A friend just alerted me to the fact that she overheard someone saying she will be applying for our funds to spay her dog, but it’s not a rescued dog and it’s actually a pet. The someone said she will lie to say it’s a rescued animal just to get our funds.
I rest my case, folks.
I’m GLAD we have stopped doing full sponsorship (even for sob-story cases) and we only have a subsidy scheme now.
I do not have adequate resources to investigate the background of every case, on whether the animal meets our criteria or not, so I will only do as much as I can. I am well aware that anyone can concoct a story, especially when it’s a one-off case.
“20% of all charity will be abused by people”, our Chief Reverend told me. “Never mind, let them, you’re helping the animals.”
If these humans lie, it’s their karma, not mine.
I’ll do my best to find out as much as I can, not because I don’t want to help the poor animal, but because I need to be accountable to our donors and uphold our policies.
Meanwhile, on the other end of the spectrum, I have encountered rescuers/requesters who are SO honest that after they have read our policies, they withdraw their application saying that they or their animals do not qualify for the subsidy/sponsorship.
There was a case of a spaying of a cat in early pregnancy because the vet could not detect the embryos until it was too late. The rescuer felt bad since it’s our policy that we do not sponsor the spaying of any pregnant animal, and despite the fact that I assured her it was nobody’s fault and we would still pay (since it was unintentional), she decided not to claim.
Now, that’s acting with an honest-to-goodness conscience.
There had also been several cases of rescuers writing back to say their animals have passed the 6 months – 1 year deadline and they don’t qualify anymore.
And there are those who would tell the truth and ask if their animals still qualify.
You know, I appreciate honesty so much…because it’s a dying virtue these days.
Despite the few bad apples, I am still optimistic that we can nurture a community of honest and responsible rescuers and caregivers.
I’m positive we can…
We just need to set the example. Some people would just need a longer time to learn.
Comments
4 responses to “Sigh…another fraud attempt?”
Hi Kah Yein,
Like you said, it’s for the animals. If the sponsorship is not available, the pet owner would not have bothered to spay the pet, but because the owner wants to get that “free” offer, the pet gets to do the procedure.
Let’s face the truth, many Malaysians have not even heard or thought of the concept of spaying animals. Many people ask me about my cats and when I say that the cats are spayed, many give a blank look. And there are many who though they know the benefits of spaying, do not bother with it because it’s not part of the “cultural-social routine” that they are used to.
So the silver-lining is this. These people once they have used the sponsorship and have gone through the experience (and relief) of spaying their pets may become like the “100th monkey” in the post you blogged about earlier – the next time, the resistance or hesitation to spay pets become less and less until it becomes a norm for them.
We may then see these fraud cases as educational expenses to spread the message of spay-neuter.
I agree, and that is why Chief Rev has already forewarned me of the 20% abuse and told me to close an eye and let it be. This is only when I do not know it is a fraud, but once I already know or have been forewarned, I cannot just let it go on. It would not be fair to the donors as some have expressed that their money should be used only for worthy cases. Some rescuers have also written to me saying it’s unfair that our funds are channeled “too easily” to fraudulent “rescuers”.
As the song Garden Party goes, “Can’t please everyone, so you got to please yourself”.
I’m doing the best that I can, with a clear conscience, and this includes being accountable to the donors. Without the donors, there would be no AnimalCare, and there would be no subsidy scheme at all!
Such a pain on the ass. Personally I think many are too used to the ‘back-door’ way of getting things done. Twist and turn a bit and you are ‘qualified’.
While I also believe that as long as the money goes to the animals after the best verification done then it’s good, I dislike people who lie and mis-use a certain service or fund. Many charities/services exist to provide to their ‘target audience’ who are in need of that particular service. If you are capable, why lie? It’s like those people who park at reserved parking lots for disabled. Ignorant, inconsiderate, and extremely selfish.
Recently, I sent 2 stray cats to be spayed in Klinik Kembiri, SPCA. When I told the PIC that these are stray cats, the response I got was “Ya, that is what everyone says..” I was taken aback because the cats are really stray cats and I have taken leave and travel all the way from Shah Alam to Setapak just to get them spayed. I was offended but quickly understood his initial response. It seems that SPCA used to run a program for strays (@ RM35/cat) and the program has been abused by people to spay/neuter their own pet.
I never knew there was such a program because this is my first time sending strays for spaying. It is sad, but it seems Malaysian need to get through this “integrity” huddle before we can progress further.