Charity donors' anger over 'tip traps' on fundraising websites
Three in four adults are 'frustrated' with the 'tip trap' set by some fundraising websites, fresh research reveals.
Some 76 per cent of those polled by advisory firm Strand Partners are annoyed at the way tips are collected on online fundraising platforms and are calling for the Government to tackle the practice.
Fundraising websites act as a middleman between charities or fundraisers and donors, making donations to good causes simple.
But many now automatically add a 'tip' on to the donation amount, which goes straight to the platform – and not the charitable cause.
It's catching out many generous donors, who end up frustrated after unintentionally paying the automatic charges.
When a donor reaches the checkout stage of the fundraising platform, the tip is shown on a sliding scale, which is automatically set at 17 per cent on popular website JustGiving.
This means on a £50 donation, an £8.50 fee is automatically added.
Donors can change or opt out of these tips, which go directly to the platforms, but only if they spot them – and work out how to reduce them to £0.
There are two higher options – at 19 and 20 per cent – and two lower options – 12.5 and 15 per cent. However, the sliding scale doesn't allow donors to reduce the tip to £0, as they must instead manually enter this by clicking an 'enter custom amount' button.
Almost two thirds of Britons want it to be easier to remove tip options when donating online, Strand Partners found.
Scores of annoyed users have vented their frustration on social media and review websites.
One user says 'any tip should be opt in, not opt out', while another says they were 'disgusted' to find a donation had been automatically added.
One review of JustGiving says: 'What an insult. I did not want to leave them a tip.'
If you leave an unintended tip, you can ask the fundraising platform you used if you can get a refund.
It's not just donors who are feeling frustrated. The research comes as MPs are piling pressure on the Government about the sliding tipping scales.
Cross-party MPs including Annaliese Dodds, MP for Oxford , and Saqib Bhatti, MP for Meriden and Solihull East, have recently pushed the Government on its plans to take any action on the sliding tipping scales.
One of these MPs, Jo Platt, MP for Leigh and Atherton – and a member of the Culture Media and Sport Committee – says: 'Fundraising platforms play an important role in facilitating giving. But concealed tipping options and hidden charges are unnecessarily diverting money away from charities and misleading donors.'
The tip system means websites don't levy a platform fee on donations to charities or personal fundraisers anymore in order to run their service.
Instead, it is these tips which now pay for the running of the platforms.
The UK Fundraising Regulator has long maintained the importance of transparency in online donations. In April, it updated its Code Of Fundraising Practice to specify that all voluntary tips must be clearly presented and on equal footing to free donation options.
This is due to take effect in November.
A JustGiving spokesman says: 'In order for us to continue to support fundraisers, it is essential that we operate as a for-profit organisation. In recent years we have seen growth in the volume of donations which in turn has naturally increased our profitability.
'Following consultation with some of the UK's leading charities, in 2019 we moved to a voluntary contribution model, so that as much money as possible could go directly to charities and good causes. This is now standard practice across the industry.
'Today, anyone using our platform has the option to leave a tip on top of their donation to support the running of JustGiving and this is not compulsory.
'When people do choose to add a tip, this goes towards investing in and maintaining the technology that helps our site continue to securely raise funds on a global scale, 24/7.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Investors to grill M&S chiefs over crippling cyber strike
Investors will grill Marks & Spencer bosses publicly for the first time since a major cyber attack that took out its online shopping for weeks. Chief executive Stuart Machin and chairman Archie Norman are addressing shareholders at the High Street stalwart's annual general meeting tomorrow at its headquarters in London. Questions are likely to be raised over the devastating cyber attack over the Easter bank holiday weekend, which bosses have said could cost the chain around £300m. In M&S's annual report in May, Norman said the impact of the cyber attack was likely to 'endure for some weeks, or even months'. The group was forced to halt website orders on April 25. It resumed online shopping only in mid-June, after more than six weeks. Customer personal data was also taken by the cyber criminals in the attack.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Blow to City as Initial Public Offerings at new low
Britain's stock market has suffered its worst first half of the year in decades, figures show. Analysis by data provider Dealogic reveals that stock market debuts have raised just £150m in 2025 so far, down 78 per cent on 2024 and the lowest level on records going back to 1999. There were just five London IPOs in the period, even lower than the desultory seven a year earlier, and the lowest level since 2009 when markets were in the grip of the financial crisis. The figures will intensify disquiet over the state of the London market which has been hit by a flurry of departures to rival exchanges and takeovers by foreign predators – who have spotted bargains among the UK's undervalued stocks. Fintech Wise recently announced it is upping sticks for New York, while hopes of a blockbuster float by fast-fashion giant Shein have evaporated as it plots a Hong Kong IPO instead. Tech firm Alphawave is among the UK-listed firms being snapped up. The latest gloomy data covers a period when Donald Trump's announcement of swingeing tariffs on trading partners – on what he called 'Liberation Day' in April – battered market sentiment at at time when there was already a dearth of IPOs. The worst of Trump's tariffs have since been put on hold. But Samuel Kerr, global head of equity capital markets at Dealogic, said: 'Liberation Day was a nightmare for deal flow, with April the worst since 2011 for global deal volume.' Charles Hall, head of research at Peel Hunt, said the figures highlighted what has been 'a theme for some time'. The London Stock Exchange's woes have led to calls for measures to force British pension funds to invest more in the UK. Hall added: 'If we don't have investment from domestic investors then we can't expect to have a healthy equity market. This is fundamental to the health of our economy.' Simon French, chief economist at Panmure Liberum, said the Government 'should promote an equity ownership culture' drawing on the legacy of 1980s privatisation campaigns. Russ Mould, investment director at AJ Bell, said the dearth of IPOs in the first half was not unique to London, with other global markets also struggling. The figures come days after it emerged that, in a rare boost for the City, Norwegian software firm Visma is planning a £16billion London IPO – partly encouraged by reforms to the UK's listings regime. Changes have been encouraged by a City task force set up to try to revive London's market. But LSE boss Julia Hoggett, who is spearheading the campaign, admitted in a speech last week: 'We still have not seen the real turning point in terms of risk capital within and into the UK.'
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Magazines caught using AI and fake writers for online stories
Belgian editions of Elle, Marie Claire and other women's magazines are claimed to have been using artificial intelligence to write hundreds of online articles under the names of fake journalists, complete with photographs and profiles. 'Sophie Vermeulen', who has written an impressive 403 articles for Elle online this year, was, according to her profile, complete with photograph, 'always ready to inspire you with fascinating stories or practical tips. Her passion for fashion and beauty is complemented by a love of travel and literature. Offline, you can spot her on a long walk in nature,' her Elle online profile said. Her equally personable colleague 'Marta Peeters' was presented as a 'fashion and lifestyle journalist from Antwerp with a passion for stories that touch people', who has written 150 stories this year. 'She has a background in communication sciences and an inexhaustible curiosity about everything related to femininity, creativity and culture,' the profile said. • ChatGPT blocks Iranian network pushing Scottish independence Over on the Belgian Marie Claire website, owned by the same publisher, Ventures Media, almost half the online articles are by 'Claire De Wilde', who has 'developed a passion for travel, beauty and wellbeing'. None of the writers actually exist. Their photographs and articles are creations of AI, although the artificial journalists only appear online and not in the print editions. Perhaps more seriously, the online site of the magazine Psychologies, a publication dedicated to the 'personal development and wellbeing' of women, published the work of 'Femke'. Described as 'an editor specialising in psychology and well-being', the AI expert wrote articles describing herself as an 'experienced psychologist'. In the real world, the Commission of Psychologists, the ethics watchdog for the profession in Belgium, is up in arms. 'The example of Femke, who presents herself as a psychologist under a journalistic profile and provides advice from that role, is not only misleading but also legally and socially unacceptable,' Carl Defreyne, the body's chairman, said. Confronted by the Belgian public broadcaster VRT, the publisher has removed the fake names and profiles with articles now bylined 'Elle Belgium' or with a disclaimer that 'content was generated using AI and then reviewed and modified by our editorial team'. 'We understand that the use of aliases can lead to confusion and that is why we have now also adjusted this practice to make it clearer,' the publisher said. 'We generate articles that are entirely created by AI and have not been editorially reviewed. Aliases have been used within the framework of the test. It remains limited and is separate from the editorial team.' The magazines are published as the Belgian version of the brand franchises. In Britain, Elle is published by a different company Hearst Magazines and Marie Claire is produced by Future Plc. There is no suggestion that either company uses AI. The Dutch Elle is also published by Hearst. Gigi van der Zwaan, the company's digital editor in the Netherlands told the Dutch broadcaster NOS: 'They have very strict rules when it comes to AI. We are only allowed to use it to translate a word.' • Danish citizens to 'own their own faces' to prevent deepfakes Hearst publishes the US, Spanish and Italian editions of Elle and does not use machine or AI translation for shared content. Publishers of the British editions of Elle and of Marie Clare have been approached for comment.
