# The data industry’s response to the Fundraising and Regulatory Compliance Conference

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2017/02/23/data-industrys-response-fundraising-regulatory-compliance-conference/
- Published: 2017-02-23T18:02:53+00:00
- Author: Howard Lake

**By now every fundraiser in the land will be aware of the ICO’s draconian stance
on wealth screening, data appending and data matching following the recent Fundraising
and Regulatory Compliance conference in Manchester. **

The bow [waves from this conference](https://fundraising.co.uk/2017/02/21/discussion-fundraising-regulatory-compliance-conference/)
are going to be immense not just for the charity sector, but for marketers in general,
if the ICO continues to be allowed to interpret the Data Protection Act in this 
manner. And make no mistake – this is purely an interpretation of the DPA; it is
entirely subjective. One person’s ‘fair’ is another person’s ‘unfair’.

It is for this reason that for those of us in the data industry that have worked
incredibly hard with fundraisers over the past three decades to gain a more holistic
understanding of their donors that we won’t be taking this ruling lying down. We
passionately believe, not only in protecting our businesses, but in the benefits
that data services, when used responsibly, bring.

## Advertisement

It is true that at times some ethical boundaries have been crossed and it was for
this reason that the [investigation into fundraising practices](https://fundraising.co.uk/2015/09/01/daily-mail-claims-15-charities-misused-personal-data-of-donors/)
came to light. However, both the charity sector and the data industry were quick
to respond and put [safeguards in place](https://fundraising.co.uk/2015/09/22/strengthened-iof-code-bans-selling-donors-data/)
to ensure the vulnerable were protected. For the ICO to now be going after legitimate
and long standing marketing practices such as home mover trace products on the assumption
that it is ‘unfair’ is tantamount to a witch hunt.

Moreover, where does this stop? This insane interpretation surely applies to all
sectors, not just charities. Or is it ‘unfair’ to trace donors but ‘fair’ for supermarkets
that provide money-off vouchers to trace their lost customers?

On the topic of home movers, research shows that people that are moving house now
have an average of 39 essential providers to  inform of their new address. This 
includes financial institutions, schools, government bodies, doctors, dentists and
utilities. On average this takes around 10 hours to carry out. If you add to this
list a person’s favourite retailers, charities, loyalty schemes, entertainment channels
etc. the list to inform stretches to over a hundred organisations and becomes a 
monumental task taking three working days to complete. It is therefore unsurprising
that the majority of home movers don’t get round to telling a charity that they 
donate to or an online retailer that they enjoy receiving a catalogue from that 
they have moved house?

## Previous relationship with the charity

Consequently, how can trace products be deemed unfair if the person has had a previous
relationship with the charity? It’s not as if the donor has moved house for the 
sole reason of escaping the charity – if that was the case they simply stop their
donation and ask to be unsubscribed from the marketing database and communications
will cease.

Rational arguments such as this need to be presented and the data industry along
with its trade associations will be rallying to formulate a strong defence of these
practices. At the end of the day the data industry is one that the economy can ill
afford to lose, contributing billions to GDP annually. Moreover, the government 
relies on charities to provide the socio-economic assistance that it cannot. If 
donations dry up the well-being of the nation will decline.

## Legitimate marketing tools

But in the meantime what does this mean for the charity sector? Elizabeth Denham
has said that none of these practices are illegal. Consequently, fundraisers should
still be able to use these entirely legitimate marketing tools without fear of prosecution.

More clarity is needed from the ICO but it seems that the emphasis is now on the
charity to be satisfied that their permissions/privacy statements are clear and 
openly disclose how they intend to use the customer data – whether it is to locate
a donor if they have moved, determine their lifetime value or find additional information
on that person.

Making no bones about it, this will be a huge challenge and costly in terms of legal
advice but the data industry will be working tirelessly to help its charity clients
with this process whilst simultaneously fighting what the ICO currently defines 
as a breach of the DPA. 

 

![Martin Rides](https://wfay6x.infiniteuploads.cloud/2015/07/martin-rides.jpg)

_**Martin Rides** is Managing Director of [The Software Bureau](https://www.thesoftwarebureau.com/)._

 * **[Data protection: can I email the Doctor?](https://fundraising.co.uk/2017/03/02/data-protection-can-i-email-doctor/)**(
   2 March 2017)
 * **[GDPR and getting to grips with your database](https://fundraising.co.uk/2017/06/14/gdpr-getting-grips-database/)**(
   14 June 2017)
 * **[Data concerns dominated consumer complaints in 2017, says DM Commission Annual Report](https://fundraising.co.uk/2018/01/29/data-concerns-dominated-consumer-complaints-2017-says-dm-commission-annual-report/)**(
   29 January 2018)

![Loading](https://fundraising.co.uk/wp-content/plugins/page-views-count/ajax-loader-
2x.gif)
