R.N.I.B screwing the blind and the dead

This is from an article published in woman's own March 2005.

Called "how could a charity be so cruel?"

Claire lee, 52 from Kingston, surrey, was shocked when a charity began charging her interest - for failing to hand over her dead aunts money quickly enough.

I had been quietly congratulating myself on the way I had handled the execution of my aunt Marians will - until this awful letter arrived from one of the charities that she had generously left money to. You've taken too long to send us the money from your aunt's estate it said, so we are charging you interest, we will expect an extra 800 pounds a year. I hope you understand. I couldn't believe my eyes! Was this the way that a charity was supposed to behave? Until that moment, I had felt i'de done a good job as the executor of Marians will. Now, I wondered what she would have made of it all. Marian was a real character. A talented amateur artist, she was a feisty, determined woman, always ready to adopt a stray animal or fight a campaign to improve the traffic light crossing near her home in Maida vale, north London. She was 87 when she was taken ill in January 2004. She had a heart attack, followed by a massive stroke. Typically she had already made a living will, stating that if her quality of life became poor and she stopped breathing for any reason, she didn't wait to be resuscitated. When I visited her in hospital, she was unable to speak. But I held her hand and she gave me a look that clearly said I don't want to go on like this. Soon after, she slipped into a coma, and died 2 days later on 15 January, 2004. It was sad of course, and I knew I would miss our long telephone conversations. But I put my sadness aside and concentrated on sorting out her final affairs. I knew that was what she would have wanted. I made sure all her favourite opera tunes were played at her funeral, and I read a poem, written by one of her friends, about a stray kitten Marian had adopted. It was a lovely day and afterwards several of her friends said Marian would have loved it. The funeral over, I turned my attention to her will. My aunt had a few shares, insurance policies and a building society account. But most of her estate was tied up in her flat. In her will, she asked me to sell her home, share 113,000 pounds of her total proceeds between 8 charities and then divide the remainder between 3 relatives and myself. It seemed straightforward, but the flat sale proved more difficult that I had anticipated. Ten months after Marian's death, 2 sales had fallen through and the flat was back on the market. I started contacting property developer's inn the area and looked at auction sales. I also wrote to all the 8 charities named in Marians will, updating them and promising the sell the flat and settle their bequests as soon as I could. 7 of the charities were fine with this. But on 9 December I got a letter from royal national institute for the blind (RNIB). It stated that, because the sale was taking so long, the rnib would be charging me interest on the money owed to them, at the rate of 4 per cent a year. Marian had left the charity 20,000 pounds, which meant that, until the flat was sold. I would have the pay them 800 pounds a year in interest! I was flabbergasted. How could they be so insensitive? I felt as if the rnib were accusing me of deliberately hanging on to the money, even though I was doing everything possible to sell Marians flat. I was even more horrified when a probate expert at the legal firm where I worked told me that the charity was perfectly within its legal rights to ask for interest. The rnib's legal services department was unsympathetic when I asked for help. I was told 'properly in maida vale sells like hotcakes'. If you haven't sold the flat yet, you must be asking for too much. After that phone call, I was so upset. I couldn't' sleep. My husband, Stuart, tried to tell me I had done nothing wrong. But I feared I would be paying 800 pounds a year that I could not afford for many years to come. Then I remembered Marian and her feisty ways, and something clicked. The woman whose friends had affectionately called the iron lady of Maida vale wouldn't have taken this lyingq down, so neither would I. I wrote to all the national newspapers. One published my letter and another carried the story on its news pages under the heading 'greed of a charity'. It didn't change the situation but if certainly made me feel a lot better to see that other people thought the situation was outrageous too. In January, the flat finally sold for 81,000, and I sent all the charities their money immediately; however I haven't yet paid the rnib's interest. I am still furious that the law allows a charity to persecute people. My aunt made a generous gesture in leaving the rnib 20,000 pounds; I think it's a pity that the same spirit is so lacking among the bureaucrats who run their charity.

An rnib spokesperson said 'Mrs Fisher was a regular donor to the rnib for many years. She Cleary supported our cause and wanted to ensure that blind and partially sighted people would continue to be supported through the rnibs work after her death. It is not only acceptable but appropriate that we ask for the funds Mrs Fisher left us. We are not asking for money to make a profit. We are a charity, whose aim is to support 2 million people in this country who have a sight problem. Almost one third of the rnibs income is derived from the generous bequests left to us. As a result, we have a great deal of experience in dealing with legacies. We absolutely recognise the importance of dealing with relatives in a sympathetic way while also acting in the best interest of blind and partially sighted people. We are confident that we have behaved honourably both to Mrs Lee and the memory of Mrs. Fisher.