Banned from submitting complaints to the ASA

[Bennyxp]

In just over a year, you have submitted 19 complaints to us, all about sit-up Ltd and presentations on their various teleshopping channels. Eight of these have been submitted this year alone.



You’ll recall that back in 2011 we had cause to warn you about the volume of complaints you were making to us, asking that you must demonstrate that you suffered personal detriment, harm or offence as a result of having seen an ad. Because you have continued to complain at a rate which we view as being unsustainable, and after careful consideration of the issue, I have decided to place a temporary restriction on your further access to our services.



We will continue to deal with all of the complaints that you have already submitted to us to date.



Please note, however, that we will not be accepting further complaints from you for a period of six months. Further complaints received during this period will not be responded to except at our sole discretion.



I am sorry that I have had to take this step but I have to consider the best interests of all of the customers of the ASA. Please feel free to call me to discuss further if you’d like.



Thank you for your co-operation.



Yours sincerely

 

[PJ.]

*hug*. That email sounds very unprofessional, sorry you have been treated like that buddy.


PJ

 

[Greg]

we had cause to warn you about the volume of complaints you were making to us, asking that you must demonstrate that you suffered personal detriment, harm or offence as a result of having seen an ad.

That is utterly ridiculous! What about people complaining to protect others who may be subject to misleading presenting and inaccurate information?

The ASA should be there to do their job they have been appointed to do, i.e. to protect the general public. If people are submitting a large number of complaints, then is this not an indication that Bid TV Ltd are a business in need of greater scrutiny and direction from the ASA? To ban people because they want to help others not to get ripped off, yet again, just smacks of laziness by this so called watchdog quango.

 

[Flying Pigs]

I think you need to talk to your MP. This is unreasonable.

 

[Sazza]

ASA is there to do a job, people should be able to report issues to them, go to your MP about it!!

 

[Adam]

Ben, I'm gonna do some research to see if they're legally allowed to ban you from submitting complaints.

If they're a government-appointed body, there's probably very little chance they're alloweed to do this.

I'll get back to you.

 

[aqua]

Had you submitted a large number of vexatious complaints (i.e frivolous ,malicious or without substance) then the ASA would be within their rights to suspend you in this way.
It would appear however that a number of the complaints have been upheld-perhaps you could provide the stats on this?
Is it stated on their constitution that a complainant must have suffered a personal loss,harm or offense I wonder?.Does not being subjected to broadcast falsehoods contitute offense? In any event the complaints that you submitted that were upheld were presumably done so without such supporting evidence,so thay seem to be changing the criteria.
I am not convinced that the ASA's current position is sustainable and you may wish to challenge it with the organisation's director.

 

[Hillary]

Benny love I'm going to start sending in complaints as from tomorrow. If everyone did it, that would show 'em. They are what my grandson would call 'Absolute sons of a bachelor'

 

[Enigma]

Refer this to your Member of Parliament.

If you are able to make numerous complaints to the ASA about Bid TV, then the ASA should be asking Bid why they are continually causing offence and not telling you to shut up.

That point needs to be put to your MP; are the ASA there to support viewers and potential shoppers, or to prevent organisations like Bid being complained about?

 

[Adam]

I've browsed the ASA website. There's nothing there stating that there's a limit for the amount of complaints you may submit, either in total or about one company.

The ASA isn't government-funded. Instead, it's funded by the advertisers themselves. They claim to be able to guarantee independence, but I'm not so sure how that's possible if they're ruling against the people who fund them. The ASA is effectively powerless compared to OFCOM, but OFCOM can't really do anything unless a complaint gets referred to them.

I'm wondering if it's worth complaining to PhonepayPlus about certain presentations where the cost of the call isn't mentioned - for instance, the pre-sells they do with the info on the bottom ticker.

I'd suggest contacting your MP, and trying to contact the Chief Executive of the ASA - Guy Parker.

 

[Bennyxp]

I did reply to him saying


I don't understand how the majority of the complaints I make against Bid TV are being looked into and all have valid points, and you suggest this is a bad thing? I only complain when I see something which the vulnerable viewers will not realise, and will therefore be taken along with their sales patter.

If I didn't contact you on these accounts, the channel would still be:

* Displaying the P&P and phonecall charge in a font which old people will not be able to read ( the majority of customers are old age citizens)
* Telling people they can 'multibuy' 9 items at 1p each, not mentioning that you have to pay a minimum of £7.99 P&P each time
* In accurate price comparisons
* Saying you can't buy it anywhere else, when looking online for 5 seconds you realise they are everywhere
* Scare tactics Smoke alarm - "If you have a young son or daughter upstairs and there's a fire, you wont know without this. Do you want them to suffer injuries or even death?"

Surely your service is to stop against misleading advertisements, and the only reason you have received a high volume from me in regards to Bid TV, is because they try and get around the rules, and they come up with new tactics on a weekly basis. I watch other shopping channels too, and I think only on one occasion in the last 5 years I've had to contact you regarding them.

I certainly don't do it for my own pleasure, but to make them LEGAL which they aren't.

So if I see something i.e. where they sell something as solid gold, when it's gold plated, should I let them just get on with it and take extra money from these people? I tell you now, if I don't complain, you will see the channels start to divert back to their old ways. BUT if you're happy with that, fair enough, but I always thought you were there to remove the misleading advertisements?


And his response was:

"Don’t misunderstand, we are very grateful for the close interest you have taken in bringing potentially problematic advertising to our attention. I am sure you understand, however, that we have a responsibility to ensure that we are able to meet the needs of all of our customers. We aim to provide a fast and responsive service and we must be mindful of the need to meet the expectations of all who complain to us. This means that we do need to ensure that our finite resources are utilised in such a way that is fair to all complainants, not just a few.

You are correct to maintain that many of the complaints that you submit raise valid concerns, with some being investigated either formally or informally. Our investigations process is costly, both from a labour and time perspective. Even those complaints that aren’t taken forward to this stage must be assessed to determine whether a likely breach of the Code has occurred. If we didn’t ask you to refrain from making complaints, we would be devoting an inordinate amount of time to looking at your objections, to the detriment of others who submit complaints to us. And this is simply insupportable.

We now do not expect to receive any complaints from you until 6 August. To reiterate, any complaints submitted during this time will not be responded to, except at our sole discretion. "

 

[Adam]

Right, I've just got some information that might be useful.

In order to complain about false advertising, you have to have suffered personal detriment. In other words, you have to have bought the product and found that it's been inaccurately described. The ASA seem to be well within their rights to refuse to handle complaints from you unless you can prove that you've personally suffered as a result of their sales pitch. However, if you can word your complaints to show that you have suffered great offence from their sales, you might be able to make them deal with your complaints.

I've been advised to recommend complaining to the Office of Fair Trading - they're more likely to be able to properly deal with our complaints.

 

[Greg]

I've browsed the ASA website. There's nothing there stating that there's a limit for the amount of complaints you may submit, either in total or about one company.

The ASA isn't government-funded. Instead, it's funded by the advertisers themselves. They claim to be able to guarantee independence, but I'm not so sure how that's possible if they're ruling against the people who fund them. The ASA is effectively powerless compared to OFCOM, but OFCOM can't really do anything unless a complaint gets referred to them.

So basically it could be open to collusion if the quango is paid for by the businesses themselves. I am not saying at all there has been any but there is something strange about two other complaints (from different people that were posted here a few days ago) which were not officially assessed by the ASA. They chose to write back saying they advised Bid privately. I don't think this is on. If people are making complaints, they should take them seriously in a transparent manner, otherwise the ASA will lose credibility.

 

[Nikki]

I think you need to talk to your MP. This is unreasonable.

Totally agree with you FP! That's where I'd be addressing that letter, bl**dy cheek of them! What they likley mean is...
"We really can't be ars*d to do the job we're employed & paid for to do"
"We'd also like to keep that lovely revenue Bid is giving us on the back of their sales so we don't actually want to investigate them too much as those higher up say we may loose their dosh"
That ASA letter is utterly disgusting imo! They're supposed to be a public service aren't they?? Oh yeh but hang on...one that's funded by the advertisers, that'll explain it then!
Good point Adam, in which case the person who wrote that letter should have advised Benny appropriately, or better still referred his complaints to the office of fair trading themselves imo.

 

[£1 MEGADROP1]

I wonder if they sent that because someone at ASA has read the suggestion the other day about Benny doing complaints for others because he got results

 

[Flying Pigs]

My fault then!

 

[Nikki]

My fault then!

It's ok FP we forgive you lol x. I really cannot get over that letter from the ASA! Bang out of order & shows them up for what they are, USELESS & TOOTHLESS from what I've witnessed in my view!

 

[Atticus]

And his response was:

"Don’t misunderstand, we are very grateful for the close interest you have taken in bringing potentially problematic advertising to our attention. I am sure you understand, however, that we have a responsibility to ensure that we are able to meet the needs of all of our customers. We aim to provide a fast and responsive service and we must be mindful of the need to meet the expectations of all who complain to us. This means that we do need to ensure that our finite resources are utilised in such a way that is fair to all complainants, not just a few.

You are correct to maintain that many of the complaints that you submit raise valid concerns, with some being investigated either formally or informally. Our investigations process is costly, both from a labour and time perspective. Even those complaints that aren’t taken forward to this stage must be assessed to determine whether a likely breach of the Code has occurred. If we didn’t ask you to refrain from making complaints, we would be devoting an inordinate amount of time to looking at your objections, to the detriment of others who submit complaints to us. And this is simply insupportable.

We now do not expect to receive any complaints from you until 6 August. To reiterate, any complaints submitted during this time will not be responded to, except at our sole discretion. "

That's quite a shocking response - basically ASA are saying that your points are valid, but they just cant be bothered to deal with them anymore.

They seem to be attributing that the problem is you complaining, when of course the problem is sit-up breaking the rules. If sit-up stopped being dishonest, then the complaints would stop also. I genuinely don't see how ASA's position is feasible.

Perhaps instead of limiting the number of complaints an individual is allowed to submit, they should focus on working with Ofcom etc to put an end to sit-up's dishonesty.

 

[merryone]

That's quite a shocking response - basically ASA are saying that your points are valid, but they just cant be bothered to deal with them anymore.

They seem to be attributing that the problem is you complaining, when of course the problem is sit-up breaking the rules. If sit-up stopped being dishonest, then the complaints would stop also. I genuinely don't see how ASA's position is feasible.

Perhaps instead of limiting the number of complaints an individual is allowed to submit, they should focus on working with Ofcom etc to put an end to sit-up's dishonesty.

Hear Hear!

 

[Adam]

I'm just thinking.. didn't The Mirror investigate Ideal World after a number of complaints?

We could all get in touch with Penman & Sommerlad at The Mirror by using this form and see if they can launch an investigation into bid. If they do, the bad publicity might be enough to get them to change their ways.