Re: *Your comments needed please*

[Rainrescue]

I don't think this is complicated at all.
Rescue takes dog to their own vet for treatment.
Vet takes dog in
Rescue applies to RHU for funding for dog saying its 'potentially' expensive and gives 'their' view of what is going to be needed.
RHU review the application of the rescue.
(My view is that if rescue has a good track record on RHU (supporters, nominated by another rescue and takes dogs in that are in need)
RHU decide out of their funds - if they can manage to help with the vet fee.
If yes - make out a cheque to vet - send a) direct to rescue b) direct to vet

With the alternative being that vet/rescue didn't get any money - I don't think thats hard.

I don't think we need a vet report or estimate of what work is being done on that particular dog - like i said earlier, if the rescue is reputable - and known to help dogs that do end up with vet bills (ie dogs out of pounds, old ones, etc.,) it wouldn't matter if it left a credit on their account for the next needy one. Better that than left floating unaccounted for.

The other thing is that we could probably 'sponsor' a couple of reputable holding kennels for dogs at risk - and maybe with fuel - work out a system where the transporter could claim direct from RHU? Its a shame when these small rescues are suffering so badly when really many would probably help if it was clear.

Can we do some sort of questions to other members about it?
If they would be happy to do a membership / monthly donation towards vet fees or kenelling etc.,?

[Jacobean]

So the vet account Julie mentions as number 4 doesn't mean the actual account at the vets then. It's a vet account on here as part of the RHU fund?

I thought this was concerning rescues themselves making appeals on here and individuals sending funds direct to them rather than RHU issuing payment.

[Rainrescue]

My view is that we should be drawing up a way that we can collectively help rescues - who help pets in crisis. Thats not accusing anyone of mis-use of funds - it just gives us as a forum a method to ensure that the money raised is going to what it is intended.

I have heard rescues being accused of keeping money when the dog has moved on - or not paying kenelling fees - again when the dogs aren't in kennels. Personally - I don't have a problem with either of those things - as long as I know that the rescue receiving the funds - will just use the money for the next needy case. Its irrelevant which one actually gets the money concerned (thats my own opinion).

Mods - is it possible that we ask members if they would be prepared to do regular donations to support 1 of 3 options - (vets/kenel/fuel) - then if we have a good majority that will either do a 1-off donation/membership or make a month s/o - then we can ask for suggestions how it can be distributed safely.

[Hopper]

Ony just seen this and I think its a little far fetched.

Some vets charge for written reports, I myself as a rescue cant afford additonal fees. We dont always have estimates either and from past experiences we have been given estimates and then the total hase been a few hundered more? Donations paid direct to vets, I am not sure vets would be happy with people phoning all the time should a an appeal go well and having to spend alot more time taking payments, also some vets dont accept payments over the phone? I havent a clue about ticker timers?? But what if you have more than one appeal?

I find the whole thing just to much. I am taking it that somewhere along the line something has gone wrong with donations for things to be tightened up like this?

I guess i will have to do fundraising and appeals else where now which is a shame as this was my main used forum

[Rainrescue]

Re: *Your comments needed please*
Rainrescue Yesterday at 8:29 am

.I don't think this is complicated at all.
Rescue takes dog to their own vet for treatment.
Vet takes dog in
Rescue applies to RHU for funding for dog saying its 'potentially' expensive and gives 'their' view of what is going to be needed.
RHU review the application of the rescue.
(My view is that if rescue has a good track record on RHU (supporters, nominated by another rescue and takes dogs in that are in need)
RHU decide out of their funds - if they can manage to help with the vet fee.
If yes - make out a cheque to vet - send a) direct to rescue b) direct to vet

[Rainrescue]

Hopper - sorry that wasn't meant to be curt.
I think its suggestions in progress and not cut and dried yet. I hope that at the end of it we should be able to raise more money - without it being hard work for anyone - once we have best practise in place.

[Jod]

I agree, it just looks like it's going to take some time and brain power to get things up and running but then good things never come easy do they

We will get there people! Have faith!

[Hopper]

But my rescue doesnt run with just one vet, I have a few UK wide due to animals being in foster care homes further a field. Some of the vets arent the easiest to get along with and just getting the damm invoices sent out is hard enough.

Also i got the impression RHU are wanting to see printed off proof from a document, so we have to get one off vets then scan on to pc??

[Neapolitan Mastiff Admin]

I agree, it just looks like it's going to take some time and brain power to get things up and running but then good things never come easy do they

We will get there people! Have faith!

Nice post. Please everyone try to see there are reasons for this and we've all got to work through the suggestions to try and something out that is achieveable for everybody so that when people donate, it can be in good faith.

[Jacobean]

We're the same Hopper. We have fosterers all over the UK and so have numerous vets all over too. Maybe you should ask for volunteers to help you with fundraising or attend events maybe?

Sorry to go a bit off topic but Hopper sounds like they need help.

[Rainrescue]

Aren't many the same who come on here?
I don't think there are any large rescues who would be applying for help with funding are there? Most of the people on here that are struggling are the same and almost all will be having dogs needing vet treatment at one-off vets? I know we do too - but I manage the bills fine.

So whats the progress on this - it seems to be slipping by

[Admin]

i think applications would work well, and perhaps guidelines of who can apply maybe?

ie no offence but rspca branch couldnt or wood green

[Rainrescue]

I think all it takes is a few pics of the animal concerned don't you?

I totally agree with you - places like rspca branches and large rescues who have money in the bank - not a chance, because they have obv. got people who are already fund raising for them.

this fund is for the rescues that come onto RHU and that regularly take in dogs that are in crisis. Or for those that are constantly helping dogs in pounds who always have vet fees.

What can we do to start and progress this then Admin?

[mole]

I think all it takes is a few pics of the animal concerned don't you?

I totally agree with you - places like rspca branches and large rescues who have money in the bank - not a chance, because they have obv. got people who are already fund raising for them.

this fund is for the rescues that come onto RHU and that regularly take in dogs that are in crisis. Or for those that are constantly helping dogs in pounds who always have vet fees.

What can we do to start and progress this then Admin?

Lots of small rescues come on here who consistently take dogs in danger of being put to sleep and incur kennelling fees and potential vet expenses and who are all run by volunteers on a shoe string. These are the type of rescues who need fundraising help IMO.

Obviously would have to be some sort of vetting proceedure but we all are aware on here of the consistency of the smaller rescues on RHU. Obviously any rescue wishing to be included would need to abide by normal rescue rules of homecheck neutering etc and perhaps anybody new applying to join the scheme would have to have a period of time on the board, during which their commitment was seen, and perhaps have a "homecheck" done at the kennels (if used) by an experienced homechecker.

Just some suggestions

[Admin]

well it would be handy to have money in an rhu account first lol

[Jod]

I thought there was around £150 in there from Phil's photo comp?

Obviously any rescue wishing to be included would need to abide by normal rescue rules of homecheck neutering etc and perhaps anybody new applying to join the scheme would have to have a period of time on the board, during which their commitment was seen, and perhaps have a "homecheck" done at the kennels (if used) by an experienced homechecker.

Good idea

[Guest]

The ideas are good here - TBH Any rescue who is helping out and who regularly uses the forum - will always have vets fees of their own. Ok - so dogs may move on - but as long as the money is paid to the vet directly - then that will stay there for the next castration/neuter/emergency treatment that the rescue may need. Not perfect - but a comfort blanket.

Please also bear in mind, rescues should always have a fall back plan, money wise for emergency situations. RHU donations shouldn't be relied upon as a source to justify taking animals into rescues care. We are an added bonus if you like

[Jacobean]

That would work for rescues that use the same vets all of the time but there are lots of rescues that don't. Yes you're right Julie rescues should have funds in to cover costs of the animals in their care.

[Guest]

Michelle

Any other ideas?

[Rainrescue]

So - what can we do to move this forward?

Can admin have a look at it, maybe merge the threads where many members are proposing that we as members all do try to raise central funds.

Who they go out to - and how thats monitored can be looked at when we get our first £500? maybe?
this has gone on for so long now, who is it that can actually make a decision please?