FundRaising Standards Board

Advice & Regulation

• The Standards
  • The Codes of Fundraising Practice
  • The Fundraising Promise
  • Self-regulation
  • Influencing the Standards
• Complaints
  • Identifying a Complaint
  • Our Process
  • Adjudications
  • Annual Return
• Supporter Care
• The FRSB Tick
  • Public Confidence
  • Using the Tick
  • Download the Tick
  • Promoting Your Membership
• Your Membership
  • What It Means
  • Getting Started
  • Communicating your membership
  • The Advisory Forum

Adjudications

Cancer Research UK - Not Upheld

Published: 25th January 2008

Complaint Summary

A member of the public complained that his area had been aggressively targeted with unaddressed appeals containing pens. He was unhappy that he received 13 pens as a result of these mailings over the past two years and most recently had received 4 in one day.

A complaint was made directly to Cancer Research UK and after several e-mail responses from Cancer Research UK, the complainant was not satisfied that they had addressed his complaint. He therefore made his complaint known to the Fundraising Standards Board. Issues

• Cancer Research UK through their unaddressed campaigns had targeted the complainant’s local area aggressively/ wastefully over the last few years.

Member's Response

Cancer Research UK did not accept that the complainant has received 13 unaddressed mailings over the last 2 years. They stated that a maximum of 3 unaddressed mailings had been sent to the complainant’s area during that period and that, after studying the photograph of the pens, it appeared that at least 4 mailings had been received longer ago than 2 years. Further, Cancer Research UK explained that addressed, cold mailings sent to the complainant during the period in question may have accounted for some of the pens he received. A maximum of 6 such addressed mailings could have been sent but it was likely to have been less than this.

Cancer Research UK felt they did not aggressively target the complainant’s area or wasted natural resources. They stated that they would no longer be using the plastic pens and had switched to cardboard barrelled pens, and that they had not sent an excessive number of mailings to the complainant. Further, they stated that enclosing pens in mailings was an effective way of raising funds and increased the response rate by up to 70%.

Assessment

The Board of the FRSB adjudicated on the basis of the Fundraising Promise, particularly with reference to:

• Paragraph 1 - which states that members are "committed to high standards" and;
• Paragraph 2 - which states that members must "take care not to cause unreasonable nuisance or distruption"

COMPLAINT NOT UPHELD

After carefully considering the information provided by both the complainant and Cancer Research UK, the Board did not uphold the complaint. The reasons for the decision were as follows:

• there was not sufficient evidence to show with certainty that all 13 pens had been received within a 2 year period - it is possible that at least 4 of the pens were received outside that period;
• it was not possible to establish that others in the complainant's area had also experienced high volumes of mailings and it could therefore not be concluded that the area had been aggressively targeted;
• whilst accepting that the complainant had grounds for being annoyed, the receipt of this number of mailings, taking into account the points above, did not amount to unreasonable nuisance or disruption and neither did it indicate that Cancer Research UK is not committed to high standards.

Return