CORGI HomeCare?
djc
information from CORGI" on the envelope. Basically a mailshot to join
CORGI HomeCare ie 'insurance'. So junk mail and it's going in the
shredder, but...
I don't believe they got my details from Worcester-Bosch, who have their
own scheme, and haven’t bothered me lately. So I assume this came from
CORGI, who as we know have been replaced by 'GasSafe'. So it seems they
have my details because the installation details were supplied as part
of the registration required when the boiler was installed ("Our records
show your Worcester boiler was installed in 2005..").
I did not give them my information for use in marketing, and I think the
use of the CORGI brand and logo could be misleading. Who should I
complain to?
--
djc
Peter Andrews
"djc" wrote in message news:iomple$mts$2...@news.albasani.net...
--
djc
The fact is that when the government set up the CORGI scheme they completely
forgot to ensure that the name CORGI was registered to the government, so
when the scheme came up for renewal after 10? years and the contract went to
another company the first company said - hey ho we own CORGI and no you
can't transfer it. So we now have Gas Safe and the original company can
continue using CORGI for anything they want too!!
As for where they got your name we can only guess....
Peter
John Stumbles
> I did not give them my information for use in marketing, and I think the
> use of the CORGI brand and logo could be misleading. Who should I
> complain to?
I'd ask on uk.legal.moderated. You're not the only person this has
happened to and it does look as if CIRGI have been [mis?]using
information, supplied to them by installers using their service for
notifying boiler installations in accordance with building regs, to spam
said installers' customers trying to sell them this entirely unrelated
commercial insurance deal.
--
John Stumbles
If a tree falls in a forest, can one hand hear it clap?
Bill
<john.s...@ntlworld.com> writes
>On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:13:02 +0100, djc wrote:
>
>> I did not give them my information for use in marketing, and I think the
>> use of the CORGI brand and logo could be misleading. Who should I
>> complain to?
>
>I'd ask on uk.legal.moderated. You're not the only person this has
>happened to and it does look as if CIRGI have been [mis?]using
>information, supplied to them by installers using their service for
>notifying boiler installations in accordance with building regs, to spam
>said installers' customers trying to sell them this entirely unrelated
>commercial insurance deal.
>
to see if you get anywhere.
I'm on my second letter to Ofcom about foreign callers saying they
represent Sky who hang up when I ask for their street address, so I'm in
the mood to join in attacking about anyone who has misused my data.
--
Bill
hugh
>
>> I did not give them my information for use in marketing, and I think the
>> use of the CORGI brand and logo could be misleading. Who should I
>> complain to?
>
>I'd ask on uk.legal.moderated. You're not the only person this has
>happened to and it does look as if CIRGI have been [mis?]using
>information, supplied to them by installers using their service for
>notifying boiler installations in accordance with building regs, to spam
>said installers' customers trying to sell them this entirely unrelated
>commercial insurance deal.
>
>
>
--
hugh
"Believe nothing. No matter where you read it, Or who said it, Even if
I have said it, Unless it agrees with your own reason And your own
common sense." Buddha
fred
<hugh@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>In message <918b9g...@mid.individual.net>, John Stumbles
><john.s...@ntlworld.com> writes
>>On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:13:02 +0100, djc wrote:
>>
>>> I did not give them my information for use in marketing, and I think the
>>> use of the CORGI brand and logo could be misleading. Who should I
>>> complain to?
>>
>>I'd ask on uk.legal.moderated. You're not the only person this has
>>happened to and it does look as if CIRGI have been [mis?]using
>>information, supplied to them by installers using their service for
>>notifying boiler installations in accordance with building regs, to spam
>>said installers' customers trying to sell them this entirely unrelated
>>commercial insurance deal.
>>
>>
>>
>Information Commissioner deals with misuse of personal data.
And in IME is a useless cnut who makes it unnecessarily awkward to make
a complaint. IMV a crude attempt to reduce their workload.
--
fred
FIVE TV's superbright logo - not the DOG's, it's bollocks
tim....
"Bill" <Billa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:aMhhg8nf...@itsound.demon.co.uk...
I don't think the "Sky" callers are misusing any data. They are just
dialling numbers randomly on the basis of a 30% chance the owner will have
Sky.
tim
tim....
"fred" <n...@for.mail> wrote in message news:jq0ImNHAlDsNFw5d@y.z...
This was not my experience.
tim
Bill
<tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
are bright enough to say is that Mr or is that Mrs.... depending on who
answers.
I actually feel quite sorry for the poorly paid of downtown Timbuktu or
wherever on the end of the line, but Sky should police the use of their
name more actively. Ofcom's first reply said they now can fine
organisations up to £2million for illegal random calling.
These foreign calls are quite separate from the insurance scammers
posing as a Sky maintenance organisation. They have called twice, and
they hang up if we try to engage them in conversation. If there's a 3rd
time, I'll take them on.
I have cobbled together a little database to enter details and anything
learnt from these random calls.
--
Bill
fred
<tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
related complaints is a good example. It requires that:
1. You quote the full name, address and postcode of the abusing company.
You may only have the caller ID of the caller so you cannot trace these
details. They could reverse trace these details of course but refuse to,
adding a layer of unnecessary complexity and dramatically reducing the
number of 'valid' complaints that they will receive.
2. You must contact the company to ask them to stop and wait a
'reasonable' time before they will consider your complaint.
In the case of random dialler scammers, I have no intention of wasting
my time and money contacting these scum. Per 1., their address is not
available and on principle I will not call their revenue share numbers
to beg them to remove me from their calling list.
As I am unable to comply with these 2 requirements I cannot complain to
the ICO. This makes them worse than useless IMO as they claim to be the
enforcement authority but then block valid complaints.
tim....
"fred" <n...@for.mail> wrote in message news:j944jeIxRHsNFw4N@y.z...
OK I did have that as it was a "high street" name.
> 2. You must contact the company to ask them to stop and wait a
> 'reasonable' time before they will consider your complaint.
There was no suggestion that I should do this.
tim
fred
<tims_n...@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>
>"fred" <n...@for.mail> wrote in message news:j944jeIxRHsNFw4N@y.z...
>>>
>> Although not directly relevant for this case, the process for telephone
>> related complaints is a good example. It requires that:
>>
>> 1. You quote the full name, address and postcode of the abusing company.
>
>OK I did have that as it was a "high street" name.
>
>> 2. You must contact the company to ask them to stop and wait a
>> 'reasonable' time before they will consider your complaint.
>
>There was no suggestion that I should do this.
>
procedure.
Have a scan at the page here and the linked complaints form, absolute
joke:
http://www.ico.gov.uk/complaints/privacy_and_electronic_communications.aspx
and to correct my earlier statement, they're not cnuts of course but I
certainly view them as a collective chocolate fireguard.
Dave
uttered:
>>
>I've had one of these, too, in the last week. I'll watch with interest
>to see if you get anywhere.
>
>I'm on my second letter to Ofcom about foreign callers saying they
>represent Sky who hang up when I ask for their street address, so I'm in
>the mood to join in attacking about anyone who has misused my data.
I've had one as well. Addressed to 'Worcester Boiler Owner' with the
correct address but no name.
Dave
Adrian
> On Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:52:15 +0100, Bill <Billa...@gmail.com> uttered:
>
>
>
> I've had one as well. Addressed to 'Worcester Boiler Owner' with the
> correct address but no name.
>
> Dave
I was intrigued by this when I got it and went through the process of
registering to see what happened. When it came to subscribing the web
site informed me that as my postcode was within the M25 I would have to
pay a £3 monthly surcharge. The only proble is that I am not within the
M25, rather about 8 miles away from it. I e-mailed the company to point
this out and their reply was that teh surcharge applied within and
around the M25. I wrote back pointing out that their wevb site said
otherwise and that I didn't really want to do business with a company
that was less than honest.
I have heard nothing more from them.
Adrian
hugh
<m...@my.privacy> writes
advertising - as they keep telling you over and over and over if you
listen to Classic FM
Steve Walker
In my case, the caller witheld their ID and the calls were silent so I
couldn't identify them; this was later confirmed as a rogue autodialler.
As the calls were to my mobile and happening up to four times a day,
this was very inconvenient. The phone company would not release any
details to me, as the number was withheld or contact them on my behalf
to tell them to stop, their only advice was to contact the police and
report nuisance calls. The police response was that they receive
hundreds of these and that they would not follow it up, as it was a
waste of manpower and advised me to change my number. Unfortunately
changing my number is not a viable option, as not only do friends and
family know this one, so do clients, suppliers, agents, HMRC,
accountants, utilties, even my local garage and I can guarantee that I'd
miss informing someone of the change and that it would lose (possibly
significant) sums of money.
I was also advised to block calls from withheld numbers, by the police -
who advised me of this during a call from them on a witheld number! Many
of the agencies that I use and clients withold their numbers, so this
was a non-starter too.
For now the calls have died off, but I know from previous experience,
that I will experience another 10 days or so of it every three months.
SteveW
tony sayer
>In my case, the caller witheld their ID and the calls were silent so I
>couldn't identify them; this was later confirmed as a rogue autodialler.
A lot of firms do that, they have a computer system that dials out and
makes the called party wait till they get around to dispensing their
spiel to you..
I do wait sometimes and tell them in as menacing voice as I can muster
to get to the next on their list and delete our number as I have some
friends in MI5 the Home office and similar .. seems to work..
>
>As the calls were to my mobile and happening up to four times a day,
>this was very inconvenient. The phone company would not release any
>details to me, as the number was withheld or contact them on my behalf
>to tell them to stop, their only advice was to contact the police and
>report nuisance calls. The police response was that they receive
>hundreds of these and that they would not follow it up, as it was a
>waste of manpower and advised me to change my number. Unfortunately
>changing my number is not a viable option, as not only do friends and
>family know this one, so do clients, suppliers, agents, HMRC,
>accountants, utilties, even my local garage and I can guarantee that I'd
>miss informing someone of the change and that it would lose (possibly
>significant) sums of money.
I suppose you have complained to Ofcom not that it does a lot of good
but if enough people agitate them they might...
--
Tony Sayer
hugh
<to...@bancom.co.uk> writes
agent free to pass the call to hence the silence followed by hang up.
There was an edict from Ofcom that these systems should be changed and
the number of complaints dropped, but of course there will still be some
around - and Ofcom can't control overseas call centres.
Steve Walker
It was confirmed that it was a rogue autodialler - every single time it
called (dozens of times over 10 days or so) it was silent and waiting
didn't get anyone at the other end. My mobile provider confirmed this,
but would not release the information, despite me quoting a section of
European Legislation that requires the release of witheld numbers in
cases of harrassment or nuisance calls.
I did contact Ofcom, they were a waste of time.
SteveW