mBlox still ripping people off; Phonepayplus still letting them get away with it

[mike99]

http://www.phonepayplus.org.uk/consu...udications.asp

Service Provider mBlox Limited

Information Provider Genius Games Ltd

Service Name Magic Millions/Get Rich Quick

Breaches upheld against mBlox Limited

Procedure Standard
Summary


PhonepayPlus received 16 consumer complaints in respect of chargeable messages from a quiz service called ‘Magic Millions'. Complainants reported that they began to receive messages after entering into a lottery service on the website www.magicmillions.co.uk. Examples of two of the quiz messages received by complainants are as follows:

"MagicMillions CashQuiz 1000 Pound Cash Prize > What year was the Falklands war? A) 82 B) 83 C) 84 Reply A, B or C"

"MagicMillions CashQuiz 1000 Pound Cash Prize > How many players in an ice-hockey team? A) 7 B) 9 C) 11 Reply A, B or C"

Complainants said they were unaware that entry into the online lottery service, would result in automatic subscription to a text quiz subscription service, charged by reverse billed SMS messages, costing £1.50 per message.

The following breaches of the PhonepayPlus Code Practice 11th Edition (amended April 2008) were raised:

Paragraph 5.4.1a - Fairness (Misleading)
Paragraph 5.4.1b - Fairness (Unfair Advantage)
Paragraph 5.7.1 - Pricing Information (Cost)
Paragraph 7.12.4a-f - Subscription Initial Message
The Tribunal upheld breaches of paragraphs 5.4.1a and 7.12.4a-f of the Code. The Tribunal did not uphold breaches of paragraphs 5.4.1b and 5.7.1 of the Code. The Tribunal considered the case to be significant, issued a formal reprimand and imposed a £35,000 fine. The Tribunal did not impose an additional fine in respect of the service provider's breach history, in view of the service provider's current compliance activity. The Tribunal stated that if future cases were brought to PhonepayPlus involving services which demonstrated a failure in the new compliance structure, it would be open to the Executive to recommend that future Tribunals take into account the fact that there was no additional fine imposed for breach history in this case. The Tribunal imposed a bar on the service until compliant. The Tribunal commented that it doubted whether the service which had been the subject of the complaints could be made compliant with the Code. The Tribunal also ordered that claims for refunds are to be paid by the service provider for the full amount spent by complainants, except where there is good cause to believe that such claims are not valid.

and

Service Provider mBlox Limited

Information Provider Outsource Logistics Limited/Maximex (UK) Limited/3 Blue Steps Ltd

Service Name Mocon/Fonics.net

Breaches upheld against mBlox Limited

Procedure Standard
Summary
PhonepayPlus received 78 consumer complaints in relation to a service branded as ‘Mocon / Fonics.net' which appeared to have been marketed, via one service provider, by three information providers namely Outsource Logistics Limited, Maximex (UK) Limited and 3 Blue Steps Ltd. The information providers stated that they had obtained the service itself from a separate company called MoconDigital Limited, which claimed to have no relationship with the service provider.

All 78 complainants indicated that they had never previously consented to receive chargeable messages in respect of the service. The SMS messages received by complainants cost £1.50 per message received, examples of which are as follows:

2 download your content 003_Ayo Technology, use link http://fonics.net/get/CQCGYQDJKE with your mobile wap/GPRS. Probs call 08700429664 / moconsupport@aol.com
2 download JohnButlerTrio_UsedToGetHigh:2c go to http:3a//fonics:2enet/getZ8PYEJT6RR with your mobile WAP on your phone:2e Help:3a info@maximex:2euk:2ecom or 08700428521:2e
2 download Sweet About Me, go to fonics.net/get/EKPSL4YLTT using WAP on your phone. Help: threebluesteps@aol.com or Call 08700427522. Enjoy!
The following breaches of the PhonepayPlus Code Practice 11th Edition (amended April 2008) were raised:

Paragraph 3.3.2 - Documentary or other evidence required
Paragraph 3.3.3 - Adequate Technical Quality
Paragraph 5.2 - Legality
Paragraph 5.4.1b - Fairness (Unfair Advantage)
Paragraph 5.7.1 - Pricing Information (Cost)
The Tribunal upheld breaches of paragraph 5.2, 5.4.1b and 5.7.1 of the Code. The Tribunal did not uphold breaches of paragraphs 3.3.2 or 3.3.3 of the Code. The Tribunal considered the case to be serious, issued a formal reprimand and imposed a fine of £75,000. The Tribunal did not impose an additional fine in respect of the service provider's breach history, in view of the service provider's current compliance activity. The Tribunal stated that if future cases were brought to PhonepayPlus involving services which demonstrated a failure in the new compliance structure, it would be open to the Executive to recommend that future Tribunals take into account the fact that there was no additional fine imposed for breach history in this case. The Tribunal imposed a bar on the service until compliant. The Tribunal commented that it doubted whether the service which had been the subject of the complaints could be made compliant with the Code. The Tribunal also ordered that claims for refunds are to be paid by the service provider for the full amount spent by complainants, except where there is good cause to believe that such claims are not valid.

The Tribunal also commented that it considered MoconDigital Limited to be an information provider under paragraph 11.3.7 of the Code by virtue of having provided a service for the purposes of section 120(9)(a), (c) and (d) of the Communications Act 2003, notwithstanding the lack of a contractual arrangement between itself and the service provider.