Scam offers from 'New Scientist'

Voyager2002

Is there any way to make an effective complaint when a reputable body uses its mailing list to promote financial products that are essentially fraudulent?

I have a lot of respect for 'New Scientist' and am on its mailing list. My instinct would be to be less sceptical about something that it promotes than about things I see advertised elsewhere, and I am sure that many others respond in the same way. However, this trust seems to be being abused:

The latest email from them promotes a 'service' that claims to be able to detect when bookmakers have got their odds wrong so that you can make money by placing winning bets! However, it is dressed up as a financial product, bearing the misleading but irrelevant statement "Approved for distribution by WDFS Limited under Section 21, who are authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FRN: 147518)".

I have already complained to 'New Scientist' about distributing this kind of material and was essentially brushed off. Is there any body such as the FCA that might issue some kind of reprimand?

SonOf

You can also complain to the company regulated by the FCA. Financial promotions are a regulated activity for financial services companies. So, if their name is being put to something, it should be compliant (seeing as they said "approved for distribution by"

You should complain to the company first before being able to take it further.

danm

Is it actually fraudulent?


i doubt the FCA would be reprimanding New Scietist for promotions made by someone else; Unless the communication is misleading in the sense that it actually says somewhere that it is endorsed/promoted by them.... the FCA can't regulate based on peoples instinct.


You can however request that New Scientist update your mailing preferences. if you have not given them permission to provide your data to third parties then this would be a breach of GDPR. If you have given permission, then you can update your preferences so they do not do this.

verybigchris

Not necessarily a scam. Arbitraging bookmaker odds is a real thing: essentially you can get situations where you place opposing bets with two different bookies and you are guaranteed a positive return, irrespective of the outcome of the event you're betting on. I did it for a while (didn't use a service like that, just wrote a Python script for my Raspberry Pi that scraped Oddschecker for me every hour) but the bookies got on to it and limited my accounts. I can see how investing in a service that manages these bets could be a legitimate investment (but don't take that as a recommendation).

There's a matched betting subforum on here somewhere that goes into more detail on it. Returns are great if you take up all the "Free Bet" offers, but once they've dried up the returns plummet.

colsten

verybigchris wrote: »

I can see how investing in a service that manages these bets could be a legitimate investment (but don't take that as a recommendation).

Legitimate perhaps, but not the best investment anyone could make. Firstly, the odds-comparison market is saturated, secondly - and mainly - there is literally no arbitrage to be found these days, and thirdly, the bookie free bets are such miserable value these days that very few people bother. Betting abitrage was an absolutely superb source of income for me for many years (I did it full time) but it's become so tedious that I chucked it in in 2014. I would very much recommend against investing in any business that touts odds comparison, or (worse) betting tips.

Flobberchops

Legally, I expect New Scientist has some kind of disclaimer that third party marketing shouldn't be taken as an endorsement, perform your own due diligence or consult an IFA, etc etc. Also, FCA authorisation shouldn't be taken as a safety net; plenty of people assume that just because a financial product is FCA compliant that implies some kind of protection in the vein of FSCS cover. As many P2P investors have been discovering recently, that's not the case. I'm sure the less reputable companies are aware of this confusion and capitalise upon it.

Rudyson

Are you 100% sure it's from New Scientist? I've been a subscriber for years, receive regular emails, and have never had an offer like that.

pip895

Rudyson wrote: »

Are you 100% sure it's from New Scientist? I've been a subscriber for years, receive regular emails, and have never had an offer like that.

Likewise..

Dox

Voyager2002 wrote: »

I have already complained to 'New Scientist' about distributing this kind of material and was essentially brushed off. Is there any body such as the FCA that might issue some kind of reprimand?

How was it distributed (i.e. what method - a flyer included with a print copy, an e-mail...?).

Voyager2002

Rudyson wrote: »

Are you 100% sure it's from New Scientist? I've been a subscriber for years, receive regular emails, and have never had an offer like that.

Yes I am.

Some months ago I received what I felt was an equally dubious "opportunity" and contacted them saying that they needed to take more care about the kind of material that was distributed in their name. I received a courteous reply with the offer to remove me from their mailing list, so I am sure that it was them. (I declined the offer because I don't mind them making money sending me advertising emails.)

Their reply said something about the advertising emails being "served up" by Google, so presumably I received this "offer" because of the searches that Google have recorded for me.

Voyager2002

Dox wrote: »

How was it distributed (i.e. what method - a flyer included with a print copy, an e-mail...?).

An email. As mentioned above I am confident that it was from them.