ICO - Digital Growth Experts Limited: Difference between revisions
(You'd think data protection experts would notice that the DPA in the UK changed in 2018) |
(Undo revision 11429 by 2A00:23C7:5201:4400:F57C:E1B:159C:4DA2 (talk)) Tag: Undo |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
|National_Law_Name_1=Data Protection Act | |National_Law_Name_1=Data Protection Act 1998 | ||
|National_Law_Link_1=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/ | |National_Law_Link_1=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/contents | ||
|National_Law_Name_2=Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 | |National_Law_Name_2=Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 | ||
|National_Law_Link_2=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2426/contents/made/data.htm | |National_Law_Link_2=https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2426/contents/made/data.htm | ||
Revision as of 08:32, 1 October 2020
| ICO - Digital Growth Experts Limited | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Authority: | ICO (UK) |
| Jurisdiction: | United Kingdom |
| Relevant Law: | Data Protection Act 1998 Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 |
| Type: | Investigation |
| Outcome: | Violation Found |
| Started: | |
| Decided: | 22.09.2020 |
| Published: | 24.09.2020 |
| Fine: | 60000 GBP |
| Parties: | Digital Growth Experts Limited |
| National Case Number/Name: | Digital Growth Experts Limited |
| European Case Law Identifier: | n/a |
| Appeal: | Unknown |
| Original Language(s): | English |
| Original Source: | ICO (in EN) |
| Initial Contributor: | n/a |
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has fined Digital Growth Experts Limited (DGEL) £60,000, under Regulations 22 and 23 of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003, for sending thousands of nuisance marketing texts without customer consent at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
English Summary
Facts
Seeking to capitalise and profit from the pandemic DGEL sent the texts, of which 16,190 were received, between 29 February and 30 April 2020 promoting a hand sanitising product that it claimed to be “effective against coronavirus”. The messages were all sent to people who had not consented to receive them.
Throughout the ICO’s investigation, DGEL was unclear and inconsistent in its responses, and it was unable to provide sufficient evidence that it had the consent it is required to have under the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations 2003 (PECR).
DGEL came to the attention of the ICO when complaints forwarded via short text 7726 to the GSMA’s Spam Reporting Service were incorporated into the ICO’s Monthly Threat Assessment, which is used to identify organisations in breach of PECR.
Dispute
Whether DGE violated Regulations 22 and 23 of PECR by sending out over 16,000 unsolicited marketing messages during the coronavirus pandemic?
Holding
The Commissioner finds that DGE contravened regulations 22 and 23 of PECR. The Commissioner finds that between 29 February 2020 and 30 April 2020 there were 16,190 direct marketing text messages received by subscribers. The Commissioner finds that DGE transmitted the direct marketing messages sent, contrary to regulation 22 of PECR.
Comment
Share your comments here!
Further Resources
Share blogs or news articles here!
English Machine Translation of the Decision
The decision below is a machine translation of the English original. Please refer to the English original for more details.
