Tag Archives: Privacy and Electronic Communications Act

Better Together

Posted on by

Breach details

What Breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) – Sent text messages without the consent of the recipients.
How many 300,000 SMSs.
When 22 March 2013 and 27 April 2013.
Why Better Together were sending out text messages to individuals in Scotland regarding how they would vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum. However, they did not ensure the recipients had given their consent to be contacted as they believed another company had already done this on their behalf.

Regulatory action

Regulator ICO
Action Undertaking to comply with Regulation 22(2) of PECR.
When 19 November 2013.
Details Two rounds of texts were sent out even though Better Together had received a letter from the ICO warning them to comply with the law.

Links

View PDF of the Better Together Undertaking (Breach Watch Archive)
View PDF of the Better Together Undertaking (Via ICO Website)

Tameside Energy Services Ltd

Posted on by

Breach details

What Serious breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR).
A high volume of unsolicited marketing calls to consumers that had registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) that continued despite customer complaints and requests to unsubscribe.
How much An unknown number of direct marketing calls resulting in 1,010 TPS complaints and 60 complaints directly to the ICO (8 of which were duplicates), making a total of 1,062 complaints.
When 26th May 2011 to 31 January 2013.
Why Failed to screen calls effectively against a current Telephone Preference Service (TPS) list or maintain an opt-out register.

Regulatory action

Regulator ICO
Action Monetary penalty of £45,000.
Enforcement notice issued to ensure that Tameside does not make unsolicited marketing calls to individuals registered with TPS, or who have notified Tameside that they do not want to receive further calls, within 28 days.
When 5 July 2013.

Why the regulator acted

Breach of act Breach of Regulation 21: repeatedly ignored provisions that marketing calls should not be made to individuals who had registered with TPS.
Known or should have known Concerns over PECR obligations were first raised by the Commissioner in May 2012. The volume of complaints made before and after the Commissioner’s letter of May 2012 would have made the company aware that they were continually breaching regulations.
Likely to cause damage or distress. The overall level of distress was assessed as substantial due to the very large numbers of individuals affected. A small number of individuals also personally suffered substantial levels of distress.

Links

View PDF of the Tameside Energy Services Ltd Monetary Penalty Notice (Breach Watch Archive)
View PDF of the Tameside Energy Services Ltd Monetary Penalty Notice (Via ICO Website)
View PDF of the Tameside Energy Services Enforcement Notice Ltd (Breach Watch Archive)
View PDF of the Tameside Energy Services Ltd Enforcement Notice (Via ICO Website)

Nationwide Energy Services and We Claim You Gain

Posted on by

Breach details

What Breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR).
A high volume of unsolicited marketing calls from two companies both owned by “Save Britain Money Ltd” to consumers that had registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) that continued despite customer complaints and requests to unsubscribe.
How much An unknown number of direct marketing calls resulting in over 2,700 complaints to the TPS or ICO.
When May 2011 – December 2012
Why Did not screen outbound calls against the TPS register.

Regulatory action

Regulator ICO
Action Nationwide Energy Services: Monetary penalty of £ 125,000

We Claim you Gain: Monetary penalty of £ 100,000
When 17 June2013

Why the regulator acted

Breach of act Breach of Regulation 21: repeatedly ignored provisions that marketing calls should not be made to individuals who had registered with TPS.
Known or should have known Both companies had been repeatedly contacted by the TPS and ICO and were made aware they were in contravention of the Act. The TPS contacted Nationwide Energy Services on 1,601 occasions and We Claim You Gain 1,070 times.
Likely to cause damage or distress The sheer volume of complaints should have indicated that distress would be caused and individual complaints to the ICO detailed varying degrees of actual distress.

Links

View PDF of the Nationwide Energy Services Monetary Penalty Notice (Breach Watch Archive)
View PDF of the Nationwide Energy Services Monetary Penalty Notice (Via ICO Website)
View PDF of the We Claim You Gain Monetary Penalty Notice (Breach Watch Archive)
View PDF of the We Claim You Gain Monetary Penalty Notice (Via ICO Website)

DM Design Bedrooms

Posted on by

Breach details

What Serious breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR).
A high volume of unsolicited marketing calls to consumers that had registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) that continued despite customer complaints and requests to unsubscribe.
How much An unknown number of direct marketing calls resulting in 1,945 TPS complaints and an unspecified number of complaints directly to the ICO.
When June 2011 to November 2012
Why Ignored requirement to screen call lists against the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) or maintain an opt-out register.

BW Comments

After initial contact from the ICO, the unsolicited calls continued and some reported to the Commissioner were described as aggressive.

Regulatory action

Regulator ICO
Action Monetary penalty of £90,000
When 20 March 2013

Why the regulator acted

Breach of act Breach of Regulation 21: repeatedly ignored provisions that marketing calls should not be made to individuals who had registered with TPS.
Known or should have known Concerns over PECR obligations were first raised by the Commissioner in 2004. The volume of complaints made before and after the Commissioner’s letter of May 2012 would have made the company aware that they were continually breaching regulations.
Likely to cause damage or distress The overall level of distress was assessed as substantial due to the very large numbers of individuals affected. A small number of individuals also personally suffered substantial levels of distress.

BW Observations

That DM Design breached the PECR by not screening against the the TPS register and maintaining their own opt-out list is not debatable. The volume of calls and complaints are significant (although we are not told what the average or maximum level of complaints are to the TPS in respect of a company other than “they [DM Design] were one of the organisations about which the most complaints were received”). What’s interesting is the ICO again used the same justification as the Tetrus Telecommunications MPN to determine the s55A(1)(b) ‘substantial damage or distress test’ – that although the distress in each individual case was not considerable, the cumulative effect of the distress caused by the totality of all calls made in contravention of PECR met the Commissioner’s threshold of substantial distress.

Links

View PDF of the DM Bedroom Design Ltd Monetary Penalty Notice (Breach Watch Archive)
View PDF of the DM Bedroom Design Ltd Monetary Penalty Notice (Via ICO Website)

Direct Response Security Systems

Posted on by

What

Breach of the Privacy and Electronic Communications Act

How much

–

Why

Making of unsolicited marketing calls.

Regulator

ICO

Regulatory action

Enforcement notice issued to ensure that the numbers of any subscribers who have declared that they do not wish to receive marketing calls are suppressed and that a line data is checked against the TPS list every 28 days.

Reason for action

Each of the individuals who complained about the calls from Direct Response Security Systems Limited had already stated that they did not wish to receive such calls, yet continued to receive them.

When

19 August 2010

Links

View the Direct Response Security Systems Enforcement Notice (Via ICO Website)