has not gone the money and ran into debt
 
I tend to agree with you Mooch.

As to posters slating the RSPCA, their involvement has been simply to assist with any emergency care any of the animals required. This they have done. Their involvement is no longer required. It has nothing to do with the media.

The animals are being looked after by a company appointed by the mortgage company. And the animals owner has been on site to check them.

Organisations have stepped in to offer homes for the animals, including the CPL and Hillside, who are reported to have offered a home to all animals except the cats.

It's a very sad situation. And whilst I sympathise with the owner, unfortunately once again it's the animals that siffer.
 
I can only imagine it is fairly common to hoard animals, run into massive debt and then try to claim you are a rescue/welfare charity and hope the public makes donations to enable you to care for the animals. I think people in these situations start off meaning well, but get completely out of their depth and it ends up like this. Such a shame, I hope the animals find good homes and the owner gets the help they need if they are in fact unwell.
 
amymay said:
I tend to agree with you Mooch.

As to posters slating the RSPCA, their involvement has been simply to assist with any emergency care any of the animals required. This they have done. Their involvement is no longer required. It has nothing to do with the media.

The animals are being looked after by a company appointed by the mortgage company. And the animals owner has been on site to check them.

Organisations have stepped in to offer homes for the animals, including the CPL and Hillside, who are reported to have offered a home to all animals except the cats.

It's a very sad situation. And whilst I sympathise with the owner, unfortunately once again it's the animals that siffer.
Click to expand...

p87 said:
I can only imagine it is fairly common to hoard animals, run into massive debt and then try to claim you are a rescue/welfare charity and hope the public makes donations to enable you to care for the animals. I think people in these situations start off meaning well, but get completely out of their depth and it ends up like this. Such a shame, I hope the animals find good homes and the owner gets the help they need if they are in fact unwell.
Click to expand...

I fully agree with both this posts
 
No agenda, never been there, never heard of it until last week, but the animals need to be removed to new homes. The mortgage company needs to let the vet in and get these animals to Hillside or to other places. Just trying to help sorry if that annoys you.
 
shula1517 said:
No agenda, never been there, never heard of it until last week, but the animals need to be removed to new homes. The mortgage company needs to let the vet in and get these animals to Hillside or to other places. Just trying to help sorry if that annoys you.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone's annoyed with you. :confused3: Your dig at the RSPCA just seemed a bit unfair, as they appeared to have helped with what are someone's privately owned animals and checked they're being cared for. It's not their role to help rehome peoples' animals.

There's a news item saying Hillside have agreed to take all the animals, and that they're being cared for for now by an agency.
 
shula1517 said:
No agenda, never been there, never heard of it until last week, but the animals need to be removed to new homes. The mortgage company needs to let the vet in and get these animals to Hillside or to other places. Just trying to help sorry if that annoys you.
Click to expand...

A vet has been on site. Hence the destruction of one animal and the immediate involvement of the RSPCA.

Arrangements are being made to re home the animals. But that can't be done overnight.

It will cost a huge amount of money to move these animals - hence the fundraising. Hillside will make no contribution to transportation costs.

Any 'stock' such as pigs, sheep or cattle will need a licence to be moved.

Remember, this situation is not the fault of the mortgage company - and they are acting within their legal rights to repossess their asset.
 
amymay said:
A vet has been on site. Hence the destruction of one animal and the immediate involvement of the RSPCA.

Arrangements are being made to re home the animals. But that can't be done overnight.

It will cost a huge amount of money to move these animals - hence the fundraising. Hillside will make no contribution to transportation costs.

Any 'stock' such as pigs, sheep or cattle will need a licence to be moved.

Remember, this situation is not the fault of the mortgage company - and they are acting within their legal rights to repossess their asset.
Click to expand...

A lot of money seems to have been donated through the fundraising page (£40,000) which they say will more than pay for the transport, with donations to the charities taking the animals. So hopefully it will be all sorted. :)
 
amymay said:
A vet has been on site. Hence the destruction of one animal and the immediate involvement of the RSPCA.

Arrangements are being made to re home the animals. But that can't be done overnight.

It will cost a huge amount of money to move these animals - hence the fundraising. Hillside will make no contribution to transportation costs.

Any 'stock' such as pigs, sheep or cattle will need a licence to be moved.

Remember, this situation is not the fault of the mortgage company - and they are acting within their legal rights to repossess their asset.
Click to expand...

That's what I felt looking at the story, what else do they expect the mortgage company to do, esp. If it's not a registered charity; they can't have one rule for one and one for everyone else, it sounds like they have already given lots of extra time. If they didn't evict non payers they couldn't lend to the rest of us.
Won't comment on the whole hoarding versus rescuing argument of it, one big can of worms.
Just hope every animal has the best action taken for it, whatever that might be.
 
Am I the only one is a little concerned that 100's of animals are going to Hillside, who have over 2000 animals themselves and recently had a "we need money for feed as we have none" fundraising campaign?
 
Broke_But_Happy said:
Am I the only one is a little concerned that 100's of animals are going to Hillside, who have over 2000 animals themselves and recently had a "we need money for feed as we have none" fundraising campaign?
Click to expand...

I thought that but didn't want to mention it in case I got lynched. Hillside to me will not much better then where they came from
 
Broke_But_Happy said:
Am I the only one is a little concerned that 100's of animals are going to Hillside, who have over 2000 animals themselves and recently had a "we need money for feed as we have none" fundraising campaign?
Click to expand...

Yes I thought of that too. :(

At different times of my life I've cared for numbers of rescued creatures, wild or domesticated. It never occurred to me to call myself "a sanctuary" and expect others to take responsibility for them. I chose to take them on, so they were my responsibility and I didn't take on more than I could cope with.

If I'd wanted to open a sanctuary, I'd have done it legally and registered it as a charity.
 
Surely there should be some sort of law or similar that takes a welfare centres size/knowledge/financial situation etc into consideration and puts a cap on how many animals it can keep? Easier said than done though I imagine, and it's not really something I know all that much about.
 
Broke_But_Happy said:
Am I the only one is a little concerned that 100's of animals are going to Hillside, who have over 2000 animals themselves and recently had a "we need money for feed as we have none" fundraising campaign?
Click to expand...

They are already campaigning for funds and they don't even have any of the animals yet ..... Frying pan to fire...... Will now await another warning from HHO admin ......
 
p87 said:
Surely there should be some sort of law or similar that takes a welfare centres size/knowledge/financial situation etc into consideration and puts a cap on how many animals it can keep? Easier said than done though I imagine, and it's not really something I know all that much about.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top