TijaMobile Ltd

Publication Date
22 December 2016
Case Reference
Track 2
Adjudicated Party
TijaMobile Ltd
Service Type
Tribunal's final assessment
Very Serious
4.8.3 (b) Sanctions
4.8.3 (d) Sanctions
4.8.3 (a) Sanctions
4.8.3 (k) Sanctions
4.8.3 (i) Sanctions
Breaches raised
Code 13 4.2.4 Investigations
Code 13 2.3.3 Fairness

Between 9 March 2015 and 19 September 2016, the Executive received 285 complaints concerning a glamour video subscription service, charged at £3 per week(“the Service”). The Level 2 provider for the Service was TijaMobile Ltd. The Level 1 provider for Service shortcode 85878 was Zamano Solutions Limited. The Level 1 provider for Service shortcodes 88150, 82999 and 82445 was Veoo Ltd.

Complainants variously alleged that they had not consented to be charged for the Service.

The Executive raised the following potential breaches of the PSA Code of Practice (“the Code”)

  • Paragraph 4.2.4 – Provision of false information to the Phone-paid Services Authority (13th Edition)
  • Rule 2.3.3 – Consent to charge (12th and 13th Editions)

The Tribunal upheld the breaches of the Code raised.  The Level 2 provider’s revenue in relation to the Service was in Band 1 (£1m +). The Tribunal considered the case to be very serious and imposed a formal reprimand, a fine of £500,000, and a requirement that the Level 2 provider remedy the breach by ensuring that it has robust verification of each consumer’s consent to be charged before making any further charge to the consumer, including for existing subscribers to the Service.The Tribunal also imposed a requirement that the Level 2 provider must refund all consumers who claim a refund, for the full amount spent by them on the Service, within 28 days of their claim, save where there is good cause to believe that such claims are not valid, and provide evidence to PSA that such refunds have been made. In addition, a requirement was imposed that the Level 2 provider submit to a compliance audit of its procedures for ensuring that consumers (including existing subscribers) were not charged unless the Level 2 provider held robust evidence of those consumers’ consent to be charged. The audit is to be carried out by a third party approved, and to a standard prescribed, by the PSA, and the costs of such audit are to be paid by the Level 2 provider. The audit must be completed and the recommendations implemented within a period specified by the PSA.

Administrative charge recommendation: 100%