COLUMNIST–INSIGHTFROMEUROPE
Coldcallers–Germanlawstighten
We’veallhadadvertisingcalls Becauseofthis,the
fromcontactcentreagents amendmentreformingthelaw
Unfortunately,
newspaperormagazine
subscriptionswillnowbe
withsuppressedcallerIDwho againstunfaircompetitionwas
unreliable
o
wanttosellaspecialproduct broughtinatthestartofthis a71
nemonth.
Ifconsumershavenotbeen
orserviceviatelephone. year;acoupleofmonthsafter
companies
informedabouttheirrightof
LastJuly,Germany’sFederal theFederalParliamenthad
Cabinetenactedanamendment passedtheamendmentfollowing
somehowfind
withdrawalinwrittenform,
consumerswhoconcludeda
againstunsolicitedadvertising secondandthirdreadings.
callsandso-calledcosttrapson Thereby,theEuropean
waystodefy
contractviatelephoneorthe
Internetarenowallowedto
theInternet.Unsolicited Directiveregardingunfair
thelaw–at
w
advertisingviatelephone businessconductwas a71
ithdrawfromthosecontracts.
Contractsagreedoverthe
becameabigproblem. implementedtoregulatethe theexpenseof phonethatentailswitching
Accordingtoasurveybythe cross-sectorsalesandmarketing
FORSAresearchinstitutein measuresofcompanies
thecustomer.
–suchaschangingtheprovider
ofelectricity,gasortelephone
Germanyintheautumnof2007, towardsconsumers. –becomeeffectiveassoonas
86percentofthepopulation thecustomersendsawritten
feelannoyedbyunsolicited Themostsignificantchanges confirmation.Also,therewillbe
advertisingcallsand64per b
centoftherespondentshave a71
ytheamendment,ataglance: improvedprotectionfor
Advertisingcallswith consumersregardingimplied
beencontactedviatelephone suppressedcallerIDarenot contracts:Ifacustomerchanges
byacompanyrecentlywithout allowed;thecaller’sIDmustbe aprovider,thenewcontractual
havinggiventheirapproval. displayed.Furthermore,itisnot partnerhastoverifyinwriting
Advertisingcallswithout allowedtoshowthecallerIDofa thattheoldcontractis
customerapprovalareexplicitly thirdparty(iethecallerIDofthe cancelled.Thisprocedurehasto
forbidden.Thelawagainstunfair o
competition(UWG),alsostates a71
rderingparty). becompletedbefore,for
Ifacustomercancelsa example, thetelephone
thatunsolicitedadvertisingcalls contractwithinanallottedtime, connectionofthecustomeris
areanunacceptableannoyance he/shewillnothavetofulfilthe changedtothenew
forconsumers–anybodywho contract.Thedeadlinefor telephoneprovider.
actscontrarytothisrestriction cancellingacontract–
risksaninjunctionfrom dependingonthecircumstances
eithertheassociationfor ofeveryindividualcase–istwo
consumerprotectionorfroma weeksoronemonth.Thetime
competingcompany. beginswhenthecustomerhas
Furthermore,thereisan beeninformedabouttherights
entitlementtodamagesifitis ofwithdrawalinwrittenform,
provedthatthepersonwho suchasviaemail,letteror
calledactednegligently telephone.Forunsolicited
ordeliberately. advertisingcallsthedeadlineis
Ifthelawagainstunfair g
competitionproveswilfulintent, a71
enerallyamonth.
Consumersarenowallowedto
thiswillresultinaskimmingof cancelcontractsthatdealwith
profitsforthecompanyatfault. thedeliveryofnewspapersand
Unfortunately,unreliable magazinesaswellascontracts
companiessomehowfindways withgamblingandlottery
todefythelaw–attheexpense services,withoutgivingany
ofthecustomer. reasons.Therightof
Theproblemisthat withdrawalconcerning
implementationofthelawhas advertisingcallsfor
limitationsinpractice. gambling/lotteryservices,
34 May2009 www.dmi-news.com
Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52