The gentleman who asked advice about stopping free newspapers in the end got a flaplock for his letterbox. It would make you laugh if it wasn't for the fact that people currently can't do anything to stop unscrupulous junk mailers such as Forth Independent Newspapers Ltd.

Or is there? A couple of weeks ago I was contacted by a company called Jo-One. Normally, I'm not that interested in businesses starting some sort of anti-junk mail enterprise. I've been contacted by tens of businesses over the years and have learned that they usually aim to make heaps of money and/or to use a campaign as an affordable PR stunt. The Green Insurance Company is a case in point; in 2008 they hired a posh PR company to launch the UK Junk Mail Awards. The agency wanted my expertise and made all sorts of vague promises about working together on a massive anti-junk mail campaign (there would even be adds on telly!). Of course they didn't keep their word; after they had what they wanted they refused to be contacted and Stop Junk Mail never got any credits. The campaign failed, which I reckon is because they didn't really care about junk mail. The whole thing was a PR exercise from start to finish; an attempt to come across as 'grass roots' and to get lots of free publicity in the process. Marketers often don't realise that the average person can smell green wash from miles.

So, what makes this company called Jo-One different? I'm not entirely sure yet, but there are two things I like about Jo-One. First, it's run by an ordinary person who hates junk mail. It's a for-profit business, but not one that specialises in cheesy marketing. Second, Jo-One has a very straightforward philosophy. It's starting point is disarmingly simply; if you ask any organisation to stop sending you whatever junk mail they have to comply. Jo-One wouldn't care one bit whether or not the publisher of the East Kilbride Mail is a member of the Direct Marketing Association, for instance, or whether or not Virgin Media uses the Mailing Preference Service's 'To the Occupier' loophole to ignore those of us who have signed up to the Mailing Preference Service. A request not to send you junk mail has to be respected. If the junk mailer fails to comply with such as a request Jo-One will demand compensation, and if the junk mailer refuses to pay legal procedures are started.

It raises some interesting questions. First of all, how does this approach sit with current legislation? The only piece of legislation dealing with junk mail is the Data Protection Act 1998. Section 11 of the act states that you have the right to ask any organisation in the UK to stop (or not begin) processing your personal details for 'direct marketing' purposes. To do so, you can send junk mailers a so-called Data Protection Notice (ODT). It's a somewhat bureaucratic and time-consuming process, in particular if the junk mailer ignores your Notice and you want to complaint to the Information Commissioner's Office (the body enforcing the Data Protection Act). Can you just knock on Jo-One's door instead?

Secondly, how does self-regulation by the junk mail industry affect Jo-One's work? Where the Data Protection Act doesn't apply there might be bits of self-regulation – that is, policies invented by the junk mail industry – which should give people some rights. There's the Mailing Preference Service, for instance, which gives you rights when it comes to stopping addressed junk mail from organisations that are members of the Direct Marketing Association. And we got Royal Mail's Door-to-Door Opt-Out (to stop unaddressed mail delivered by the postman) and Your Choice. Should you try getting your head round all these (often silly) rules and regulations before contacting Jo-One?

Jo-One doesn't see why you'd have to write Data Protection Notices or follow all the different policies dreamed up by the the Direct Marketing Association. It's your house, your letterbox, and if don't want an organisation to dump advertisements through you door then they've got to respect that. Although this approach doesn't sit well with the self-regulatory framework everybody will agree that this is how it should be. Even the Direct Marketing Association is nowadays saying all the time that the wishes of 'consumer's' (why not call us 'people' for a change) should be respected [Hyperlink to dma.org.uk/information/env-introduction.asp removed in June 2012 as the page no longer exists – JB]. Of course, rhetoric and practice are different things, and what junk mailers won't tell you is that you actually don't have a right to stop 'To the Occupier' mailings and unaddressed junk mail from specific organisations.

Let's build a quick case study. Say you're quite pleased with most unaddressed mail items delivered by Royal Mail but do take offense to all the Farmfoods leaflets coming through the door. If you would contact Farmfoods they would tell you to get in touch with Royal Mail, as it's Royal Mail that delivers the items. Royal Mail will tell you there's the Door-to-Door Opt-Out, but warn you that signing up to the scheme will stop all leaflets delivered by the postman. That's not what you want; you just don't want leaflets from Farmfoods. The self-regulatory framework doesn't give you that option; you don't have a right to ask individual junk mailers to stop pushing leaflets through the letterbox.

What makes Jo-One's approach interesting is that it challenges the status quo. If we all agree that people should have the right to stop junk mail from any organisation, then who is Royal Mail to let Farmfoods hide behind its Door-to-Door Opt-Out? As far as Jo-One is concerned the existence of the Door-to-Door Opt-Out is irrelevant. It might be useful for people who want to stop all leaflets distributed by Royal Mail but it doesn't change the fact that people should also be able to stop junk mail from specific junk mailers only.

Does Jo-One's approach work? So far it seems to be the case, at least as far as claiming compensation is concerned (stopping the junk mail might still be tricky!). The reason for its success is probably largely due to the fact that junk mailers all too often fail to respond to requests from ordinary people. Or maybe it's just because the average junk mailer simply doesn't know how to respond; before they know it they find themselves faced with a legal challenge and not a leg to stand on. In short, it's worth a try with junk mailers like the East Kilbride Mail and Virgin Media who obviously know that self-regulation gives them the right to ignore people and who couldn't care less about anyone asking them not to target them with junk mail.