Reply to: Roc-search - pointless waste of time

[SueEllen]

Oh yes SueEllen most definitely and I have my solid case with years of unsolicited email.
To elaborate further I have on more than one occasion asked them to desist under threat of reporting as you describe. <snip>

You threatened them but did not carry out the threat then come on here and write random non-related stuff - no wonder they ignore you and continue to spam you.

[monkfish]

Oh yes SueEllen most definitely and I have my solid case with years of unsolicited email.
To elaborate further I have on more than one occasion asked them to desist under threat of reporting as you describe. Not one blind bit of difference, not even when my 550 reject message suggests they take themselves somewhere else in a manner inappropriate to describe for this board

Where you mention Information Comissioner I have in my work capacity had to deal with the office and it was not a bad experience at all.

I suppose its more this; couldn't agree more with other posters on this thread but cannot understand why somebody elects to stick up for Roc when multiple posters can suggest ways in which they are anything but a straight company.

Saying no more, back in me box.

[SueEllen]

Andy, in my direct experience of ROC-Search the above is, to be frank, bulltulip.

FIVE YEARS AGO I required them to remove my details as I no longer wished them to represent me, contact me or otherwise make their continued pointless existence known to me. I still get upwards of five messages a month attempting to contact me, for what I havent the foggiest as roc-search.com won themselves a permanent 550 block at the MTA level.

So that alone tells me two things a) they are not managing their returned mails correctly b) they still hold my details. Which by now will be woefully out of date and irrelevant.

Still a straight company that cannot adhere to basic data protection principles required of them by law? Especially after I have formally requested they remove my details.

Meh

If you want Roc Search to adhere to the Data Protection Act send them a recorded delivery letter making it clear if they don't stop using your data, which is incorrect, you will make a complaint to the Information Commissioner.

Then when they contract you again, complain to the Information Commissioner showing your recorded delivery slip as proof.

I've had a few other agencies annoy me but once they realised I would complain they left me alone.

[squarepeg]

So what about my idea to create sticky name and shame list? We could flag these agents by names or agency name ? That will show them !

One word: libel. Nobody wants that hassle.

[monkfish]

Straight company that ignores compliance?

Normally I don't comment / stick up for other companies, but I happen to know the owner of Roc-Search. He is a decent guy who runs a straight company.

Andy, in my direct experience of ROC-Search the above is, to be frank, bulltulip.

FIVE YEARS AGO I required them to remove my details as I no longer wished them to represent me, contact me or otherwise make their continued pointless existence known to me. I still get upwards of five messages a month attempting to contact me, for what I havent the foggiest as roc-search.com won themselves a permanent 550 block at the MTA level.

So that alone tells me two things a) they are not managing their returned mails correctly b) they still hold my details. Which by now will be woefully out of date and irrelevant.

Still a straight company that cannot adhere to basic data protection principles required of them by law? Especially after I have formally requested they remove my details.

Meh

[contractor475867]

Yup, same experience. Utterly useless.

[No2politics]

Yesterday I had a call from <a slime: should I disclose his name??> at ROC SEARCH : they had a role 'come up' thats sounded ideal, but they needed 2 references. So, I gave them 1 reference who is a previous ROC slime, then another misc. agency slime.
Today I got the same call from the same ROC slime! Only just realised it was the self same slime!!

Incompetant and slimey, that's ROC. (not to mention a waste of time).

You just won the internet!!

[easyrider]

Yesterday I had a call from <a slime: should I disclose his name??> at ROC SEARCH : they had a role 'come up' thats sounded ideal, but they needed 2 references. So, I gave them 1 reference who is a previous ROC slime, then another misc. agency slime.
Today I got the same call from the same ROC slime! Only just realised it was the self same slime!!

Incompetant and slimey, that's ROC. (not to mention a waste of time).

[psychocandy]

Normally I don't comment / stick up for other companies, but I happen to know the owner of Roc-Search. He is a decent guy who runs a straight company.

Then why does he employ idiots who get away with things like this?

I think its fair to say, a lot of people know that ROC Search are a complete joke as an agency. They seem the worst for this sort of behaviour.

If the owner is a decent guy then someone needs to tell him whats going on. Andy? ;-)

[expat]

Arent these the same as ROC IT? If so, they're a small agency who want to meet you before submitting you to the client. Ive told them previously I dont do agency 'meets.'

They gave me some bollocks about them being able to satisfy the client about me personally. I said you can get that via a discussion over the phone. They said they like to see what people look like!

Click, brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrr.

Aren't most of the things they can tell by looking at you illegal to use as a basis of decision?

[diseasex]

So what about my idea to create sticky name and shame list? We could flag these agents by names or agency name ? That will show them !

[MrMarkyMark]

No, cos I know a lovely chap like you fall for that tulip.

They would never afford me anyway

[BolshieBastard]

I'm surprised you didn't volunteer to go through their screening process

No, cos I know a lovely chap like you fall for that tulip.

[MrMarkyMark]

Arent these the same as ROC IT? If so, they're a small agency who want to meet you before submitting you to the client. Ive told them previously I dont do agency 'meets.'

I'm surprised you didn't volunteer to go through their screening process

[SimonMac]

However if you feel like being really mean slam the phone down on them when they ask for references If you are lucky they will ring you back claiming they were cut off so you can slam the phone down on them again.

Angrily pressing the end call button on a mobile doesn't quite have the same cathartic affect though