Other findings contained in the report showed:
-
Mrs Ingram-Moore was “very much involved in discussions around setting her salary” and said to trustee Stephen Jones that “her expectations were in the region of £150,000 per annum”. Her claim that she was not offered a six-figure salary was described as “disingenuous” by the inquiry
-
She “purposely” removed the conflicts of interest clause from her employment contract with the charity, telling Mr Jones: “This is not a legal requirement… I will not be doing anything to conflict with all my roles but I cannot be in a position to request authority at every turn, my life would grind to a halt.”
-
Since the Ingram-Moores’ company, Club Nook, owned the Capt Sir Tom trademarks, trustees had to consult with them when it wanted to use his name for charity purposes, including by asking for permission to sell printed mugs
In July, Mr and Mrs Ingram-Moore were disqualified from being a trustee or holding a senior management position in charities for a period of eight and 10 years respectively.
Mr Holdsworth urged the Ingram-Moores to “follow through on the commitment that was made and donate a substantial amount to the charity”.
He said it was up to the remaining trustee whether to take legal action and the Commission “stood ready to provide advice as they considered that”.
In a statement, a spokesperson for the Captain Tom Foundation said it was “pleased with the Charity Commission’s unequivocal findings regarding the Ingram-Moores’ misconduct”.
“We join The Charity Commission in imploring the Ingram-Moores to rectify matters by returning the funds due to the Foundation, so that they can be donated to well-deserving charities as intended by the late Captain Sir Tom Moore.
“We hope they do so immediately and without the need for further action”, the spokesperson added.
Responding to the Commission’s report, the Ingram-Moores said they had been treated “unfairly and unjustly”.
They said the two-year inquiry had taken a “serious toll” on the family’s health and described the process as “excessive”, adding that the charities watchdog had a “predetermined agenda”.
“True accountability demands transparency, not selective storytelling,” the statement said, adding that they “never took a penny” from public donations.