When the verdict came down in the Eric Garner trial, the Internet exploded in support for his family, from organizing protests around the country to starting crowdfunding campaigns for his loved ones. There’s just one problem: in the two months following the indictment, the Garner family hasn’t received any money from these campaigns at all.

Photo Credit: Beverly Yuen Thompson
Photo Credit: snakegirl productions

After a grand jury failed to hand down an indictment of the police officer who killed Eric Garner, at least 19 crowdfunding projects  popped up across multiple sites, bringing in  approximately $120,000 in funding. Some even claim to have been in contact with the Garner family, with that particular one having already raised more than $9,000. The Garner family has never heard of them.

In fact, Erica Garner, one of Eric Garner’s daughters, told DNAInfo that with the exception of a couple campaigns, her family doesn’t know where any of the money is going. “I feel like people are trying to use my father’s name for their own gain,” Erica told DNAInfo New York. “It’s unfortunately a sad situation.”

One IndieGoGo campaign that raised over $40,000 went to another of Garner’s daughters, who then “refused to share it with Erica Garner” and Gwen Carr,  Garner’s mother. A Fundly campaign that raised almost $75,000 is currently being held by the website until they verify that the funds are actually going to the family. Meanwhile Erica Garner’s foundation, which has two funding campaigns (one to raise funds to help the family, another to create an album to protest police brutality) have netted just $3,422 for the family. Carr’s campaign, similarly aimed at raising funds for the family, received only $540 of her $25,000 goal.

Websites like GoFundMe, Kickstarter, and IndieGogo have started getting more and more attention as their crowdfunding campaigns draw in significant projects like feature films to potato salads. But as online crowdfunding becomes increasingly commonplace, so has the potential abuse of them. Many campaigns have been disastrous; Reddit even keeps a log of failed Kickstarters.

Fund creators should bear in mind that not living up to the promises of a campaign could be costly. After Ed Nash III and his company Altius Management didn’t deliver on the playing cards they promised to their Kickstarter backers they became the subject of a historic lawsuit, as Melissa Landau Steinman and Kristen Brown report for All About Advertising Law:

In response, Washington filed the first known case against a crowdfunded project, alleging that Nash and Altius acted in a deceptive and misleading manner by taking consumer money and failing to deliver the promised playing cards and other rewards to these consumers.  The complaint seeks consumer restitution, as much as $2,000 per violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act, and the state’s costs and fees for bringing the suit.  According to the Washington Attorney General, “This lawsuit sends a clear message to people seeking the public’s money:  Washington state will not tolerate crowdfunding theft. The Attorney General’s Office will hold those accountable who don’t play by the rules.”

While the outcome of this case is still pending, government regulators have always been clear that they will enforce existing consumer protection, advertising and marketing laws on the internet, and the crowdfunding model is no exception.

For now the Garner family is weighing their legal options, and it seems many of the crowdfunding websites—despite, apparently, initially not vetting the funds—have been receptive to allowing the family to contact them and step in and help correct any wrongdoing.

Crowdfunding is certainly an innovative tool, with an ability to give life to little-known projects and plenty of opportunities to do good. But though there have certainly been bad practices in the past, this is crowdfunding at its absolute worst.