Anonymous in this post made a good guess about whom had complained about us to the Charities Unit - I believe that the person who complained is a different individual, but the man who insisted that one must be sincere when helping him wrote in yesterday to the adoptions volunteer threatening to complain to the AVA, MCYS and whomever else he thinks he can get us into trouble with.
Here's what happened - after the episode of the other day, he decided to adopt one of his kittens out. The adoption volunteer decided to continue to allow him to do so as it was in the interests of the cat to be adopted out. This is one of the kittens that had to be adopted out because the mother cat had not been sterilised, and why the adoption volunteer had gotten involved in the first place. She felt bad that this person had not enough money and was unemployed, so she took it upon herself to get the cat sterilised at no cost to him, and to provide food as well.
After increasingly bizarre emails between him and some potential adopters (including one where he told the potential adopter that he knew what his leisure habits were and where he lived because he was in the private investigation business), he decided to adopt the kitten out yesterday.
This is when the problem started. He insisted on putting the CWS logo on his adoption contract. The adoption volunteer explained to him that this was NOT a CWS adoption because this was an adoption carried out via public bulletin board as a public service. Often we do not know the potential fosters or adopters, and we want both parties to be the ones responsible for the contract.
The reason for this is that firstly, we do not know the parties involved - nor the cat involved. No one would know the cat better obviously than the foster - besides looking out for things such as good health, the foster would be the best person to tell if the cat is happy and contented in the new home.
Secondly, we want both parties to be responsible - after all, the foster, especially in this case, being an owner, ought to have some form of responsibility. Some fosters are still too quick to adopt cats out to the first available home despite whatever the adoption volunteer may advise. At one point, our last head of adoptions agreed to take cats back if people didn't want them. That stopped because too many people started returning the cats, and this was often because many of the fosters didn't bother to check that the cats were going to go good homes - after all, if there was a problem, CWS would take the cat back, not them. So we ended up with cats being returned and the foster refusing to take the cats back. The last head of adoptions said she ended up with some cats she had never seen in her life whom didn't fit in well with her cats so that had to be stopped.
Thirdly obviously a contract between the adopter and foster can be customised between the two parties to put in whatever makes the two of you comfortable - so you have more leeway obviously if you're amending a sample contract to your liking.
Now the young man took umbrage at this - he insisted that because the adoption posting had been done on the CWS board, that therefore CWS had to be responsible and that we had to take action if the contract was breached. From a strictly contractual point of view, we aren't even a party to the contract - so you can't ask a third party to come and enforce the contract for you, which I pointed out to him in an email. He also made allusions to other charity organisations that he said had 'made mistakes'.
I explained in my reply why he wanted the two parties to be responsible and that our board was a public service and what was said at the top of the adoption page and that it was a public board. I also explained that this was a means of advertising, like a supermarket notice board - the supermarket cannot be responsible if two people contact each other and the deal falls through. It would be akin to say suing the Social Development Unit if at some point you and your date whom you met through their activities broke up.
He wrote back another rather strange email - half of which is hard to follow (he mentioned something about people writing in to see his cats, and these 'volunteers' not contacting him again and what action we were taking on this matter). I forwarded it to the committee and one of the committee members asked what exactly he was upset about as the email was so garbled.
He also upset the adoption volunteer, who had from the beginning tried to help him out with this in her own capacity. Of course, the young man then said he would be complaining to us to all the different bodies and would be getting us banned (much as he tried to get the person helping the other day banned).
In fact, as the adoption volunteer had written the other day, he HAD written into complain about the person helping with transport to one of the Ministers asking to have volunteers banned. The adoption volunteer replied to both and we did not hear from the Minister.
One could argue that we might be in good company after all - in an email he sent earlier, apparently he had complained about different MPs in his Town Council too. He said that he had written to the Senior Minister and Minister Mentor to complain about them.