The Advertising Protection Agency

PhylPho

An old thread but still a goodie.

As to VAT registration: there's no requirement to be registered at Companies House in order to qualify for VAT registration. Even a sole trader can be VAT registered if turnover is above the tax threshold.

Sorry to learn of your own experience but you're absolutely right: NEVER, ever, enter into any verbal arrangement with cold-callers. Cut any conversation short by ALWAYS, but always, asking for sight of printed documents -- and especially where an advertising cold-call is concerned: say that you won't ever commit to anything until you've received a printed Rate Card in your hand. . . by post, not email.

burgor57

I signed up with them in 2104 after being bother by bogus claims for advertising invoices. They appeared like my solution. I registered with TPS myself, got a BT phone that blocks unwanted calls. Stopped answering calls from nuisance callers. Have tailed off to an odd few which I block immediately. But now TAPA are asking for me to renew the 12 mth contract. I am hearing things about them that make me suspect they are actually part of the problem disguised as a solution. I want to cancel but suspect it will not be that easy or stress free.

burgor57

I registered with them in early 2014 after being plauged by bogus advertising scams. I am not at all certain they are genuine and not actually part of the scam itself or feeding off those scams. Is there are proper status we know of posted anywhere from a genuine agency that regulates or polices these things?

burgor57

Worrying because I am about to 'cancel' or at least not renew.

burgor57

Is there any update from them yet about TAPA?

Hern

If on the basis of your experience of this commercial enterprise (which, of course, is not a statutory body nor any kind of 'agency' of government or of the UK's telecomms regulatory authority) you believe that what it has done for you so far is worth whatever you've paid it, and you further believe that it will be worth the money that it's wanting you to pay it in future, then renew.

If you don't think it's done anything for you and you've therefore concluded that it's not worth the money . . . then don't.

Just be mindful of the fact that you are dealing with a commercial operation which exists to make a profit, and that the UK's Advertising Standards Authority was less than happy about the way this business formerly misrepresented itself on its website:

Although we noted that some aspects of the website indicated that TAPA were not an official body, we considered that, in light of the name, service and content, the overall appearance of the site could lead users to infer it was an official government service and therefore concluded the ad was misleading.

https://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2012/1/The-Advertising-Protection-Agency/SHP_ADJ_172523.aspx

When it comes to opt-out call screening, including all cold calls from any source and of any nature, The Telephone Preference Service is the only official service regulated by OFCOM in the UK. Whether or not "The Advertising Protection Agency" is now on better terms with the Advertising Standards Authority than hitherto, it remains on the TPS's own consumer alert list as follows:

Beware of Unregulated Companies Charging For Their Service!

There are other companies that are not necessarily scams but they are not TPS. They usually claim to offer a similar or even an enhanced service to TPS. They make exaggerated claims about the effectiveness of their service and may even suggest that TPS does not work. Some of these companies are listed below:

CPR Global (previously known as the Call Prevention Registry)
http://www.callpreventionregistry.co.uk

Opt Out UK
http://www.optoutuk.com/index.asp

Anti Marketing Group
http://www.nomoremarketing.co.uk

The Advertising Protection Agency (TAPA)
https://www.theadvertisingprotectionagency.co.uk

Stop Unwanted Calls
http://www.stopunwantedcalls.net

No More Marketing
http://www.nomoremarketing.co.uk

The Nuisance Call Registry
http://www.nuisancecallregistry.co.uk/

IPC Intelligent Protection For Consumers
http://www.davisonandson.co.uk/#

Call Prevention Service
http://www.callregister.co.uk/

TPS-Register.org.uk
http://tpsregister.org.uk/

Secure Telephone Service
http://securetelephoneservice.co.uk/

AKA Silver Linings
www.silverliningscps.co.uk/

Stop Comm
www.stopcomm.com

Stop Box
http://stop-box.co.uk/

Telephone Restriction Services
www.telephonerestriction.co.uk

Telephone Blocking Services
www.telephoneblockingservices.co.uk

Call Blocking Services (CBS)
http://www.callblockingservice.co.uk/terms.html

Cold Call Registry
www.coldcallregistry.co.uk

Telephone Preferencing Company (TPC)
www.thetelephonepreferencing.com

The Nuisance Prevention Service
AKA . Nuisance prevention Agency
AKA . Nuisance 2 Aware
http://www.nuisance-prevention.co.uk

Home Guard Direct Data Security
http://homeguarddirect.co.uk/

Cold Call Elimination Team
http://www.coldcallelimination.co.uk

Telecom Preference Service

Stop These Calls
http://stopthesecalls.co.uk/
All of the above are commercial organisations, all of which charge consumers for a service that is unregulated, some make it clear that they charge whilst others don't and will call later asking for payment.

http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/tps/mobile/bogustpscalls.html

GraceCourt

On the web site, it states that TAPA is not a limited company but a partnership. However, I cannot find the name of the partnership or the names of each of the partners on the site, as required by Regulation 6 of the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002, which is the UK domestic legislation that implements certain requirements under EU law - Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000.

That prompted me to look further, and the registration number displayed on the TAPA web site does not exist on the public Register of Data Controllers... there's no trace of any registration on the public register of data controllers using the same postcode as is listed on the site, which is a very strange way of running a business unless one makes the same assumptions about the nature of the business that many seem to have drawn based on reports published about its activities.

One might expect a bona fide trading entity to be careful about its corporate governance and its compliance with basic consumer protection legislation: I certainly would. So, anyone reading this who is being pursued for a "debt" incurred by using TAPA's services - ask for a "letter before proceedings" to be sent to you stating the name(s) of the claimants and precise details of the verbal or written contractual provision on which the claimant(s) is/are basing the claim - this is a fundamental pre-requisite before Part 27 proceedings can be commenced to attempt to recover the alleged "debt". The result, if indeed any are provided, will be of interest to all following this thread.

And, of course, without a valid letter before proceedings, the Part 27 claim will fail, therefore there will be no debt that can be enforced, irrespective of any "threat-o-gram" letters that are sent - these can be safely binned until the claimant partnership identifies itself.

Hern

Superb post, Grace Court.

As to the nature of this business's correspondence with those from whom it wishes to secure monies, you may be interested to note the following example from November 2011 and cited on the Consumer Action Group website:

Recovery & Collections
BY EMAIL & POST

letter before action

Date: 04.11.11
Our Reference: PFS11060005
Creditor: The Advertising Protection Agency
Proposed Defendant:

Amount: £39.95

Dear

In accordance with the Pre-Action Protocol Practice Direction under the Civil Procedure Rules regarding the HMCS final notice requirements, we are hereby providing you with notice that if payment in full is not received by The Advertising Protection Agency within seven days of the date of this letter, a county court claim will be filed against you with the HMCS on 11.11.11. If you wish to avoid this course of action, you can make settlement by way of telephone on 0844 357 3311 or online at the below URL.

No charges have been added to your account at this stage. If a county court claim is filed against you, solicitor’s fees of £80.00, a court fee of £30.00 and interest under section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 may be added to the total claim amount. No further written notices will be sent to you. A claim will be filed against you on the above date if payment in full is not received by The Advertising Protection Agency.

I found it interesting that this "agency" appeared to be resorting to the invocation of all manner of legislation in pursuit of the alleged small debt -- and even more interesting to note its portentous citing of "Pre-Action Protocol Practice Direction" as being of specific relevance to civil debt when, er. . . It isn't.

But surely: after being slammed by the Advertising Standards Authority and placed on the consumer alert list by the Telephone Preference Service, the Advertising Protection Agency couldn't possibly be inadvertently confusing people again. Could it?

GraceCourt

Thanks for the additional information, Hern. The "Letter before action" is in itself correct procedure, and is exactly the "letter before proceedings" to which I refer, except for one thing - it doesn't say who the claimant is. It would do if "The Advertising Protection Agency" was an incorporated body - that's the whole point of incorporating, it creates a "legal person" that can sue and be sued - but it isn't. If a claim was issued in that name, the defence would be that, as the claimant didn't exist in law, it can't commence proceedings. End of claim. And if it does exist, it has to identify itself on the web site and in all of its business communications: if it's an incorporated partnership, it would be listed at Companies House (it isn't, and see below), and if it's an unincorporated partnership, all of the partners must be identifiable by name - again, there is a legal obligation for business communications to state where anyone can inspect the list of partners' names. If anyone is named as a partner on the business communication, all of the partners' names must be listed.

The name "TAPA" cannot be used for incorporation - Tapa Limited was a bakery company registered in Scotland and dissolved in October 2014. Irrespective of this, Companies House will not allow "TAPA Limited" to be used because it considers the name to be "the same as" Tapas Limited, a legitimate registered company in the licensed restaurant business, with no connection whatsoever to "advertising protection".

Hern

Further thanks for your latest comment because the concept of "a business" as a legal entity isn't as widely understood as it should be. It certainly seems not to be understood by those behind The Advertising Protection Agency though obviously, an alternative explanation inevitably exists.

As new poster burgor57 revived this thread, it would be interesting to now hear from her or him. The fact that this poster was actually worried about what might happen if her / his subscription was not renewed is not a little troubling.