When someone deliberately damages a charity vehicle, it’s a serious matter. It can disrupt vital work, create unexpected expenses and understandably upset the people who donated towards it. But an allegation of vandalism is not the same as proof of vandalism. And when those allegations are accompanied by public accusations, claims of police involvement and appeals to supporters’ emotions that lead to public sympathy donations, the evidence deserves careful examination.
That brings us to the ‘Pumpkinmobile’.
NOVEMBER 2024 — THE TYRES WERE ALREADY RAISING CONCERNS
Before the ‘Pumpkinmobile’ became the familiar bright pink charity van, it was a silver 2019 Ford Transit Custom. The charity announced its purchase in December 2024 following a public fundraising appeal. But the vehicle’s earlier MOT history contains details worth noting.
On 16th November 2024, before the charity acquired the van, it initially failed its MOT because of a rear brake defect. It subsequently passed a retest that same day. The MOT record also included advisories concerning two tyres:
*Nearside front tyre:* worn close to the legal limit or worn on the edge.
*Nearside rear tyre:* worn close to the legal limit or worn on the edge.
FEBRUARY 2025 – ANOTHER DETAIL IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS
By February 2025, the ‘Pumpkinmobile’ had received its distinctive pink branding. On 13th February 2025, photographs published by a supporter showed the newly transformed vehicle, with what appear to show the original worn tyres. They appear to provide a dated visual record of the vehicle before the following March incident.
MARCH 2025 — THE ‘PUMPKINMOBILE’ IS ALLEGEDLY TARGETED
On 8th March 2025, just some weeks after the ‘Pumpkinmobile’ hit the road. Pumpkin and Friends Charity published an angry Facebook post alleging that somebody had deliberately inserted screws and nails into the ‘Pumpkinmobile’s’ tyres during the early hours of 6th March 2025. The charity claimed that a security camera had captured the incident at approximately 1.50 am and that the footage had been passed to the police.
The post was accompanied by photographs showing tyres, embedded screws and the vehicle undergoing attention at a garage. The charity’s anger was understandable ‘if’ somebody had deliberately targeted the vehicle. Such behaviour would be unacceptable.
Given Trustee Richard Blogg’s reported background in kitchen and bathroom fitting, we’re sure he’ll be familiar with just how easily these everyday fixings can find their way onto roads and driveways. The charity said it had CCTV footage and had involved the police, but what was the outcome?
Some supporters even offered to pay for the damage.
Did Pumpkin and Friends Charity use allegations of vandalism to justify replacing tyres that had already been flagged as worn at an earlier MOT — while generating public sympathy in the process?
WHAT DID THE POLICE RECORDS SHOW?
Our supporting material includes correspondence concerning a Freedom of Information request to Lincolnshire Police, followed by an internal review. Police data identified ‘one report of criminal damage to a vehicle with a March 2025 start date, reported online in April’, with the investigation subsequently finalised. If this is the vandalism Pumpkin and Friends purport occurred during the early hours of 6th March, why was it not reported online until April. Or was the purported vandalism never reported?
JANUARY 2026 — FROM ALLEGED VANDALISM TO PUBLIC ACCUSATIONS
On 7th January 2026, Pumpkin and Friends Charity revisited the first alleged vandalism of the ‘Pumpkinmobile’ with a social media post, this time attributing the damage to what it described as a “Hate Group”. The charity claimed the incident had cost approximately £500 and delayed assistance to two disabled dogs.
But the allegations did not end there. More recently, those connected with the charity have publicly named individuals it associates with this supposed group, raising serious concerns about the consequences of linking identifiable people to allegations of malicious behaviour.
Let’s be absolutely clear: questioning a charity, examining its finances, reporting concerns to regulators or challenging public statements does not make somebody a criminal, a bully or a member of a hate group. Accusing people of involvement in deliberate criminal damage is an entirely different matter from disagreeing with their opinions. Such allegations require credible evidence, not speculation, personal grievances or the encouragement of an angry social media audience.
We have not seen any evidence establishing that the individuals publicly named by the charity were responsible for damaging the ‘Pumpkinmobile’. If such evidence exists, it should be provided to the police and properly investigated, not used to fuel public hostility towards people who have raised questions.
Criticism is not vandalism. Scrutiny is not harassment. And an accusation repeated often enough does not magically become a fact. If Pumpkin and Friends Charity has evidence connecting any named individual to the alleged damage, we invite it to provide that evidence for independent verification.
JUNE 2026 — HAVEN’T WE SEEN THAT PHOTOGRAPH BEFORE?
On 1st June 2026, Pumpkin and Friends Charity again published statements about alleged damage to the ‘Pumpkinmobile’. The charity linked the latest reported incident to the period around its May 2026 Disability Dog Walk and stated that the matter had been reported to the police.
But something in the accompanying material caught our attention.
A tyre photograph used in connection with the June 2026 statements appears to be the same image that had already been published in March 2025. Not simply a photograph of a similar tyre, but the same image.
It appears Pumpkin and Friends Charity spotted their mistake and uploaded a different photograph to a separate social media post. They claimed “Same screws, same size” and the POLICE and GARAGE have confirmed this is not a coincidence!!. Mighty claims indeed, but again, no evidence. So we’d welcome any evidence substantiating these claims. As for the screws, we’re no experts, but one looks like a Phillips and another like a Torx, which has a much larger head.
There’s another problem with this post.
MARCH OR APRIL 2025? THE DATES DON’T ADD UP
As we’ve already evidenced, on 8th March 2025, Pumpkin and Friends Charity published a Facebook post claiming that the ‘Pumpkinmobile’ had been deliberately vandalised in the early hours of 6th March 2025. The post included a photograph of a tyre allegedly damaged by screws and nails.
Fast-forward to 1st June 2026, and the charity appeared to change its account of when that first incident occurred. In a new Facebook post shown above, it stated that the first damage had happened in APRIL 2025, shortly after that year’s Disability Dog Walk on 27th April. It’s all very confusing.
So, Pumpkin and Friends Charity, which was it – March or April 2025?
SHERWOOD FOREST: AN INCONVENIENT DETAIL IN THE VANDALISM TIMELINE
Just four days after the Disability Dog Walk on 24th May 2026, Tammie Fox and Richard Blogg took the Pumpkinmobile on a trip from Lincoln to Sherwood Forest. Photographs and video footage document the outing, including the vehicle travelling home.
Yet on 1st June, Pumpkin and Friends Charity publicly reported another alleged incident of vandalism.
The Pumpkinmobile was apparently fit for a substantial journey on 28th May, with no damage publicly reported at the time. Just four days later, the charity was announcing another alleged attack.
That is a significant omission in the charity’s account of events. The absence of an earlier report does not establish when any damage occurred, but the Sherwood Forest journey is a documented part of the timeline that cannot simply be overlooked.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/1538623477974572
A SUSPICIOUSLY CONVENIENT SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
On 30th May 2026, just two days before the 1st June post alleging further damage to the Pumpkinmobile, an anonymous Facebook post appeared in Animal Associated Warnings & Discussions (The Facts), questioning Broken Biscuits Charity. Broken Biscuits Charity vehemently defended itself against the criticism that followed. Whilst the post was anonymous, and posted using what we believe to be a fake account, we are in receipt of evidence which leads to people associated with Pumpkin and Friends Charity. We won’t be naming them at this stage.
Just two days later, Pumpkin and Friends Charity published fresh allegations concerning the ‘Pumpkinmobile’, and Broken Biscuits Charity was drawn into speculation about who might be responsible.
The timing is extraordinary. First, an anonymous post puts Broken Biscuits Charity under scrutiny. Then, within 48 hours, its name becomes entangled in allegations of criminal damage — without a shred of publicly presented evidence linking it to the incident.
A RETIRED POLICE OFFICER JOINS THE SPECULATION
Among those commenting on the charity’s June 2026 vandalism allegations was Sarah Lewendon, AKA Lewie Lewie on Facebook, who was publicly introduced by Pumpkin and Friends Charity as a retired police officer and member of its volunteer team.
Despite the charity acknowledging that it had no proof of who damaged the Pumpkinmobile, Lewie Lewie introduced Broken Biscuits Charity into the discussion, speculating that someone connected to its supporters might have been responsible. She also made disparaging comments naming Sally Finnigan.
We find it particularly concerning that someone with a police background would introduce identifiable people and organisations into a discussion about alleged criminal damage without providing evidence linking them to it.
Being retired does not give speculation the status of evidence. Surely someone with that background should appreciate the importance of the distinction?
The public deserves an accurate account of what happened. So do the people who may have been unfairly associated with the accusations. Because when serious allegations are made, the evidence should do the talking – not the outrage.
Broken Biscuits Charity has asked us to make its position absolutely clear
It categorically rejects as false and abhorrent any accusations or insinuations that its founder, Cassie Carney, or Trustee, Tim Giles, were involved in the alleged vandalism of the ‘Pumpkinmobile’. The charity considers such allegations deeply offensive and entirely unacceptable.
Broken Biscuits Charity states that the police have confirmed there is no case against either Cassie Carney or Tim Giles in connection with the alleged incident. Neither individual should be publicly implicated in alleged criminal damage without credible evidence.
Making or repeating damaging allegations against identifiable individuals without evidence is a serious matter and may give rise to defamation proceedings. Broken Biscuits Charity strongly condemns the circulation of such accusations and calls for an end to speculation implicating its founder and trustee.