Burger King 2for1 offer

System

fluffnutter wrote: »

I did think that any business that you deal with does have to, by law, offer you the opportunity to opt out of marketing.

You CAN opt out, unfortunately it also means that you also opt out of the perks that go with opting in such as a 2 for 1 offer on burgers.

fluffnutter

!!!!!! wrote: »

You CAN opt out, unfortunately it also means that you also opt out of the perks that go with opting in such as a 2 for 1 offer on burgers.

Perhaps I'm being pedantic but I'm still not so sure. There's a difference between saying 'You've advertised a deal to an unedited audience, i.e. everyone. Can I take advantage of that deal please?' 'Only if you agree to accept marketing' and not hearing about a deal because you're not emailed the offers.

The latter is, of course, more fool you. The former..? I'm not so sure if that's not merely circumventing the law which states that you must be able to decline marketing (and still get the service on offer).

Companies can impose conditions on their offers ("Spend £50, get a £5 voucher") but these conditions can't be used to circumvent consumer law ("Spend £50, get a £5 voucher, but only if you sign this piece of paper agreeing to waive your statutory rights, for example, you're not allowed to return the item that you spent the £50 on should it turn out to be faulty").

TBH, I don't really care that much. Whenever I feel like a dirty burger, I go to MuckDonalds not BK.

pulliptears

fluffnutter wrote: »

TBH, I don't really care that much. Whenever I feel like a dirty burger, I go to MuckDonalds not BK.

Oh no fluff! BK's burgers but Muckducks fries :D

unholyangel

The simple point of the matter is that a company can choose who they wish (or do not wish) to do business with or give offers to.

They have (in this instance) chosen only to do this particular offer to people who consent to receiving marketing material from them. It may be "unfair" in your views but it is not illegal and is not a breach of the DPA or even the PaERs. They have seemingly fulfilled their obligations under the DPA - which is to make it transparent why they are collecting the data and for what purpose it will be used.

By agreeing, you are indicating consent to these terms and conditions. Much as in the same way, if you didn't like a shops return policy on 50% off items, you do not have to agree to them and buy. It would be absurd to try and force the shop to sell the item to you if you disagreed with the T&C's.

fluffnutter

unholyangel wrote: »

They have (in this instance) chosen only to do this particular offer to people who consent to receiving marketing material from them. It may be "unfair" in your views but it is not illegal and is not a breach of the DPA or even the PaERs.

I'm not sure that it's legal to insist that you accept marketing. That's my point.

nomoneytoday

Why not use a Guerrilla-mail address if you're that worried.
You get your voucher and the email expires in an hour...

fluffnutter

nomoneytoday wrote: »

Why not use a Guerrilla-mail address if you're that worried.
You get your voucher and the email expires in an hour...

Alternatively, the first time you get a mail with marketing, click the 'unsubscribe' link. Job done.

Not that I'm condoning companies doing this - I'm arguing that they shouldn't!

pulliptears

fluffnutter wrote: »

Alternatively, the first time you get a mail with marketing, click the 'unsubscribe' link. Job done.

Not that I'm condoning companies doing this - I'm arguing that they shouldn't!

Probably not, but the fact is that it was stated clearly enough for OP to make his own informed choice on whether he wanted to be added to BK's marketing or not.

Had this been in writing this small hidden away somewhere I'd have taken issue but it was obviously big enough to see.

unholyangel

fluffnutter wrote: »

I'm not sure that it's legal to insist that you accept marketing. That's my point.

I checked ICO website, nothing against it

The opt out thing was to stop companies taking "no objection" to mean "consent" as with regards to marketing they (i believe its in force already, may be wrong on that part) changed it so that you must opt in and instead cannot take you voicing no object (as most of the tick boxes are indicted "i do not object to blah blah using my details for blah blah") as expressly meaning you consent to them doing so.

There may be an issue if perhaps the tax office were forcing you to do it as you cant help but do "business" with them. But in this case, you're free not to do business with the company if you do not agree to their T&C's.

It would only be illegal if they later refused to give you the opportunity to opt out.

texranger

Bilbobiggin wrote: »

The point is you there is no option to say no to the question.
If you do not agree you don't not get the burger.
My understanding of the DPA is you have to have the option to say yes or no !!

They state

BURGER KING will not pass on your details to any other organisation or 3rd parties.

what will happy you give them your details you get a free burger and then twice a year you will get a booklet from BK with a few BOGOF and discount vouchers