how do i stop begging letters?

poet123

Oh dear, someone is touchy!

However, as you say,people can interpret things as they see fit,as you too have aptly illustrated!!!

I wasn't actually saying it was aimed at me,if you read the beginning of my post. I was saying the bullying comment was unfair and unwarranted whoever it was aimed at.

hollydays

If your Mother explained the circumstances to his Doctor,that might be a starting point.

Nicki

cathy2702 wrote: »

Oh and dont mind the bullies on here, who are choosing to read and interpret what they want, to make you seem as if your story is changing (which it isnt).

Cate

No one on this thread has been rude to the OP, or aggressive towards her. Having a different opinion is not "bullying" or "trolling". Asking the OP to consider whether her proposed actions are justified is not bullying her. They were not justified in the light of her first post in my (and others opinion). They may be justified in the light of later posts (and only the OP can judge if that is the case). If they are justified I and other posters have given her good advice about what she can do to deal with the situation. If they are not justified, then the OP may decide on reflection to leave well alone (or to let her mother deal with the issue) in which case she may look back in later years with relief that she didn't jeopardise her relationship with her father by jumping in prematurely.

I would say that your comment is bizarre, but that might be construed as bullying you!

dannys_3

I was basing my comments on the fact I've cleansed a charities mailing list before, have worked in IT for 20 odd years, know the Data Protection Act and the tolerences on it, and have also spent 6 months doing charity work in a fundraising department (beats doing nothing when you're temporary unemployed!).

Mailshots (depending on the size of them) can cost about 50 pence an item. Charities would rather have that money to spend, than waste it going into someones bin as unwanted junk mail.

Charities depend on goodwill, and although they do target those who give more frequently, they would rather that they kept the goodwill.

Smaller charities also don't tend to check again MPS (this actually costs a lot of money to do) - I know the legality of this and I disagree with the fact its not done, although there is an assumption that the giver has consented to receiving direct mail.
Also, a lot of givers tend to be elderly, and a percentage tend to die off each year (blunt, but true).

For this reason, its not uncommon for relatives to request suppression of direct mailings. Its also common for "return to sender"s to be removed from the marketing list as well.

poet123

I worked as a regional fundraiser for a large national charity for 3 years when my kids were young. I now work in teaching and cover the DPA regularly,however how it is actually used by real companies and charities varies greatly.

It is obviously the case that if a person dies and a relative contacts the charity then they are removed from the mailing lists,as to receive mail in the name of a dead relative can be very upsetting,and of no benefit to the charity.

Where it is not so clear cut is when a relative of a person who is still alive,and in full possession of their faculties, rings and asks for that person to be removed from the mailing list. The charity really has no obligation to do so,and in fact by acting on the say so of a third party when no obvious/definite reason is given is breaching the Data protection Act,by even discussing the issue.

My guess is that some charities will some won't.the advice given to us was to ascertain why the informant wanted the action taken,who they were in relation to the giver,and any specific reason(mental incapacity,other illness). If it is an arbitary attempt by a relative to safeguard monies that would otherwise go to the charity willingly from the giver then it is not really in the charities interest to do so. It is therefore(or was in our case)up to the manager to judge each contact on merit or to try to contact the party involved and ask for their consent.

borosteve_2

poet123 wrote: »

I worked as a regional fundraiser for a large national charity for 3 years when my kids were young. I now work in teaching and cover the DPA regularly,however how it is actually used by real companies and charities varies greatly.

It is obviously the case that if a person dies and a relative contacts the charity then they are removed from the mailing lists,as to receive mail in the name of a dead relative can be very upsetting,and of no benefit to the charity.

Where it is not so clear cut is when a relative of a person who is still alive,and in full possession of their faculties, rings and asks for that person to be removed from the mailing list. The charity really has no obligation to do so,and in fact by acting on the say so of a third party when no obvious/definite reason is given is breaching the Data protection Act,by even discussing the issue.

My guess is that some charities will some won't.the advice given to us was to ascertain why the informant wanted the action taken,who they were in relation to the giver,and any specific reason(mental incapacity,other illness). If it is an arbitary attempt by a relative to safeguard monies that would otherwise go to the charity willingly from the giver then it is not really in the charities interest to do so. It is therefore(or was in our case)up to the manager to judge each contact on merit or to try to contact the party involved and ask for their consent.

So the answer seems to be buy a shredder then?
From your "review" in seems harder to get off a charities list once you're on it than to escape from Broadmoor!

My advice to the Op: Just get your mum to cancel any direct debits to these charities if they have a joint account and send their letters back unopened - or write on them that they have moved, they should soon get the message. Also at the bottom of most of the emails theres an UNSUBSCRIBE link. Just click that and hey presto! No more emails.

Incidentally Poet123 - if someone had rung your charidee asking you to stop sending begging letters would you actually have asked to see a death certificate before stopping?

poet123

No,it would have been taken on trust!! as it is presumed that not many people would lie about that...rightly or wrongly!

red_devil

gets on your nerves all this asking for money all the time its constant. Charity begins at home. If you gave to everyone who asked you would never have any left for yourself and your family.

dannys_3

borosteve wrote: »

So the answer seems to be buy a shredder then?
...........
Incidentally Poet123 - if someone had rung your charidee asking you to stop sending begging letters would you actually have asked to see a death certificate before stopping?

My advice would be to call them and ask them to stop. It works.

On the subject of deaths, these are registered, and the details then passed onto a mailing suppression list (which should be acted on within weeks - not the 3 months or so with the MPS list). IF this list is checked, the mailings should stop immediately.

Unfortunately, I beleive that this list AGAIN costs money to buy for the charities involved. All data cleansing costs money that companies don't want to spend.

poet123

dannys wrote: »

My advice would be to call them and ask them to stop. It works.

.

It might work, it might not:D depending on the policy of the individual charity.