UK ICO fines biz profiteering from COVID-19 crisis by sending unsolicited marketing texts to Joe Public
- Reference: 1600952407
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2020/09/24/ico_fines_biz_sanitiser/
- Source link:
Some 16,190 texts were received by unsuspecting members of the public between 29 February and 30 April, [1]said the UK Information Commissioner’s Office. However DGEL - which also [2]lists products on Amazon - was unable to "provide sufficient evidence that it had the consent it required."
The texts promoted Zoono-branded hand cleaning products that purported to be "effective against coronavirus," said the ICO. Reg readers will remember that silly members of the public bulk-bought certain products, including [3]toilet paper and hand sanitisers as the spread of the potentially deadly virus made its way across Europe.
"DGEL played upon people’s concerns at a time of great public uncertainty, acting with a blatant disregard for the law, and all in order to feather its own pockets," said Andy Curry, heads of investigations at the watchdog org.
Curry said the ICO will "prioritise action on organisations carrying out similar activity." Direct marketing laws, he added, are clear and businesses must ensure they comply as: "Ignorance of it or attempting to rely on vague and misleading evidence in support of a marketing campaign simply does not wash."
More tough talking from the ICO man followed: "The sending of nuisance marketing texts are a significant concern to the public, and the ICO will continue to take action where our advice is not followed and where we find serious, systemic or negligent behaviour that puts people's information rights at risk."
Complaints about the texts were forwarded to the GSMA's Spam Reporting Services, incorporated into the ICO's Monthly Threat Assessment.
London-based DGEL is [4]listed on the United Kingdom's registrar of companies, Companies House as providing "Management consultancy activities other than financial management." The organisation was only incorporated in December 2019, with an Andrew Hughes listed as the sole director. It was originally called Motorhome Brokers Ltd but changed to its current form in February 2020.
The ICO said DGEL told the watchdog that it sells a line of Zoono-branded products via the Zoono.io website and on other websites.
The business contravened Regulation 22 and 23 of the [5]Privacy and Electronics Communications Directive 2003 , leading to the £60,000 fine, which equates to £3.70 per text message that was received. ®
Get our [6]Tech Resources
[1] https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/enforcement/digital-growth-experts-limited-mpn/
[2] https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?me=A2QAPKN2S42HLA&marketplaceID=A1F83G8C2ARO7P
[3] https://www.theregister.com/2020/04/01/willyourunout/
[4] https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/12373841
[5] https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2426/contents/made/data.htm
[6] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Still not clear
In this case, "DGEL came to the attention of the ICO when complaints forwarded via short text 7726 to the GSMA’s Spam Reporting Service were incorporated into the ICO’s Monthly Threat Assessment, which is used to identify organisations in breach of PECR."
https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/enforcement/digital-growth-experts-limited-en/
Re: Still not clear
Nothing at all to do with GDPR. Uses a pre existing law stating that marketing calls are
A) Callee is not on a do not call list
B) Callee has an existing relationship with caller and has consented to marketing calls.
Re: Still not clear
I do find it difficult to get the ICO to care about clear and obvious information abuses.
Their standard response is always, "Have you raised it with the abuser?"
Well, no. That's their job, not mine.
Should really be OFCOM
The virus is spread almost exclusively over the air (a novel OTA update!) so hand sanitisers cannot effectively stop its spread. They may well prevent other infections spreading, just not SARS-COV-2.
On the plus side, the fine seems proportionate and can hopefully be collected. Non-payment of fines has been the biggest problem so far.
Re: Should really be OFCOM
Jail is now an option. Dissolving a company is no longer an escape route.
A pedant writes...
Since when has "feather its own pockets" been an expression? It's "feather its own nest" or "line its own pockets".
But will they collect.
The ICO is not a good finisher. Just ask BA.
Still not clear
As a data protection consultant, it's still not clear to me what basis the ICO uses to select the cases they pursue. My general impression is that it may largely be driven by narrow interpretation of specific clauses in the legislation, rather than on the wider implications to complainants. This case is based on PECR, for which that approach may work adequately, but in the context of the GDPR and its UK replica (which are human rights law, not data law) only the GDPR data-specific rights seem to be considered, which leaves a huge range of common personal data abuses untouched.