header-logo header-logo

Junk mail: what's your preference?

22 September 2017 / Ellis Pugh
Issue: 6672 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Giselle Davies & Ellis Pugh report on the Fundraising Preference Service—the new weapon against ‘junk’?

  • The Fundraising Preference Service was introduced to ensure the public has more control over the contact received from charities.

Developed from a recommendation in the Etherington Report of September 2015, the Fundraising Preference Service (‘FPS’) was intended to ensure that members of the public would have more control over the contact they received from charities. Launched on 6 July 2017 by the Fundraising Regulator, 6,305 ‘suppression requests’ have been received in its first month of operation.

To the dismay of some, the FPS does not work in the same way as the Telephone Preference Service (TPS), Mail Preference Service (MPS) or the Royal Mail opt-out from unaddressed mail. However, in conjunction with these pre-existing weapons may well successfully add to the arsenal that the public can use in their war against unwanted communications or ‘junk’.

In simple terms the FPS works by allowing members of the public to list charities from whom they do not wish to receive direct marketing.

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Muckle LLP—Ella Johnson

Real estate dispute resolution team welcomes newly qualified solicitor

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

Morr & Co—Dennis Phillips

International private client team appoints expert in Spanish law

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

NLJ Career Profile: Stefan Borson, McCarthy Denning

Stefan Borson, football finance expert head of sport at McCarthy Denning, discusses returning to the law digging into the stories behind the scenes

NEWS
Paper cyber-incident plans are useless once ransomware strikes, argues Jack Morris of Epiq in NLJ this week
In this week's NLJ, Robert Hargreaves and Lily Johnston of York St John University examine the Employment Rights Bill 2024–25, which abolishes the two-year qualifying period for unfair-dismissal claims
Writing in NLJ this week, Manvir Kaur Grewal of Corker Binning analyses the collapse of R v Óg Ó hAnnaidh, where a terrorism charge failed because prosecutors lacked statutory consent. The case, she argues, highlights how procedural safeguards—time limits, consent requirements and institutional checks—define lawful state power
Michael Zander KC, emeritus professor at LSE, revisits his long-forgotten Crown Court Study (1993), which surveyed 22,000 participants across 3,000 cases, in the first of a two-part series for NLJ
Getty Images v Stability AI Ltd [2025] EWHC 2863 (Ch) was a landmark test of how UK law applies to AI training—but does it leave key questions unanswered, asks Emma Kennaugh-Gallagher of Mewburn Ellis in NLJ this week
back-to-top-scroll