2 Nuisance calls and texts
Types of nuisance calls
3. There are no generally accepted definitions of
the term "nuisance calls" or its close cousins, "unsolicited
calls" or "unwanted calls". In a recent LSE brief,
Claire Milne, Chair, Consumer Forum for Communications,[1]
used the term "nuisance calls" to mean phone calls that
their recipient experiences as a nuisance or worse. These can,
of course, include personal calls, for example during the breakdown
of a relationship. But the vast majority of nuisance calls of
public policy concern are from strangers, have commercial motives,
and may be termed "unsolicited telemarketing calls".
There are also nuisance calls which aim to deceive and/or defraud
recipients. Though fewer in number, these can have much worse
consequences than mere nuisance.[2]
4. Marketing calls made for non-commercial reasons,
such as political campaigning,[3]
health campaigns and charitable fund-raising, also fall within
the regulatory framework. The National Autistic Society told
us that the telephone is "the single most successful way
that - as a charity reliant on public donations - we raise money
from individuals."[4]
The Society's evidence ends with an appeal : "Please do
not curtail our use of this marketing channel - I would implore
you to fully consider the implications for society before making
any changes."
5. Many unwanted calls may be perfectly legal and
legitimate. These could include legitimate market research and
fund-raising appeals by charities. During elections, candidates
for Parliament or local authorities might also wish to canvass
by telephone as an alternative or addition to a doorstop presence.
However, while such activity counts as marketing and ought to
be captured by the Telephone Preference Service, Richard Lloyd,
Executive Director, Which? told us that complaints have "always
been about claims management companies or large businesses. It
is plainly about sales."[5]
6. We heard no evidence to suggest that members of
the public are receiving persistent unwanted calls from their
elected representatives. Registration with the Telephone Preference
Service will not necessarily stop such calls as a clear relationship
exists between elected politicians and those whom they represent.
It is, however, not in the interests of Members of Parliament
(or local councillors) to make unwelcome telephone calls to their
constituents and we believe most would cease to make contact if
asked to do so.[6] Richard
Lloyd told us: "This is not about legitimate contact between
elected representatives and their constituents. This is about
firms often breaking the existing regulations for the purposes
of sales calls or sales texts. I think it would be really unfortunate
and just wrong if there was not a carve-out for those legitimate
purposes, because that would not be attacking the problem."[7]
7. We agree with Which? that a complete ban on
cold-calling should not be sought, not least because there are
many legitimate reasons why such calls might be made, be it by
the emergency services, medical practitioners, pharmacists, elected
politicians, candidates for elections, charities and companies
with whom the recipient has a genuine relationship. The target
must be unsolicited calls and texts for marketing purposes and
the smaller number of calls made with fraudulent intent.[8]
Silent or abandoned calls
8. A type of "nuisance call" which recipients
often find particularly disturbing is the silent call. Silent
and abandoned calls are usually caused by call centres using automated
calling systems known as diallers to maximise the amount of time
agents spend speaking to consumers. If no agent is available,
Ofcom expects that a recorded information message should be played.[9]
A silent call (i.e. an abandoned call with no message) can be
due to an automatic dialler incorrectly "thinking" it
has reached an answer machine instead of live individual.
Prevalence
9. Research from Which? revealed that 85% of people
with a landline had received an unsolicited call in the previous
month. The most common type of such calls - 62% - were related
to Payment Protection Insurance (PPI). An online survey indicated
that the average number of calls received was seven in a month.
Ofcom has also conducted market research in which it asked 800
consumers to keep a diary of nuisance calls over a four-week period.
During this period, 82% received an unwanted call (around two
such calls a week on average). Only 1% of unsolicited calls were
considered to be useful.
10. Claire Milne has published work in which she
notes that in recent years there has been a marked rise in the
number of complaints received about nuisance calls and the issue
"is finally getting the attention of policy makers."
[10] Data from
Ofcom and the Telephone Preference Service shows that the number
of complaints by month to each of these about nuisance calls has
more than tripled in the last two years. This is illustrated
by the figure below, an update[11]
based on a figure in an LSE briefing paper.[12]
 Figure 1: Nuisance call complaints
received by Ofcom and TPS since July 2010
11. The Information Commissioner informed us of
"significant and compelling evidence of growing volumes of
unsolicited live and automated telephone calls and SMS texts to
UK consumers".[13]
Since setting up an online reporting tool in March 2012, over
240,000 complaints have been made to the Commissioner. In its
evidence to us, Ofcom noted that the volume of nuisance calls
and messages grew sharply last year. For example, complaints
to Ofcom about silent and abandoned calls alone now stand at nearly
3,200 a month.
12. Evidence from the Telephone Preference Service
(TPS) points to a recent growth of complaints which started around
September 2011, rising from around 3,000 - 4,000 per month to
a peak of over 10,000 in February 2013. It was suggested to us[14]
that one reason for this was that some organisations might actually
target numbers registered on the list in the belief they would
be less used to receiving unwanted calls and thus be more receptive
to marketing pitches.
1 An informal forum hosted by Ofcom. Back
2
http://www.lse.ac.uk/media@lse/documents/MPP/LSE-MPP-Policy-Brief-8-Nuisance-Calls.pdf
Back
3
http://www.ico.org.uk/~/media/documents/pressreleases/2010/dma_guidance_04032010.ashx
Back
4
Ev w13 Back
5
Q 11 Back
6
Qq 7-11 Back
7
Q15 Back
8
Qq 11, 15 Back
9
Ev 60 (footnote 3) Back
10
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/mediapolicyproject/2013/07/18/new-policy-brief-reports-nuisance-calls-complaints-more-than-triple-recommends-co-ordinated-action/
Back
11
Claire Milne, personal communication, October 2013 (the upper
plot refers to TPS complaints, the lower plot to Ofcom complaints) Back
12
LSE Media Policy Brief 8, Nuisance Calls: A Case for Concerted
Action, July 2013 Back
13
Ev 85 Back
14
Ev 79 Back
| 
