Search results

I'm not an expert and an outsider, but I think what should happen is that the Charity Commission should get involved, pronto. I don't know who is doing that. (@Dx Revision Watch is in contact with Companies House, @Peter Trewhitt contacted the ME Association for confirmation on the undated new...

Actually, that might possibly create a wild semi-rescue for them. If the special resolution voted on in 2014 was void because it was not approved following the AoA (e.g. inappropriate notice, failure to specify agenda,lack of quorum <--- note I'm making these up typing, I can't check the...

This could have been minor alterations, like a formatting improvement before it was put online.

This is a thing as well. Notice the creation and mod date for the March 2014 online PDF? Created: 11 March 2014 (this solidifies that the date in its name is indeed its creation date of 11 March 2014) AND a modification date of 28 June 2018. This is again a sign that in 2018, the ME Association...

I'd say that it's not unclear though - unless solidly proven otherwise, the AoA that the ME Association declared as its approved AoA before they were questioned on payments -evidenced by both its signed statement registered at Companies House, and the fact that until earlier this month the same...

Summary: In 2022 and 2023 the trustees of the ME Association hired eachother for services for nearly 70,000 pounds. They apparently also hired another trustee after 2020. (And there are likely also still payments for 2024.). This is a conflict of interest. According to the ME Association's...

I hear you. And then I say that that statement derives from a dispute (probably the same case, at least for two of the links) on wheter registration or special resolution determine the validity of AoA's in the case of two, consecutive, AoA's both approved by resolution (only the first one...

@Yann04 Love that you dove into it, I'll read it soon with more attention, as I'm very interested. (Been digging into books on, and old publications of, the eugenics movement, but it's ben a while back, always curious to expand knowledge.) Now running on the fumes of my fumes, so it'll have to...

I can't reply more, but read with interest.

Ah, I see! (I was already surprised.) That 15 day notification also matters to additionally show that there was indeed an AoA approval on 18 November 2014. You can't amend your AoA in 2013 and then register them a year later. I can't find it in the text (sorry, too zonked out). But that's a...

I'm really going to try and stop digging on this topic (for) now, it's making me really unwell and I feel stupid for deteriorating over this. Good luck to any members and other interested dealing with this - it's a terrible mess, I hope it will be resolved as quickly as possible. (And if you...

It's somewhat of a side issue, but what I also found interesting, is that paragraph 6.6 says that you can't pay directors of a charity unless your AoA specifically says so: The ME Association did not represent that properly in their statement imo, when they said: It's not so that the CC...

I know some people who I think should read that....;) Great guide, it indeed points out that ME Association trustees are not, ahem, functioning optimally at the moment. I doubt if the article and nonpology are cases for the CC - I would reckon that the CC would direct the members to their own...

I've seen you've done the first part, which is great for the paper trail (although I think not the key documents needed, nor the most solid, trustworthy ones), but imo the second part is a very bad idea. It would only create more mess: you'd be asking the members to post-hoc vote in articles...

And there's also a third officially registered version that we haven't seen: the Charity Commission also holds a copy. (This is evident from various texts on its website, the fact that it dates the latest AoA for the ME Association on 18 November 2014, and its guide on changing your governing...

Yes, indeed! It's so stupid: I had to look up the word, but yes. He really acts like he can wave it all away with saying-it-a-lot and some intimidation, problem solved.

Why is that? Because I reckon it is just the 15 day notification rule after the members voted on the AoA amendments. AoA-Nov2014 was approved on 18 November 2014, and the sticker on the CH file says 28-11-2014, so that was within the limit. From some looking around, I think the bigger, way more...

Same. Also not after October because for amendments to Articles the members should have had to vote about it and afaik it wasn't on the agenda for the last AGM, no? :thumbup:

Whoa, I missed that in your first post. Must be. (But if not..... it would be another gobsmacking twist in this saga.)

I see no reason to believe the author of the summary overlooked it if they had voted on a whole resolution: there is no further proof of this, plus the author repeatedly states that these two clauses were the "changes" to the AoA that were voted on. I find this report disturbing, as it means...