Five British companies fined for making half a million nuisance calls Britain's data watchdog has slapped financial penalties totaling £435,000 (c $529,000) on five companies it says collectively made almost half of million marketing calls to people registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS). Under local laws, it is illegal for businesses to make live marketing calls to anyone who is …
One of my many work streams used to involve looking at the London Gazette, yes, the dead tree edition. The number of official notices asking for a director of a failed company to be allowed to be a director of a new company with a remarkably similar name to the dead company was shocking. Companies House and company law are not fit for purpose, although I may have a divergent opinion on what's fit and unfit... it's working for some, clearly.
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 ...
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.
At first it was "Which accident that was not my fault do you mean? I have a LOT of accidents."
Then it was "Thank god you called, he's getting away, his number plate is AK58... oh, you've hung up..."
Then one day, and I can't explain why, the nice lady who rang to discuss my injury compensation (I hadn't been injured) was allowed to do her full spiel, then got the following question: "What are you wearing?". It's a sad indictment of our society that she knew exactly where that was going and hung up immediately.
The next lady who called to help me with the problem with my computer (I wasn't having a problem with my computer) was asked the same question, but didn't understand. "What do you mean?"... "What sort of clothes have you got on?". Hung up.
The next caller wanted to help with the accident that wasn't my fault, but when I asked "What are you wearing?", responded with "Why do you need to know what I'm wearing?". I thought in for a penny, in for a pound, and said "How am I supposed to masturbate to the sound of your voice if I can't picture you while I'm doing it?".
Well, let me tell you - he did NOT like that. Such language, before he hung.
Tell you what though - the calls stopped for a while. I think I was put on a list. Possibly a register.
I had one today - trying to help me with my 'slow' internet. For some reason communications broke down. I'll use asterisks to prevent shy embarassed criminals from being upset
HIM: Is there any particular time when your internet is slow?
ME: Well yes actually.
HIM:When
ME: When I'm trying to upload pictures of me shagging your mother up the *rse.
ME: Strange she really reminds me of you.
HIM: What?
ME: Yes, she even looks like a c*nt. Piss off criminal.
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.
The only person ever prosecuted for giving Companies House false information was the person trying to show there was a problem:
Britain, headquarters of fraud
Companies House's lack of checks is used to launder money worldwide:
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:
Companies House to verify directors' identities before being listed
And since then nothing has changed:
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.
"One can only assume it's like this because it's convenient for those in power"
Sure is. That's how political party donors, often appointed to the House Of Lords, can avoid scrutiny of their contracts for unusable medical equipment.
People like Matt Hancock's pub landlord, or Michelle Mone and her husband for example.
An Ltd is a bit too convenient for deliberate liability avoidance and other shenanigans. Perhaps only publicly traded companies should be allowed to be Ltds i.e. they'd need to be something like limited partnerships (at least some partners with personal liability, crucially) until an IPO and listing at which point the partners would become shareholders of the new Ltd. This might also chill schemes by private equity (and other) masters-of-the-universe as the reverse would need to happen when taking an Ltd private.
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.
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.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
