Skip to main content

Silent Phone Calls .... Result!!! (Case opened today)

Complainant: Ofcom own-initiative investigation
Investigation against: Promote IT, Toucan Telecom, The Listening Company Ltd, ANT Marketing UK, Thompson Directories Ltd, Fax Information Services Ltd, Firestorm Marketing Ltd.
Case opened: 16 June 2005
Issue: Persistent misuse of electronic communications network(s) or service(s)
Relevant instrument: Sections 128 to 131 of the Communications Act 2003

A “short duration” or “silent call” is a call which is usually initiated by automatic calling equipment ("ACE"), generally used by Call Centres making outgoing calls. The call is terminated by the ACE immediately after the called party answers (usually, because no live operator is available to speak to the called party).

A short duration call may also arise where companies attempt to send fax messages to telephone numbers that are not connected to terminal equipment capable of receiving fax messages. When the call is answered, the called party may hear a series of tones or the call may have been terminated.

Complaints

Ofcom has received complaints from members of the public about Promote IT, Toucan Telecom and The Listening Company Ltd regarding the annoyance caused to consumers by the making of short duration and/or silent calls.

In addition, Ofcom made a formal request for information relating to short duration and silent calls from British Telecommunications plc ("BT") in May 2005. The request was made under section 135 of the Communications Act 2003 (“the Act”). Following the receipt of the information from BT’s Nuisance Calls Bureau, Ofcom has identified ANT Marketing UK, Thompson Directories Ltd, Firestorm Marketing Ltd, and Fax Information Services Ltd as companies which have regularly made silent and/or short duration calls.

Ofcom has therefore decided to open an investigation to determine whether the companies identified above have persistently misused an electronic communications network or electronic communications service contrary to section 128 of the Act.

Sections 128 to 130 of the Act gives Ofcom the power to take action against persons or companies who persistently misuse an electronic communications network(s) or service(s) in any way that causes or is likely to cause unnecessary annoyance, inconvenience or anxiety.

Where Ofcom finds that a person or company is in breach of the above provision, it may issue an enforcement notification and/or impose a financial penalty on the misuser.

Case Leader: Tanya Rofani (020 7783 4342 e-mail: Tanya.Rofani@ofcom.org.uk)

Case Reference: CW/00835/05/05

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Homelessness vs Selling Books

Candidates in elections tend to find themselves very busy with lots of things to do.  It is, therefore, necessary to prioritise things to ensure that the important things are dealt with.

To me the issue of homelessness and rough sleeping is an important issue.  Therefore, when Birmingham's Faith Leaders group contacted me to ask me what I would propose and whether I would work with them to make things better I was pleased to respond with my views and indicate that I would work with them after the election.

The Faith Leaders Group (Bishops and other religious leaders in Birmingham) have now sent out their report.

Sadly, according to their report,  I was the only candidate for Yardley to respond.  The group in their report said:

"Particularly disappointing was the lack of response from some of those candidates seeking re-election as MP for their respective constituencies."
It is worth looking at the priorities of my opponent.
Interestingly today she has decided to be at th…

Millionaires and politics

The Labour Party spent most of the last election criticising me for being a successful businessman (aka millionaire). That is business in the private sector employing over 250 people. It is worth looking at the situation for the Labour Candidate now:

For the year 2016-7 Annual Income from Parliament74,962Specifically for her book51,250Other media income etc5,322.82Total declared income131,534.82

Traditionally anyone with an annual income of over £100,000 has been considered to be a millionaire. I did not use my position in parliament to increase my income.


I have been asked for sources for this. This BBC piece looks at how one should define rich. It was written in 2011 so the figures will be slightly out of date. There are perhaps 2 relevant pieces:
"In 1880 a rich person would have had £100,000 in assets or an income of £10,000 a year, he says. About a hundred people a year died leaving £100,000 and by 1910 this was 250 - "a microscopic fraction of the number of death…