Praise for Thomson Local

Last week I mentioned someone had started receiving unsolicited e-mails from Thomson Local after cancelling the company's directory via Junk Buster. Thomson Local was quick to respond, and it turns out that it was merely a technical issue.

When you cancel the Thomson Local directory via Junk Buster the application sends a standard e-mail to the company:

From: [ your e-mail address ]
To: distribution@thomsonlocal.com
Subject: Opt out request

Dear Sir or Madam,

My household wishes to opt out of receiving the paper version of the Thomson Local directory. Please could you ensure that the directory is no longer delivered to my address:

[ your name and address ]

On an average day Junk Buster sends about ten such e-mails to Thomson Local. (At times when junk mail is in the news this figure is much higher. For instance, when the Daily Mail launched another attack on junk mail last month Junk Buster fired off 614 opt-out e-mails to Thomson Local in just two days.) To deal with the e-mails Thomson Local's e-mail system looks out for e-mails with 'Opt out request' as the subject, and all those e-mails are automatically acknowledged with the following standard e-mail:

From: david.meikle@thomsonlocal.com
To: [ your e-mail address ]
Subject: Re: Opt out request

Thank you for contacting thomsonLocal.com. We understand that you do not wish to receive a hard copy of the directory. However, we can continue to help you to find what you need locally;-

• If you have an iphone - the free thomsonLocal.com app can be downloaded from the iPhone app store, simply go to the app store and search for thomsonlocal.com
• If you have an android phone - The thomsonlocal.com app can be downloaded for free by going to the android Market and searching for thomsonlocal.com.
• If you have a nokia phone - The thomsonlocal.com app can be downloaded for free from the Nokia Ovi store by clicking here: http://store.ovi.com/publisher/thomsonlocal.com/

Alternatively, we provide an online service with www.thomsonlocal.com

Yours sincerely,
Thomsonlocal.com

The person who accused Thomson Local of spamming had received four such e-mails. The reason was that Thomson Local's e-mails were being sent with a read receipt and that these receipts somehow came back with 'Opt out request' still as the subject. Thomson Local's system therefore automatically sent another standard confirmation e-mail, creating a true e-mail pendulum. They've now solved the problem and have contacted the recipient of all the 'spam'.

It's good to see Thomson Local is actually making an effort to deal with opt-out e-mails it receives. They don't always get it right (remember the 'No Thomson Local' sticker?) and I reckon the standard e-mail should explicitly mention that your address has been taken off the distribution list - the e-mail doesn't confirm this and does read like a marketing e-mail. But, at least they're making an effort. That's not something you could say about Yell Hibu and in particular BT - both companies still find it very difficult to respect people's wishes. Thomson Local is past that stage; they seem to genuinely understand that not everybody is interested in unsolicited directories.

While discussing the issue with the e-mails I asked them how long a Thomson Local opt-out registration lasts nowadays. The answer is indefinitely. They said that they used to ask people from time to time whether or not they still wanted to be opted out. You can imagine the sort of responses we got, they said. Well done to Thomson Local for listening to people (and not hiding behind ignorant statements by the Data Publishers Association).

Return to sender revolt

Charities were (not for the first time) accused of putting pressure on people with little or no money to spare to donate money to good causes. The criticism came from the Scottish Women's Rural Institute - itself a charity.

Apparently, the SWRI unanimously passed a motion earlier year this calling on its 20,000 members to deplore the practice. They then contacted the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator who told them politely that charities may target as many vulnerable people as they like. They're now urging its members to simply return the mail to the sender.

Or, at least that's how the Strathspey and Badenoch Herald has interpreted the SWRI's advice. There's nothing about the junk mail revolt on the SWRI website but the paper quotes the charity as saying:

Our advice, therefore, would be for anyone who receives these letters to write back to the charity and state that they want to be removed for their mailing list. We feel disappointed that there is nothing more that can be done, but if enough people make it clear that this type of mail is not wanted or appreciated, it will send a loud and clear message.

It's worth noting that writing to individual charities isn't the same as returning junk mail. If SWRI members really want to send letters or e-mails to charities they should at least send them a proper data protection notice. It's sad, but it's the only way to ensure the message really comes across loud and clear.

They've arrived!

Speaking of returning unwanted junk mail to senders - I finally got return to sender stampers in the shop again!

In June, I predicted the Direct Marketing Association would set up a one-point-stop for opting out of junk mail. Tomorrow, they'll announce the launch of the new opt-out site. I don't have much details yet but I understand the site will include the Mailing Preference Service, the Your Choice Dummy Scheme, as well as Royal Mail's Door-to-Door Opt-Out.

The new site won't include opt-out schemes for other types of unsolicited marketing such as the Telephone Preference Service and the opt-outs for the Yellow Pages, Thomson Local Directory and BT Phone Book. And of course the world would be a better place without opt-out schemes for unsolicited, unaddressed mail (a sticker scheme would be much more effective). But it sounds like it will be progress - soon you should be able to finally register with the Door-to-Door Opt-Out and Your Choice online.

I'm going to try something new… vlogging. The first attempt can be viewed below. A bit lengthy and boring, if I say so myself. In other words, just what you'd expect as a reader of the Diary.

If you can't play the video you're probably viewing this page using an ancient version of Internet Explorer - you should be able to view the video on YouTube. If I look rather squeezed in the video you're probably using Google Chrome. For some reason Chrome doesn't want to keep the 16:9 ratio aspect. Again, you might want to head over to YouTube.

In June, I lodged a complaint with the Information Commissioner's Office about BT refusing to stop the delivering the phone book to people not willing to give the company their phone number. Yesterday, I got the following letter from the Information Commissioner's Office:

Your complaint to us

As I understand you are concerned at the amount of personal data BT require in order to process your request not to receive a paper copy of the telephone directory.

You have explained that you are not a customer of BT, but on 13 January 2011 you emailed them to request that the directory is no longer delivered to your address.

On 1 June BT responded to you and said they did not have sufficient information to action your request; they asked you also to provide your phone number.

In this case the matters you have raised that are relevant to the Data Protection Act relate to the third data protection principle. This says: "Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed".

BT's response to us

BT have explained that when an individual requests to opt out of receiving the directory they request, amongst other details, the person's phone number. The reason for this is twofold; so that BT can create a record against that number and also so they can verify the individual's identity and reduce the risk that someone else is claiming to be that individual. The more information that can be cross-referenced the more confidence BT can have in that person's identity.

Our decision

On the basis of all the information available we have decided it is unlikely that BT have complied with the requirements of the Data Protection Act in this case.

This is because, in our view the amount of personal data BT require from you in this instance is excessive, given the purposes for which the data is being processed.

All you are requesting is that BT suppress your address from the list of properties to which the unsolicited directory is delivered. It is difficult to see what further information, other than your name and address, BT might reasonably require to comply with such a request. You are not a BT customer, therefore BT presumably do not have a customer number against which to create a record that you no longer wish to receive the directory.

Furthermore, the likelihood and potential consequences of someone pretending to be you for the purpose of cancelling your receipt of the directory do not appear to justify BT collecting personal data to this extent. In this light we have recommended to BT that they review their response to your request.

However, the Information Commissioner has decided that further regulatory action against BT is not required at this time.

Next steps

Most organisations want to put things right when they have gone wrong and learn from complaints that are raised with them. We have therefore asked BT to consider the information we have provided during the course of this assessment and take steps to prevent the situation from happening again.

We will keep a record of your complaint and take this assessment into account if we receive further complaints about BT. The information we gather from complaints may form the basis for action in the future.

The last paragraph is the most significant. Should you find that BT refuses to stop delivering unsolicited phone books to your address you should contact the Information Commissioner's Office and refer to this case (reference number available on request).

The current edition of Yellow Pages mentions - for the first time ever - that it's possible to cancel the delivery of the book. BT has now followed Yell's lead. I've just received a copy of the new phone book, and under 'Phone Book Customer Services' it includes this message:

Opting out of receiving The Phone Book

To opt out of receiving The Phone Book
Freephone 0800 833 400
Mon - Fri, 8.30am - 5pm

Another small but significant step. In 2008, BT told 192.com's Say no to Phone Books campaign that the company would ignore any opt-out requests, apparently claiming it had a legal obligation to deliver the book to every address in the UK. Let's hope the company will soon start making it easier to cancel the book (it's not yet possible to do this via the BT website) and that they'll stop that nonsense about demanding the phone number of people who want to cancel the delivery of the book.