header-logo header-logo

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

Junk mail: what's your preference?

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

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans—Jason Slatcher

Weightmans appoint new Chief Technology Officer

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya—trainees

Mishcon de Reya announces trainee retention rate of 86%

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers—Charlotte Adams & Fraser Sutton

Sackers welcomes two new Graduate Solicitor Apprentices

NEWS
LexisNexis is delighted to announce the launch of the LexisNexis Legal Awards 2027, celebrating outstanding achievement, innovation and impact across the legal profession
The Legal Services Board (LSB) is to take further enforcement action against the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), setting additional performance targets and ‘intensifying’ its oversight, it has said
Regulators missed several opportunities to intervene in PM Law Group before it collapsed, an independent review by City firm Jenner & Block has found
An employer’s vicarious liability for the alleged torts of an employee cannot be transferred by TUPE, the Court of Appeal has confirmed
Tiered fees of up to £1,500 for Legal Ombudsman (LeO) cases could leave firms with little option but to pay out, lawyers have warned
back-to-top-scroll