| Quote from: Mark |
Hi there.
1. Let me assure you that out of the many thousands of referrers we have, there is absolutely no suspicion of fraud. That comment is harsh and unfair.
2. Are you guessing that the DPA is not applicable here or do you know that for a fact?
3. What information would you need to know about some random person who you have never met but who clicks a referral link on a website and subsequently signs up? What purpose would it serve knowing their username?
4. Please understand that part of my role is to ensure that the referral programme which we offer to you guys is as straight forward as it can possibly be. I am well aware that it is cumbersome and problematic and this I will fix. But I will not bend the rules or break the law, however I will ensure that we deliver what works for you guys and makes referring as easy and straightforward as possible.
|
Not being funny, but:
1. My comment is not harsh. I didn't say there is suspicion of fraud, but that the current conditions make it impossible for a referrer to ensure there isn't any fraud. I maintain that PlusNet are not providing sufficient imformation to permit accurate tracking of referral benefits, so they have the opportunity to commit a fraud. This is not the same as accusing them of already having committed a fraud. If this truth is unpalatable to PlusNet's representatives, I'm sorry - but it is a truth.
2. You cannot answer a question by turning it back against the questioner. I just asked YOU if PlusNet know for certain that the DPA is applicable. Their claim that it is applicable came first. We need clear reasons how it is applicable. I gave you the reasons why it may not be... it is for PlusNet to take notice of that and answer my question.
3. The only information I and other referrers require is the account name that the referral benefit applies to. The reason it is required is to enable referrers to accurately track which accounts they are receiving benefit for. Without this information it is not possible to CHECK that PlusNet are keeping their side of the contract to give a referral benefit. Yes, it is a contract involving a benefit in exchange for a service... the referrers, as suppliers of the service are entitled in law to ensure that they are being correctly paid. If there is no mechanism to permit this, (which is the current situation) it is an unfair contract. PlsuNet can pay what they like, there is no way to ensure they are paying what they owe.
I refer customers directly not via banner ads. I then require to know that I am receiving the referral fee for that account. That is not unreasonable. In fact I am legally entitled to check the accuracy of benefits promised under a contract.
4. Bending the rules is exactly what is going on if the Data Protection Act is being quoted when it does not apply. This would amount to bending the rules to justify not disclosing information that MAY be disclosed. No-one is being asked to break the law, because if it is permissible under the act to disclose this inoffensive piece of information, the law is not broken.
In all your response, you have not taken any notice of the logic that demonstrates the act does not apply, nor argued against it. I have given good and specific reasons why I believe the DPA does not apply. The response is vague and defensive.
Please don't take offence at this. The fact is I have a valid complaint, and I won't just drop it when the reason I am asked to drop it is invalid. However, I think we've posted enough words about it. I won't push any further on the forum.
With respect! In the end, PlusNet does a superb job, and the referral scheme works.
