Overview
Carrie-Anne Ridsdale (Carrie), who presents publicly as Jayne Price repeatedly claims trademark ownership and criminal enforcement rights, but official records and legal standards contradict these claims, revealing misunderstandings and misrepresentations about trademark law and status.
Carrie, Carrie-Anne Ridsdale, also known as Jayne Price, has consistently asserted that her operation, Jayne's Baby Bank, holds registered trademarks and that breaches of these trademarks constitute criminal offences. Early claims from mid-2023 indicate that trademarks were pending for various aspects of the operation, including the baby bank and associated appeals. By early 2024, Carrie stated that the logo for 'JAYNE'S BABY BANK & CHARITY SHOP' was registered with the UK Intellectual Property Office, although an article raised questions about the validity of the logo's trademark due to potential licensing issues with the artwork used.
Throughout 2024 and into 2025, Carrie escalated her claims, frequently asserting that trademark law violations are criminal offences rather than civil matters. She also claimed entitlement to financial compensation and legal action against those she alleged breached her trademarks. These claims included demands for settlements and public apologies, and threats of prosecution. However, legal commentary and articles clarify that trademark infringement is primarily a civil matter under UK law, with criminal offences being narrowly defined and not applicable to typical trademark disputes.
In 2025, Carrie-Anne Ridsdale also claimed that her operation was a trademarked registered Community Interest Company (CIC), audited by an accountant, and that this status provided legitimacy and legal protections. She further asserted that the Financial Conduct Authority authorised the use of her business name and trademark, a claim contradicted by the FCA's remit and official records. Carrie's repeated framing of trademark breaches as criminal and her threats of legal action appear to overstate the legal realities of trademark enforcement.
Carrie also announced intentions to secure trademarks for additional ventures, such as a second CIC and new appeals like 'Tin for a child' and 'Jayne's Accessories'. She claimed ongoing communication with trademark authorities and that her rescue operation had obtained a trademark. However, these claims are complicated by public denials from other parties, such as Carol Gravenor of Caerphilly Bird Rescue, who refuted any connection and warned the public about Carrie's use of the name.
Throughout early 2026, Carrie-Anne Ridsdale continued to assert trademark ownership and the criminal nature of breaches, often linking these claims to her CIC status. She also claimed that damaging her signs constituted criminal damage and trademark infringement. Despite these assertions, official records confirm that Jayne's Baby Bank C.I.C. was incorporated only in late 2025 and holds no registered charity status. Carrie's trademark registrations include the word 'charity' in branding, which she uses to imply legitimacy while simultaneously denying charitable status.
Carrie's claims about trademark law and enforcement reveal a pattern of misunderstanding or misrepresentation of UK trademark law, which is primarily civil and requires legal due process for enforcement and damages. Her repeated public statements about criminal liability and unilateral compensation demands do not align with legal standards. Additionally, Carrie's use of trademark claims as a tool in disputes with other individuals and organisations, including threats and accusations, complicates the operational and legal landscape.
In summary, while Carrie-Anne Ridsdale holds some trademark registrations related to her business names and logos, her claims about the criminal nature of trademark breaches, the scope of her enforcement rights, and the legal status of her operation as a registered charity or fully authorised entity are contradicted by official records and legal frameworks. These discrepancies highlight significant issues in Carrie's public representations and legal understanding, with implications for regulatory compliance and public trust.
