Case details for ANTONIO DANIEL PARDO

Name: ANTONIO DANIEL PARDO

Name: DIRECT SECURITY MARKETING LIMITED

Date of Birth: 20 / 8 / 1963

Date Order Starts: 3 / 5 / 2019

Disqualification Length: 6 Years 0 Month(s)

CRO Number: 09335535

Last Known Address: 17 CROFT ROAD, , , , WARWICK, CV35 7QE

Conduct: At a time when Antonio Pardo (“Mr Pardo”) was sole director of Direct Security Marketing Limited (“DSM”), DSM breached the regulations of the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 as amended (“PECR”) leading to the Information Commissioners Office (“ICO”) issuing an Monetary Penalty Notice under section 55A of the Data Protection Act 1998, in the sum of £74,000 against the Company, which remained unpaid at Liquidation. In that:

  • DSM was incorporated on 01 December 2014 and provided marketing services to its clients.
  • The ICO received 49 complaints about the receipt of automated marketing calls, which were from a withheld number and did not identify the sender.
  • ICO's enquiries discovered that the automated marketing calls had been instigated by the Company.
  • On 3 November 2015 the ICO issued a Notice of Intent in which the Commissioner set out his preliminary thinking. Representations were received in response to the Notice of Intent and considered and on 15 February 2016 a final Monetary Penalty Notice was issued;
  • The Notice stated that the Commissioner found that the Company had breached Regulation 19 of PECR by: o instigating 39,214 automated marketing calls on 24 August 2015 to subscribers without their prior consent, although the calls only connected to 12,000 subscribers; o 9,775 of those calls were made during unsociable hours
  • The Notice stated that the Commissioner was satisfied that the breach was serious and considered that it was deliberate.
  • A penalty in the sum of £70,000 was issued; the amount of the penalty took account of the fact that: - The company had fully co-operated with the ICO; - The reputation of the Company would be damaged; - The contravention was likely to cause substantial distress to subscribers; - The Company may have obtained a commercial advantage by generating leads from unlawful marketing practices; - The Company had also contravened Regulation 24 of the PECR in failing to provide the company's name and address or a free telephone number in the automated message;
  • The penalty went unpaid, as a result on 10 June 2016, upon application of the Information Commissioner, the High Court Queen’s Bench Division made an Order for Recovery of Money for £74,000.
  • Further during their enquiries, the ICO discovered that DSM being a data controller, had failed to have an entry in the register maintained by the Information Commissioner under section 19 of the Data Protection Act 1998, which was contrary to sections 17(1), 21(1) and 60(2) of the Data Protection Act. On 26 November 2015 both DSM and I pleaded guilty to this offence at Dudley Magistrates Court. DSM was ordered to pay £1,208, comprising a fine, surcharge and costs. 

    This information is correct as at 15 / 4 / 2019



    If you believe this page contains any errors, please email civil.proceedings.team@insolvency.gov.uk with details of the error that you have found.

  •