Ad description
An e-mail offering electronic salt and pepper mills, reduced from £50 to £10, included the following text at the top of the page: "This is an email communication sent by Jean Patrique part of the TIA Group of brands. If you no longer wish to receive these emails please use this link". The end of the e-mail also stated "You were signed-up when you registered with www.prizehunters.co.uk We hope this email has been of interest to you. Please use this link if you would prefer not to receive further Jean Patrique email communications".
Issue
One complainant challenged that US Euro Link plc, trading as Jean Patrique Cookware Ltd (US Euro Link), was sending unsolicited e-mails despite the ASA having been previously assured that his details would be removed from their databases.
Response
US Euro Link plc, trading as Jean Patrique Cookware Ltd, did not respond to the ASA's enquiries.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA was concerned by US Euro Link's lack of substantive response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in the future.
We had previously secured two assurances from US Euro Link, firstly on 20 January 2012, and then 16 March 2012, stating that the complainant had been removed from their databases. Despite these assurances, however, the complainant was still receiving e-mails promoting Jean Patrique Cookware in April 2012.
We noted that US Euro Link had not provided evidence that confirmed the complainant had been removed from their database, or that there was a working mechanism in place to ensure that any member of the public in receipt of their communications could easily request to be excluded from all future mailings.
We once again requested that the complainant was removed from US Euro Link's databases by communicating directly with the organisation that managed their databases. The database manager informed us that previously the suppression had not been correctly applied but that the error had since been rectified and therefore the complainant would no longer receive e-mails from US Euro Link plc. We concluded, however, that US Euro Link did not provide a simple means for consumers to opt-out of receiving marketing communications from them and therefore repeatedly sent communications to individuals who had asked not to receive them.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.7 (Unreasonable delay), 10.4.4 10.4.4 marketing communications are not sent to consumers who have asked not to receive them (see rule 10.5) or, if relevant, who have not had the opportunity to object to receiving them (see rule 10.9.3). Those consumers should be identifiable and 10.13.3 10.13.3 sending marketing communications by electronic mail (excluding by Bluetooth technology) but marketers may send unsolicited marketing about their similar products to those whose data they have obtained during, or in negotiations for, a sale. Data marketers must, however, tell those consumers they may opt out of receiving future marketing communications both when they collect the data and at every subsequent occasion they send out marketing communications. Marketers must give consumers a simple means to do so (Database Marketing - Rules).
Action
We told US Euro Link plc to ensure their mailing lists were accurate and up-to-date and mailings were not sent to recipients who had asked not to receive them. We referred the matter to CAP's Compliance team.
