As he doesn’t have a wiki could someone explain the fraud timeline please?
Simon Harris #5 Mr Harris, who was a popular figure on the internet
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Simon Harris Threads
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
It’s a ride
Simon Harris - Man Behaving Dadly Wiki
Simon Harris AKA Man Behaving Dadly is 40 years of age and is ostensibly a blogger, internet personality, and freelance social media manager. In reality, he's a performing clown desperate for attention and social media engagement. He became known in January 2024, when it was widely reported...
tattle.life
Evening chaps, just catching up. Hope we are all well and absolutely well done to the efforts of others on here that have brought this to attention. You are bloody brilliant.
My experience working in Local Authorities means that I sadly won’t hold my breath for any individual accountability or job losses as a result of this fiasco. It will be a “lessons learned” report. However, I do hope that they claw the money back. As someone commented on the South End Article, the amount of money given is MASSIVELY disproportionate for what was produced, even if he had done it well. I do hope this is the end of him and his attention seeking ways though. The irony is that he has been taken down in the same way as his twin flame Jack Monroe
The GoFundMe stuff is weird. I personally think it is one of two things - he is either getting it sent to himself so he can have the glory of the donation in his name or he is skimming. There is no other logical reason why he would want the money to go to him rather than set it up to to go directly to the charity. As he has refused to clarify this, he is leaving himself open to bad thinking.
As someone else mentioned, he would have likely got away with it if he hadn’t been such an attention bleep and insufferable with it.
My experience working in Local Authorities means that I sadly won’t hold my breath for any individual accountability or job losses as a result of this fiasco. It will be a “lessons learned” report. However, I do hope that they claw the money back. As someone commented on the South End Article, the amount of money given is MASSIVELY disproportionate for what was produced, even if he had done it well. I do hope this is the end of him and his attention seeking ways though. The irony is that he has been taken down in the same way as his twin flame Jack Monroe
The GoFundMe stuff is weird. I personally think it is one of two things - he is either getting it sent to himself so he can have the glory of the donation in his name or he is skimming. There is no other logical reason why he would want the money to go to him rather than set it up to to go directly to the charity. As he has refused to clarify this, he is leaving himself open to bad thinking.
As someone else mentioned, he would have likely got away with it if he hadn’t been such an attention bleep and insufferable with it.
As he mentioned he had a relationship with Gofundme I figured it was a kickback thing... What else would a relationship be?
I have to be very careful what I say here but I don’t think it’s that. What I will say is that GoFundMe don’t monitor what happens to the funds once they hit the account. All they do is process and take the fees for transaction. So if I set up a GoFundMe and the money was to hit my personal account, there is no way for that money to be tracked.
So, an absolutely random example here and absolutely no way linked to Simon….
1. I decide I want to raise money for vulnerable people who need milk. I haven’t researched this, I’ve just seen one newspaper article, or jumped on the bandwagon about People stealing milk. Anyway, I don’t need to explain my intentions to you bunch of tories
2. I set up a GoFundMe to go to my account. This is rather clever or thick of me depending on my motivation because there isn’t a specific national “milk charity” is there.
3. I get the money from GoFundMe, less their fees into my account
4. I disperse the money as I see fit, rely on the fact that 99% of people who donated won’t ask about receipts and just trust what I say. If you question me, I will ignore, block you or abuse you.
Quite frankly, anyone who donated a brass razoo to that clown is as clowny as him. I am sick of telling people I know to either donate to people personally or to registered charities because at least you know what you are getting.
I agree that there is definitely something to the GoFundMe kickback avenue. You raise some very good points about your purely hypothetical milk fundraising scenario. That is totally plausible if anybody were to ever think of doing that 
But for some of his fundraisers, the cash never touched his chocolate covered fingers. They went straight to the charity. In those cases, I’m absolutely convinced that GoFundMe were incentivising him to raise via their platform. I’ve done some research into whether they run affiliate programs like that and it’s as clear as mud to be honest. They seem to say no but other websites I’ve read make reference to such a program. He even said himself that he was connected to GFM and justified his status as middle man between benefactor and charity because GFM would help promote his appeals. He also wrote at least one published article for them.
And let’s face it, this is a man motivated entirely by selfish reasons. Everything he ever did was designed to benefit him somehow. There is not a benevolent bone in his blubber-draped body, so I refuse to believe that he raised £250k for the RNLI and watched all that money sail off into the sunset without earning out of it somewhere in the process.
But for some of his fundraisers, the cash never touched his chocolate covered fingers. They went straight to the charity. In those cases, I’m absolutely convinced that GoFundMe were incentivising him to raise via their platform. I’ve done some research into whether they run affiliate programs like that and it’s as clear as mud to be honest. They seem to say no but other websites I’ve read make reference to such a program. He even said himself that he was connected to GFM and justified his status as middle man between benefactor and charity because GFM would help promote his appeals. He also wrote at least one published article for them.
And let’s face it, this is a man motivated entirely by selfish reasons. Everything he ever did was designed to benefit him somehow. There is not a benevolent bone in his blubber-draped body, so I refuse to believe that he raised £250k for the RNLI and watched all that money sail off into the sunset without earning out of it somewhere in the process.
I had lost this morons thread halfway through #3. Stumbled back across it yesterday.
What. A. Ride.
What. A. Ride.
Same same. I was just idly thinking that I hadn’t looked at this thread for ages so I thought I’d check it out for old times sake and oh my GOD.
So, my guess any/all of the following:What’s all this about then?
As of today, Social Kindness has been rebranded to KIRSTY OCALLAGHAN LIMITED.
However did she come up with that name? So inventive. But on a serious note, what could she be up to here? Must be trying to hide the connection between this company and the old one for some reason
View attachment 2763284
1. Regularlise her contract with Suffolk. Meaning they are allowing her to have the old, unenforcable contract, novated accross and she is seeking to tidy up. It will still end in March. So far, she has been lucky to have her name less in the press than SH so this company name is less toxic than Social Kind and plausibly keeps her separate from SH. However, to prevent SH from indepedently engaging with the press about the true nature of their grift there will still be a financial relationship between them. Afterall, those high-level "Canva" templates won't draw themselves
2. Whomever her new employer was, has agreed to pay her as self employed and this is more acceptable to them through some bizarre sense of loyalty or maybe buys into the narrative that she has been "wronged" and is a victim - so this is the bone they are throwing her
3. She will be joining the sociopaths at facebook/meta - again on the same basis
4. Just hopeful - new start, she's strong, independent and she can crush it - this is they kind of thing I expect her friends (and Aunty) will be saying
All of the above will become clearer when her accounts land - or if.
Looks like he's bored of the Suffolk page and just waiting for the contract to end now. Barely posted anything in a week.
Just doing retweets of other pages at this stage. Nice work if you can get it.
The Suffolk County Council Facebook page has 19k followers. I’m sure they’ll be grateful for the share from a page with only 4k followers. A page they paid £130,000 for, no less.
The Suffolk County Council Facebook page has 19k followers. I’m sure they’ll be grateful for the share from a page with only 4k followers. A page they paid £130,000 for, no less.
Do you reckon he is still losing weight
Apparantly Social Kindness has had a name change and the (only) director has resigned.
(saw on LG's Twitter)
(saw on LG's Twitter)
Something was odd there. O'Callaghan was listed as a director twice with different versions of her name. Each one with a different address.
She is also listed as company secretary, which is pointless because a director can do everything a company secretary can.
Of course because it’s SO easy and anyone can do it if they just stop eating crisps.
Those accounts: a few things I have noticed.
1. The service address is an accountancy firm
2. The accountancy firm is not referenced as having prepared the accounts - it looks like a "garbage in, garbage out" support offer if they have actually done anything with the accounts to get her ready/able to submit them on time. If they had actively prepared them, they may have said so. Alternatively, they are just a service address - there are loads of other companies with the same address.
3. There is no indication that the company is VAT registered, but income during the year is enough that they should be - Suffolk Council describing it as a "grant", which I think is what they did, does not make the activity any less likely to be subject to VAT.
4. The company has been set up under SIC CODE 96040 "Physical Wellbeing Services" which is clearly not the space she has been in - this would, typically be sub-categorised (if a bit of light internet research is to be believed) things like:
Health farm
Steam baths
Spas
Solariums
Saunas
Russian baths
Reducing and slimming salon activities
Public baths
Physical wellbeing activities
Massage salons
Local authority baths (hot water and sauna)
Turkish baths
Obviously, it was a mistake. I have only just been able to write this up as I have spent the last two days laughing.
5. The Company should have ended the year with a liability for Corporation Tax on the balance sheet unless, during the year, all of its income (£130K from Suffolk or whatever part of that fell in 22/23) was offset against costs. This means she would have had to have intended during that year or confected afterwards an in-year liability to offset against her income certain "supplier" costs that would have reduced her profit to zero. She has no employee costs so this can only have been Harris.
My guess is that this was either the intended presentation of the accounts (I am not saying she did not profit - she has VERY expensive tastes) or it is an arrangement that has been confected after year-end (which from a tax perspective is problematic, but may not be discovered unless investigated) - where the magnanimity to Harris was in return for the valid argument he would now have, which is that she has come out of this less scathed than him and his career is effectively over - and he really would have otherwise had little to lose in going full disclosure in respect to both Suffolk AND Essex contracts. Doing so would demonstrate a high degree of reciprocity between the two of them - any of which if not formally accounted for in respect to her obligations as a director or either of their obligations to HMRC should be of valid interest to the authorities and something she would very much want to avoid.
Simon, Kirsty - am I getting anywhere close?
1. The service address is an accountancy firm
2. The accountancy firm is not referenced as having prepared the accounts - it looks like a "garbage in, garbage out" support offer if they have actually done anything with the accounts to get her ready/able to submit them on time. If they had actively prepared them, they may have said so. Alternatively, they are just a service address - there are loads of other companies with the same address.
3. There is no indication that the company is VAT registered, but income during the year is enough that they should be - Suffolk Council describing it as a "grant", which I think is what they did, does not make the activity any less likely to be subject to VAT.
4. The company has been set up under SIC CODE 96040 "Physical Wellbeing Services" which is clearly not the space she has been in - this would, typically be sub-categorised (if a bit of light internet research is to be believed) things like:
Health farm
Steam baths
Spas
Solariums
Saunas
Russian baths
Reducing and slimming salon activities
Public baths
Physical wellbeing activities
Massage salons
Local authority baths (hot water and sauna)
Turkish baths
Obviously, it was a mistake. I have only just been able to write this up as I have spent the last two days laughing.
5. The Company should have ended the year with a liability for Corporation Tax on the balance sheet unless, during the year, all of its income (£130K from Suffolk or whatever part of that fell in 22/23) was offset against costs. This means she would have had to have intended during that year or confected afterwards an in-year liability to offset against her income certain "supplier" costs that would have reduced her profit to zero. She has no employee costs so this can only have been Harris.
My guess is that this was either the intended presentation of the accounts (I am not saying she did not profit - she has VERY expensive tastes) or it is an arrangement that has been confected after year-end (which from a tax perspective is problematic, but may not be discovered unless investigated) - where the magnanimity to Harris was in return for the valid argument he would now have, which is that she has come out of this less scathed than him and his career is effectively over - and he really would have otherwise had little to lose in going full disclosure in respect to both Suffolk AND Essex contracts. Doing so would demonstrate a high degree of reciprocity between the two of them - any of which if not formally accounted for in respect to her obligations as a director or either of their obligations to HMRC should be of valid interest to the authorities and something she would very much want to avoid.
Simon, Kirsty - am I getting anywhere close?
I just had the Together for Suffolk pothole video appear in my facebook feed. I've never been to Suffolk and live approximately 200 miles away but still, exciting times!
This is tin-foil hat territory and I don't quite believe it myself, but just went to see if anything new had popped up and saw somebody surmising
Probably not true, but then I was scrolling their feed and this sparked my spidey senses
as old Simon has form for quoting the East Midlands colloquialism "ey up me duck" in reference to Lee and having done a brief search on Twitter, this is not a common centrist Dad meme (thank God, I think I'd explode with rage because it's cringe)
Who bleeping knows
Probably not true, but then I was scrolling their feed and this sparked my spidey senses
as old Simon has form for quoting the East Midlands colloquialism "ey up me duck" in reference to Lee and having done a brief search on Twitter, this is not a common centrist Dad meme (thank God, I think I'd explode with rage because it's cringe)
Who bleeping knows
The Mid and South Essex ICB FOI request has been partially responded to:
www.whatdotheyknow.com
The substantive questions about discussions, contracts etc. they've asked for longer time to respond to. They must be in a right panic as the "we didn't keep the emails" defence would appear to be less plausible as O'Callaghan was there until comparitively recently and even if she attempted to purge them before leaving, there would be a server copy.
The multi pronged question about the Community Assembly etc. they have responded to and burried within that is a response relating to the question "who owns the facebook" page? They have said "yes we do" (although I suspect they aren't actually sure). In any case, we are told
"due to the recent Integrated Care Board restructure and changes to personnel we are currently reviewing its utilisation with a view to closing down this Facebook Group as we do not have administrator resource available to facilitate it going forward"
I'd all urge you to read the following https://www.midandsouthessex.ics.nhs.uk/get-involved/working-with-communities/
Specifically, the quite superb document available as a PDF at the end, which features many examples of highly focused and meaningful prose - for example: (I'd urge you to read whilst playing "Land of Hope and Glory" in the background)
"through developing relationships within communities themselves to address health inequalities, meeting people where they are using a narrative and common language that resonates with our communities."
And
"We will actively listen to what people want to talk to us about."
Exceptional.
Whether they like it or not, they've pinned their flag to the mast of the KOC/SH axis of social media excellence and would appear now to have nothing!
So it seems so non-sensical that this new frontier of public engagement, this world-beating, mechanism, this conference key-note speech confetti if you will, for engaging with and "listening to the things communities want to say to us", should be thrown to dogs (not missing dogs - metaphorical dogs) - and all for the lack of an "administrator resource".
What a travesty...
Information on the proposed Community Assembly (from November 2022) - a Freedom of Information request to NHS Mid and South Essex Integrated Care Board
I am writing to you to ask: 1. whether the Community Assembly first proposed on 16th November 2022 was ever formally established and if so, whether it continues to run (in an official or unofficial capacity) 2. How the "Digital Community Leader" position was advertised, shortlisted, and a...
The substantive questions about discussions, contracts etc. they've asked for longer time to respond to. They must be in a right panic as the "we didn't keep the emails" defence would appear to be less plausible as O'Callaghan was there until comparitively recently and even if she attempted to purge them before leaving, there would be a server copy.
The multi pronged question about the Community Assembly etc. they have responded to and burried within that is a response relating to the question "who owns the facebook" page? They have said "yes we do" (although I suspect they aren't actually sure). In any case, we are told
"due to the recent Integrated Care Board restructure and changes to personnel we are currently reviewing its utilisation with a view to closing down this Facebook Group as we do not have administrator resource available to facilitate it going forward"
I'd all urge you to read the following https://www.midandsouthessex.ics.nhs.uk/get-involved/working-with-communities/
Specifically, the quite superb document available as a PDF at the end, which features many examples of highly focused and meaningful prose - for example: (I'd urge you to read whilst playing "Land of Hope and Glory" in the background)
"through developing relationships within communities themselves to address health inequalities, meeting people where they are using a narrative and common language that resonates with our communities."
And
"We will actively listen to what people want to talk to us about."
Exceptional.
Whether they like it or not, they've pinned their flag to the mast of the KOC/SH axis of social media excellence and would appear now to have nothing!
So it seems so non-sensical that this new frontier of public engagement, this world-beating, mechanism, this conference key-note speech confetti if you will, for engaging with and "listening to the things communities want to say to us", should be thrown to dogs (not missing dogs - metaphorical dogs) - and all for the lack of an "administrator resource".
What a travesty...
- Status