Non-compliant applications

This is the old broken tape-recorder speaking again, but it needs to be said.

Recently, we received quite a number of non-compliant applications.

(1) Late submissions, as late as 22 days.

(2) Receipts issued in other names, not the applicant’s.

(3) Applications without the vet’s signature and stamp.

It is actually very sad that these applications have to be rejected because we really want to help as many animals (and their human rescuers and feeders) as we can, but when the humans refuse to comply with our procedures, we have no choice but to reject these applications.

It takes more time to reject than to accept and process an application because a rejection means we have to call up to inform the applicant, explain why it is rejected. Often, we have to deal with the applicant’s unhappiness and anger. There have been cases where the applicant threatens not to help animals anymore because his/her application has been rejected.  This sort of reasoning baffles us because our aid is really not an “entitlement” for anyone.

And again, the non-compliant applications almost always come from highly educated applicants (sad to say, some are post-graduate students). Some do not even bother to read our policies at all. We have no problems with the non-literate applicants – they will always get everything right. They cannot read or write and rely on whatsapp voicemails, but they can do photo collages, their forms are completely filled and they have a total understanding and respect for rules and deadlines. Bless them. Really, bless them so much.

Sometimes, we have to contact the vet to verify certain claims. Once, a vet told us that she tried with all her best efforts to explain the procedures to an applicant, but the applicant blatantly refused to listen and decided to simply do things her way (hence, rejected by us, due to non-compliance).

And the stories go on….

It isn’t easy running this fund.

Comments are closed.