1. False Claim of FCA and Council Regulation
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) does not regulate charities, baby banks, or fundraising shops. Its remit covers financial services and the use of certain sensitive words (e.g., “bank”) in company names. Even where the FCA issues a letter of non-objection for a name, that is not an authorisation or endorsement of the business.
In July 2025 the FCA confirmed in direct correspondence that it “does not authorise or regulate charities or baby banks.” Any earlier permission related only to the use of the sensitive word “bank” within a trading name. This clarification, published in the investigation ‘The Only FCA-Approved Charity?’, demonstrates that no regulatory approval was ever issued to Jayne’s Baby Bank.
Torfaen County Borough Council confirmed through FOI Ref 25/418 (6 October 2025) that Jayne’s Baby Bank is not a registered company or charity. The Council stated: The requested information is personal data as it relates to an individual as the entity known as Jaynes Baby Bank is not a registered company.
This means the shop operates in a private individual’s name, not as a legal entity.
Likewise, a food-business registration filed with Caerphilly County Borough Council on 24 February 2024 for 68 Tredegar Street, Risca listed the operator type as “A charity (registered by a representative)” with the charity number “Awaiting.” No such registration appears on the Charity Commission register. This was a self-declared form for hygiene purposes, not official recognition.
Images captured in early 2024 (Image Archive) show the same “Awaiting Charity Number” phrase printed on shop signage and shared on Facebook. This confirms the false declaration extended beyond paperwork into public-facing materials, misleading donors and visitors into believing formal charity registration was pending.
2. Misuse of Trading Standards References
Trading Standards have not “approved” Jayne’s Baby Bank. Officers visited after complaints about signage describing the shop as a charity. They ordered the removal of a poster claiming charitable status. The service continues to monitor the premises but has issued no endorsement.
3. False Identity
The operator of Jayne’s Baby Bank is Carrie-Anne Ridsdale, not “Jayne Price.” Official documents from Caerphilly CBC list the contact email carridsdale@gmail.com. Lease and tenancy documents also carry her legal name. The alternating use of aliases “Jayne Price,” “Jayne-Anne,” and “Jayne-Anne Carrie-Anne Ridsdale” across councils demonstrates deliberate identity variation.
FOI disclosures from Caerphilly County Borough Council include emails sent from carridsdale@gmail.com and signed “Carrie Anne.” These appear alongside business-rate and trading correspondence referencing “Jayne’s Baby Bank,” linking the Facebook persona and the legal identity of the operator beyond doubt.
Using a false or partial name in trading contravenes the Business Names Act 1985 and sections 1202–1206 of the Companies Act 2006, which require sole traders to display their true legal name and address on business documents and signage.
Identity Confirmation via Tribunal Letter
Further confirmation of the operator’s legal identity surfaced in August 2025, when a letter from HM Courts & Tribunals Service and Torfaen County Borough Council appeared during a livestream. The document, visible in the leaked footage, names Ms Carrie-Anne Ridsdale in full. This directly aligns with prior correspondence held by Caerphilly CBC and confirms that “Jayne Price” is a trading alias, not a separate individual.
“A Familiar Pattern: Identity Confusion” — This is not the first time Carrie Anne has exposed her legal identity during a live broadcast. Previously, in a leaked Subject Access Request video, she revealed the name “Carrie Anne Ridsdale” — the same name now seen on these official summons letters issued by HM Courts & Tribunals Service and Torfaen Council.
Supporting imagery is available in the Carrie Anne Slips Up Live Article.
4. Unsupported “Not-for-Profit” Status
No constitution, incorporation, or accounts exist to prove not-for-profit status. FOI records show councils treat the activity as personal trading. Describing income as “fundraising for foodbanks” without audit or independent oversight does not meet the legal definition of a not-for-profit under UK company or charity law.
5. The “Only FCA-Approved Charity” Myth
The claim to be “the only charity in Great Britain approved by the FCA to use the word ‘charity’ ” is impossible. The FCA confirmed it does not authorise or approve any charity. Permission to use “charity” in a name falls under the Charity Commission, which has confirmed no application or consent from Jayne’s Baby Bank.
6. Absence of Regulator Endorsement
- Charity Commission: No registration or name-use permission.
- Fundraising Regulator: Organisation not registered and outside remit.
- Trussell Trust: Confirms no partnership or affiliation.
- Caerphilly Social Services: States Jayne’s Baby Bank “is NOT endorsed and NOT allowed to make referrals on behalf of Caerphilly Social Services.”
7. Deflection via “Charity Rivalry” Narrative
No evidence supports the claim that “other charities” are conspiring against Jayne’s Baby Bank. The only documented communications involve regulators correcting misrepresentations. The rivalry narrative distracts from compliance issues and misleading public claims.
8. Transparency and Record-Keeping
No audited accounts or public reports exist. Councils have confirmed they do not oversee financial activity. Without a registered structure, there is no legal requirement for audit or independent inspection — contradicting statements of full transparency.
9. Health-Based Justification
The operator’s repeated references to serious illness, including “palliative bone-marrow cancer,” are inconsistent with medical definitions. Aplastic anaemia is not a cancer. Such claims have been used to justify non-payment or absence of wages but lack verification.
10. Integrity and Public Trust
The documentary pattern — false charity declarations, alternating identities, and misleading references to regulation — shows a sustained attempt to create an illusion of legitimacy. Integrity is demonstrated by compliance and disclosure, not by unsupported claims of approval.
Legal and Regulatory Findings
– Torfaen CBC (FOI Ref 25/418): Entity not registered; treated as personal data.
– Caerphilly CBC (24 Feb 2024): False self-declaration as charity.
– FCA: Confirmed no authorisation; does not regulate charities.
– Charity Commission: No permission for use of “charity” in name.
– Fundraising Regulator: Not registered.
– Caerphilly Social Services: Not authorised for referrals.
– Trussell Trust: No affiliation.
Conclusion
Jayne’s Baby Bank, operated by Carrie-Anne Ridsdale (“Jayne Price”), is neither a registered charity nor FCA-regulated. Every claim of approval, regulation, or recognition has been disproven by documentary evidence. The continued use of false names and misleading statements undermines public confidence and may breach the Charities Act 1992 s.63 and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.
Evidence further indicates that rate-relief and funding requests made under “Jayne’s Baby Bank” were processed in the personal name Carrie-Anne Ridsdale. As an unregistered trader, she would not qualify for mandatory charitable rate relief under the Local Government Finance Act 1988. This distinction is central when assessing any claim of council support or subsidy.
Members of the public should verify any charity or regulatory claim before donating or volunteering. Searches can be made on the Charity Commission register and the FCA Financial Services Register. Jayne’s Baby Bank appears on neither.
Primary Sources and Evidence
Investigation: “The Only FCA-Approved Charity?” (16 July 2025)
Jayne’s Baby Bank Image Archive
Complete Document Archive
Compiled for public-interest transparency. This material is for information only and does not constitute legal advice.
– Sherlock
In her latest video, she claims that the DWP telephoned her and asked about her earnings as an ‘influencer’. PIP is not means tested, you can work, earn and have savings if you claim PIP. On the other hand, in the unlikely event the the DWP called her and referred to her as Jayne, methinks she is claiming Universal Credit or similar which is not means tested. Looks like things are finally starting to close in on her!
She has a free house, a free car and all the income from Jaynes Baby Bank. She has a lot of spare funds.
– S
If Ms Ridsdale is claiming PIP then I think she needs a review! She manages to work all hours and manages to move heavy items, including tables and chairs in and out of her shops. She lifts heavy boxes of toiletries on to high shelves, and her knees miraculously recover when she is walking around the streets videoing people. Considering she claims to be seriously ill and palliative she is incredibly fit. I’m sure the DWP (PIP) will be very interested to see her in action in all her videos!
8 October 2025 — Facebook Livestream Transcript Review: “Autism” References
Today’s livestream (8 October 2025) continues Carrie-Anne Ridsdale’s pattern of using autism as both a shield and a promotional device. She invoked the label to explain behaviour, justify hostility, and claim unique insight into “neurodivergent” volunteers. The issue is not autism. It is the dishonesty around qualifications, conduct, and the manipulation of diagnoses for legitimacy.
1) Autism as Defence
She reframes criticism as discrimination. Public dislike stems from lies and abuse, not the label.
2) Autism as Marketing Narrative
She presents an “autism-friendly” workplace without any verified safeguarding framework or accredited training. This misleads vulnerable people into an unregulated setting.
3) Pattern of Self-Declared Autism Claims
Across previous posts and videos she has repeatedly self-declared an autism diagnosis and claimed “training” in children, behaviour, and autism. No independent documentation or employment history supports these statements. They remain personal assertions, not confirmed medical or professional facts.
4) Verification Context — Proven Record Inaccuracy
As set out in “Unregistered for 12 Years? EWC Finds No Record of SEN Assistant” (3 September 2025), the Education Workforce Council confirmed she has never been registered in any education role in Wales despite a public claim of twelve years as an ASD/SEN classroom assistant. When a statutory register shows no record of a supposed twelve-year career, all later self-disclosures demand independent corroboration.
5) Behavioural Contradictions
Despite frequent references to autism and sensitivity, she publicly ridicules people, labels others “pedos” and “liars,” and broadcasts confrontations. This undermines her portrayal of empathy and suggests opportunistic use of a condition to deflect accountability.
6) Documentary Reference — 2022 Leaked Email
The 2022 email (cited within “Analysing the CCBC Subject Access Request: Uncovering the True Identity and More”) was used to explain difficulties with accounts and correspondence. It is the earliest written instance of her multi-condition self-diagnosis later repeated across social media.
7) Broader Implications
Conclusion
The 8 October 2025 livestream, viewed alongside the 2022 email and EWC findings, shows a sustained use of self-diagnosed conditions as rhetorical tools. Public criticism focuses on falsehoods, harassment, and financial opacity — not on autism.
– Sherlock
Some Notable Quotes
Source: 8 October 2025 Facebook livestream transcript (
20251008_2539549993095395.txt)Concern: Expects a community venture to fund personal sick pay.
Concern: Asserts employment entitlement despite unclear employment status.
Concern: Trivialises disability.
Concern: Contempt for customers and safety rules.
Concern: Blames parents instead of acknowledging product safety duties.
Concern: Abusive language towards others.
Concern: Normalises grant-gaming behaviour.
Concern: Implicates off-site handling that may evade oversight.
Concern: Suggests disputes over vehicles linked to the operation.
Concern: Unsubstantiated criminal slurs.
Concern: Aggressive expansion while presenting as a charity-style service.
Concern: Family-led commercial strategy, not community need.
Concern: Public mockery; unprofessional.
Concern: Jokes about learning difficulties.
Concern: Violent, xenophobic tone.
Concern: Broad defamatory insinuations about other charities.
Concern: Implies reckless behaviour.
Concern: Further poor judgement.
Concern: Adversarial stance over community-minded conduct.
Concern: Describes a benefits/tax avoidance scheme.
Concern: Misuses oversight claims to silence criticism.
Concern: Open rejection of regulatory authority.
Concern: Deflection; used to justify behaviour and operations.
Concern: Suggests ongoing monitoring of surplus food streams for own operation.
Concern: Normalises low-quality stock practices.
– S