5 Reporting nuisance calls
Identifying callers
42. Many callers withhold or disguise their telephone
number and Which? told us they want to see all companies required
to send their valid telephone number when they make calls for
the purpose of direct marketing. Identifying overseas callers
poses a particular problem and there is very little information
about the proportion of such calls.
43. Which? has proposed that all businesses making
marketing calls should send their caller line ID;[49]
this is already in line with the Direct Marketing Association's
code of practice. We see no reason why it should not be codified
in law. The Government notes in a response to Which? that Ofcom
also requires calls made by predictive diallers to include a calling
number.[50]
44. Caller identification should never be withheld
in the context of a marketing call and consumers need to be made
aware of this fact.[51]
We recommend that the Government legislates to proscribe the
withholding of caller identification in telephone calls made either
for marketing or for establishing marketing leads. We discourage
consumers from making any purchase arising from telephone marketing
activity where a valid contact telephone number has not been provided.
Short codes
45. The Mobile Broadband Group told us they are:
"highly incentivised to do all that we can to minimise inconvenience
to customers by disrupting unwanted texts, while avoiding the
unintended consequences for those messages that are wanted and
valued."[52] The
MBG adds that they anticipate being able to deal with nuisance
voice calls should they also become a serious issue on mobile
networks. They explain that dealing with unhappy customers imposes
significant costs, reputational damage and higher churn to alternative
service providers. For some years, mobile operators have provided
customers with a short code 7726 (the numbers for S-P-A-M on an
alphanumeric keypad) to which unwanted texts could be forwarded.
This provides intelligence to mobile network operators, who can
investigate the content and source of the messages and who can
disconnect offending SIM cards. Enhanced intelligence sharing
among operators and the ICO has recently been enabled by a new
GSMA [Global System for Mobile Communications Association] Spam
Reporting Service.
46. Which? has suggested that a short code be developed
for landlines which would enable consumers to simply and rapidly
report any unwanted calls.[53]
This would then be used to provide intelligence to regulators
and network operators about organisations persistently misusing
the telecommunications networks. Like the Government in its response
to Which?,[54] we do
not underestimate the technical hurdles to this. Nor do we underestimate
the abilities of communications providers to overcome them.
We recommend that Ofcom deploys its expertise and good offices
to help landline operators overcome the barriers that prevent
them from providing a short code nuisance call reporting service
analogous to the one their mobile competitors already provide.
Making it easier to complain
47. BT told us about their lead role in a trial which
involved collecting and sending customer complaint data direct
to Ofcom—making it easier for customers to complain.[55]
While this is welcome, it serves as a reminder of the difficulties
consumers encounter in knowing where to turn when they receive
nuisance calls or texts. In response to consumer confusion as
to where to complain, Which? has launched a complaints portal
which directs consumers to the appropriate regulatory complaints
form.[56]
48. Both Ofcom and the ICO have extensive information
and advice on nuisance calls available on their websites. People
with internet access are directed to the appropriate regulator
and complaint form according to type of nuisance call or text
they receive. While this is welcome, we believe it could go further.
We believe it would be more convenient for telephone users
were they presented with a single straightforward online complaints
form for all nuisance calls and texts. This can then be directed
to the relevant regulator and an appropriate reply provided to
the complainant. Such a one-stop shop for complaints stops short
of creating a single regulator. However, it would provide some
elements of a "customer-facing" approach that such a
regulator would bring and which the existing reporting mechanisms
have failed so far to provide.
49. An online complaints form clearly has limitations.
An obvious one is that it may only be used by people with internet
access. Claudio Pollack, Group Director of Content, Consumer
and External Affairs Group, Ofcom, told us that about 15% of people
have no internet access.[57]
Simon Entwisle, Director of Operations, Information Commissioner's
Office, agreed that the vast majority of people without internet
access would "probably not" know who to complain to.
He said: "They would need to go to the CAB or someone like
that. They can make a phone call to us and they would be directed
to the right place. But, no, it would be challenging to find out
who to complain to without using another adviser like the CAB."[58]
50. We are concerned that some of the most vulnerable
customers will not have the internet access to find out who to
complain to. When asked about publishing on telephone bills a
number people could call to complain, Claudio Pollack said:
We will take that away for consideration. It
is a solution we have used in other areas. For example, a priority
area for us is about people's right to complain and their right
to go to the ombudsman where they are not satisfied with their
complaint. We do have regulations in place that require the name
and contact detail of the respective ombudsman to appear on the
bill, so it is a solution that we have experience of. We have
not evaluated it being applied to this issue, but it is one that
we will do.[59]
51. There should be a single nuisance calls helpline
to which individuals should be directed. We suggest that this
helpline should be prominently displayed on all telephone bills.
The helpline could be staffed by individuals from either Ofcom,
the ICO or both.
49 Ev 39 Back
50
Ev 73 Back
51
See, for example, the Direct Marketing Code of Practice, Direct
Marketing Association, February 2012 Back
52
Ev 56 Back
53
Ev 39 Back
54
Ev 73 Back
55
Ev 51 Back
56
http://www.which.co.uk/campaigns/nuisance-calls-and-texts/ Back
57
Q 137 Back
58
Q 138 Back
59
Q 144 Back
| 
