Following from the Derek Ogilvie MDC and Channel 5 programme I decided to check the law regarding 'psychics' etc. It seems we have had some progress.
I tested the situation regarding a show Ogilvie is due to do at the Pavilion Theatre in Glasgow later this Month. I wrote to trading standards in Glasgow complaining that the show appeared to be being promoted without any of the 'health warnings' which seem to be the minimum required under the new law.
They have replied as follows:
Psychic Show
Thursday, 9 October, 2008 12:05 PM
From: "Whyte, Stewart" <Stewart.Whyte@glasgow.gov.uk>
To:
Dear Mr ,
I have been passed details of your complaint concerning the Derek Ogilvie show at the Pavilion Theatre in Glasgow. In relation to the complaint, the new Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations came in to force this year and you are correct to say that they would cover such areas as false mediums and psychics. The regulations repealed a statute called the Fraudulent Mediums Act 1951 which was in place to try and prevent anyone making profit from falsely claiming to be a medium or psychic.
When the new regulations were brought in there was heavy media coverage of this particular area, it appears to be something that the media latched on to and was one of the issues that was highlighted as being covered by the new regulations. Following some discussion it has been agreed that any psychic show should contain a disclaimer stating ‘for entertainment purposes only or for scientific experiment’. We have advised the Pavilion Theatre of this and provided them with guidance on the new regulations. They have amended their website to include the warning and will include it in any promotional advertising used for the show. The Government have also commented on the repeal of the Fraudulent Mediums Act as follows,
“The Fraudulent Mediums Act 1951 will be repealed from April 2008 by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2007 (CPRs) which implement the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (UCPD).
The CPRs include rules prohibiting conduct which misleads the average consumer and thereby causes, or is likely to cause him to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise.
Although the average consumer would arguably not be misled by a person who claims he is able to contact the dead, such conduct would still be unfair under the CPRs if it deceives the average member of (i) the group to which it is directed, or (ii) a clearly identifiable group of consumers who are particularly vulnerable to this type of practice.
Unlike the Act, there is no requirement in the CPRs to prove an "intent to deceive". This means that where practices are aimed at vulnerable consumers or average members of particular groups, it should be easier to take action against fraudulent mediums than under the Act.
The CPRs will be enforced by both civil (injunctive) action and criminal sanctions.”
The practicalities of enforcing a piece of legislation like this against a medium or psychic mean that it is more appropriate to advise consumers of the ‘entertainment’ aspect rather than trying to prove in a court of law that someone can or cannot contact the deceased, therefore as long as the venue are making it clear that the show is for entertainment purposes then we would be satisfied that any consumers who attend the show are not being misled.
Thanks for bringing the matter to our attention,
Best regards,
Stewart Whyte
Trading Standards Officer
Trading Standards Unit
Land and Environmental Services
Glasgow City Council 231 George Street Glasgow G1 1RX
Phone 0141 287 3632
Fax 0141 287 6682
E.Mail stewart.whyte@eps.glasgow.gov.uk
www.glasgow.gov.uk
It is a shame that they will not prosecute on the grounds that Ogilvie singularly failed to prove his claimed abilities, and as we know, he clearly does not have any. However, we now have a new weapon in our armoury, and anyone who wants to put a spoke in the works of the charlatans can now contact their local trading standards asking that they insist anyone promoting 'psychic' or other woo must add the 'health warnings' to their publicity material, and preferably to make the entertainment only disclaimers during the show itself.
I hope more UK skeptics will do so whenever possible. At least it will make life a bit more awkward for these latter day snake oil salesmen!
Good luck. DD
Could they give a more half heated disclaimer?
It sounds like a young boy being forced to say sorry by his mother.
Actually looking at it he is still claiming the same things surely they must go against something.
I'm still amazed by the fact that I am been able to help those who wish to communicate with their loved ones who have passed away. I am very conscious that my work is important and that I have to use it wisely," says Derek. "I fully realise though that not everyone who comes along to one of my shows will get a reading. I've always been aware of the fact that I have to also entertain the audience that I have in front of me. It's about getting the balance right.
Last edited by lazerustheduck; 10th October 2008 at 04:54 PM.
I did make the point that we should push for more prominent disclaimers, but at least there is now a chink in the armour i.e. before there was no provision to do anything at all. Small victories can result in winning wars so everyone joining in and complaining to TS whenever and wherever possible will build pressure. Apparently the Woos are really upset about the new law so lets wind them up more!
I've also sent off an email, I know this one will get ignored but hopefully if enough letters come in about these dodgy dealers they may start to think twice.
I pointed out that it wasn't much use having a disclaimer if the rest of the site continued to claim things that they could not prove, that went directly against the disclaimer.
It's like having a cigarette advert saying they are good for us and perfectly healthy. They wouldn't allow it even if it had the disclaimer at the bottom.
The more the merrier!! I agree it is still weak but before there was nothing. Remember a few years ago there were no health warnings on fags, and now there si talk of pics of raddled lungs. Maybe we can get pics of empty wallets!! Ho Ho. But seriously, the more people put pressure on, and I would be very happy to join a UK Skeptics lead petition for more prominent and hard hitting warnings, if not worse (like slow torture!!), the better.
Onward skeptic soldiers (sorry! Had a couple of beers).
I see they repeat the fallacy that this is an EU law, presumably in the hope of making people think "More EU interference, even though we know this guy is completely genuine".
Perhaps a follow-up to the complaint should ask that the theatre should be required to attribute the regulations properly.
Good point. In my excitement at getting something done I had not noticed that! Maybe you would like to drop the TS people a line to that effect. Better not just me bashing away at them. We have to understand that TS is way under resourced and way overburdened sadly. As the current economic conditions show, the lack of perfect knowledge in the market is not adequately counter-balanced by regulatory power, but give those Glasgow TS people some credit. They did act as best they probably can. Always for more pressure though so GO FOR IT!!
I sent an email off to the Pavilion as well, hopefully it may stick the wind up them a little.
Wow pavilion are quick of the mark just got a reply.
We have checked this wording with Trading standards and it was them who approved this. They could not actually provide any written wording on this as they say they have not produced anything yet and it is only covered under general conditions.
They also said it is a very grey area as far as the legal position goes.
We have also looked at other venues disclaimers to comply with this legislation and the majority of other venues and shows of this nature do not carry any disclaimers.
Trading standards in Glasgow have viewed our disclaimer notice and are happy with this.
I am happy at present that we are complying with the current legislation as directed by the trading standards.
Any and all advertising for this show was supplied to us by the performer and we have no control over the wording of his material but as I said we have checked the wording on this with Trading standards who have accepted this.
I hope this makes our position clear. I thank you for your comments regarding this.
With regards to being a point of law, does it really make much difference what or where the law is part of as surely the point here is advising the customer that the show is for entertainment only. Does anyone really care what part of the law it is, are we not all part of the EU? My understanding that this was an EU directive passed by them and passed by the UK government. So EU or British is debatable in my opinion.
I will leave it there as clearly you are not a customer or have no intention of coming to see the show and are clearly aware that this show is for entertainment purposes only.
Iain Gordon.
From what I have seen, the biggest problem with the new 'law' is the lack of uniformity in its guidelines. Imo it has been deliberately created thus, leaving the gate open for misinterpretation.
There are many who welcome the overall ruling, which is aimed specifically at weeding out the money-grabbing frauds and tricksters in what has become a hugely lucrative 'psychic industry'. Spiritualists do not fall into that category, and for those involved in the true cause of mediumship the formality of having to declare that what they do is purely for entertainment, just goes against the grain of the true nature of mediumship. Mediumship and spiritualism is not about entertainment. Unfortunately, the evasive structure of this new 'law' doesn't really go very far in curtailing the big exploitation business.
Talking about 'big business' - here is one disclaimer which seems to have every eventuality covered.
http://www.psychics.co.uk/psychicreading/info.html
Calls are for entertainment purposes only. Your psychic reading is subject to your own personal interpretation and guidance given is not intended as predictive. Psychic and mediumistic consultations are scientific experiments and results cannot be guaranteed. Readings are not experimentaly proven. The information contained within your reading should at no time be regarded as legal, psychological, medical, business, or financial fact. Any actions taken by you the customer are solely your choice and your responsibility. Any opinions expressed in readings are those of the individual reader and not the opinions of the owners of this website. Remember also that ALL psychics and mediums are fallible and can sometimes make mistakes.
Last edited by Nasib; 10th October 2008 at 11:05 PM.
Originally Posted by Trinoc
Actually, it is an implementation of the unfair business-to-consumer commercial practices directive (Directive 2005/29/EC), so it is an EU law.
However, I'm not sure that their "entertainment only" disclaimer, which would have been a defence under the Fraudulent Mediums Act, applies under the new regulations.
Maybe Jack of Kent can tell us.
so why did they bother to say it then?With regards to being a point of law, does it really make much difference what or where the law is part of as surely the point here is advising the customer that the show is for entertainment only. Does anyone really care what part of the law it is, are we not all part of the EU?
Mojo, It seems that given the lack of resources etc at TS the 'Entertainment Only' disclaimer is what they have come up with in place of actually taking action. In fact, the way the law reads it seems to me it would be easy to bring a case with the money or a friendly lawyer willing to do pro bono. Seems the law, if read at face value, says that those perpetrating woo should prove they are not misleading. Since none of them can (witness the Ogilvie MDC) then it is wide open for a legal challenge.
To the poster who thinks that mediums etc are not included, of course they are. There is no such thing as a legitimate medium either. I know that the poor darlings are upset about having to tag their baloney as entertianment only but that is of course all it ever possibly could or should be!! Please let's not get into a silly discussion here about one form of woo not being woo!
I am now going to write to The Consumer Affairs Minister. When i have the details I will return so that anyone who wishes can join in, and try to push for tougher interpretation/enforcement.
Meanwhile, here's a thought. Maybe Government is nervous about this because fo course all religions cannot prove they are misleading, and they might be worried about opening the floodgates against all unfounded faith/belief. On balance I am happy to go after the 'psychics' 'spiritulalists' 'mediums' for now (Oh, yes, and of course Scientology!, because they are only in it for the money as well!)
NASIB, please let me emphasise from my above post. THERE IS NO TRUE MEDIUMSHIP! It is all baloney! Please, if you are not a skeptic, do go and ply the boards of your pals on psychic woo woo.com etc
Sorry to be so direct but what choice do we have when there are people like you out there trying to sell one kind of woo as better than other woo. It is all woo. Ogilvie also claims to be a medium by the way. None have ever been able to demonstrate more than varying degrees of cold reading, and other fraudulent techniques. Ever! If you or your buddies think they can then there is a $1 million bucks up for grabs. Go for it at JREF and if you can prove the unprovable then of course imagine how much good that money would do in supporting your cause. And I imagine the Nobel prize and many others would also be in your grasp, and me and all the other skeptics would have to bow down to you.
Please do not bother to respond unless you or someone you know in the world of 'true mediums' actually will apply for the Million Dollar Challenge. Otherwise ther is no discussion to be had.
DD
Thought I should join the fun, have sent the message below, using the information prrovided, hopefully a few similar might give the impression of a groundswell of concern.
Dear Mr Whyte,
I wish to thank you for your proactive steps in respect of this matter.
I am sure by now others will have pointed out the rather half-hearted semi-compliance of the Pavilion.
May I suggest that one recommend an appropriate form of disclaimer such as that used by the psychics UK website, making it clear from the entire content of what is advertised that this really is merely entertainment - not simply aquiescence to unfair EU rules.
http://www.psychics.co.uk/psychicreading/info.html
Quote:
Calls are for entertainment purposes only. Your psychic reading is subject to your own personal interpretation and guidance given is not intended as predictive. Psychic and mediumistic consultations are scientific experiments and results cannot be guaranteed. Readings are not experimentaly proven. The information contained within your reading should at no time be regarded as legal, psychological, medical, business, or financial fact. Any actions taken by you the customer are solely your choice and your responsibility. Any opinions expressed in readings are those of the individual reader and not the opinions of the owners of this website. Remember also that ALL psychics and mediums are fallible and can sometimes make mistakes.
Quote:
Yours sincerely
etc
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks