Imagine being publicly associated with a so-called “Hate Group”. Imagine seeing allegations made about people you know, or finding yourself accused of behaviour you strongly dispute. Imagine feeling unable to defend yourself, watching others accept those allegations as fact, and wondering what damage they might do to your reputation, relationships or wellbeing.

For some of the people who have contacted us, these are not hypothetical concerns. They describe experiences of public criticism, online hostility, accusations they strongly dispute and the distress of feeling that their side of the story has not been heard.

Behind every label is a person. Behind every allegation may be a life affected. And behind every public dispute are questions that deserve to be examined fairly.

During our investigation into Pumpkin and Friends Charity, we have encountered repeated references to a so-called “Hate Group”. CEO Tammie Fox mentions this “Hate Group” during a February 2026 Facebook Live.

We wanted to understand who was being described in this way, what evidence supported the allegations and, crucially, what the people concerned had experienced themselves. What we heard raised serious questions about the human cost of these disputes.

VAL TALKS PETS PODCAST MAY 2025

During a second US Val Talks Pets podcast, published in May 2025, CEO Tammie Fox stated:

“I think they think we’re going to crumble and disappear and that is never, ever, ever going to happen. And what these people need to realise is I’m not the type of person to disappear. When somebody says no to me or somebody gives me a FIGHT, it makes me more determined…”

THE PEOPLE BEHIND THE LABEL

Trustees, volunteers and supporters of Pumpkin and Friends Charity have repeatedly referred to a so-called ‘Hate Group’. Across podcasts, articles, social media posts and other public communications, allegations have been made about individuals believed to be associated with this group.

These allegations include claims of jealousy, dishonesty, the use of fake profiles, damage to a vehicle, malicious reports to the RSPCA, police investigations and attempts to undermine the charity’s work.

The allegations have even extended to another charity, Pawsitive Futures UK, which has been wrongly accused of being behind Pumpkin and Friends Only Facts (see below social media screenshots). For those who have been wrongly associated with these allegations, the consequences can be devastating — damaging reputations, affecting relationships, undermining wellbeing and leaving people struggling to defend themselves.

These are serious allegations, particularly when the individuals and organisations concerned are either expressly named or clearly identifiable from the context in which the allegations are made.

We have also examined public communications containing language, imagery and music that we consider confrontational or potentially intimidating towards those perceived to be opposing the charity.

WHAT HAVE WE FOUND?

Our investigation has examined correspondence, public statements, screenshots and first-hand accounts from individuals who have been described, or believe they have been described, as members of the so-called “Hate Group”.

Those who have contacted us describe experiences that contrast sharply with the allegations made about them.

They report having:

• Attempted to defend themselves against allegations they dispute.
• Been blocked from the charity and influencer social media accounts, preventing them from responding directly on those platforms.
• Been accused of operating fake profiles.
• Identified what they believe to be the unauthorised use of their work or material.
• Experienced online hostility and distressing communications including ‘subtle’ references to their charity such as ‘We are not broken’.
• Faced criticism for supporting other charities.
• Received communications they understood to be threats of legal action.
• Suffered significant personal distress as a result of ongoing disputes and public allegations.

Some also acknowledge responding emotionally to situations they felt were deliberately provocative.

These are not trivial experiences. Some individuals have described serious consequences for their wellbeing, personal lives and involvement in animal welfare.

We take these accounts seriously while recognising the importance of examining them alongside documentary evidence and relevant responses from those concerned.

NOT A HATE GROUP – A VICTIMS GROUP

The people we have spoken to do not recognise themselves in the description of a “Hate Group”. Many describe themselves not as aggressors, but as people who have been hurt, publicly criticised or unfairly portrayed because they raised concerns or expressed opinions.

Some feel they have become victims of the very behaviour they have been accused of.

Disagreement with a charity does not constitute hatred. Serious public allegations must be supported by evidence, not repeated as established facts.

We invite CEO Tammie Fox, Trustee Richard Blogg and anyone else who has made or repeated allegations about the so-called “Hate Group” to provide supporting evidence. We particularly want to establish whether the conduct complained of was unprovoked or arose in response to earlier accusations or treatment. All relevant accounts and evidence will be considered fairly.

WHEN AN INVESTIGATOR BECOMES A VICTIM

One of the most troubling developments in this investigation has been the experience of our own investigator, Linda. Linda became involved in examining concerns, reviewing evidence and seeking to establish the facts. However, as events unfolded, she became personally affected by the very issues our investigation was examining.

Her experience has brought home to us that the consequences of public allegations and online disputes can extend beyond those originally involved. Even people seeking to investigate concerns may find themselves drawn into deeply distressing situations.

No one should have to choose between asking legitimate questions and protecting their own wellbeing.

We have addressed Linda’s experience and the wider circumstances in her Testimony, which we encourage readers to examine alongside the evidence presented on this website.