Unsolicited text spam from Marks and Spencer
in [UK Mobile]
|
Prev: Mobiles for VOIP
Next: Tethering and Samsung GT-B2100
From: tim.... on 28 Apr 2010 17:50 "David Carlson" <david(a)055952023-003189766.bogus.domain.dom.invalid> wrote in message news:enima7-oi8.ln1(a)pepper.local.lan... > Chris Blunt wrote in uk.telecom.mobile >> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:50:28 +0100, "tim...." >>> >>>Having received something similar to the OP, I fail to see why I should >>>have >>>to pay to "stop" something that I never asked for, that I (also) believe >>>has >>>been received by the misuse of my number, however trivial the amount >>>that I >>>am expected to pay. >> >> Quite simply because any other course of action you might take to stop >> the texts would very likely involve you in even greater expense. > > I'm assuming that I can email the Information Commissioner at no > additional cost (my internet access costs are, of course, already 'sunk > costs'). You can complain this way if you think someone has breached the rules. But IME it won't stop the company for continuing the breach wrt a specific number tim
From: andy on 28 Apr 2010 19:11 On 28 Apr, 22:18, David Carlson <da...(a)055952023-003189766.bogus.domain.dom.invalid> wrote: > > It's precisely because the companies > know that it's easier (for them) to make us jump through their hoops, > than for us to take the time to pursue it through the regulators, that > they can try to get away with this kind of data abuse. > you haven't read the terms and conditions, or you or they have made a simple mistake that's why they tell you how to unsubscribe, in case either you changed your mind or they you haven't received these messages at 3 am, so stop the paranoid bollocks about what to do in a set of imaginary scenarios just contact them and unsubscribe, then you can concentrate your verbosity on that dreary unfinished novel you are obviously practising for
From: rest on 7 May 2010 06:43 On Apr 26, 12:31 pm, Mark <i...(a)dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> wrote: > On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 14:21:25 +0800, Chris Blunt <m...(a)nospam.com> > wrote: > > > > >On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:50:28 +0100, "tim...." > ><tims_new_h...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > >>"Tim Downie" <timdownie2...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > >>news:hqrt9m$gih$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > >>> andy wrote: > > >>>> Just ask them to stop sending the messages, politely and simply, most > >>>> of all calmly, in a way that avoids complicating itself by introducing > >>>> any further extraneous incoherant rants at other irrelevant targets, > >>>> whether real or imaginary, fleeting or immovable > > >>> Or even just reply "STOP" to the short code. Works most times. > > >>Having received something similar to the OP, I fail to see why I should have > >>to pay to "stop" something that I never asked for, that I (also) believe has > >>been received by the misuse of my number, however trivial the amount that I > >>am expected to pay. > > >Quite simply because any other course of action you might take to stop > >the texts would very likely involve you in even greater expense. > > Complaining to the ICO involves virutally no expense. > > I agree with Tim. I'm also fed up with similar spam texts or cold > calling. Many companies DO NOT comply with the regulations and ask > for permission to send you sales emails or texts before doing so. Many > make opting out difficult by setting awkward methods for opting out. > Many ignore opt out requests too. > > Takes my daughter's phone for example. Vodaphone send her regular > spamming texts despite never asking her for permission to do so. They > do not publisize the method for opting out. Therefore we had to phone > their CS number (for which we have to pay) and then send a text > message to the given number (again for which we have to pay). They > still send her spam texts. I haven't got around to complaining to the > ICO yet about this. > -- > (\__/) M. > (='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and > (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles > posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by > everyone you will need use a different method of posting. Hi Mark, If you want to opt out of advertising then please contact us here http://bit.ly/JhPl0 with WRT135 in the title and we can get it removed for you. All the best, Andy Web Relations Team Vodafone UK
From: Mark on 7 May 2010 08:51 On Fri, 7 May 2010 03:43:56 -0700 (PDT), rest <andrew.wood2(a)vodafone.co.uk> wrote: >On Apr 26, 12:31�pm, Mark <i...(a)dontgetlotsofspamanymore.invalid> >wrote: >> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010 14:21:25 +0800, Chris Blunt <m...(a)nospam.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 11:50:28 +0100, "tim...." >> ><tims_new_h...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> >> >>"Tim Downie" <timdownie2...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message >> >>news:hqrt9m$gih$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> >>> andy wrote: >> >> >>>> Just ask them to stop sending the messages, politely and simply, most >> >>>> of all calmly, in a way that avoids complicating itself by introducing >> >>>> any further extraneous incoherant rants at other irrelevant targets, >> >>>> whether real or imaginary, fleeting or immovable >> >> >>> Or even just reply "STOP" to the short code. �Works most times. >> >> >>Having received something similar to the OP, I fail to see why I should have >> >>to pay to "stop" something that I never asked for, that I (also) believe has >> >>been received by the misuse of my number, �however trivial the amount that I >> >>am expected to pay. >> >> >Quite simply because any other course of action you might take to stop >> >the texts would very likely involve you in even greater expense. >> >> Complaining to the ICO involves virutally no expense. >> >> I agree with Tim. �I'm also fed up with similar spam texts or cold >> calling. �Many companies DO NOT comply with the regulations and ask >> for permission to send you sales emails or texts before doing so. Many >> make opting out difficult by setting awkward methods for opting out. >> Many ignore opt out requests too. >> >> Takes my daughter's phone for example. �Vodaphone send her regular >> spamming texts despite never asking her for permission to do so. �They >> do not publisize the method for opting out. �Therefore we had to phone >> their CS number (for which we have to pay) and then send a text >> message to the given number (again for which we have to pay). �They >> still send her spam texts. �I haven't got around to complaining to the >> ICO yet about this. >Hi Mark, > >If you want to opt out of advertising then please contact us here >http://bit.ly/JhPl0 with WRT135 in the title and we can get it removed >for you. Ha Ha. Now you want my email address as well? I dare say you will start spamming this as well. >All the best, I appreciate the reply but I really should not have to do this. 1. You should not be spamming anyone without prior permission. 2. We should not have to ask to be removed from your spamming list in the first place. Let alone more than once. -- (\__/) M. (='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and (")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
From: Marks & Spencer on 24 May 2010 11:28
David Carlson;212625 Wrote: > Excuse the language, but I am ****ing furious that Marks and Spencer > are > sending me text spam. > > I have a credit card account with M&S Money (who are really HSBC) who > somehow seem to think that data protection laws don't apply to them and > > have managed to divulge my mobile number over to Marks and Spencer to > send > me text spam. > > (I'm actually somewhat concerned as to how they obtained my number in > the first place: M&S Money's web****e doesn't let you update your > contact details online, and therefore I'm fairly sure that I've never > filled in a form with my mobile number (I never give out my number to > companies if I can possibly avoid it, precisely to avoid this kind of > misuse). However, I did have to phone M&S Money to give them my new > address details some time ago, and although I don't think I gave them > my > phone number explicitly, I'm rather concerned that they may have > harvested it from CLI details. If that's the case, that's well dodgy > as > I can clearly never have given consent for harvesting and misusage. > Even > if I did somehow slip up and actually gave my number to them, I have > *never* given them my explicit consent to receive spam (and at the time > > I'd have been damn sure to scour the original card application form for > > the "Don't **** with my personal data" boxes, in case they were trying > some unethical deceitful non-consensual forced opt-in).) > > After the first instance of text spam, I sent a sternly worded email > to > M&S Money telling them to cease and desist. They acknowledged receipt > and confirmed that they would do so, but I have now received a further > 2 > spam texts, several weeks later. > > > This has *really* ****ed me off as I value my privacy and I have never > given my explicit consent to receive spam from them. I really want the > low-life marketroid slime who is responsible for this to get the > maximum > kicking that the law allows. > > If I'm not mistaken, M&S Money have broken no less than three laws: > > * Data Protection Act: *explicit* consent never given for this data > use > purpose, and in addition, they have been further informed that consent > > was never given and to cease immediately. > > * Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations: similar to above, > text spam is an electronic communication. > > * "Opt-out" (pah) SMS short code number in the spam texts does not > quote > the price to call. > > ...this third one, what's the particular law behind this? Am I not > right > in thinking that it is a legal requirement for non-standard SMS short > codes to have the price quoted? Above all, it cannot possibly be right > and just that I should have to _pay_ to opt-out of spam that I *never* > actually opted into (let alone _have_ to opt-out of something that I > never opted into), but how am I to know that the shortcode isn't a > premium text number? > > I presume that the Information Commissioner is the correct person to > contact with regard to the first two breaches, but which regulator > should I report the lack of pricing information to? > > > I really am ****ed off about this: M&S is one of those 'apple pie' > Great British brands that you think you can trust, and now the useless > > ****ers have revealed themselves to have become nothing but scum along > > with all the rest, and have destroyed a hard-earned reputation more > than > a century old in a mere instant. > > > David. Message for David Carlson from M&S customer services. We saw your message about receiving SMS marketing texts and wanted to address the concerns you have raised. We can assure you that M&S, and its partners such as M&S Money, always act in accordance with data protection and privacy laws. In particular we have a express policy of never sending SMS marketing communications to customers without their prior consent and ensuring that an easy to use opt out mechanism is included within each message. In order to fully investigate the matters you have raised we should be most grateful if you would email us at community.manager(a)marksandspencer.com, so that we can correspond with you privately in order to resolve the matter. Many thanks -- Marks & Spencer |