MSE News: New opt-out service to stop charities cold-calling launches: How to sign up

Former_MSE_Ben_S

The Fundraising Preference Service launches on 6 July 2017. Find out how to opt out of charity cold-calling...

Read the full story:
'New opt-out service to stop charities cold-calling launches - how to sign up'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

[Deleted User]

You'll then have to identify the specific charities you no longer want to hear from - it's not possible to simply opt out of all charity communications.

This makes the service about as much use as a chocolate fire guard.

Ian011

Until such time as usage of the telephone for marketing is banned and while people continue to be distracted by trying to define what is meant by "consent" (just how can you consent to an unsolicited call?) nuisance calls will not cease.

There has already been more than a decade of failed regulation and the new service will do little or nothing to fix the problem.

redux

Now

gsmlnx wrote: »

This makes the service about as much use as a chocolate fire guard.

Agreed. How on earth can someone opt out of hearing from a charity that they haven't heard of yet?

The whole thing is back to front, moving the responsibility to the receiver not the sender.

At least, alongside this new measure, or preferably ahead of it, charities should be banned from reselling their donor details to other charities, as simple as that. That is where the problem is at the moment, with all the junk mail and free pens and other trivial emotional blackmail gifts people keep receiving from unknown and new ones because they do donate to some others.

That sort of ethical standard has applied for years to commercial sales marketing -firms aren't allowed to resell customer details to other companies without the customer's permission. Why have charities been allowed to behave more shabbily?

Sorry if this sounds callous. I'm not against donating. But how many charities is someone likely to want to support in a certain field? Let's say animals for example - 2 or 3, 8 or 10, 30 to 50?

pbfhpunk

At least, alongside this new measure, or preferably ahead of it, charities should be banned from reselling their donor details to other charities, as simple as that. That is where the problem is at the moment, with all the junk mail and free pens and other trivial emotional blackmail gifts people keep receiving from unknown and new ones because they do donate to some others.

This does happen with charities. You can't sell data on unless you have permission, but most charities don't do this. Probably the issue that you described is people receiving cold mailings because they're on another companies list. A lot of catalogue and magazine subscriptions sell data unless you tick the no third parties list box. These lists are then bought by lots of different companies - not just charities - call the company that sent the mailing, they will ask you to quote a number on the mailing and can tell you what list you were on. You can then request to be removed from the list either by asking the company to pass your details on or asking for the details of the list broker.

But there are rules whn yo ubuy lists that you can't keep that person's data unless they buy something/donate and you can only use the data once, and that person will be removed if you request data from the same list within a certain time period.

The overall learning is whenever you complete any form where you're giving data is to opt out of third-party mailings.

pbfhpunk

How on earth can someone opt out of hearing from a charity that they haven't heard of yet?

You haven't heard from them so it's no an issue.

If you hear from them, you can then opt out. Easy. And it makes total sense for it to be down to the receiver to opt out. How can a charity remove you from a mailing list or database that you're not even on??

Ian011

pbfhpunk wrote: »

If you hear from them, you can then opt out.

Once you have heard from them, they have already caused the nuisance and have already broken the law. So this new service will be ineffective in preventing nuisance calls.

Indeed, thinking ahead, we may reach the stage where future victims are blamed for not opting out.

Using the telephone - a communication method that demands immediate attention - to pester people for donations should be banned.

jamesd

So the plan is "lets pretend we're doing something but make it impossible in practice because each of thousands of charities gets to harass you at least once before you even know they exist." No way they are serious when they take only three requests at a time online and it'd take weeks on the phone to list them all.

Looks as though some organisation that's more serious about stopping it is going to have to impose a solution that isn't deliberately designed to be impossible to use.

pbfhpunk

How would they be breaking the law by contacting you once?

They would have your details because either you've contacted them and not opted out, or when signing up to something else you didn't tick the box about third party contact.

When you opt out using the Fundraising Preference Service you can select not to hear from them via the phone. If you do get a call then you can ask to be removed from the calling list. And as others have said there are other services to opt you out of other mailings and phone calls.

Again if you've ticked to hear from third parties then you are the one that allowed this.

pbfhpunk

So the plan is "lets pretend we're doing something but make it impossible in practice because each of thousands of charities gets to harass you at least once before you even know they exist." No way they are serious when they take only three requests at a time online and it'd take weeks on the phone to list them all.

Looks as though some organisation that's more serious about stopping it is going to have to impose a solution that isn't deliberately designed to be impossible to use.

You don't need to opt out of all of them, all charities are listed regardless of what their fundraising practices are. For example some small little local animal rescue charity may rely only on donations from stalls at village fetes, and will never have the resource to do mailings or telephone calls so you don't need to opt out of all of them.

If I get a call from a fundraiser on behalf of a charity I politely stop them, ask to be removed from their list and think nothing of it, if I get postal mailing I recycle it, if I get people at the door again I'll politely stop them so they don't waste either of our time and tell them that I'm not interested and if I was going to donate to a charity I'd do it online. Any emails I get I unsubscribe and delete.

All of this takes seconds and is not a major hassle and among my family and friends I don't know anyone that has an issue with excessive charity contact.

jamesd

The problem is not knowing in advance which one might contact you so you can tell them not to. If you have to wait until you've already been disturbed you can still get lots of contacts even if each does it once only before stopping.

I'm less kind with unsolicited contact and may choose to post an empty prepaid envelope to increase the negative reward for the contact.

I suspect that unlike night workers you haven't had much potential for getting phoned and woken during your normal sleeping time.