In our 2008 Annual Report, we commented on the volume of complaints which had been received against Company X (a broadband provider). We had conducted a broad-based inspection of the company on foot of the high level of complaints received. We issued a number of recommendations to the company as part of an audit report. We noted that the company had then taken a number of steps to improve its data protection compliance. However, we pointed out that there was no room for complacency and signalled that we would pay close attention to any further complaints against this company to ensure that there was no slippage in terms of compliance.
I am disappointed to report once again that Company X remained the subject of regular complaint in 2010, especially with regard to direct marketing. In particular, the company's telephone marketing activities have been brought to our attention several times since the 2008 Annual Report. Following the investigation of a complaint received in October 2008 concerning a marketing telephone call, we warned this company that any further such infringements would give rise to a prosecution. Despite the warning, further complaints were received. Following the investigation of two of them, we commenced prosecution proceedings against Company X in the Dublin Metropolitan District Court.
In 2009 we received a complaint from a customer of Company X regarding a marketing telephone call that he had received on 1 July 2009 from the company in relation to broadband services. The complainant supplied us with a copy of an email that he had sent to the company in April 2009 requesting that it use his phone number for contact relating to his account only and not for sales calls. He also supplied a copy of a reply he received in May 2009 notifying him that the company had complied with his request and that his account had been flagged for exclusion from marketing calls. If a telephone subscriber has notified a marketer that he/she does not consent to the receipt of marketing calls on their line it is an offence under Regulation 13(4)(a) of SI No. 535 of 2003 (as amended) for the marketer to make any further such calls to that subscriber's line. Company X admitted that the marketing call had been made as stated by the complainant. The company explained that, due to human error by a customer service agent, the customer's details were not properly removed from the marketing database. On receiving an opt-out request, an agent must put an indicator on the system by ticking the relevant options. In this case, the agent selected an incorrect option and only removed the customer's address from postal marketing. The agent failed to remove the customer's account from telephone marketing and consequently it remained on the telephone marketing list. Following our investigation, we were satisfied that an offence had been committed and we decided to prosecute that offence.
In early September 2009 we received a complaint from another customer who stated that he had received a marketing call from Company X on 27 August 2009 in regard to digital television and broadband services. The customer supplied a copy of an email which he had sent to the company in April 2009 stating that he did not wish to be contacted for marketing purposes in the future. We investigated the complaint. Company X acknowledged that it made the marketing call on the date in question. We established that a staff member had not passed the customer's email regarding his marketing opt-out to the responsible company department. The company stated that this was a once-off occurrence and that the individual staff member responsible had been reprimanded and retrained. We were satisfied following our investigation that an offence had been committed and I decided to prosecute that offence.
The cases came before the Dublin Metropolitan District Court on the same day in April 2010. The Court accepted Company X’s guilty pleas to each offence. The Judge imposed a penalty of €500 for each of the two offences and directed that the defendant pay our costs in respect of the prosecutions.