Scam Archives - Aberdeen Voice

AV Reporter Blamed For Northfield Pony Poisoning

Nov 222016

Suzanne Kelly reports the latest claims from controversial commercial farm-cum-rescue for farm animals – an alleged break in, vandalism and deliberate ‘poisoning’ of a young Shetland pony.

open-day-july-15-sign-says-all-farm-animals-and-shows-animals-northfield-actually-slaughter As has been demonstrated in previous AV articles, Northfield Animal Haven owner, Kelly Cable has engaged in some bizarre fundraising schemes, and animals have been injured, frozen to death and overfed to death at the New Pitsligo premises.
On the afternoon of 15 November 2015, a woman named Jackie Dow posted on facebook that Northfield Animal Haven had suffered a break in on the night of 14 November.

She wrote:

“hello to the evil people who went to Northfield Animal Haven last night. hope you are proud of yourselfs as you cut all the wire so the sheep could get out. and you poisoned my pony who sadly died today. call yoursels animal lovers. I don’t think so. This vendetta needs to stop before any other animals suffer and thanks to you I will have to spend a fortune on vet bills. what did my boy do to deserve it…. and if the people who did this are reading this hope you are proud of yoursels.”
– Jackie Dow on NAH’s facebook page, 15 Nov 2016.

Aberdeen Voice sent Ms Dow an email to clarify why she thinks she knows who did this act, why she thinks they are animal lovers and what vendetta she is referring to. When / if she replies, we will print her response.

Northfield also echoed this allegation; on its Facebook page owner Kelly Cable wrote:

“got up this morning to find fencing cut out onto main road for the sheep and horses, lovely little auguero who everyone met at the Super Saturday locked in a portacabin and sadly he was very toxic, no gut sounds at all so he had to be pts [put to sleep]. Very evil twisted people out there and when they get caught I hope they throw the book at them.”
– Northfield Animal Haven Facebook page.

It seems that Ms Dow and Eric Cable had suspects for this very odd crime in mind – and Eric decided to name me and blame me for this event:

“Well the haters have really done it this time. A 22 month old Shetland pony poisoned last night after locking it in a feed store I hope that cowbag Suzanne Kelly is f**king happy with her work now the most evil bast///on on this planet I believe that she is now encouraging activists and it looks like they decided to pay a visit last night cut fence wire let sheep out locked a trusting wee pony into a portakabin and poison the wee toot… the vets want to speak to the police when they arrive.”

The Cables assert in their posts on the incident that the press and police were informed.

However, when alerted to this development, I telephoned the Police Scotland media arm – the spokesperson could find no such report. On Monday 21 November the police now have an incident report – which only concerns a fence. No pony is mentioned.

The police have been asked to say when this incident was reported considering there was no such report on their books when Eric Cable’s post claimed the vet wanted to speak to the police when they arrived. It currently seems that while Cable wrote those words about police arriving, the police had no information whatsoever about the incident.

Sources associated with local newspapers were unaware of anyone contacting them about a poisoned animal or vandalism. No news reports have been published about this alleged incident which was meant to have happened 6 days ago. There was no outreach from Northfield to other shelters in the area to warn them of potential vandals in the area.

The very idea of the crime is a bizarre one. There are many incidents of livestock being stolen, and last year there was a horrific attack on a mare in a field.

But to cut a fence and then, oddly, to sneak past the CCTV system it is understood operates at NAH, for the purpose of taking one of the 170+ animals and locking it inside a feed store beggars belief.

In the past, two animals at Northfield were allowed to overeat with fatal consequences. In a separate incident, an elderly horse was left to freeze to death in a field. Could this possibly be yet another instance demonstrating that a woman with health issues (in her own words) might not be best able to look after 170 animals?

Things took a dark turn following Eric Cable’s post. Several people made threatening posts, and one man who had in the past made threats, shared Jackie Dow’s post over 2 dozen times. The threats were reported to Police Scotland. Many have since been deleted from facebook.

Two of the more concerning threats were:

“They won’t be so smart when we get hold of them. Silent justice and as for that f**king reporter and her pals it’s on f**kers”

and …

“I will find you. I will hurt you.”

There are many times over the course of investigating how the Cables operate that I have been called a liar by Eric and Kelly Cable. I have asked them to apologise for the defamatory remarks – or to at the very least point out what portions of my articles they consider to be ‘lies’.

All of my claims have sources – very often I am quoting back contradictory claims that Kelly Cable has herself made over the course of time.

One day she will say NAH rescues all farm animals; the next she claims everyone knows they also sell animals at the Thainstone market and it’s not her affair what happens to such sold animals.

She will one day say that no animal will ever be put to sleep whilst her fundraising appeals clearly say that unless money is found, animals will be put to sleep.

The Cables have been asked to apologise on Facebook, Twitter and to the Aberdeen Voice for publication of a full apology, or I will have no choice but to seek legal remedy for the ongoing, serious defamation – and not least this latest unfounded attack by Mr Cable which seems to have led to threats of violence.

In a previous facebook post, Kelly Cable had gave her permission for me to see her veterinarian’s records; I wrote to the vet at the time, who refused to release any information.

After this alleged pony poisoning and Eric Cable’s post saying the vet wanted to speak to the police (who had not been told about a poisoned pony it should be remembered), I emailed the vet once again. A source made me aware of The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons’ position:

‘The duty of confidentiality is important but it is not absolute and information can be disclosed in certain circumstances, for example where the client’s consent has been given, where disclosure can be justified by animal welfare concerns or the wider public interest.’

Considering Northfield has been asking the public for money for years and, as previous articles demonstrate, sometimes doing so under false pretences, and considering the number of animals injured and neglected at Northfield over time, it is hoped the vet will release information.

Since this poisoning tale appeared on Facebook, someone was in touch concerning a pony that died there of blood poisoning – how many avoidable deaths and injuries will it take for the vet to raise concerns with the authorities and let the donating public know what is going on?

I posted this request for apology and many questions about the incident on the Northfield Animal Haven Facebook page. The page is now offline.

Aberdeen Voice will follow this story and report any and all updates.

Aberdeen Voice is sorry to hear that yet another animal has had an avoidable death at Northfield. If indeed vandals cut a fence, snuck in, and put the animal in a feed store – then we are confident the CCTV will have caught them, and we hope they will be brought to justice.

Should it be conceivable that the truth is still to be determined and information has been withheld or warped, possibly to cover a further incident of fatal animal overfeeding and/or other form of negligence, Aberdeen Voice is equally hopeful that the truth will come out. In the mean time, we are receiving yet more stories from people who have had business/animal welfare dealings with the Cable family.

Anyone with any further information is invited to please contact Aberdeen Voice in strictest confidence.

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

How Charitable is your Animal Charity?

Aberdeen City, Featured, Opinion 3 Responses »

Aug 262016

No activity, however benign it should be, is safe from scams and frauds. Before assuming that every photo of an animal to be rescued is genuine – before assuming any charity is genuine, here are some points to bear in mind. By Suzanne Kelly.

willowsginger Everyone who loves animals can have that sentimentality turned into a powerful weapon by scammers and fraudsters.

Reputable animal charities, animal welfare organisations, consumer protection bodies will all warn you to be careful who you send your money
to.

Scambusters identifies the seven most common types of animal charity frauds on its website.

Top of the list is people soliciting donations for animals that do not exist or that are nothing to do with the charity. Aberdeen Voice reported on one such story locally.

Northfield Animal Haven used photographs on several occasions in its fundraising – and the photographs turned out to be animals that had no connection to this organisation at all.

Despite bluster, threats and denials from Northfield, the facts remain: the photos used were of other people’s animals which had no connection to NAH.

Some of the owners were extremely displeased at the use of photographs appropriated from their own websites without permission – which would not have been granted.

John Robins of Animal Concern Advice Line said:

“Regretfully the time is long overdue when all animal sanctuaries and rescue centres need to be licensed, inspected by an independent authority and maintained to high minimum standards. A true animal sanctuary does not send any animals to slaughter, does not breed animals and does its best to find good homes for life for the animals it rescues.

“Numerous times a year we hear of “sanctuaries” which are really no more than well-meaning animal hoarders where one or two people, without the necessary space, financial resources or expertise take in numerous cats and/or dogs and sometimes farm animals and horses . Before long they discover they cannot pay for vets’ bills or even for food for the animals. The animals end up ill, emaciated and infested with worms, ticks, fleas and other parasites.

“Sometimes by the time the authorities realise there is a problem all they find are dead and dying animals. If you are requested to donate to an animal sanctuary there are several questions you should ask first. Is the sanctuary a registered charity? If the answer is ‘yes’ double-check with the Charity Regulator. If the answer is ‘no’ ask why not and how can they survive without the extra money charity status provides.

Ask for copies of its constitution and most recent accounts. Find out what animals it has and how it rehomes them. Are the animals neutered and is the sanctuary registered with a local vet? If you re-home an animal from a rescue centre, expect to pay a realistic fee to cover veterinary costs such as neutering, vaccinations and micro-chipping. Do not agree to pay a rescue centre large sums of money for pedigree dogs or fashionable cross-breeds.

“Expect the rescue centre to home-check you to ensure your premises are suitable for the animal you are taking on. If they do not do a home check they are not doing their job properly. Do not confuse animal sanctuaries with commercial enterprises such as working farms with visitor facilities, petting zoos or commercial falconry centres.”

Hoarders too masquerade as rescues. Any person or organisation that takes in more animals than it can support or continues to take in animals while unable to afford basics for existing rescues may well be a hoarder. Best Friends Animal Society has this to say on the subject:

“Collective denial – of individuals, of the whole group – may have contributed to the cats’ suffering. “It’s becoming a common thing,” says Dr. Gary Patronek, a veterinarian, epidemiologist and director of animal welfare and protection for the Animal Rescue League of Boston, and the founder of the Hoarding of Animals Research Consortium (HARC).

“We really don’t understand how groups of people, as opposed to individuals acting alone, could ignore suffering and death in a shelter or rescue environment. At least three different types of hoarders have been identified: overwhelmed caregiver, rescue hoarder and exploiter hoarder. It is the latter that is the least likely to have good intentions.””

One final word: any reputable charity will always make measured, logical, precise responses to the public’s concerns. Does your chosen charity answer questions in a suitable detail, or does it make an emotional, threatening, illogical response? Your clue is in the charity’s behaviour.

Always check a charity is registered, how old it is, and the owner/operator’s background may also offer further clues as to its reputation.

How to help animals? Choose transparent shelters; do not buy pedigree breeds when you can adopt animals instead (our area Scottish SPCA rescue is a great place to find a pet). Get your dog or cat neutered. And – be careful where your charity pounds are going.

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Unwanted Calls

Featured, Opinion, Satire and Humour 5 Responses »

Feb 282013

Hall Harper looks at the phenomenon of unwanted telephone calls and offers some suggestions on how to deal with them.

I suspect there are few, if any, of us who have never had an unwanted telephone call – and I’m not talking here about ones from great uncle Charlie asking if you could see your way clear to lend him a couple of bob, unwanted as these may be.

No, I’m talking about the ones from a range of organisations who want to sell you insurance, double glazing, a new kitchen or, the current favourite, the opportunity to handle your PPI claim.

In fairness, I’m willing to accept that these come from victims of the current economic situation who have been unable to find employment other than sitting in a call centre somewhere for a pittance.

So while I am extremely unlikely to even consider buying whatever it is they’re trying to sell I will, I hope, let them down fairly politely with a “sorry, but I’m afraid I’m not interested.”

The ones, however, that really do get to me are the scam calls – the ones from (usually) a foreign lady or gentleman who tell you that they’re ‘phoning from Windows and have had it drawn to their attention by their technical department that your computer is currently at risk. The scenario, I understand, which is supposed to unfold is that they offer to sort the problem for you for a small charge which can be paid by advising the caller of your credit or debit card details.

Needless to say, there is no technical department, nor is there a problem with your computer. There is, however, a problem when you provide your bank details and the folk calling you swick you out of your hard earned spondulicks.

There are, I’ve found, a number of ways to deal with these calls depending upon your mood and the time you have available. So if you’re totally stretched for time or are just not in the mood to indulge in any sort of communication, the simplest thing to do is hang up at the point you realise it’s a scam call.

The next step up is when you’re short of time but want, at the very least, to score a minor victory by having the last word. Again the way to achieve this is quite simple. You simply take a well known Anglo-Saxon expletive and use it in a two word phrase ending with ‘off’ before hanging up.

The point is to see how long it takes the caller to terminate the conversation

If, however, you have a bit of time on your hands and want a bit of fun (and remember you’re not paying for the call, they are) there are a few jolly japes available, the point of which is to see how long it takes for the unwanted caller to hang up on you.

The first is the one unashamedly stolen from a television ad which is when you sweetly ask the caller to, “please hang on a moment,” lay the receiver down and go and make yourself a coffee, do the crossword, go and do the shopping if you want – they’ll give up sooner or later. (I did this one time and kept quietly listening in from time to time to see how long they hung on. Surprisingly it was over ten minutes.)

Then there’s the ‘one word method.’ This comprises of steeling yourself, however chatty or insistent the caller becomes, to limit yourself to only one word. The obvious one is “yes” although I suspect a real expert at the game could come up with something a bit more adventurous.

The point is to see how long it takes the caller to terminate the conversation which, if the only response they’re getting is “yes” actually takes less time than you might imagine.

But my all time favourite is the ‘bad line method’ which, as the name I believe suggests, requires you to pretend that there is a fault on the line which renders you unable to make out what the caller is saying. This is easily done by firstly advising the caller that, as it’s a bad line, you didn’t make out what they said and inviting them to repeat what they’ve said and, once they’ve done this twice, you then ask them to spell it.

A recent call I had went something like this:

Caller: Good morning, my name is Daniel. I’m calling from Windows and we have identified a problem with your computer.

Me: I’m sorry but it’s a very bad line. What did you say your name was?

Caller: Daniel.

Me: I’m sorry, I didn’t catch that. Can you repeat please?

Caller: Daniel.

Me: I’m sorry, I still didn’t get it. Can you spell it please?

Caller: D-A-N-I-E-L

Me: Daniel?

Caller: Yes, Daniel.

Me: And the name of your company?

Caller: Windows.

Me: Sorry but it’s a REALLY bad line. Could you spell that please?

Caller: W-I-N-D-O-W-S.

Me: Windows?

Caller: Yes – Windows!

Me: Ah, I see. So you’re selling double glazing.

Caller: No, it’s about your computer.

Me: But you said you were calling about windows. What have windows got to do with computers?

Caller: No, I’m calling because we’ve identified that you’ve got a problem with your computer.

Me: Sorry but it really is a very bad line. Can you repeat that please?

Caller: We-have-identified-that-you-have-a-problem-with-your-computer!

Me: My computer?

Caller: Yes, your computer.

Me: But I don’t have a computer.

Caller hangs up.

RESULT!

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.