LEON WANDER

Disqualified from

2020-12-01

Mr Leon Wander (Mr Wander) failed in his duty to comply with the provisions of the Phone paid Services Authority (PSA) causing IT Zone Limited (IT Zone) to breach the codes of Practice resulting in a fine that the company was unable to pay. • The Service was stated to be a star sign alert service providing consumers with access to horoscopes. The service charges were £4.50 per message with up to two messages received per month. • The PSA had received 26 complaints from members of the public concerning the Service since 27 June 2018. Complainants had alleged that the Service charges were unsolicited. • IT Zone was first made aware of the PSAs concerns on 3 October 2018 when they wrote to the company • The company was notified on 15 November 2018 that there would be a formal investigation into the alerts service it operated • An interim Warning Notice was issued on 15 January 2019 • On 23 January 2019, the Code Adjudication Panel (“CAP”) imposed interim measures, namely a withhold of Service revenue up to £260,000. • A final Warning Notice was issued to the company on 23 July 2019 identifying the breaches of the PSA’s Code of Practice • IT Zone did not respond to the PSA’s Warning Notice. • Following the final warning the director put the company into liquidation ahead of the fine being imposed • On 11 October 2019, A Tribunal reached a decision on the breaches. The Tribunal upheld 5 breaches: 1. IT Zone had failed to provide evidence that established consent had been obtained to charge complainants 2. Where a direction is made pursuant to paragraph 4.2.1 a party must not fail to disclose to the PSA, when requested, any information that is reasonably likely to have a regulatory benefit in an investigation 3. Consumers of PRS must be treated fairly and equitably. 4. PRS must not mislead or be likely to mislead in any way. 5. Level 2 Providers (IT Zone) must, within two working days of the service becoming accessible to consumers, provide to the PSA relevant details (including any relevant access or other codes) to identify services to consumers and must provide the identity of any Level 1 providers concerned with the provision of the service. • Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal decided to impose the following sanctions: 1. A formal reprimand; 2. A prohibition on the Level 2 provider from providing, or having any involvement in, any premium rate service for a period of five years, starting from the date of publication of the Tribunal decision, or until payment of the fine and the administrative charges, whichever is the later; 3. 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; 4. A fine of £250,000. The company was fined £250,000 following the tribunal for breaches of the PSA’S code of practice which remains outstanding at liquidation. A further £159,267 is outstanding to overseas creditors.