Sarah Acott was involved in running the channels on Revelation TV during their first year of broadcasting. She became suspicious and wrote to Peter Darg and the Trustees in 2012 outlining some very serious concerns about the money that goes to 21st Century Television Ltd, the holding company for Revelation TV. Sarah has been "sitting" on this information for a number of years, but now has decided to go public with it. I totally support Sarah's decision because I believe that it is better for RTV to be exposed by genuine believers rather than by the secular media for the sake of the Christian witness (2 Peter 2:2). Below is a transcript of Sarah's concerns which I have not altered, apart from highlighting certain critical points and deleting Sarah's contact details:
"Dear Peter and Trustees
I originally wrote this report to you in February, but was asked not to send it at the time due to the then climate that existed at Revelation. There are a few things I do not agree with regarding the way that the channel operates, however today I just want to focus on finances.
Peter, I don’t know if you would remember me. I was the then 17 year old girl who used to run the live shows during the first year of the channel?
I have knowledge of the inner workings of the channel as I didn’t just do the live shows, but also training others, scheduling and working in the office before it was moved to Surbiton. During this time I learnt about the finances, airtime sales etc so have put my own knowledge together with that available on the internet and come to the following conclusions. The conclusions below were written back in February before Howard’s email to firstname.lastname@example.org and now look as being correct. I have not edited this much further so a lot of this is now possibly old news, so please bear with it.
The issue I wish to raise is that donors to the channel are being mislead in the way that funds are raised and presented on the Building the Foundation programme. The programme leads the viewer to believe that the finances reported on the pie charts are a representation of the entire channels financial operation. This is not true and could be accused of being fraudulent. I am only bringing this to you because I believe that this is something that you as the legal overseers should be aware of.
It became obvious to me when I watched one of the first Building the Foundation programmes years ago. The income stated leaves out one of the largest income streams into the channel – airtime and advertising sales. Having worked in the office during the set up of the channel I know about the 21st Century television account and believe that the money from this huge source of income is going straight into this account. From what I can gather from the charities commission website 21st Century Television makes donations to the Revelation Foundation. The donation total for 2009 was £350,000 I believe. I have a problem with this as by my maths this is no where near the total that is received in airtime and advertising. Using very conservative figures I come to the below sums.
Airtime at £350 per 30 min slot x 4 paying ministries = £1400 per day x 365 = £511,000 per year
Advertising at £15 per spot x 12 = £180 per day x 365 = £65,700
As you can see from this very conservative estimate there is around £200,000 which is going into this account. Howard and Gordon have always said 'come and look at our books'. I’m sure they would be happy for someone who hasn’t a clue how a station is run to come and look, but I believe this over confidence is a bluff.
I do not know what is happening to the money that goes into 21st Century, but as Trustees I hope you do. The reason I am bringing this up is the dishonesty and deception. When I tell people I used to work for the station they often comment about the transparency of the finances and how wonderful it is to see exactly where the money goes. The problem is they are not seeing where all the money goes and if people found out what sort of a response should we expect from the poor old ladies at home who give 'the widow’s mite' in good faith that the money is needed and that there is transparency. How would Jesus respond?
My own suspicion is that 21st Century tops up the Revelation Foundation at the amount it needs. If I am correct then how wrong is it to convince people of a need which isn’t real? This is fraud and those who are aware of this deception need to repent. I am aware that for some of you however, that this would be unknown.
There needs to be either a clear distinction for viewers between 21st Century Television and the Revelation Foundation or preferably all money to flow through the Revelation Foundation as this would give the clarity and transparency that the viewers expect. Also I cannot see the charities commission looking favourably on the current reporting of finances.
Considering that in the initial mission statement of the channel was a very clear statement of not asking for funds on air – things have not only gone very far from the vision, but also veered into an area of possible criminality.
Please see my other document BTF Report, which is a transcript of the last Building the Foundation programme (February 2012).
I would like to make it clear that the last thing I want is for this information to go into the public domain. I have sat on this for years and feel I should have confronted earlier, but feel that with the current Trustees there is an opportunity for things to be put right.
I pray you will have the strength and courage to do what is needed.
You are welcome to contact me with any questions or queries at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In light of Howard’s email to email@example.com, it is now confirmed that all money from airtime sales etc goes to 21st Century TV and that this money goes to Howard and Lesley. There have been many programmes which suggest that Howard and Lesley do not take a wage from the station and I guess to some extent that could be true as they might take it as a dividend, but this is deceptive.
Howard’s email said that he didn’t feel comfortable taking from 'the widows mite', which sounds very sacrificial when said in that way, however by taking the entirety of the stations earned (as opposed to donated) money they have created a deficit which the 'widows mite' then has to fill. Personally I cannot see this as a good argument and whilst I don’t wish to be cynical, I believe this is done in this way so that the viewers cannot see how much money is being taken by Howard and Lesley.
I realise that is a heavy accusation, however I do accounts for a charity myself and can’t see this any other way. I have no problem with Howard and Lesley taking even millions every year as that is their choice. However it is not being fair or honest with the viewers and those who do give the 'widows mite'.
I would never go public with this information, as I spent 6 months as a volunteer and a further 6 months on a wage that covered my train fare and not much more. So for me to see something that I invested so much of myself into be brought down by either the charity commission or a police investigation would be a personal loss. However after Howard’s email I’d be very surprised if no one else did as it’s not difficult to connect the dots.
You are welcome to contact me with any questions or queries at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
BUILDING THE FOUNDATION REPORT
Transcript from Building the Foundation 14th February 2012 with Gordon Pettie and Doug Harris.
Doug – "Gordon, let me just ask you a question, because we say each month and we are very open. We are I think one of only a few channels who are, but tell me Gordon – be honest. Do you manipulate the figures in any way?" 
Gordon – "Doug! What a question to ask me!"
Doug – "Well, I do sit next you in the office."
Both – Laugh
Gordon – "What does that mean?!
I suppose the answer would be yes and no… no…"
Doug – "Before the phones start ringing even more you had better explain that! "
Gordon – "Well, no in the sense that the figures are done every month. We have Elaine who works in the accounts department and she collates all the figures for us. When she’s done them, she sends them to our accountant. The accountant then looks at them and the figures that I use are the figures the accountants use. 
But, yes, in the sense that when we show the figures for January, we actually should have a payment going out for the rent £15,000. We didn’t get enough money coming in in January to pay the rent. So the figure you are going to see is an incorrect figure, because we really should say there is another £15,000 of expenditure in January, which we didn’t do.
When I show the figures in a moment, you’ll see we had a surplus in January of £2,000+ and that’s why our target is £12,300, because that means we will have the rent money. Of course in February we then have to raise that again all the money that we need."
Doug – And that’s the point, because we take it to the end of the month, but Building the Foundation is already using a couple of weeks in, so already got another target to reach.
But it is amazing and even with the slight differences it’s amazing how often the two figures – the income and expenditure, balance. And whatever the expenditure the income is there. I’m always amazed at that – month by month. 
Gordon – "I am too and we don’t manipulate that.  John O’Dell one of our trustees and accountant, he tells me off. He says “well the figures are bound to vary every month, because it just depends on when the income comes in and when the expenditure goes out”. 
And that’s why some months like this month we have a slight surplus and maybe next month a slight deficit, but you average out and you come to the end of the financial year and you’re very close. It’s the Lord, it’s the Lord!" 
Doug – "Well, we need to move on with the figures."
Gordon – "So January time. Let me show you the income that came in and the way that we spent it. Here’s a chart, which just illustrates the income. One-off gifts – those of you who sent cheques in those of you who made donations £20,969. And so many of you now pay monthly by standing order and direct debit a tremendous £53,946.
Those of you who told us that you are taxpayers we were able to ask the government for money back and that came in during January to £8,754. Those of you who go to World pay and paypal and make donations by credit card £48,633 and many of you tonight have been going to the website and paying that way. So that means a total income for this month of £132,302.
So what did we do with the money? How did we spend it? That’s the income figure there - £132,000.  How did we spend the money during the month of January?
Well, our broadcast costs – it costs us a lot of money each month to send it down to a firm called Globecast, who send it up in the sky to a satellite, beam it down into your homes and Sky and Freesat £47,753. Our personnel costs, our staffing costs, consultant costs and other ancillary costs towards that £41,243.  We spent some money on equipment during the month - £10,013.
We spent some money on our property, just continual maintenance and work that needs doing - £8,645. Our administration costs were low this month £7,168 and other expenditure of £14,692, which means that the total you can see there on the screen coming up at £129,514.
For those of you who have already done your sums, you will know what that means for the month – it means that if you just look at this simple chart, which shows two poles coming up. It means our income figure was £132,302, our expenditure was £129,514.  So at the end of January we had a surplus we thank the Lord for of £2,788, but as I’ve already said we didn’t actually pay the rent on this building in January and it would have put us quite close to where we would have had no money in our account and as a charity, we are not allowed to go in the red or have an overdraft. And so our target tonight is that and any surplus that comes in once that rent money has been brought in will go towards the expenditure for February. So Doug, it’s amazing isn’t it, the figures and the people who are giving tonight."
 This is a direct and likely scripted question, which misleads viewers into believing they are seeing the full picture.
 The figures the account uses are the figures of the Revelation Foundation – not the figures of the channel as these figure do not included income from airtime and advertising sales or the sales of merchandise. This figure I conservatively estimate to be over half a million per year (see my calculations for more details) and goes instead to 21st Century TV Ltd.
 The reason for this I suspect is the donations from 21st Century TV are just enough to top up the funds to ensure the foundation can continue to meet it’s expenditure.
 If point 3 is true this is blatant deception.
 Even the accountant has noted a pattern.
 Is it the Lord or manipulation?
 Absolutely no reference is made to any income other than viewer donations – this is leaving the viewer with no option than to believe that this is the only income to the station, which is not true.
 Revelation Foundation pays for the airtime, but 21st Century TV takes the profit from selling the airtime, but with no liability for the actual real cost of running a 24 hr station. I suspect they pay a wholesale price for each slot they sell, but this is income that should be for the Foundation as charities are allowed to have income other than donations.
 21st Century TV did make a contribution towards the staffing costs for the year of £45,000 for using the channels staff – This would only pay for 1-2 peoples wages and bearing in mind the profits involved 21st Century TV are getting an extremely good deal.
 No mention of any other income to the channel via 21st Century TV or any other companies.
FOLLOW UP POSTS:
Howard Conder's deceptive Facebook post which omits the transcript from Building the Foundation above. Emails sent by Sarah Acott and the responses she received from Peter Darg,
Gordon Pettie and Alan Tun. Howard Conder has never responded directly to Sarah about her concerns.
Gordon Pettie And The Barlow Clowes Fraud: http://bewareofthewolves.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/more-revelations-about-revelation-tv.html