Caller: Product Testing Group

Received 5 calls on Monday, 3 of which were answered. First time told them "not interested". Second time the caller tried a spiel asserting that they were not telemarketers and so "let's get on with it." I immediately said "No. We will not get on with it". I told them that their outfit has been repeatedly told the same thing "not interested" and that there is an obvious problem with thick skulls being incapable of understanding that their unsolicited calls are to cease. Third time after the introductory "this is X from Product Testing Group", I said "did you say Product Testing Group" to which the answer was "yes". I said, "Product Testing Group is not a registered company with ASIC. What is the name of the company behind this call?" The initial response was "I don't understand what you are saying". So I repeated the same point, and the caller backed away and hung up. The reason for my third tack was I burrowed into find out about this outfit. There is a website for Product Testing Group but that is not the name of the company. The website reveals in its contract that customers who will do product reviews are involved in a contractual arrangement with Submission Technology Pty Ltd. A further search of publicly available information is that this outfit is located in Birchgrove, Sydney. It is a residential address where several companies are listed. I also checked details from NSW Dept of Fair Trade, ASIC etc. The company has an ACN 606 612 060. Its "official" phone number is a mobile number 0420 004 565, although some of the callers have slightly different numbers such as 0420 083 552. The basic points to note are that as soon as they ring you they have initiated what is known as an "unsolicited consumer agreement". If you are registered on the Do Not Call Register (as I am) then they have immediately breached the law (Do Not Call Register Act 2006). When they claim they are not telemarketers they are misrepresenting themselves because they are soliciting for clients to review products on behalf of third parties. That action falls within statutory definitions of telemarketing. Since they are initiating a contract with those they call, they are obliged to observe contract law and telecommunication law. On both counts they are breaching the law once the person called has declined their offer, and to repeatedly ring after being told "no" constitutes harassment. You are entitled to ask when phoned "what is the name of the company behind the call" (i.e. they should answer Submission Technology P/L not pretending that they company is "Product Testing Group"). When they fail to disclose who they are, they begin to create the suspicion of untrustworthiness. You are entitled to ask (because of the initiating of a contract agreement) "what is the name of the employer of the person making the call" as well asking "who caused this call to be made". I have found the callers to be boorish and obstinate. The process of deliberately lining a phone number up for repeated calls not only points to the egregious conduct but also the mindset fostered among the persons who act on behalf of this private trading company. If you probe the net then you will discover the exact residential address, the name of the man behind it (a man born in Canada, which further accounts for the accent-twang of a few of the callers). They seem to think that by repeat calls that "no" does not mean "no" and by persistence they will wear down resistance. Remind them they are breaching the law and that they will face action once reported to Dept of Fair Trade, ASIC, and the ACCC. Do not be bluffed by their boorish efforts to control the call and parrot-fashion read off their spiel from a computer screen. they are violating the Do Not Call Register Act, and as soon as they launch into a spiel they are bound by the laws of contract and of consumer protection.