When is a Paws Permanent?

P.A.W.S. is grateful for the help that's been offered over the last few weeks, not least from Bedlington.co.uk, but, as you say, efforts have fallen short.  Appeals to local big businesses have fallen on deaf ears (except for Tustain and NUFC who at least had the grace to reply, if only in the negative).  Donation requests via Facebook resulted in just four pledges of regular payments.  Our hopes of reviving the '100 Club' lottery were shot as only a very few showed interest.  Pre-Christmas tombolas raised an average of less than £100 each.  And still the bills came in.

All of this despite great outcries of regret, sadness and horror.  The FB page has over 900 'likers' who clearly didn't like us enough; £1.50 per month each would have solved the problem!  Perhaps the most disappointing thing is the paucity of help offered or given by present or former clients, who, if not cash-rich, could have donated some time to fund-raising.

Sheila promised Mary that she would carry on for as long as she could.  In fact, she has gone beyond that, despite major joint-replacement operations and being in constant pain from one source or another.  None of us now is in much of a physical condition to do more.

It is also interesting to note how quiet the phone line has been.  Whilst sympathising with the genuinely needy, as has always been the case, we now wonder whether we are needed as badly as we imagined.

I think Mary can rest in peace, knowing that we did our best.

They thought it was all over . . .

Since PAWS ceased operating several months ago, Allen has worked tirelessly to tie up all the legal and financial loose ends - no mean feat.  Remaining assets have been sold, requirements of the Charity Commission satisfied and keys handed over to the Council, following a satisfactory inspection of the premises some time in March. 

Now it seems the Council want to squeeze us for £2000 (which is no longer there), claiming a breach of the lease terms, i.e. that the premises were not left in a good enough state of repair. Admittedly, the decor was less than perfect, but we saw no point in decorating a building that was surely destined only for demolition.  The outside areas at the back and side were left wild to discourage the sort of vandalism that had occurred in the past.  Generally speaking, the premises were in much better condition than when we took them over.

Just wondering why it was deemed satisfactory a few months ago and now is not.  

Could the Council be trying to claw back some of the £millions spent unnecessarily on buying Manor Walks? Perhaps they should be chasing some local builders happily vandalising Bedlington, or are they just targeting those they can more easily bully?