The launch of Trust UK by DTI Minister Patricia Hewitt was heralded
by a tremendous media fanfare. But how valuable are online codes of
practice?
"Big boys" back TrustUK
TrustUK is the newer of the two emerging UK standards for ensuring
fair and responsible codea of practice for online traders, although
it does have the more prestigious names behind it. The two main
parts of TrustUK are the Consumer Association (CA) and the Alliance
for Electronic Business (AEB). The alliance itself has several
illustrious members including the CBI, CSSA and the DMA as well as
e-centre UK and the Federation of the Electronics Industry. Added
to these consumer and business associations are the DTI and trading
standards organisations. At the launch of TrustUK earlier this
month, the Minister of State at the DTI, Patricia Hewitt MP,
offered an endorsing sound bite: "The message to consumers shopping
online is simple: if you want to shop safely, look for the TrustUK
hallmark." Hewitt also chastised those sceptical of TrustUK. "We
shouldn't be rubbishing TrustUK but instead offering it our
support", she remarked.
Accreditation criteriaThe basis of
the TrustUK offering centres around 11 pages of accreditation
criteria, conditions with which TrustUK sites or those of
affiliated bodies need to comply in order to earn the logo and
associated "trusted status". TrustUK does not directly approve web
sites but instead approves other organisations' online codes of
practice. For example, if your company is a member of the Direct
Marketing Association (DMA), then by following the DMA online code
of practice, you are effectively approved for TrustUK status, as
the DMA code of practice has been accredited by TrustUK. The
accreditation process is essentially a self-certification form on
are posed such questions as, "Are your online advertisements legal,
decent, honest and truthful?" In addition, there is a process of
"fulfilment timing [the period in which the company must deliver
its goods or services], which, unless the parties have agreed
otherwise, must be within a maximum of 30 days from the day
following that on which the consumer placed the order." These
accreditation criteria have been written with some skill, paying
consideration to the intricacies of the Internet as well as
covering factors such as cookies, the Data Protection Act and WAP
(Wireless Application Protocol).TrustUK is likely to attract a
large number of online e-commerce subscribers considering that the
Consumer Association's earlier accreditation scheme, Which? Web
Trader, has attracted 1,000 members since its launch. Combined with
the 800 members of the DMA, it provides an already powerful group
of supporters.
TrustUK is tough, but ABTA carries a bigger
stickAnother big participant in TrustUK is ABTA (Association of
British Travel Agents) whose members make up 90% of all the travel
agencies in the UK. Their own rules require ABTA members to provide
a bond based on the size of their business (in excess of £50,000).
The ABTA code of conduct is much stricter than that of TrustUK and
it also provides independent arbitration for consumer disputes.
Sean Tipton, a spokesman for ABTA, agreed that the rules for ABTA
were stricter then those of TrustUK but whether TrustUK should
adopt ABTA policies was for, "The government to decide upon". The
rules for ABTA members who use online commerce have also been
clarified to take account of the Web.However, this gives rise to a
paradox. A TrustUK certified code of practice issuer which has
online travel agents as members does not have to be a member of
ABTA, but ABTA members automatically gain TrustUK status. This
could lead to confusion as to the level of protection available to
the consumer in the event of a travel site not being able to fulfil
its financial obligations. The situation could arise where two
different code of practice regulators (ABTA and ATOL for example),
are both TrustUK affiliates. Both would be allowed to use the
TrustUK logo but offer different levels of protection for
consumers.The main government body dealing with consumer complaints
is the Trading Standards Office (TSO), an agency that is still
underfunded and not familiar with many of the issues surrounding
online purchases. In fact getting any action from the TSO is
perceived by many as a lengthy process even without the
complexities of the Internet.TrustUK is a new concept but
government backing will help to raise its profile and assuage the
fear of potential online customers. The real test will be if any of
these TrustUK-certified companies generate a large number of
complaints and TrustUK is forced into action against
them.
Clicksure parts company with TrustUKTrustUK guidelines
bear an uncanny similarity to another accreditation system, that of
Clicksure. Clicksure applied to become a TrustUK code owner but has
since pulled out, apparently due to differences with TrustUK
policies. Clicksure claims to have offered a great deal of
assistance in hammering out a workable set of standards when
TrustUK was setting up. One of the contentions between the two
organisations is that every Clicksure client would have to display
a TrustUK logo.ClickSure believes that this may in fact hinder some
of their overseas clients. Another problem topic is that of
inspection. According to Clicksure, TrustUK claims that, "...the
TrustUK Hallmark is to show you that the e-trader operates to the
requirements of an accredited code of practice." Clicksure takes
issue with this claiming that it is untrue: "There is no evidence
of implementation checked prior to receiving approval from the code
[of practice] owner. The criteria are UK-centric and do not address
global trading issues." ClickSure claims that the mandatory
inclusion of the TrustUK logo all its customers' sites would add
"no value" and lead to "confusion" for customers operating
overseas. Phil Hendey, Clicksure's Head of Marketing, corporate
stance is robust. "There are sites currently listed under the
Direct Marketing Association (a TrustUK code owner) which would not
pass Clicksure standards. If we had been associated with TrustUK,
our standard would already have been diluted", he said.The question
of cost is an interesting one. Clicksure is a private limited
company, started with investment from its founder, Christopher
Upton and several VC companies. Clicksure use a three-stage method
of issuing accreditation which consists of online web site
inspection, physically visiting the companies' premises to examine
business practices (1 out of every 10 customers) and an ongoing
monitoring policy. This accreditation process costs up to $8,000
dollars for the first two years with a residual charge of $4,000
per year for continuing accreditation.In situations where a company
does not have a web site or back-end processes capable of meeting
accreditation, Clicksure can either offer advice or recommend an
independent consultant who can bring these businesses in line with
the required standards.Clicksure also has its critics. Critics have
claimed that because they are a commercial company, impartiality
may be affected, particularly when it comes to chasing up smaller
complaints with their large-fee paying customers. Also, critics are
seeing their split from TrustUK as both a "publicity stunt" and
"financially motivated", due to the fact that as a free scheme,
TrustUK (including the Consumer Association's Which? Web Trader)
would ultimately affect their fee-paying business model.Chris
Hendey dismisses these claims. "As a company, it is our goal to
make sure that our clients are both technically and ethically able
to deal with e-commerce correctly", he says. Hendey agrees that
bonded schemes like ABTA's "play an important part", but observes
that prevention is much better than cure. "We will not sacrifice
our reputation by weakening our accreditation process by joining
TrustUK," he adds.
Joining the band wagonWith the publicity
surrounding TrustUK, other vendors are also pitching comment into
the debate. Dermot Hill, managing director of another rival scheme,
Trust-On-Line comments,"We agree that consumers need assurance to
shop online, but as this scheme is UK based, it is too narrow to
protect global Internet users. If governments in different
countries try to regulate the Internet, it would mean a confusing
mismatch of laws across different nations.""Governments should not
be involved in solving consumer disputes in a free market economy.
We feel it is important that complaints are dealt with quickly and
efficiently by a body that has real experience of the Internet,
rather than an outside body with no real knowledge of the Internet
which may over-regulate," he adds.Hill's comments are interesting
but like those of the ABTA spokesman, may be slightly misguided.
TrustUK has been tarred with the "government approved" brush, but
the very core of Trust UK is the Consumer Association, which is far
from being a government pawn. The misconception surrounding TrustUK
is likely to evaporate as more codes of practice start to gather
under its umbrella. In fact German online retailer,
Trustedshops.com has approached TrustUK for membership. This is
even before the EU produces its own e-commerce guidelines (based on
those of TrustUK). Timetabled for the end of November.
What does
this means for the Internet shopper?The number of such
organisations, either government-endorsed or private, is likely to
grow. The problem is recourse with the e-trader if things to go
wrong. Buying any item from a bricks and mortar shop always gives
you the option to complain in person. But as a customer in the UK
buying a book from a server based in Hungary run by a US company
via a French distributor, the responsibility for dealing with your
problem is easily passed between pillar and post.The only truly
global players within this area are the credit card companies like
Visa and MasterCard, who have been very careful to distance
themselves from these schemes. Why? The biggest reason is liability
- they do not want to be Internet police or have to pick up the
bill every time a customer has a problem with goods or services
bought online. Both TrustUK and ClickSure are currently in
discussions with the credit card companies. However, if past form
is a good indication as to the outcome of these discussions, the
credit card companies will agree in principle. However, it is
unlikely that these credit companies will offer the means to
sanction rogue traders who persistently fail to deliver proper
customer service. The ultimate action that Visa or Mastercard can
apply is to remove credit-processing facilities from companies that
continually fail to comply with codes of practice. Losing the
ability to process credit card transactions is the kiss of death
for any e-trader and as such gives the credit card companies the
"big stick" to keep order in the new global market place. For the
consumer and business, schemes like TrustUK or ClickSure do not
provide the whole answer. However, with these schemes you can gain
some level of confidence as to the validity of the trader. Finding
the good e-traders will still be from word of mouth and by
reputation. Reputations are built by offering a good experience to
customers over a period of time and not by the inclusion of an
accreditation seal, no matter who is behind the accreditation
process.
Will Garside