[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Irish Data Protection Commission Case Studies
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Irish Data Protection Commission Case Studies >> Unfounded complaint about unsolicited marketing text messages [2008] IEDPC 5 URL: http://www.bailii.org/ie/cases/IEDPC/2008/5.html Cite as: [2008] IEDPC 5

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

Unfounded complaint about unsolicited marketing text messages [2008] IEDPC 5 (31 December 2008)

My Office received a complaint from a data subject about text messages that she had received to her mobile broadband modem.  The data subject first found out about the text messages when she received her mobile broadband bill.  Over a two month period she had incurred charges amounting to hundreds of euro for premium rate text messages.

My Office investigated the complaint on the basis of the data subject's allegation that the messages were unsolicited.  On investigating the complaint, my Office found that the data subject's broadband bill showed that she had been charged for premium rate text messages by four separate data controllers.  It was then established with the data subject's mobile network provider that her mobile broadband modem was capable of sending and receiving text messages.  It confirmed that this was technically possible and that mobile broadband modems have SIM cards with mobile phone numbers assigned to them.

My Office then contacted the relevant data controllers to find out where they had sourced the data subject's mobile number and whether they had obtained appropriate consent to send her the text messages.  Each of the data controllers responded promptly with full details of all messages sent to, and received from, the data subject's mobile number.  These responses indicated that the communications had been initiated from the data subject's mobile number.  My Office then compared these details with the data subject's broadband bill which confirmed the data controllers' version of events.  Following a detailed examination of the case and taking account of the material submitted by all four data controllers, I was satisfied that the text messages were not unsolicited and that no contraventions of SI 535 of 2003 had occurred.  It became apparent that a member of the data subject's household had subscribed to the relevant services using the data subject's mobile broadband modem without her knowledge.  This was not the fault of the data controllers.

Similar situations arise quite often in regard to complaints to my Office about subscriptions to phone services.  It is not uncommon to find that another member of the complainant's household, such as a child or spouse, has used the mobile phone of the complainant without their knowledge to subscribe to various services.