Another Fat cat charity boss !

Rubbish. Save the Children is totally corrupt and Ebola was made out to be pandemic to extract funds from gullible people.

Maybe it's ok to disagree gillybob. As I've indicated, I accept, reluctantly, that market forces mean if you want a successful CEO of any large organisation, it means you're organisation will compete with all the others for that individual. Same goes for charities.

Am I delighted with this, nope I'm not but I'm a realist (well, I am in some circs ). I am even more irritated by the fact that what used to be public services, like the NHS, residential care for older people/children in need, fostering, Prisons etc are now seen as "for profit" rather than 'not for profit" organisations. The salaries some of their CEO's and managers earn made me weep.

For the record JaneA I do not have any prejudice towards charities in general . My gripe is towards so called charities paying extortionate salaries, pension contributions and bonuses to their executives before the “ charity” benefits from one single penny . If that doesn’t bother you we will have to agree to disagree .

petra
Are you going to be the one honest enough to tell her that it's illegal for her to use it without her father being either a passenger or the driver?

Stansgran
At the charity shop where I volunteer one of the other volunteers is quiet proud of the fact that her father has never driven or been a passenger in his mobility car.
She considers it her car.

Thank you for your balanced post endre.
iam One of my close friends has trained 15 GD puppies over the last 20 years and is now giving a home to one who didn’t make the grade.
She has nothing but praise for the organisation & the help & support the trainers receive.
I think that for an organisation to give the maximum benefit to those it’s setting out to help, you need people at the top with vision, leadership skills and integrity.
If they command a relatively high salary, in the long run it will be cost effective.
What a pity that the Daily Mail article seems to have reinforced some people’s prejudices and overlooked the fact that charities play a very important part in many people’s lives.

Gillybob, I agree with your disbelief at high salaries but if thats the rate for the job, that’s what those ceo’s and others will command.
Guide dog puppies live with volunteer puppy walkers until the go into GD kennels, where they’re trained by highly skilled, paid employees.

Most Motability cars have an advanced payment and it varies throughout the year depending which models they want to promote.

These payment used to be fairly manageable for people on benefits but they have soared in the last three years and that needs looking into. From about £500 - £5,000 advance non refundable on top of the monthly payments out of their disability. Some cars are no advance payment but it can change throughout the year.

Most customers need something suitable for their disability and they are usually the automatics with plenty of space for wheelchairs and other equipment. They tend to have the highest advanced payments and this is where it needs investigating.

Hundreds of thousands of cars have been recalled by Motability in the last three years when the DWP changed the rules about who needed help with mobility. Some decisions were unfair and Motability has been helping those left with no way of leaving their homes by giving them a lump sum to buy a second hand car.

Obviously fewer people able to apply for Motability cars makes a big different to Motability . It certainly hit the car industry in a big way as Motability was a huge customer.

As for someone handing their car over to their mother, there are forms to sign that don't allow that to happen. The mother will not be insured unless the client is in the car with her. It could be a case of disabled abuse.

Saying that is it a well run company proud they do an amazing job with people who cannot walk for any reason.

As someone said, the donations come from disabled people and their families and it is often substantial.

I know how difficult it is for the volunteer puppy walkers to train a guide dog and I know how valuable a guide dog is to a blind person.

I don’t think this is a “charity bashing fest” at all Iam . Personally I am just questioning how appropriate it is for the boss ( and many others too) of registered charities to cream off £ millions in wages, pensions and bonuses before the “charity” sees a single penny . It’s up to everyone else to make up their own minds.

What we can't lose sight of in this charity bashing fest, is the good work some of them do.
Guide Dogs for the Blind - I have had close contact with many people who work or volunteer for that organisation. their trainers are second to none. Dogs who get through the arduous selection and training process do work hard with their new owners but, they have a good life in comparison with many other dogs.

as far as i am concerned where money and CEO`s are they will always cream off the money ,i have never ever read or heard about a CEO having principles and earning their money it is a "take as much as possible "attitude

GabriellaG I was once a contractor for Guide Dogs. At the time they had at least 30 personnel working in Human Resources for a company that didn’t actually have that many employees. H.R. had plenty of “motivational” hairbrained projects which made most people want to bang their heads repeatedly against a wall. I don’t think the executive pay was excessive at all at the time though.

RTT it isn’t a charity, it’s funded by disabled people who use their high rate mobility payments to rent their vehicle. It’s purpose is to help those who qualify to be able to be
Mobile. Public transport rarely offers this to the extent needed

I had no idea it was a charity.
I was stupid enough to think it was some sort of service provided by the government.
Why isn’t it? Sounds like the tax payers could save a bit of money.

Thanks janeainsworth for the links that set out the reality of Motability. It's totally wrong of the Daily Mail to describe the CEO as a 'Charity Boss'. It isn't surprising though is it, to see the DM distorting facts to create OUTRAGE.

Whether he’s the boss of a charity, or the boss of a business, I don’t think he, or anyone else, is worth that kind of money, because quite frankly, no one on this earth can actually earn nearly four million pounds in a year.

Gilly Motability may call itself a charity, but it does not receive donations from the public, and it doesn’t have volunteer staff.
That is what most people understand by a charity.
From the Motability website

“How the Motability Scheme is funded
It is a common misconception that the Motability Scheme costs the Government (and therefore the public) money. That is not the case. The Motability Scheme is funded by disabled people who choose to spend their higher rate mobility allowance to pay the cost of their lease.”
www.motability.org.uk/Factsheet_3_-_How_the_Motability_Scheme_is_funded.pdf
I agree with you that very few people, if any, deserve a salary of £1.7million.
But I think it’s wrong of the Daily Mail to describe the CEO of Motability Operations as a ‘Charity Boss’ because that casts a slur by association on genuine Charity CEO’s who work for far less.

www.motability.co.uk/contact-and-support/motability-charity/

And again .... the clue is in the word charity!

Motability IS most definitely a charity . Funded wholly by the tax payers ! Not sure why anyone thinks otherwise ?

“The organisational structure of the scheme can be broken into two parts: Motability, which is a registered charity, and Motability Operations (formerly Motability Finance Ltd), a public limited company owned by five clearing banks which operates the car and powered wheelchair leasing scheme on behalf of Motability.

Having charitable status doesn’t equate to a charity.
All heads of big business are very well paid, you can either agree with this or not.
A really good CEO makes a huge difference to a business, so they are paid accordingly.

So, my neighbour who uses her husbands motorbility car to go on holiday sometimes leaving it parked at Gatwick for a couple of weeks while he is at home, is acting illegally?

This is from the National Council for Voluntary Organisation’s website, about the Charity Commission:
“The Commission investigates accusations of wrongdoing. The vast majority of errors are simple mistakes, and help and advice from the Commission to trustees is enough to rectify things. However, in some rare cases, a statutory inquiry is necessary to find out what has gone wrong and how it can be fixed.
If a serious problem is uncovered, the Commission has powers to:
restrict transactions a charity may enter into
appoint additional trustees
‘freeze’ a charity’s bank account
suspend or remove a trustee
appoint an interim manager
make a referral for investigation to the police and other law enforcement agencies.”

The Charity Commission has no powers of its own to prosecute any charity which is perceived to have done something illegal. It can only refer matters to the police.
It has a much wider role of advising charities about how they should conduct themselves. So it’s rather unfair to describe it as toothless.

Once again, Motability, which was the subject of the OP, is not a charity.
It’s an organisation which has charitable status for tax purposes. There’s a big difference.

I don’t understand the criticism of charities who have money invested. Surely that’s sensible, to invest rather than spend every donated penny.
I agree with those who question whether anyone ‘earns’ huge salaries. However, if your organisation wants an individual who has a proven track record as CEO, that person will expect to earn a competitive salary no matter who their employer is.

What does the Charity Commission actually do. Is it a toothless organisation- if so what's its point?