Jail would be more appropriate.

Jail and a fine would be more appropriate

Nah...

- Jail Time

- Fine

- Disqualification From Being Company Director (In Extreme Cases)

EZPZ!

Those fines are at least 2 orders of magnitude too low.

I wonder how much those companies are making. I suspect those fines will just be an inconvenience.

I suppose that writing a chit for the petty cash is a bit inconvenient.

The fines should be at least this amount - payable by the directors not the companies (which they will prolly bankrupt to avoid paying)

Definitely. It's a slap on the wrist and only shows that crime does pay. I'm sure the company director(s) involved are rolling on the floor laughing.

No doubt the companies will fold with minimal assets and lots of debt. Fines may be issued but not collected.

Meanwhile, the culprits will suffer little personal loss and establish another company and start again.

That is what needs to be stopped.

With a total of £435,000 for fines and around half a million cold calls the fine is low enough that those companies probably can factor in those fines as a cost of doing business and still have a viable business model -> no need to fold.

Exactly. I automatically read the headline as "Five British companies become insolvent and directors declare bankruptcy because they know they can get away with it."

Be interesting to know whether these companies are still trading or were trading at the time of enforcement action being taken.

I seem to remember that the rules were being changed so the ICO would be allowed to chase the directors of such companies but I may be imagining that ...

otherwise, what's the point of the ICO ?

So they used personal data gathered for one purpose (TPS) for a different, incompatible purpose (cold call telesales)? Isn't that a GDPR infringement? Where's the Eur 10m fine?

SWMBO and I fall into the 'over 60 and on the TPS' category. We've noticed a significant increase in telemarketing bastards over the past few years. Also, of course, scammers/fraudsters. I must be getting slow - it never occurred to me that TPS itself could be being used against us.

If I've got enough time I like to string them along. I once got a 'you've got a computer virus' scammer to call back two days running before he twigged. My! Such language from a 'BT tech support' bod!

One thing I hadn't realised was that TPS only covers 'live' marketing calls. I'll have to check up on that.

Automated marketing calls are illegal unless you opt-in. That's why TPS, an opt-out register doesn't cover them.

TPS (and all alternatives) is a gold mine for scammers. A full set of verified info on potential victims.

Definitely. That's why I never click "unsubscribe", I just blacklist the spammer's whole domain (using wildcards if they use numbered domains).

This is about voice calls, not emails.

I know, my point was simply about the fact it's useless telling people you don't want their pointless ads: You shouldn't. It always backfires.

Well, if after the fines they still made a profit, the fines are not large enough!

I consider these to be scam calls. Nuisance is just far too polite.

Most of the scam calls I get come from South Asia. They are made by Indians using British names.

When they can get those scumbags shut down then the ICO might not be a total waste of space.

I get relatively few UK based scam calls. There is one from 'my local energy efficiency advisor'. If they are genuinely local then at least they could fake a local phone number instead of one in Manchester.

As my home has an 'A' rating there is little I can do to improve it.

Most of the scam calls I get come from South Asia. They are made by Indians using British names.

When I get an obviously Indian accent saying a variant of "Hi, my name's Colin" I tend to reply with "Hello, my name's Krish".

When I get a call from an Indian accent, I just put the phone down. Shame if they genuinely work for BT or Virgin Media for example. But that's life, guys.

I prefer saying "I'm terribly sorry old chap, but I don't speak a word of English. Good day to you.", in my best Mr Cholmondley-Warner.

Bastards!

Far too easy to set up a Limited Company in the UK, scam people, and then shut it down again.

Being a "Ltd" is no longer a sign of trustworthiness, sadly. Companies House needs to completely re-think how it controls limited companies and the people creating them.

Companies House needs to completely re-think how it controls limited companies and the people creating them.

I think you are assuming that Companies House has powers that it simply does not have.

It is a register*, not a regulator.

* Funny that, in one way or another...

There are [1]plans to change that . Hopefully they will work.

[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/corporate-transparency-and-register-reform/corporate-transparency-and-register-reform-accessible-webpage

The only person ever prosecuted for giving Companies House false information was the person trying to show there was a problem:

[1]Britain, headquarters of fraud

Companies House's lack of checks is used to launder money worldwide:

[2]How Britain can help you get away with stealing millions: a five-step guide

Two years ago it was announced that checks were going to be introduced:

[3]Companies House to verify directors' identities before being listed

And since then nothing has changed:

[4]Companies House is dysfunctional and facilitating fraud, MPs told

One can only assume it's like this because it's convenient for those in power.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/05/how-britain-can-help-you-get-away-with-stealing-millions-a-five-step-guide

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/05/how-britain-can-help-you-get-away-with-stealing-millions-a-five-step-guide

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/18/companies-house-to-verify-directors-identities-before-being-listed

[4] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/nov/08/companies-house-is-dysfunctional-and-facilitating-mps-told

From the article: Under local laws, it is illegal for businesses to make live marketing calls to anyone who is signed up the TPS.

In what way are UK Data Protection & TPS observance "local laws"?

The UK is a small district outside of the USA, and this is an american website!

At least we're no longer a candidate for 51st state.

Fantastic when US publications use the phrase "local laws", it's as if they had the same importance as Macclesfield's dog fouling bylaws.

No, they're "national laws"... AKA "laws".

I'm glad I got my parents a callblocking phone, whitelisted all family, friends and important companies leaving anyone not on the whitelist to have to declare who they are before the phone even rings. 99% of them don't pass that hurdle, and the few that try, answer so incomprehensively my parents just hang up on them. I scan their call list when I can and add any dodgy numbers to the blacklist. I recommend one for the elderly, does sometimes catch valid callers out, but I whitelist them too for next time.

My parents have one as well sometimes there are 30+ missed calls on the phone of people trying to get through…

I set up a an asterisk server for my Parents - it just dumps any number that isn't in it's known list to voicemail - virtually no scammers leave a voicemail whereas genuine but unknown callers will - works quite well for them.

...because I said to myself the fines imposed will be pathetic in comparison to what they likely got away with.

Less than £1 per call.

Sucks to be right.

Obviously unaware of the Eleventh Commandment.

One can only suppose either that they're incredibly stupid or they believe they'll make more money while they succeed than the aggregate penalites they incur when they're caught. If you want to be successful as a fraudster you have to be a lot smarter than that.

AUKL is unknown to Companies House.

BCBL and BBL have the same directors and seem to be ongoing companies.

RPUK has filed to be struck off but the action has been suspended.

UGL has also filed to be struck off.