The Information Commissioner’s Office has proved there is no seasonal cheer for companies which blight consumers with nuisance calls after fining a Croydon firm £90,000 for continually harassing vulnerable individuals.
Kwik Fix Plumbers – previously known as Boiler Shield – was the subject of 214 complaints to the ICO and the TPS. The complaints were received between 1 July 2013 and 31 March 2014, with many being made by relatives of the elderly people affected.
The recipients of the calls were already registered with the TPS and had not previously consented to being called by the company. However, Kwik Fix Plumbers continued to contact these people in breach of the law.
The ICO’s investigation found that Kwik Fix Plumbers had no process in place to stop calls being made to people registered with the TPS, and was unable to provide evidence to show people had overridden the TPS by agreeing to receive live marketing calls.
The company also failed to provide their employees with sufficient guidance or training on how to comply with electronic marketing rules, under the Privacy & Electronic Communications Regulations.
From September to November 2014 the ICO received more than 100 concerns a day from people fed up by calls about boilers, more than any other sector. In total the ICO received 9,179 concerns, almost twice as many as those related to PPI refunds.
ICO head of enforcement Stephen Eckersley said: “The actions of this company are truly despicable. Contacting anyone registered with the TPS without their consent involves breaking the law, but harassing vulnerable people is disgraceful. We had no choice but to take action.
“We will continue to work with Trading Standards and the police to protect vulnerable people from these types of calls and take enforcement action against those responsible for breaking the law.”
The penalty comes a week after the Information Rights Tribunal dismissed an appeal by home improvement company Amber UPVC Windows to overturn a £50,000 penalty issued by the ICO in April this year. The judge ruled ‘there is a very significant and weighty chance of substantial distress being caused’ by the nuisance calls.