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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll