Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20-38)
MR TONY
HERBERT, MS
SUSAN MARKS
AND MS
SHARI VAHL
28 NOVEMBER 2006
Q20 Mr Evans: You just think that
is fine. You have somebody reputable like Nick Owen, a newsreader
people trust, and he is saying, "Phone this number now. Come
on, phone this number now"; he must be the housewife's favourite,
Nick Owen.
Ms Vahl: That is editorial and
that is up to them.
Q21 Paul Farrelly: I was leaving
the office and switched on and found Nick Owen following Keith
Chegwin and I found it very sad that Nick Owen lent his name to
this sort of programme and I hope the fee was worth it. To follow
on from Nigel's analogy, the analogy he used on horseracing, it
is not just that you pay your 75p and someone forgets to put it
on, it is actually you pay your 75p and your horse gets nobbled
in all sorts of different ways during the race, either it is not
running or they are stopping it from running for half an hour.
If that happened in horseracing you would expect not just the
British Horseracing Authority to be involved but the police, because
those are the sorts of fraud the police investigate. Shari and
the CAB, when you say you do not know how prevalent these practices
are, then surely that means it is time for not just the Fraud
Squad but, given the amount of money involved, the Serious Fraud
Office to take a look at the industry as a whole, to examine all
these issues to find out how prevalent these practices are?
Ms Vahl: I certainly think there
needs to be transparency and openness about this, because the
consumer does not know an awful lot more than the consumer does
know, and it is an issue of fairness. If you do have a chance
of getting through, it would be nice to know what kind of chance
that is. If you do not have a chance of getting through that is
one for the police.
Q22 Chairman: We have heard evidence
from obviously a large number of the operators who have set out
the safeguards that they have put in place: the information they
provide to viewers in terms of the fact of how much they are going
to pay; the fact that they would pay whether or not their call
gets through; and they have given us details of the blocking mechanisms,
whereby if you exceed a certain number of calls you will not get
through. We have been told that they call back and alert people
if they have been spending more than a certain amount of money.
They would say to us that there are a whole host of consumer safeguards
in place and, at the end of the day, people choose to do this;
it is a form of gambling; people like to gamble; they get enjoyment
from it; where is the harm.
Ms Marks: For CAB clients it is
clear that they do not know they are expecting to get this huge
great phone bill. Whilst some people may be interrupting or contacting
callers and telling them how much they have spent, we are not
aware that that is right across the board. In fact, it is that
sort of intervention, as Tony said, the warning before so that
you choose to spend your 75p each time and the idea that somebody
intervenes and says, "It has now cost you £10 getting
in touch with this programme—do you want to continue?",
which is a sort of reality check to stop people being so caught
up.
Q23 Chairman: Some are doing that.
Ms Marks: Some are, but I do not
know that everyone is doing that; and if they are it would seem
odd that people are then coming in to CABs and saying, "There
must be something wrong with my phone provider. I can't possibly
have spent this amount of money".
Q24 Mr Evans: Would you advise members
of the public ever to play any of these games after what you know,
Shari?
Ms Vahl: I shall let Susan and
Tony answer that first one.
Q25 Mr Evans: I was not going to
charge you for an answer on that!
Ms Vahl: Would I advise anyone
to play them?
Q26 Mr Evans: Yes, knowing what you
know.
Ms Vahl: I do not think you can
advise anybody to spend money; but I would advise people to be
careful about what they are buying, because they do not know what
they are buying. I think that is where my advice would be. Find
out what you are buying first and then buy it.
Q27 Mr Evans: Have you ever played
any of them?
Ms Vahl: No, I have not actually,
but I have watched them and they are incredibly attractive to
watch. I have found myself shouting answers across the room saying,
"No, come on, silly woman, you've already had that once".
It is very attractive. They are very good-looking professional
presenters and, as a form of entertainment to watch, I can see
why it is so attractive to ring in even if it is 11 o'clock at
night and you have just staggered in from the pub; but there are
fewer of those and there are more people during the day. When
we talked to Bob Winsor he said many of the people who used to
ring and he did actually speak to just wanted to talk to somebody
on the telephone. They liked the presenters and felt they were
having company with somebody. The issue of spending money only
came later as a very big shock.
Q28 Chairman: Shari, you have said
you have spoken to all of the operators and, as I have said, we
have had evidence from some who have made it clear that they have
quite a large number of safeguards in place. Would you say that
they are not all the same; that there are some operators who are
worse than others and, if so, who are the really bad examples
in your view?
Ms Vahl: I would say definitely
there are some better operators than others. Sources inside the
industry get frustrated. I think it is actually across the board
that it needs to be changed; because the same level of lack of
knowledge on the consumers' part is across the board. There is
only one question: "How much does it cost to enter your competition?"
None of the channels will tell you. "What is the probability
of my getting through?" which is the answer to the same question,
"How much does it cost?" "Will it cost me £5
to have a go at answering that question?" You do not know.
They are the same across the board. In terms of that, and that
is the most important question, no one operator is better than
any other.
Q29 Chairman: Do you mean by that,
"How much am I going to have to spend before I have a pretty
strong chance of getting through?"
Ms Vahl: No. "How much am
I going to have to spend before I get through?" It is as
simple as that.
Q30 Chairman: You clearly know how
much it costs to make the call?
Ms Vahl: Yes, that is right. When
I took the Big Game fraud allegations to ICSTIS, ICSTIS said,
"It says on the screen it is going to cost you 75p a go".
I said, "You don't know how many times it's going to cost
you". They said, "That's your choice".
Q31 Alan Keen: Do you think people
believe if they call another time, and another time, it is increasing
their chances of getting through? Do they understand that if you
toss a coin, heads or tails, it is the same odds whether you have
tossed it a thousand times? Do they understand?
Ms Vahl: I think that is a very
valid point—a very valid point. No, I think they think the
more times they call the better the chance of getting through.
You are quite right—it is (for want of a better word) a
"lottery".
Q32 Alan Keen: I do not want to get
too far off the subject, but I have always felt personally there
is not enough transparency with things like Pop Idol. I
think they should be completely transparent and the public should
know exactly how much money is going into Pop Idol on the
voting as a total. They know they are spending 75p or 50p, you
do not tend to get drawn into spending more and more, but I have
always felt very uncomfortable. Do people come to you and say,
"What really is the total amount that is being spent?"
Ms Marks: It seems unlikely people
have any idea of the level of revenue stream that this creates.
Q33 Alan Keen: Do you think they
should know?
Ms Marks: Yes, perhaps it is important
that people know that in fact they are paying for the whole programme,
the prize and any profits that are made.
Q34 Janet Anderson: You mentioned
it was more a problem for people who were at home during the day.
I think you said it might even be people who wanted just to talk
to someone. Do you think it is more of a problem, therefore, with
particularly vulnerable groups? Do more women play these games
than men?
Ms Vahl: I do not know about the
gender differences. The people I have spoken to are often women,
generally women. Some of the people we have spoken to are vulnerable
people. It is difficult to describe people as "vulnerable"
because they get offended if you describe them as "vulnerable".
An older person might say, "I'm 65 but I'm not vulnerable.
I did this from my own choice but I still didn't know how much
it was going to cost me". A younger person whom we might
describe as "vulnerable" would say, "I'm not vulnerable.
What are you talking about?" We have to be a little careful.
The enticement of winning £6,000 by making a call—and,
as it was suggested on ITV Play the other night, "It's got
to be worth a 75p call" and I shouted across the room, "Just
one"—that is where people become vulnerable because
they have become roped in and it is exciting, and that can take
anybody.
Q35 Janet Anderson: Would they be
more likely to be in a low income group?
Ms Vahl: I would imagine that
people who are very interested in winning that pot would be in
a lower income group because they would benefit from it.
Mr Herbert: A recent programme
I saw said something like "£6,000—think what a
difference that would make to your Christmas".
Q36 Rosemary McKenna: There is one
running just now with exactly that: "Don't worry about Christmas.
You will win Christmas". That is really very glitzy and looks
very attractive but for someone who is sitting there and has perhaps
lost all their money with Farepak sees that on television and
says, "I'm going to go for that", and they have no idea;
and even if they do know that every time they make a call it is
costing them, they are paying that money and thinking they are
going to win and not knowing just how much money is going into
the company, and not knowing how many people are actually competing
for it. It really is a lottery, is it not?
Ms Vahl: It is the equivalent
of putting your money in the door, and the door does not open.
You think you can come in here, sit down and answer a question
but actually you do not know how much money you have got to put
in the door before you are allowed in the room, before your horse
comes out.
Q37 Adam Price: How many of the people
you have spoken to know about the free internet entry route; and
how well do you think that is promoted as an alternative method?
Ms Marks: There is quite a concern
about that, because the free entry route (where there is one)
is always an internet access; and there are some figures Ofcom
have recently published which showed that only 35% of people in
the socio-economic groups D and E had internet access; only 28%
of consumers in the 65-plus age group had internet access; and
only 25% with an income of up to £11,500 annually. So we
wondered if CAB clients are actually likely to have that access
at all and whether that is, in fact, an option.
Q38 Adam Price: By definition almost
it is discriminatory against those vulnerable groups really?
Ms Marks: Anyone who has not got
internet access; and it is known from research that people with
less money are less likely to have home internet access.
Chairman: Thank you very much indeed.
| 
