Royal Fail

Royal Mail AGAIN! This time they have been incredibly unhelpful.

I ordered something online. Royal Mail won't let you know at what time they will be delivering items, so you have to take a day off work and stay in all day. I did this. I waited all morning. Then I had to go out for two minutes, just around the corner. I left a huge fluorescent note above the letter box, saying:

"Deliveries - I have popped out, just around the corner, and will be back in a couple of minutes, or ring me at 01970 617737 and I will be back in a few seconds."

I got back a few minutes later to fine a note through the door - they had taken the parcel back to the depot. WTF? My options were to collect it from the out of town office (I don't have a car and no buses go there), or to arrange for re-delivery on a different day, even though I would be in for the rest of the afternoon. So another day off work... That is a most unhelpful service. Couldn't they have rung, or waited a minute, or tried again on their way past the road later? Or given an option for same day re-delivery? Or the phone number of the delivery driver so you could speak to him?

Normally these things can be overlooked, but bear in mind the Royal Mail junkmail problem. I went through Royal Mail's procedures to opt out - junkmail still came. I did it again. Junkmail still came. I complained. I got bounced back messages saying to go through the procedure. I complained to others. I got nowhere. I still get junkmail delivered by Royal Mail, who seem to be given impunity by so called watchdogs and the Government to make money from waste and junkmail.

Read More

Philips - putting barriers in place

Past experiences with Philips
In March 2009 I had the misfortune of trying to use Philips' Customer Services department. A product bought from them had failed (surround-sound speakers) and was within the Philips warranty period. They made it difficult to contact them, sent me round various departments, had contact forms which did not work, did nothing when I contacted them (so I had to keep getting in touch every nine days to complain again). In the end it took two months and a huge amount of effort on my part before they would honour the warranty. Even then I was unhappy with them - we should all be concerned about waste of the Earth's resources. Yet when I asked Philips about getting the speakers repaired, even if I had to pay, I was told that Philips no longer repair faulty products - that it is cheaper to buy new. However environmentally it is a disgrace - if a product breaks after a year Philips expect you to throw it away and buy more, even if the fault is something that is easy to fix. Electrical goods have some of the most damaging manufacturing processes and include many toxic substances; recycling can not deal with the sheer amount of goods that Western society produces then discards. Any decent manufacturer would have the ingenuity and inclination to design their products to be easily (and cheaply) repairable, and would either have their own repair scheme or would enable repairs to be made by small local companies. Philips are a big let-down here, and I am very disappointed. On top of the fact that it took two months before it was resolved, during which time I had no sound from my PC, limiting its creative uses massively.



Current experience: Philips projector breaks
So has Philips improved at all? Sadly, no.

Around 20th August my Philips Bsure XG2 home cinema projector stopped working. It has always been looked after with great care - the only time it is moved is to perform recommended maintenance such as cleaning the dust filter. When it refused to turn on my assumption was that the bulb needed replacing, so I ordered another one on 27th August, at a cost of almost £200 (yes, accessories for some Philips products are that expensive).

The bulb came and was put into the projector, only to discover that the same fault remained (noisy fan, no picture, temperature warning light). Therefore it was clear that it was a problem with the projector itself.

That shouldn't have been a problem in an ideal world. It should be possible to contact Philips Customer Support, discuss the problem, and get an estimate of where the problem might lie and if it is fixable. If so to then arrange for a paid repair at the nearest Philips repair centre, and just keep the bulb as a spare. However, if for some reason it is not repairable, then the bulb needed returning to the seller as soon as possible for a refund - otherwise I would be left with a £200 bulb and no equipment to use it in. It should be clear that a timely response from Philips would be necessary...

First I tried to find details of my nearest Philips repair centre on their website. However their website had no such information - it just seemed to be designed to persuade people to buy Philips products, and the required support information was not there. I had to use a form on the site to contact them (there was no email address) - the form was extremely dodgy and took six attempts (tried in different browsers and sessions) before it finally sent the details off. The other times it just crashed.

Confirmation of my first contact with Philips, 1st September

Then next day I got an email back off Philips, saying that Philips Customer Support can't deal with a straightforward support issue for a Philips Product - instead to ring a phone number and speak to staff in another Philips department. They did not take ownership of the query or pass it on.

I rang that number immediately (2nd September). The Philips staff at the other end said they could not give me contact details for their repair centres, but would pass my details on to it. I explained the urgency - how I just needed to speak to someone to get an idea of whether it was a fixable problem since if not I needed to return the projector bulb or risk being £200 out of pocket (in top of the money that would have been wasted in buying a Philips projector).

After that: nothing.

On 8th September I rang again, rather angry at the waste of time and hassle that I was going through. I was told that the support centre would be contacted again and asked to get back to me urgently, and that I would get a copy of the email.

I did not receive an email. No one contacted me.

On 9th September I rang again. (I should add that the support phone number obviously goes to a non-UK support centre). By now there had been over 30 minutes of phonecalls and waiting - the calls were recorded. This was when it became clear that Philips do not even have a UK repair centre for this product! I was shocked that they only keep a repair centre open in Austria; nor will they advise on anywhere in the UK where the projector could be repaired. (Bear in mind that this was not a cheap product - the projector cost over £1,500 to purchase, so this level of aftercare and support is rubbish).

Now it is the 12th September. I have been unable to watch films or use the Xbox that is connected to the projector for over 20 days. Philips have made it hard to contact them, then ignored me when I eventually spoke to someone. There is currently no prospect of getting the projector fixed in the UK (if at all), and I could be left with a £200 useless bulb on top of that since it is too late to return it.

Next steps?
I will give them another day or two and give a preliminary crap rating - which is likely to be high based on the runaround I have been given.

If they don't resolve this quickly I will also post up the details of the speakers problem too (I have all the screenshots and emails showing how poorly they treat their customers) and will rate them on both experiences. They could then join Royal Mail as the company to get crap-rated TWICE - quite an achievement.

Update 17 September 2010: Despite the original queries by email and phone, and new email of 12th September (which informed them of this website), no-one in Philips replied. There were no unaccounted-for missed calls, and no emails from them. I rang them again today for another ten minute phone call (five of which were spent on hold). I was told (again) that someone would get back to me.

Update 26 September 2010: It has now been over a month since the projector broke. Philips have still not spoken to me about the problem and given an estimate of time and cost to fix, so for all that time I have been unable to use the living room as a home cinema and entertainment room, since there is nothing to connect my Xbox to. Central Philips Customer Services have ignored my most recent email of 12th September about how unhappy I am and why (it included a link to this blog post), so they obviously don't care what customers think once they have got their money.

I have received a phonecall once on 21st September from the staff Philips directed me to, apologising for the delays, but not from the projector repair team who I urgently needed to speak to (over a month ago...) It is increasingly looking like Philips are just hoping to ignore me, leaving me with no option but to try and get the projector recycled (oh, just noticed, Philips don't recycle them either) and waste all those resources, time and £1,700. That looks like the sum of the 'Philips experience'. The irony is that their stupid slogan is: "Our Mission: Improve the quality of people’s lives through timely introduction of meaningful innovations". It should be: "Worsen people’s lives through faulty products and our refusal to make it easy to get them repaired."

I have just sent another email to Philips. What do you do when Customer Services fail you? Go above them. However the Philips website is high on gloss, low on utility. For example you can find out who is on the Board of Management or Group Management Committee but there is no way of contacting them to point out the failings of one of their core departments, and the inevitable bad publicity that will arise from it. I very much doubt that Philips will be helpful enough to provide any details though.

Update 30 September 2010: Thanks to everyone who has emailed details of problems you have had with Philips, or said you will avoid Philips products in future. Your support means a lot! I contacted some 3rd party, UK-based repair centres and they replied within a day with clear guidelines on costs and timescales for repair, some of which even offered to arrange for collection of the projector. The contrast in experience by trying to go down the 'official' route is rather sharp.

Update 3 October 2010: Along with the other emails backing me up I received a long and detailed axample of someone else's experiences which were very similar to mine. I have decided to post the text in its entirety, since the sender went to such effort to record every transaction. Many thanks! I hope you get somewhere with your repair, I can only recommend trying a third party company and never buying from Philips again.

"My Philips projector broke too so I thought I’d contact them to see if it could be fixed. That my first mistake. I should have just gone to an independent repair company. My second mistake was assuming that ‘customer care’ meant anything to Philips. My third mistake was to assume that because a customer care line had stated office hours, that there would be anyone there during those hours to answer the calls.

Here’s the sorry tale of trying to get an answer to a simple question from Philips.

Tue 14th September. I use their website to send an online enquiry (note – no direct email address available from Philips) regarding my projector. As I couldn’t find projectors listed within their general categories I choose ‘home entertainment’ as the nearest match. I get an automated reply back, which clearly isn’t based on the information I submitted as they’ve put “Dear Mr. / Mrs. [surname]”. I am neither a Mr or a Mrs, and chose another title from the options. Why haven’t they used it? Maybe a minor point, but it didn’t start me off in a good mood.

Thur 15th September. I got an email from “Luke, Philips Customer Care” saying “Unfortunately, this department does not handle queries regarding Projector products. Please contact the following number to speak to the Philips Projector Department 02079490069.”

Hmm, I thought. Why can’t they just pass on the email? Surely it’s not that difficult to transfer an enquiry? And what were the office hours of this phone number? Also, why should I have to ring them, when I’ve already made the enquiry by email, AND, ticked that I wanted to be communicated with by email? And, it’s not a free-phone number.

A little disgruntled I went back onto the Philips website to see if I could find more info about the projector team. Didn’t find anything, but, a pop-up box asked me if I wanted to try online chat with a member of Philips to answer my question, so I did. That didn’t help in any way as the person was unable to explain why the email enquiry could not be simply emailed from the home entertainment team to the projector team. The person I was chatting with, Frank, seemed to have a poor grasp of grammar and spelling, and was not particularly helpful eg
[from live chat:]

“Visitor: Not sure why Philips is putting the onus on the customer to do the running round, phoning a number, even if it is a national land line. The support pages do offer the option of using email to contact customer services, so I did. Now I have to phone.

Frank: yo have to undesrtand that email service will not be able to solve all queries, especially the more technical ones that would require a hands on trouble shooting.”

So I gave up on that route too. I thought I’d try submitting a basic enquiry about Philips repair centres via the online form again, selecting the generic contact, not a particular department. I tried THREE TIMES and each time the request was rejected to ‘Bad request.’ So I gave up on this.

I thought I’d try ringing the projector team then. No hours for this team had been provided in the email from Luke from Customer Care and so I rang at 19:45pm, but it transpires this was outside their office hours which are “M- F 8am-7pm and Saturdays 9-5.”.NB – this is very important later on.

So I decided to ring the main customer care number given in Luke’s email:
“Our Customer Care Centre can be contacted on Tel: 08003316015 Monday to Friday 8:30am till 8:00pm and Saturdays 9:00am till 6:00pm.” NB it’s important for later on to know that this is stated in the email signature as ‘Customer Care Centre’.

I spoke to a female (who’s name I didn’t catch). She didn’t know who Luke was, she was on reception and could not answer my question as to whether Philips had any UK repair centres. She explained that the Philips projector people are a separate team. I explained I can’t ring during those office hours. She said I’d have to go back online then. But the online form won’t work!!! Wasn’t hugely impressed with this level of customer care. Why didn’t she offer to pass on my query, or take my number and get someone to call me? As a last resort I hit ‘reply’ to Luke’s email to ask some questions. I never got a reply.

As I work till 6pm most nights and have various evening classes and other commitments on most nights of the week it was going to be difficult for me to ring the Projector team in the evenings, so I thought I’d try Saturday. What a fool!

Sat 18th September
Rang the Projector customer number at 11am. Note, this is WITHIN their stated open hours. What happens? An automated voice says: “Our offices are currently closed. Our opening hours are M- F 8am-7pm and Saturdays 9-5.”
Now, I’m not sure which clock and calendar they are using, but generally, in the UK, 11am on a Saturday morning generally falls into the 9am-5pm hours.

To say I was pretty cross would be an understatement!

So, I decided to ring the original customer care number to see if they could put me though, or explain why the team wasn’t there.

Derek answered. He could not help me as he explained the projector team is an EXTERNAL company that Philips contract to provide the service. His suggestion? Just keep trying. Yep, that’s right, I should keep ringing a UK landline number, at my expense of time and effort. Gee, that’s really good customer care. He claimed they only have this one telephone number for this company.

With other things to do with my time on a Saturday I gave up for a few days.

Thursday 23rd September
Got home early so that I could ring the projector team in their office hours. I rang at 18:25pm. But guess what? Yes, I got the same “our offices are currently closed” message. I began to think I was in a different time zone. I double checked my watch. I double checked the calendar. I was pretty sure that 18:25pm was within the office hours of up to 7pm. Fuming by this point I decided to ring the Philips Customer Care number again. I got through to a female (didn’t catch name) who said she’d try the number for me. She put me on hold then I got redirected to the number that is not answering! So I had to ring the main Philips number AGAIN! This was really getting beyond a joke.

I asked to speak to a senior customer services manager. Was told “I understand where you are coming from but there is nothing I can do”. Why not? Apparently this Customer Care number given on Luke’s email to me (the original reply from Philips) is actually a Technical Support customer care number for the home entertainment section, NOT a generic Philips customer care number. This was NOT stated AT ALL in the email signature, or in the email address of Luke [a generic Philip’s email]. The female said she would put me through to the main Philips switchboard. So she did. And guess what? Yes, it was closed!! Their hours are 8.30am-5:30pm.

To rub salt in the wound I then got an unwanted unsolicited item of junk email from Philips, despite having ticked the ‘do not add me to the newsletter’ box when filling in the online form. Not impressed.

Fri 24th September
I decided to give it one final attempt. I had tried Saturdays, evenings, now I would try a morning. I arrange to get to work a bit late and stayed at home to make the call to the projector team at 08:30am. I got through! I was speechless for a few seconds.

Apparently they do have the facility to arrange repair, they take details of the projector and the fault and then get back to customer by tel, email or fax. I left my email and said this was my preferred method of communication as I was not at home during the day, and do not have a mobile (yes, that is true!) and also left my telephone landline.

I also raised the issue of the out of hours phone message being on when it’s during their stated office hours. She was not aware of this and said she would look into it.

Wed 29th Sept.
Not received a reply. No phone messages. I thought I’d ring again – it was 18:13. Yep, you’ve guessed it. The automated message “Our offices are currently closed. Our opening hours are M- F 8am-7pm and Saturdays 9-5pm”. You couldn’t make it up! So after being told their line is closed when they’re meant to be open, they haven’t done anything about it. Which leads me to conclude that either they couldn’t be bothered to fix it, or, they deliberately turn the message on early so that they can work shorter hours.

Saturday 2nd October.
Still no phone call or email from them.

So, after a total of 1 online form request, 3 failed online requests, 1 online chat and over 10 phone calls I have got absolutely nowhere.

Just typing this up from my notes has taken an hour of my time. My next steps are to find an address for head office and write to the chief exec – in my experience that’s the only way to get rubbish service dealt with. Great that your blog exists because these companies don’t care a damn about their customers until it gets in the public domain."

Update 9 October 2010: Someone at Philips rang me on Tuesday 5th October, and said they were looking into the repair options and would get back to me that day or the next. They did not ring back at all. So all I know is that Philips no longer repair their own top-of-the-range equipment, which makes a mockery of the principle that you should buy the best in order to be guaranteed a quality service. Apparently they direct people to independent repair centres in the Netherlands or Austria! However the Philips member of staff was not even sure of that. So yet another weekend with no films or Xbox. Thanks Philips. It has been around 40 days since I have been able to do either of those things, and no resolution is in sight.

Update 17 October 2010: Still nothing from Philips until I contacted them again. They said they would get back to me, and had spoken to staff in Holland this time about getting the projector repaired. Despite two requests, Philips refused to provide contact details for anyone on the Board of Management or Group Management Committee so that I could inform them of the problems I was having. It appears to be an attempt to cover up the poor service. I have now requested the details from Companies House which will apparently include a financial cost. I also received an update on 14th October from the other person trying to get a projector repair.

"Tonight I rang the number Philips gave me for projector repairs. It was an automated message saying "Our offices are currently closed”. It was 6:32pm - their message said they would be open until 7pm... So, I rang the general Philips switchboard, saying I wanted the name, tel number and email of Senior Customer Services Manager. I was left on hold for 5 mins.

The next day I got the email below - it makes no grammatical sense in many places, and note that there is no reply email address to respond to them.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Call #
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 16:38:28 +0200
From: do_not_reply@philips.com
Reply-To: do_not_reply@philips.com

PHILIPS

We were contacted by another customers' service of our company regarding your case.
The reason was that you can't get with us on the phone.
I tried to call you but there was no reply.
I checked your case and the service center should have received your request.
If you have any further question you can always contact us.

Kind regards"

Update 18 October 2010: Brian Desmond from Philips rang to say their repair agents are Teleplan. Teleplan had changed their email addresses so Philips automated emails to them weren't getting through. I would be contacted by Teleplan.

Update 8 November 2010: the projector came back. Philips covered the cost. I was told by Teleplan that one should not use bulbs from dodgy companies (not that the bulb was in any way related to the problem in this case). The twist is that the bulb was sold to me by Teleplan a couple of years ago...

Philips' current score:
They get a crap for refusing to provide contact details for anyone on the Board of Management or Group Management Committee, preventing anyone from going above Customer Services when the CS department is clearly failing. Another crap for failures to reply, and one for dragging this out for so long. A crap for no longer repairing their own top-of-the-range equipment, and having such a low consideration of the environment and the need to make everything repairable. Another crap for their website - no details of my nearest Philips repair centre on their website, no details of how to contact senior staff - it is just designed to persuade people to buy Philips products. They get a deduction of 1 crap for not charging for a repair when they got round to it three months later (though at first they did try to charge almost £100).

Read More

Royal Mail - mountains of junk through your letterbox

Royal Mail - again. In a saga that goes back a long way...

Junkmail
The Mailing Preference Service (MPS) is supposed to help you prevent all the wasteful junk that comes through your door. Except it is a bit rubbish, because it is run by the junkmail industry, i.e. the people sending you the unwanted rubbish in the first place. That is why they use an 'opt-out' system so that you have to go out of your way to stop receiving junkmail, rather than 'opt-in' whereby you would get no junkmail unless you asked for it, and would save mountains of paper overnight. The MPS still try and put you off opting-out first, and even then it only lasts a limited period and they do not inform you when the registration runs out. Just to show how utterly crap they are, they ignore companies who address junkmail to 'The Occupier' - their advice in those cases is "If you are receiving mailings addressed to the occupier or homeowner you must contact the company who sent the mailing directly and ask to be removed from their delivery lists" - my emphasis. Right, so you should spend your time writing to unscrupulous junkmail companies, giving them your confirmed contact details? As if that won't just increase the amount of unsolicited crap that comes through your door?



The final twist - Royal Mail run their own junkmail system and ignore whether or not you have registered with the Mailing Preference Service not to receive unsolicited junkmail. Instead they force you to register separately with them if you don't want piles of wasted paper and advertising pushing through your letterbox into your home. See the pattern here, that by making all this difficult for the homeowner they hope people will allow them to keep making money by shoving crap through your letterbox. [Note - the fact that you can even opt-out is hidden on the Royal Mail site in order to discourage you from using it. Expect a link on the first page? No chance. Even the link 'Marketing Services' - the obvious place to go to opt out of them - is a red herring, leading instead to a page that tries to persuade companies to send even more junkmail.]

Trying to stop the junkmail, 2006
I digress. Back in November 2006 I went through the process for 'opting out' of junkmail put through my door by Royal Mail. I was sick of having to sort and recycle all this rubbish, removing non-recyclable things like staples and envelope windows and enclosed pens or cards.

The email from Royal Mail first made a big effort to try and persuade you not to opt-out. Then it told you it would take up to six weeks (even though they only have to pass on your details to the local delivery office, which takes five minutes unless you are grossly inefficient). I filled in the form and returned it. I heard nothing. I emailed them November 16th 2006. Nothing. I emailed them again on November 20th 2006 asking for confirmation. Nothing. Again on December 8th 2006, saying that I was still getting unsolicited (and un-addressed) junk mail posted by Royal Mail. Nothing. Then again on January 15th 2007 saying that unless they replied I would make a complaint. No reply. At the end of January 2007 I complained to Postwatch, pointing out that Royal Mail were refusing to reply, and I was STILL getting unaddressed junk mail. Royal Mail hadn't removed my address from their junk database even though I have asked them to do so many times. I asked why I should have to go to all that trouble to stop getting something I didn't want in the first place? Junk mail is a curse, and a waste of resources. I also complained that Royal Mail stated: "It is not possible for us to separate advertising material and information that you may want, such as leaflets from Central and Local Government and other public bodies. Opting out from Royal Mail Door to Door stops all unaddressed items." Which? magazine had reported that Royal Mail were lying about this, and you will still get important Government material. Postwatch refused to do anything (email of Feb 1st 2007) - because Royal Mail had not been given enough opportunity to respond...

I gave up for some time, incredibly frustrated.

More than a year later...
The unsolicited junkmail delivered by Royal Mail piled up. I decided to try again. I emailed Royal Mail on December 22nd 2007 asking them to exclude my address from their junkmail scheme. No reply. I tried again on April 11th 2008, pointing out all the communications over the years that they had not replied to, all the times I had registered to 'opt out' and that I was still having advertising junk put through my letterbox with the regular post. I also complained that they used an 'opt-out' system which - even if it wasn't a complete failure - unfairly puts the onus on the person who never asked for environmentally-damaging and wasteful junkmail in the first place.

Guess what? No response.

I went back to Postwatch. On 16th April 2008 Postwatch's Consumer Services Officer took my case to Royal Mail. I was very pleased to have them on my side. In their letter to Royal Mail they said:

1. Please offer a sincere apology for the service failure and the inconvenience and stress caused to this person.
2. Please contact your Door-to Door department and explain why the Opt Out service is failing despite the paperwork being completed on several occasions?
3. Please investigate and explain why this customer does not receive a response to his emails.
4. Please ensure the Opt Out service is set up immediately without another form being needed to ensure no further inconvenience is caused to the customer.
5. What assurances can Royal Mail offer that the customer can rely on delivery of this unwanted advertising material to stop?

Royal Mail were quick enough to respond when it wasn't just a little customer. In Postwatch's summary of 29th April 2008 they said:

"Royal Mail has confirmed that the opt out instruction has been in place since 18 January 2008, but unfortunately, the failures you have experienced have been due to human error. This has been compounded by the fact that the delivery frames were changed and the instructions were not clearly displayed. This has now been rectified and the area Door to Door Manager has been notified of the failure. I am hopeful these steps taken will result in an immediate and sustained improvement to your service and you will receive no more unwanted mail."

Postwatch can't be faulted there. The interesting point is that even with the opt-out scheme in place I was still receiving junkmail posted by Royal Mail at the same time as delivering my letters. But surely now I wouldn't get any more?

Yeah, right.

I continued to get leaflets pushed through with my post. It was not possible to get back in touch with the Royal Mail staff who had finally responded to my query - I asked Postwatch for the contact details to save time but they said (in an email of June 9th 2008):

"Unfortunately, I cannot give you contact details for any of the staff mentioned in Royal Mail's response as the department we deal with is non-customer facing."

A surprisingly apt (if unintentional) choice of words there. Without a direct contact in Royal Mail my only option was escalating things to Postwatch! I sent them photos of the junkmail I had still been receiving, all delivered with my normal post.

On 26th June 2008 Postwatch wrote to Royal Mail again, asking them to:

1. Please investigate this matter fully and advise why the latest failure occurred despite Royal Mail’s previous assurances.
2. Please interview the Delivery Officer responsible for the failures and inform Postwatch of their comments.
3. What guarantees can Royal Mail offer that matters of this nature are taken seriously and the customer will not receive material of this nature in future?

Postwatch forwarded me the reply they received on 16th July 2008, and Postwatch's Consumer Services Officer added:

"I am glad that Royal Mail have apologised for the upset and inconvenience caused by this matter and have again reported the failure to the Delivery Office Manager. The reserve Delivery Officer who made the mistake has been interviewed and the whole Delivery Team has been briefed to ensure they are aware of your decision to Opt Out of Door to Door deliveries. Furthermore, the Special Instruction Card has also been highlighted to alert all staff to this escalated complaint. Royal Mail are confident that you will not receive any more direct/advertising mail. I appreciate that Royal Mail have offered these assurances previously, however, I hope that the improvement is immediate and sustained as a result of this complaint."

The last bit rang warning bells.

I just want to add something here. All along I was annoyed at the Royal Mail policy of making money by adding to the junkmail we receive. The decisions to do this, and to make opting out almost impossible are taken by management idiots at the highest levels of Royal Mail. I'm sure that the postal workers who sort and deliver mail are under huge pressures to do their jobs. I never wanted them to get told off or to have to deal with more complicated systems. I just wanted to stop getting junkmail, and it is obvious that current Royal Mail system does not enable you to do that.

Did it work? Did I stop getting junkmail?

Since I first tried to opt out in 2006 I have continued to receive junkmail. I took to taking photos of some of it, in case I ever felt like 'opting out' again and wanted to show what I had received. I have interspersed a selection of the images throughout this post and below to show that I continue to receive it four years later. I should add - avoid ever using any of the following crappy companies who pay Royal Mail to deliver their crappy junkmail. It is their fault that ridiculous undirected marketing systems like this continue to thrive.

What is needed?

The current system is hidden and ineffective and is a hassle, so something needs to change so we don't remain prisoners of endless junkmail. The amount of time and paper wasted nationally with unsolicited junkmail is irresponsible, and Royal Mail and the MPS should not be putting the onus on the person receiving unwanted junk to do something. One of the following systems would make it easier for people to avoid mountains of wasteful junk.

1. If you register with the Mailing Preference Service not to get junkmail then the request should automatically go on to Royal Mail and they should act on it. After 5 years the MPS could write and tell you it will expire, and give an option to extend it for another 5 years via post, email, web or phone.
2. The opt-out system is obviously flawed. An even better option is that Royal Mail (and the MPS) should switch to an opt-in system i.e. if you want junkmail you request it. Then everybody is happy.
   
3. The final option would be that once every two years Royal Mail would put a freepost card through every door saying that if you want to opt out of junkmail you can tick it and put your address on and post it back. Even better, the MPS would have access to the database and act on it too. Then no-one who doesn't want junk would get it, for the cost of one recyclable (and recycled-material) card as opposed to the bags of junkmail at present.
   

We have written to Royal Mail, the Mailing Preference Service and Postwatch about this issue, asking what they intend to do. We will award our usual 'crap scores' later, and then take the issue on to MPs and Government Ministers if we are not satisfied.

Update 16 September 2010: After seven days Royal Mail finally replied - with a standard cut and pasted response about something other than the issues we raised. How do I know it was a cut and paste job? It is identical text to emails received over a year ago. What absolute crap. Royal Mail's Customer Services don't even read and respond to your letters! Amazing levels of contempt for customers on display there. Even worse, you have no way of getting back in touch to follow up a response: the email just points you back to their website. So you can start again and get ignored all over again. CCS has emailed them again asking for the contact details of a manager, since this system of theirs is worse than hopeless. It is not clear how anyone could trust Royal Mail with a letter (or anything communications related) if this is their standard level of ineptitude. In our email we said:

"I contacted Royal Mail through this form and received a reply that completely ignored my points and instead sent me a standard response to an obviously common query, but not at all what I had asked. Please send me the email address of one of the Customer Services MANAGERS so that I can take my query up with someone more senior. I am sick of having my time wasted in this way i.e. having my email ignored then being told to start all over again and fill in another form."

Update 26 September 2010: Yesterday (after another nine days) someone at Royal Mail said they agreed that my query had not been answered and they would get back to me.

It has been 17 days since I contacted the Mailing Preference Service. They have chosen not to respond at all, as expected, presumably because they are run by the people who want you to get unsolicited junkmail. I sent them a final email today saying that I can only assume MPS don't care about the frustration their policies cause.

9 days ago ConsumerFocus got in touch and said they would reply shortly. Nothing has been heard from them since that email either. A reminder was sent today, but shouldn't be necessary.

Update 1 October 2010: Yesterday the MPS finally replied. It was no surprise that the email simply stated the current situation, pointed out that it was possible to 'reduce the unwanted mailing' by going out of your way to regularly register with various schemes, and ending by saying "a large proportion of people welcome the information and special offers they receive by post". It is no surprise that the MPS won't change the current system when it attempts to legitimise unsolicited junk mail. After all, the MPS is run by the Direct Marketing Association - the association which makes money from sending junkmail. It is like asking criminals to manage prisons - absolute nonsense.

Consumer Focus also replied the same day, but their email likewise read as an attempt to justify the status quo. The email said:

"There are several types of direct mail: named and addressed, addressed only, and unaddressed, and one scheme cannot cover all types."

Untrue - a system could be created to cover all types. It is just that the junkmail industry would resist any such move.

As to the suggestion that the industry switches to an opt-in system, Consumer Focus commented:

"If an opt-in system were to be implemented (at great cost, and it is not clear who would bear this) there is likely to be a sharp drop in the amount of direct mail being sent"

Yes, there would be a drop in unsolicited junkmail - that is the whole point! It would be a very effective way of stopping it. As to who would pay for the system: that would be the junkmail senders, such as the Direct Marketing Association, as is the case now. If they refused to foot the bill for their own industry then the Government could just ban unsolicited junkmail outright (hey, that's a good idea actually!)

The email included outright factual errors. E.g. Consumer Focus said:

"Registration with the Mailing Preference Service lasts for five years, and when your registration expires the MPS will send you a new opt-out form."

Wrong. The MPS FAQ here clearly states:

"After 5 years you will need to re-register with the service. Please note, that MPS will not notify you of this"

The final piece of dodgy information in the email was:

"it is estimated that 95% of paper used in direct marketing comes from recycled or managed resources"

Estimated by who? The junkmail senders? Anyway, 'managed' means nothing at all. Even a forest where most of the trees are just cut down is 'managed'. 'Recycled' is also meaningless alone, since the term is abused by the paper industry to sometimes include virgin pulp. Only 'post-consumer waste' recycled paper is environmentally acceptable. I receive a lot of junkmail, despite registering for all the opt-out schemes. All of it is on pristine white paper, often with plastic cards, windows and pens, and none of it labelled as recycled (let alone 'post-consumer waste' recycled paper). To make spurious claims about the junk coming through our letterboxes makes it seem as if Consumer Focus is more in the pocket of the junkmail industry than on the side of the consumer. Disappointing.

Update 9 October 2010: On 2nd October Mike Griffiths, Royal Mail Customer Service Advisor, replied by email. So it took about 23 days to get a reply. Unfortunately the reply was just a justification of their current policy - inevitable when they make money out of their junkmail scheme. (This is why it is stupid that the administration of policy is in the hands of the people who benefit from the current state of affairs: Royal Mail and the Direct Marketing Association. Nothing can change when there is corruption at this level.) Let us look at some of Mike's comments.

"the policy for it to last two years is a decision made on the basis that people do move house. "

People move house every two years? I think not. The MPS register you for 5 years - why can't Royal Mail do the same, so that it simplifies things for people?

"At the end of the two year period we would need to receive a signature from the resident confirming that they are still the householder and that they still wish to opt-out from receiving unaddressed mail."

This is disingenuous. It implies Royal Mail have some process whereby you can sign a bit of paper and extend the opt-out. You cannot. You have to go through the whole process again.

"I should explain that this is not a Royal Mail Policy, but a decision made by our Marketing Department based on various research"

What is that supposed to mean? If it is acted on then it is Royal Mail policy, regardless of which department created it. And in the first quote he said it was Royal Mail policy. Royal Mail seem to be just plain confused here.

"Finally, we do not currently notify occupiers of an address that their opt-out instructions are about to expire. ... we have no plans to change this practice"

But that was the thing I was complaining about! Repeating what I wrote in my email is no kind of answer.

"Please accept my apologies for the time it has taken me to reply and if I can help you with anything else, please let me know quoting reference number 1-1576220081. Regards Mike Griffiths Customer Service Advisor"

The twist here: no contact details for Mike were included, and the top of the email said:

"PLEASE DO NOT USE REPLY BUTTON AS YOUR MAIL WILL BE DISCARDED"

So there is no way to get back to him apart from starting the whole process again and going through the offputting barrier of the Royal Mail online form, due to their policy of not using email properly (i.e. that big button in email software that says 'reply'). Their form is definitely a barrier - you have to go through various irrelevant options, then select 'Report a fault' even if you just want to send a comment. And you are forced to select a 'title' even if you don't use them because they are an outdated sexist and elitist way of distinguishing between people.

The final kicker is that I had registered to opt-out AGAIN on Monday 6th September, yet am still receiving unaddressed junkmail for Royal Mail. They receive the request, and all they have to do is email it to the nearest delivery office. It should take an hour or two at the most. Not 33 days and counting!!! Proof of how shit their system is (if more were needed).

So we got nowhere with Royal Mail, the DMA, or ConsumerFocus. All just attempted to justify existing practice. Next we are contacting our MEPs and MP to see what they can do about this de facto junkmail quango. In the interests of fairness we have attempted to inform the quango of our next steps and why we are dissatisfied with the Royal Mail junkmail system, communication systems, and the fact that the opt-out system is a failure.

Update 23 October 2010: Only one of the MEPs did (John Bufton, UKIP) but he just said they didn't have any faith in politics: "If your MP's are unwilling to help, I can assure you, that it is probably because our national government is powerless to do anything about it. MEP's are just as powerless as they only vote on certain legislation, and due to the fact that we only have 78 MEP's, Britain always gets out voted. So much for elected representatives." The MEPs Kay Swinburne (Conservative), Derek Vaughan (Labour) and Jill Evans (Plaid Cymru) did not reply at all. So much for elected representatives.

[Addendum: On 1st November 2010 one of Jill Evan's staff replied, saying:

"On the opting out front I recommend stayprivate.org as a way to cut your own personal junk mail (and cold calling). It's a simpler and longer lasting way of engaging with MPS. It's a service set up by CF Labs to make the process of opting out easier."

They also pointed to this site as being potentially useful. No answer to the long term problems of junkmail though.]

[Addendum: On 16th November 2010 Kay Swinburne replied, as follows. Here is a shortcut to the link mentioned.

She also forwarded a further letter on 21 February 2011, though it was a copy-protected PDF so had to be printed and scanned to make it available below.

[Addendum: On 30th November 2010 Mark Williams MP replied, as follows:

"I share your opinions on junk mail. It is a waste of money, time and most importantly, resources. It is disappointing that the Mail Preference Service, The Royal Mail and ConsumerFocus have not been able to offer an effective service to stop such wasteful actions.

I have sent a letter to Edward Davey the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State who leads on Postal Affairs to ask whom to contact over the issue, and what the Government are doing to address this matter. I have attached a copy of this letter and will forward you the response as soon as I receive it.]

[Addendum: On 29th December 2010 Mark Williams MP forwarded a reply from Edward Davey MP at the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. Unfortunately BIS' reply suggested contacting the Mailing Preference Service; registering for the Royal Mail Door to Door Service; and contacting the Direct Marketing Association. As this blog shows, I have done all of those things to no avail. The current system is a failure. The letter ends with : "There are no plans to regulate unsolicited mail". BIS obviously don't want to make themselves unpopular with the marketers so things are unlikely to change.]

Update 24 October 2010: Still getting unaddressed junkmail being delivered by the postman, despite having registered to opt out with Royal Mail.

Junkmail like this is delivered by Royal Mail most days - despite having registered to stop receiving it almost two months ago.

Their whole process is stupid and offputting. When you eventually find their web pages it says:

"If you wish to opt out of receiving Door to Door mail items, please send or email your name and address to the address below [...] or email: optout@royalmail.com.

We will then send an opt-out form to your address, which you must sign and return. We do this for security reasons - to verify that those resident at the address have requested the ‘opt out’. "

In this day and age of online communication it is ridiculous that they require a printed form to be returned. A printed form is no more 'proof' of identity than an email. It is just another way for Royal Mail to put you off.

"Once you’ve returned this form, Royal Mail will stop delivering unaddressed items to your address within 6 weeks. "

As we said above, how long should it reasonably take for them to send notice to your local delivery office? 24 hours? 36? But not 6 WEEKS. That is just taking the piss.

Despite going through this process I am still getting unaddressed junkmail from Royal Mail after almost 8 weeks. I have contacted Royal Mail and heard nothing. I got no reply to my two emails to optout@royalmail.com querying this. So the whole system is a joke anyway. This is the same experience the whole blog post started with - even when you 'opt out' you still receive the unaddressed junkmail from Royal Mail - they are incapable of running a user-friendly system.

Note that the automated emails from Royal Mail when you contact them actually say:

"If you still wish to proceed with this, you will need to submit your request in writing to the Door to Door team, at the address below, or email them at optout@royalmail.com. They will then notify your local Delivery Office of your request."

That clearly states that you can opt out via email - but when you try it they refuse, and claim that it is not possible. Is it any wonder the system is a mess?

Update 11 November 2010: Royal Mail are still delivering junkmail nine weeks after I registered not to recieve it. Query emails to optout@royalmail.com have received no response; using the main Royal Mail website contact form only leads to automated messages directing to optout@royalmail.com. The system is a mess. How can I take this forward when no Royal Mail contact details are given apart from those two, and they just send you in circles?

On October 24th I contacted Consumerfocus again, pointing out the above. I also complained that "that Royal Mail only leave their system in place for two years, and do not inform you and give you a chance to renew at the end of it. MPS registrations runs for 5 years, which is more acceptable. It would be simpler for consumers if both systems ran for 5 years. Is ConsumerFocus doing anything to rationalise these two systems for the benefit of the consumer?"

and pointed out that Royal Mail's optout emails say "If you still wish to proceed with this, you will need to submit your request in writing to the Door to Door team, at the address below, or email them at optout@royalmail.com. They will then notify your local Delivery Office of your request." That clearly states that you can opt out via email - but when you try it they refuse, and claim that it is not possible. I asked if ConsumerFocus force Royal Mail to enable opt-out by email or online form as they offer in that email, since it would be a huge benefit for consumers.

ConsumerFocus have not replied. They obviously don't give a toss about consumers.

Read More

Game download services

The idea of being able to easily download PC games is a great one. There are potentially environmental benefits (no physical products to ship around the world); in an ideal world savings from not needing to make and ship physical products would be passed on to the consumer; and it can be quicker to get hold of a game in some cases.

There are a number of game download companies, all competing for customers. Once someone joins a service then - if they are happy with it - it is likely that they will stick with it for all their gaming needs. It should therefore be important to companies to offer the best possible service to the customer, with the fewest barriers - to put the needs of the customer first.



So what are the best online services to use? CCS is going to look at the major players: Good Old Games (GOG); GamersGate; Steam; Direct2Drive; and Get Games. Update 11 June 2010: We have added Impulse. (Later we may include new ones such as Desura). Issues we are concerned about:

• What DRM restrictions they use, or that they allow publishers to put onto their games - don't forget, if the download service doesn't want to allow certain restrictive practices it doesn't have to. The more restrictive the DRM, the worse the situation for customers (the worst being Ubisoft's new ridiculous DRM scheme that forces players to be online even for single player games, so no-one playing those games on your laptop while travelling...). Specific questions here:
  Is there a limit on how many times a purchased game can be activated? (This automatically earns one 'crap' rating, since the consumer is paying a purchase price for a rental service. Some people don't mind asking for permission to install a game they have bought; CCS find that to be a ridiculous idea.).
  Is there DRM from the publisher AND the platform itself? (Overkill).
  Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? (I.e. could you still play the game in the future even if the download service or publisher disappeared?)
  
• How much information they give in order that their customers can make informed decisions. Can a customer exclude games with extra DRM from results lists? Can they find out what the DRM is and what the implications are, such as limited activations (and if so, how many?) Can they search for DRM-free games? It is annoying if a download service allows restrictive DRM, but at least if customers can clearly identify the games it applies to and avoid them then they can still use the service with confidence for some purchases.
  
• How easy it is to contact them. Do they have an email address? Are you forced to create an account just to ask a question? We have a huge number of accounts and logins and passwords already, so having to create an account just to ask a question is an example of putting unnecessary barriers in the way. Are we mad in thinking that many people might have a question about a product or service before they buy? So why force them to create yet more accounts just in order to find out if they want to create an account?
  

Then we'll see if they are crap or worth using. We should state that we would love to be able to recommend and use all the services. Greater choice is to everyone's benefit. We want to spend money on these sites, in exchange for great games!

---

Good Old Games (GOG)
This is one of those nice sites to review - everything about it is superb.

Native DRM: There is NO DRM on ANY GOG game! You can install them on any PC and re-download them whenever you want, as many times as you need, and you can install and play them on any PC without an Internet connection. You can't get any simpler or more user friendly than that.

Additional publisher DRM: See above. There is NO DRM on ANY GOG game!

Are there activation limits? No! See above. There is NO DRM on ANY GOG game!

Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? Yes. So your games are safe forever.

Can you contact them easily? Yes. Click contact us, fill in a form. No need for registration; no barriers in place. They obviously care about their customers.

Other: The site oozes quality. Games have extras available on purchase (such as soundtracks). There are in-depth reviews, screenshots, often videos. There is no need for special software to be installed: the games can be downloaded through the browser, but there is the option of a special downloader if you want it.

Conclusion so far: There is absolutely nothing to fault in the GOG service. If you are browsing for interesting games then we would recommend starting there.

PS If you like GOG, have a look at DotEmu.

GOG's current score:

---

GamersGate

Native DRM: Games have to go online during installation to activate them (so you can't install the game if your Internet connection is down or if you want to play it on a PC without an Internet connection; and if GamersGate ever disappears as a service then you will never be able to install any of your games again). Not ideal.

Additional publisher DRM: Also GamersGate allows publishers to add EXTRA DRM on top of this. So games bought from them may include limited activations (these can be extended a few times but not indefinitely - so after a few uninstalls to make space, a new PC, and the occasional reinstall of Windows, you may be unable to install the games).

Are there activation limits? Update 30 May 2010: A GamersGate Customer Support Manager on Wednesday, May 05, 2010 said: "ALL DRM used on GG got 3 time activation limit"

Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? No. So there is no future-proof solution for if GamersGate ever disappears.

Can you find out about the DRM? Unfortunately it appears to be impossible to find out if there are limitations such as finite activations (and if so, how many) or online-only requirements (such as Ubisoft's ultra-draconian DRM systems) before purchase. Some games list the type of DRM, but that tells you little. For example, Batman Arkham Asylum says 'Securom' - but that might mean limited activations - or it might not. Trackmania United has no mention of DRM at all. Necrovision has 'other', which tells you nothing. The Penumbra Collection is listed as DRM free - but that is not true, since in that case the GamersGate DRM still applies - they just mean that there is no DRM above and beyond that, so it is still misleading. It is possible to go the 'ALL' tab and choose DRM-free in the Filter. However it is a bit of a con, because all GG games require online activation, which is a form of DRM. So anyone wanting to avoid limited activations will not be able to do so through the GamersGate interface.

October 2010 - game says to see below for DRM information...


...however there IS NO DRM information!

Can you contact them easily? Yes. They offer an email address (for anyone), or a form (if you have an account). They also allow customers to contact them via Twitter and Facebook. So full flexibility there.

Other: The company obviously have problems with punctuation - there should be an apostrophe in their name. They use a client-free download system, just using your browser - that is a bonus.

October 2010: GamersGate also has regional restrictions, made worse by the fact that it shows you games that you cannot buy. After clicking on Black Mirror on the UK site above...

...you see this.

Conclusion so far: The lack of information on restrictions makes the service impossible to use if you want to avoid two levels of restrictive DRM.

Update 30 May 2010: We were sent details of some GamersGate correspondence from someone who reads CCS. In an email sent by a GamersGate Customer Support Manager on Wednesday, May 05, 2010, the Manager said:

"ALL DRM used on GG got 3 time activation limit...well, with one exeption, but remember that we do reset the count if you send us en email. [...] Resetting the count is the best we can do and only within reason. 10-15 times would never be considered 'within reason'."

There we have it - when you buy a game with limited activations you will not be able to install it indefinitely. You will have to go through the hassle of asking for more unlocks (i.e. asking for permission to install the game you have bought!) until they eventually refuse. As the customer who received that email told us:

"I love games. If a game is good I will play it again and again. Some of my favourite games (System Shock 2, Thief, Deus Ex, Heroes of Might and Magic 2, Aliens vs Predator original etc) have been installed many times over the years - sometimes reinstalled because of a new PC, or reinstalling the OS, or because a mod wouldn't uninstall properly, or just to play it again after uninstalling it to save space. System Shock 2 has probably been installed 10-15 times, so you can see why I would never want to be stuck with a game with limited activations! I simply want to find a service where any games I buy will still be available to me in ten years. GamersGate said the publishers would regard that as excessive if I had bought the game from them, and they would have refused to keep activating it."

Update 1 June 2010: We have relented slightly after various polite emails from GamersGate, and removed the crap score they had been awarded for refusing to respond. CCS is nothing if not fair, and we actually want to find and promote good services. So their current score is now 3 instead of 4 craps: one crap for having multiple forms of DRM, sometimes on the same game; one crap for having limited activations on some games; and one crap for not enabling customers to easily find out how the games they want to buy have been hobbled. GamersGate could easily reduce their crap score further by: 1. Making sure every game listed the forms of DRM on it, including what that type means and whether there were limited actviations (and if so how many). 2. Make all of that a search criteria. 3. Allow publishers to choose between online activation or DRM-free but not limit the number of times a customer can install their game. (At least then you would have access to your games as long as GamersGate existed). 4. Saying that all games could only use one form of DRM, their own. Each step would improve things; if step 4 was achieved then they would get the same score as GOG. I.e. zero crap!

GamersGate's current score:

---

Steam

Native DRM: There is no obvious information about DRM on the Steam site, which is already a warning sign. However it seems to be the case that you have to install a Steam client and be online to activate a game. Therefore, as with GamersGate, you can't install the game if your Internet connection is down or if you want to play it on a PC without an Internet connection; and if Steam ever disappears as a service then you will never be able to install any of your games again.

Additional publisher DRM: Steam also allows publishers to add their own DRM on top of those restrictions. So games bought from them may include limited activations.

Are there activation limits? On some games, but it is not clear which.

Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? No. So there is no future-proof solution for if Steam ever disappears.

Can you find out about the DRM? No. Unfortunately it appears to be impossible to find out if there are limitations such as finite activations (and if so, how many) or online-only requirements (e.g. Ubisoft's) before purchase. There are no filters for searching based on these criteria. Some games have extra bits of description but it is confusing. Mass Effect 2 mentions registration codes and activation - is that a separate activation with EA Games or is it the Steam activation? How does it work? GTA IV says 'Initial activation requires Internet connection' - but Steam already does that - or does this mean you also have to activate the game with the publisher too? How many times can that be done? Can the publisher halt your activation even if you have paid for the game? There are just too many unanswered questions here.

Can you contact them easily? No. There is no 'contact us' email address. You can only contact them by opening a support account. That is rather crappy customer service - why should a potential customer with questions have to put up with barriers, creating new accounts and recording details just to ask a question? Then jumping through hoops to close the account if they decide not to use the service. You even have to wait for emails to activate an account just so that you can send them an email!

Other: Games get patched automatically, whether you want them to be or not. Some patches change games in ways you don't like, or break other features - forcing updates on customers is not very flexible (two examples - changing the Michael Jackson zombie in Plants Vs Zombies, and changing the ending of Portal) . Also if you want to play games offline you have to manually select that option for every game - it should be the default option. You have to use their Steam download manager - no choices there. Fianlly, even if a game maker wants it to be DRM-free (as many indie-devs do), then they can't do that with Steam.

Conclusion so far: The lack of information on restrictions makes the service impossible to use if you want to avoid two levels of restrictive DRM. The lack of openness of Steam (e.g. no email address) suggests that they are not customer-focussed.

Update 21 May 2010: We went through the hassle of creating a Steam Support account just so that we could contact them. We did that on 15th May. They replied four days later with this:

"Thank you for contacting Steam Support. Thank you for taking the time to report this issue. We are aware of the problem and are investigating the issue further. For news regarding the latest updates and patches, please check the SteamPowered News page"

Are they taking the piss? We didn't report an issue, we asked them for information about their policies and pointed them to the blog! Obviously Steam Support does not even read their customers' emails, they just bash out standard responses which are nothing to do with the issue. So they gain a crap for providing a clueless customer service; one crap for having multiple forms of DRM, sometimes on the same game; one crap for having limited activations on some games; one crap for forcing people to create a separate account just to contact them (little good that it does!); and one crap for not enabling customers to easily find out how the games they want to buy have been hobbled.

Update 30 May 2010: Later that day (21st May) they replied after we had complained to them about their first response. The anonymous Steam staff member said: "I accidentally pasted a response I had sent to a previous customer into your ticket and hit reply." They also said they would forward our questions on to another team to answer. Nine days later and they still haven't bothered to reply. We have asked them to close our Steam account, there is no way we would ever support a company that offers such crap service to customers.

Update 11 June 2010: Steam ignored our request on 30th May to close the account and stop storing our personal details in accordance with data protection guidelines. They obviously don't care about such issues. What a Steaming pile of crap.

Steam's current score:

---

Direct2Drive

Native DRM: Games have to go online during installation to activate them (so you can't install the game if your Internet connection is down or if you want to play it on a PC without an Internet connection; and if Direct2Drive ever disappears as a service then you will never be able to install any of your games again). Not ideal. By default there are limited activations too, which is a massive turn-off.

Additional publisher DRM: It is not clear from the site whether Direct2Drive allow publishers to add EXTRA DRM on top of this.

Are there activation limits? By default there are limited activations.

Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? No. So there is no future-proof solution for if Direct2Drive ever disappears.

Can you find out about the DRM? Unfortunately it appears to be impossible to find out if there are limitations such as finite publisher activations (and if so, how many) or online-only requirements before purchase. None of the games we checked mentioned this at all.

Can you contact them easily? No. There is no 'contact us' email address. You can only contact them by opening a support account. As with Steam, that is crappy customer service barriers to - (potential) customers. We created an account and selected 'general questions' - and even then there were fields that were not relevant such as 'Direct2Drive email address', yet they had been made mandatory. Extremely poor.

Other: You have to use their download manager - no choices there.

Conclusion so far: The lack of information on restrictions makes the service impossible to use if you want to avoid two levels of restrictive DRM. The lack of openness (e.g. no email address) suggests that they are not customer-focussed.

Update 21 May 2010: We went through the hassle of creating a D2D support account just so that we could contact them. We did that on 15th May. They have not bothered to respond at all. So they gain a crap for having either inept or uncaring Customer Service; one crap for having limited activations on all games; one crap for forcing people to create a separate account just to contact them (little good that it does!); and one crap for not enabling customers to easily find out how the games they want to buy have been hobbled.

Update 30 May 2010: They closed our support ticket unanswered. There is no way we would ever recommend a company that offers such a crap service to customers.

Update 11 June 2010: D2D ignored our request on 30th May to close the account: "Please close this support account. There is no point to it since you ignore requests sent through it." They are still storing our personal details against data protection guidelines. They obviously don't care about such issues. They are on the way to earning a 5th crap.

Update 12 June 2010: We received a response from D2D, but ONLY to our request to have our support account closed, since they don't offer it as an option. They said: "There is no account to shut down. There are no accounts attached to the email address used. To remove yourself from the database simply change your email address to a false email address at https://login.direct2drive.com/ and remove any personal information you may have provided."

The problem is that they are confused by their own systems, showing how overly-complex they have made them. We never created an account at https://login.direct2drive.com/ or even mentioned that site. Though it is interesting that they don't even enable customers to close those accounts, which implies that their data retention policies are illegal and their data management systems are archaic.

The account we asked them to close was the support one at http://supportcenteronline.com/ - on this one there isn't even an option to change the registered details, let alone close the account. Crap systems, and a customer services team who either ignore questions or completely misinterpret them. Utter crap. Could they be any worse?

Update 14 June 2010: After pointing out that their response had been nonsense, they replied with: "Your support account will not be shut down until it's classified as no longer in use by the system. We do not retain any information from that account. We would be unable to shut that down for you."

This is not a very clear response, but seems to imply that not only are they unable to delete an account from their system (showing that they have built or bought a crap support system) but they the accounts close automatically after a certain (undefined) period of non-use: hardly helpful to their customers. Then they blatantly lied by saying "We do not retain any information from that account". Names and email addresses are 'personal information'.

Direct2Drive's current score:

---

Get Games

Native DRM: All games require online activation, via one of three methods.

Additional publisher DRM: The site implies that some games require Steam as well. It is a bit uclear.

Are there activation limits? On some games, but it is not clear which.

Can you find out about the DRM? There is a brief FAQ. However it is not clear. Some games have the name of a DRM system but no information on how it works e.g. Aliens Vs Predator 3 says 'Steamworks', Alpha Protocol says 'Uniloc', yet Necrovision says nothing at all. What is the difference for the consumer with all these?
Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? No. So there is no future-proof solution for if Get Games ever disappears.

Can you contact them easily? Yes. After a quick filter you have the option of filling in a form. Full marks there.

Other: They also have games which are older but good, making sure that they are not lost for good: bonus marks there.

Conclusion so far: We'll see what they say when we contact them.

Update 15 May 2010: Get Games were the first to reply and were obviously interested in to suggestions and discussion. The fact that they made it easy to contact them means that they are definitely very responsive and open. Amongst aother things they said: "it is really interesting to get your perspective on what is good / bad / and needs better explanation. We are pretty new as a game service and consider where we are at as an open beta. In terms of content - our focus is on quality games rather than quantity of games [...] Going back to your point about explaining in a more clear fashion the DRM for each game and what the consumer is entering into when making a purchase > that is a really good point and I can see where we need to improve on that immediately. Please stay in touch and throw questions / issues my way as we do want to succeed as a company, but to do that we have to earn people's support." We will follow up this discussion.

Update 21 May 2010: Get Games had emailed us a few times as part of a discussion of these issues, so they are a company that listens and responds. It is a shame that they do not just use one form of DRM with unlimited activations and make it clear how it works - if they did we would promote them equally with GOG.

Based on our scoring system we have to award one crap for having multiple forms of DRM; one crap for having limited activations on some games; and one crap for not enabling customers to easily find out how the games they want to buy are restricted.

Hopefully two of those issues are being worked on and we can remove the bad marks for them in the near future. We feel that currently their score is more accurately a 2.5 crap than a 3 crap, but they don't sell crap by the half bucket at our local shops.

Get Games' current score:

---

Impulse

Native DRM: Impulse uses a client as a form of DRM (since you have to have it on your PC to download and install games). In their email to us (15th June 2010) they said the Impulse client is for "facilitating a secure download from our CDN servers to the user's PC after validating their user account credentials. Customers have the ability to create an archive of the game on their PC, move it to another PC, burn the archive to a disc, etc. Impulse is required to unarchive/reinstall the game, but it does not need to be online." This implies that you can install a game if your Internet connection is down or if you want to play it on a PC without an Internet connection, so that if Impulse ever disappears as a service then you will still be able to install any games you had already, not tied to just your current PC. However because it ties things to the Impulse client it is not clear whether you could install the client itself if the Impulse service disappeared (e.g. if the Impulse client requires connection to the server as part of its installation) - if not then the text above is incorrect, and you actually wouldn't be able to install the games you had bought.

On top of this, some games require online activation: "some Stardock products require activation over the Internet to use their enhanced versions"; "Internet access is required for activation of appropriate products purchased through our online store" (text from here). However there appears to be no way of finding out which games don't require activation.

Additional publisher DRM: Impulse allow publishers to host games on their system with additional DRM such as strict activation limits (e.g. restrictive software by 2K Games, EA and Ubisoft).

Are there activation limits? See 'Native DRM' above. Yes, on some games.

Can a game be kept on your PC and installed without going online? See 'Native DRM', above. So it is not yet clear whether there is a future-proof solution for if Impulse ever disappears.

Can you find out about the DRM? Can a customer exclude games with extra DRM from results lists? No. In their email to us (15th June 2010) they told us about the information they do provide though: "Generally speaking if nothing is listed in the "Protection" field on one of our product pages, then the game is DRM free. As an example, you can see on the Prince of Persia - The Forgotten Sands page (http://www.impulsedriven.com/popfs) that we list "Ubisoft’s Online Services Platform" as the Protection method; also for Capcom's Dark Void Zero (http://www.impulsedriven.com/darkvoidzero) we list that the game uses "SecuROM Activation (Unlimited Activations w/Revocation)". This is a start, though at present is unsatisfactory because the description does not link to information telling you what "Ubisoft’s Online Services Platform" or "SecuROM Activation (Unlimited Activations w/Revocation)" actually means. Does the latter one mean the game needs activating with an online connection? Can it be done limited times by default, but unlimited times if you use a piece of revocation software each time? Or is it online activation but as many times as you want (as long as the server exists) with no need for a revocation tool? Impulse added that "Whenever possible we list what DRM is in use on our product pages, including any set limitations (please note that this information is not always available to us, so we do the best we can based on what we can turn up)" but to be fair if Impulse wanted they could insist that the information has to be given by the publisher if Impulse are to host the game - anything less is unsatisfactory for their customers.

Can you contact them easily? Yes. We found an email address for pre-sales after digging around their web pages, so currently the ideal of a support email address on the first page is not achieved. In their email to us (15th June 2010) they said: "as to the ease of obtaining Impulse support, we're currently working to streamline this process. All of our customers may obtain official support from emailing support@stardock.com; many of us also are available on our IRC server (irc.stardock.com) in the #stardock channel." So all in all their customer service looks to be extremely good. We had made a comment below about our first email to them being prudishly bounced back due to the word 'crap' as part of the URL of our blog post, but because Impulse then replied so quickly and courteously we have removed that section now.

Other: A downside is that you have to have special Stardock software installed in order to get any games you have bought, or to install them. This is an unnecessary irritation. Also a search for games found some interesting ones - but when clicked on we were confronted with this:

A search for Prince of Persia - 6 results, but then you realise from the icons on the right that you can't buy any of them from Impulse, even though some of the games have been available in the UK for 8 years...

So obviously Impulse allows publishers to include arbitrary regional restrictions, which is a black mark against Impulse. It is a further irritation that the games show up in searches if you can't buy them.

Conclusion so far: We contacted Impulse again on 18 June 2010, asking them to correct any errors in this description and to make any other comments. We did not receive a reply so assume our description is accurate.

Impulse's current score:

Based on our scoring system we have to award one crap for having multiple forms of DRM, sometimes on the same game; one crap for having limited activations on some games; and one crap for not enabling customers to easily find out how the games they want to buy are restricted.

---

Conclusions
Obviously DRM is a balancing issue. The ideal for the consumer is GOG (or DotEmu), but that model is unlikely to be acceptable to most publishers for new games. As such, although it is still not perfect for the consumer, it is understandable that a game bought online will - at some point - need to be activated. An acceptable middleground seems to be that any game bought online will have to be activated online on installation (invisibly to the user); or it is activated and tied to a single PC on download, and can then be installed on that PC as many times as the user wants without needing to go online (and if they change PC they go through this process again). This is a minimal form of DRM that can be accepted and understood, as long as there are no limits on how many times you can install the game you have bought. Then it is not possible to pass on bought games to anyone else (the publishers' worry), yet anyone buying a game only has to deal with minimal hassle.

Unfortunately most services seem to have multiple forms of DRM (sometimes more than one form on the same game), each working differently, whilst also including limited activations in some cases, and not making any of that clear to the consumer. Therein lies the problem. Game download services would be fine as long as they only used one form of DRM (that listed in the paragraph above), clearly laid out in how it works, and refused to let publishers complicate things with further systems. To say: "This is the system we use on our service; it is effective and fair; our customers know what they are getting; if you want us to sell your game you have to agree that this will be the only form of DRM our customers have to deal with". So far it looks like none of the online services are putting their foot down on this issue, though we would love to be proved wrong!

In the meantime if you are desperate for a bargain, with no DRM, great games, and support for charity, then the Humble Indie Bundle is where you should spend your money. CCS paid £34.52 for the games in order to support such a great initiative. Many other developers will sell you their games with no DRM at all: as well as the Humble Indie Bundle, CCS recently bought Machinarium, World of Goo, Osmos, The Path and Fatale. So in many cases it is best to buy the games direct.

We are really pleased with all the emails people have sent us, including their own examples or thoughts on this issue. Keep sending them in! This is obviously an issue many people care about.

Update 16 May 2010: The great guys who developed Osmos said in an email to us: "Now that we've shipped a game DRM-free we'll never go back -- definitely the way to go. (DRM is like trying to swim upstream... a waste of energy. ;-)" Please support them!

Update 30 May 2010: Steam and Direct2Drive never even bothered to answer our questions about their DRM systems and how they work. As such, even though when we first thought of doing a blog on this subject we started out really looking forward to signing up to all these services, we now won't be doing it when it is clear that their customer services are so... crap. Whilst they are not open about DRM and allow systems that are unfair to the purchaser there is too much potential for problems, and since they don't respond to questions there would be no way of resolving them. Buyer beware! This is another example of how companies with crap customer service manage to transform interested potential customers into people who have a negative opinion of them. However the other companies responded to various degrees and some seemed interested in improving (and as a result we removed some of our criticisms of them).

Read More