The UK’s data protection watchdog has fined a nuisance call blocking biz £190,000 ($258,000) for bombarding elderly people with hundreds of thousands of - you guessed it - nuisance calls.

Elderly Aids Ltd made 758,053 unsolicited direct marketing calls between May 27, 2024, and February 10, 2025, according to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). On average, that works out as 2,916 calls per day. Busy fingers.

The ICO and Telephone Preference Service (TPS), a UK service to register one’s phone number to exclude it from unwanted marketing calls, received 20 complaints during this timeframe related to Elderly Aids.

It is illegal for direct marketers to call a number registered with the TPS, unless the individual has given explicit consent to that specific company to call them.

All 758,053 unsolicited direct marketing calls, in this case, were made to phone numbers registered with the TPS and belonged to people who had not given their consent for Elderly Aids to contact them.

Complainants commonly cited aggressive and misleading sales tactics, with callers also failing to identify themselves. 

One said their father was pressured into signing up to Elderly Aids’ services, which required a £139 ($188) sign-up fee, and a recurring monthly £6.99 ($9.50) payment on top of this.

Andy Curry, head of investigations at the ICO, said: “Not only did this company target vulnerable people who had explicitly asked not to be called – they harassed them to sell call-blocking devices. 

“EAL showed a complete disregard for the law and the people they were hounding. This penalty should serve as a clear warning to any business that thinks the law does not apply to them - we will hold them to account for both exploiting people in this way and trying to avoid accountability.” 

Russell Roach, director of preference services at the Data & Marketing Association (DMA), concurred and encouraged responsible businesses to screen their calling lists against the TPS and Corporate TPS (CTPS) registers.

“People register with the Telephone Preference Service because they want greater control over who can contact them,” he said. “Cases like this demonstrate why those protections are so important.

“Anyone making live marketing calls must respect the choices people have made about their privacy. When organizations ignore those preferences and contact individuals who have explicitly opted out of receiving unsolicited sales calls, particularly those who are most vulnerable, they undermine consumer trust and risk causing significant nuisance and distress.”

The ICO said Elderly Aids failed to engage with the regulator, ignoring requests for information, while continuing to make illegal marketing calls.

According to public Companies House filings, the company attempted to strike itself off the register three months after it started pestering the elderly with its phone calls, although this was swiftly suspended following an objection.

The ICO said that in cases where a debtor cannot pay a fine, such as those in “genuine financial hardship,” they provide payment plans. 

Organizations that can pay don’t face formal recovery action, and when directors attempt to skirt fines through insolvency, insolvency practitioners are called in, potentially kickstarting a multi-year recovery process. ®