This post was originally published on this site.
A company that sold call-blocking devices to elderly people has been fined £190,000 after the regulator found it was responsible for the very nuisance calls its products claimed to prevent.
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) said Elderly Aids Ltd (EAL) made 758,053 unsolicited direct marketing calls between May 2024 and February 2025, all of them to people registered with the Telephone Preference Service (TPS), the official register for those who have opted out of receiving marketing calls. The regulator announced the penalty alongside an enforcement notice ordering the firm to stop making unlawful calls and to comply with caller identification requirements.
According to the ICO, the company deliberately targeted elderly people to promote its call-blocking devices, claiming it was trying to protect them from nuisance calls. Twenty complaints were made to the ICO and the TPS during the nine month calling campaign.
Aggressive calls to people who had opted out
The complaints revealed that EAL’s callers were aggressive, misleading and often failed to identify themselves. One complainant described the firm “overcharging for call blocking services that they aren’t authorised to sell”, saying their father “was persuaded to sign up to pay £139 upfront and a £6.99 monthly fee”.
Andy Curry, Head of Investigations at the ICO, said: “Not only did this company target vulnerable people who had explicitly asked not to be called, they harassed them to sell call-blocking devices. EAL showed a complete disregard for the law and the people they were hounding. This penalty should serve as a clear warning to any business that thinks the law does not apply to them. We will hold them to account for both exploiting people in this way and trying to avoid accountability.”
The regulator said EAL repeatedly ignored requests for information throughout its investigation and carried on making unsolicited calls, generating further complaints. Once the company became aware it was under scrutiny, it attempted to strike itself off the Companies House register, and it is now registered at a default address.
Where the law stands for businesses that phone customers
The case turns on a rule that applies to any business using the telephone to win customers. It is against the law to make a live marketing call to anyone registered with the TPS unless that individual has told the specific organisation they do not object to its calls, and the ICO’s guidance on nuisance calls sets out how the register works.
Enforcement in this area has been building for some time. The ICO has previously issued £495,000 in fines over millions of intrusive marketing messages, and call centres making PPI calls without checking the TPS register were fined £225,000 in an earlier case. Penalties for companies breaking anti-spam rules have reached new highs in recent years.
Russell Roach, Director of Preference Services at the Data & Marketing Association (DMA), said the case showed why the protections matter. “People register with the Telephone Preference Service because they want greater control over who can contact them. Cases like this demonstrate why those protections are so important,” he said.
“Anyone making live marketing calls must respect the choices people have made about their privacy. When organisations ignore those preferences and contact individuals who have explicitly opted out of receiving unsolicited sales calls, particularly those who are most vulnerable, they undermine consumer trust and risk causing significant nuisance and distress.”
His advice to firms that want to stay on the right side of the rules is practical: screen calling lists against the TPS and its corporate equivalent, the CTPS, before running any sales or marketing campaign. “Doing so helps ensure they respect consumers’ preferences, comply with the rules and avoid causing unnecessary harm or annoyance,” he said, adding that the DMA remains committed to working alongside the ICO to protect consumers from nuisance calls.
