£100,000 fine for company that made nuisance PI calls


Calls: People had not given consent

A marketing company that made nuisance personal injury calls to people registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS) has been fined £100,000.

AMS Marketing Ltd of Peacehaven, East Sussex, made 75,649 calls when it is against the law to make calls those registered with the TPS unless people give specific consent to receive marketing calls from a particular company.

The investigation by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) found no evidence that AMS Marketing had done that.

The calls were made between 1 October 2016 and 31 December 2017. A total of 103 complaints were made to the ICO and TPS.

One complainant said: “They knew my name and address and claimed that I was legally owed circa £1800 for a non-fault traffic accident. I asked what the option not to pursue was, but they said I would still receive calls, even if not from them. I advised them that I don’t give personal details over the phone and they hung up.”

Another wrote: “Saying we had an accident and they can help with compensation. Asked for my daughter who has actually not been driving long so I find it very stressful and disturbing until I realise it’s an unsolicited call.”

In the ICO’s penalty notice, director of enforcement Stephen Eckersley said there was no evidence that AMS undertook any due diligence checks, or to show that contracts were in place to ensure the data’s veracity upon purchase.

“Organisations buying marketing lists from third parties must make rigorous checks to satisfy themselves that the third party has obtained the personal data it is using fairly and lawfully, and that they have the necessary consent,” he said.

“It is not acceptable to rely on assurances of indirect consent without undertaking proper due diligence.”

Tags:




Blog


Mazur: a symptom not a cause?

If Mazur is a symptom, what does it mean for the underlying health of our civil justice system: the ‘finest legal system in the world’?


Cross-generation collaboration: the key to in-house legal tech adoption

In-house legal function leaders will increasingly have to evolve their thinking on how to manage multigenerational teams containing differing levels of technological expertise.


AI and law firm risk – the view of professional indemnity insurers

In considering law firm applications for cover, many insurers will expect to see evidence of how firms are adapting to AI and preparing for the future.


Loading animation