UK marketing fines just got a lot less ignorable, and your newsletter software isn't off the hook

A law firm's 2025 blog post claims the UK's fine cap for unlawful marketing emails and calls shot up from £500,000 to £17.5 million, though it doesn't say who told them that. This includes practices like yours, if you've ever sent a newsletter without quite checking who agreed to get it.

Page updated: 13 Aug 2026

Whole-practice growth for wellness practices. Rooted in Wiltshire, UK, working worldwide.

Practices that have been treating marketing fines as an annoying but survivable cost might want to check whether that maths still holds, because the number involved has apparently grown by a lot.

Original Research	A claim that new UK data law lines up PECR marketing fines with the much bigger GDPR maximums
Source	https://bratby.law/duaa-takes-effect-ico-enforcement/
Overview	A law firm's own blog post discusses the ICO's enforcement powers under the Data (Use and Access) Act, without citing a specific report, dataset or regulator statement.
Year	2025
Publisher	Brand, Bratby (law firm blog)
Relevance to Wellbeing	Any practice sending marketing emails, texts or cold outreach falls under PECR, so if the claimed fine rise is accurate, getting consent right matters a great deal more than it used to.
Our Verdict	Too early to tell the general direction matches known changes to UK data law, but the specific numbers here have no named source behind them.
Our Summary	PECR genuinely does apply to any practice sending marketing communications, so the underlying warning isn't invented. The claimed alignment with GDPR-level fines fits the broader, well-documented direction of UK data enforcement. The page names no report, ICO statement or dataset for the actual £500,000 to £17.5 million figures. No sample, no methodology, no independent publisher, just a law firm stating a number on its own blog.
Our Geo View	Applies only to the UK. PECR and the ICO have no reach beyond it, so practices operating elsewhere can file this under "interesting" rather than "urgent".

Abstract of wellbeing niches and revenue flow

Recognise how this might impact your practice

Why this might matter to you

Coaching: this matters because most coaches run their whole client pipeline through email sequences, and that's exactly what PECR is watching.
Therapy: this matters because therapists often collect contact details for admin reasons and then quietly add them to a mailing list, which is precisely the grey area this rule targets.
Training: this matters because training providers love emailing old attendee lists long after the course ended, and thought is now considerably cheaper than the alternative.
Alternative Healing: this matters because healing practices lean heavily on referrals and follow-up messages, both of which count as marketing communications under the rules.
Clinical: this matters because clinics handle sensitive health data and marketing consent side by side, and getting either wrong now carries a much steeper price tag.
Retreat/Centre: this matters because retreats and centres often inherit guest lists wholesale from partner organisations, which is not how consent is meant to work.

Where this came from

A law firm's blog post says the UK has raised the ceiling on marketing-related fines considerably, though it stops short of saying who confirmed the actual figures.

Bratby (law firm), publish date not stated on the page.

Credibility flags: methodology not disclosed, sample size not applicable, publisher type is a law firm's own commentary rather than a regulator or research body, no named source for the headline figures.

How we scored this

A relevance score out of 100, built from three things: how well it fits the six practice types, how recent it is, and how solid the methodology behind it is.

40%

Practice fit, 25How new, 100How solid, 0

The relevance score holds up reasonably well given how many practices send marketing emails, but it's marked down heavily on how solid the method is, since no source is named for the actual numbers, while recency assumes the change is as current as the post claims.

It's worth considering changes to your marketing practices

What this means for your marketing

Put a plain consent line in your onboarding paperwork confirming clients agreed to marketing emails, not just service updates.
Say something to whoever sends your newsletters before a client asks why they're on it, particularly if they were added from a referral or event list.
Brief your team on what actually counts as "marketing" under PECR, because "it's just a friendly reminder" doesn't exempt anything.
Fix your unsubscribe process so it removes people properly, not just quietly mutes them.
Hold off quoting the exact £17.5 million figure to clients until it's confirmed by the ICO or a named report.

Who this is most useful for

Practice type	Relevance	Recommended action
Coaching	Medium	Audit your email list consent before the next campaign.
Therapy	Medium	Separate admin contact lists from marketing lists.
Training	High	Review post-course follow-up emails for a proper consent basis.
Alternative Healing	Medium	Check referral-sourced contacts actually opted in.
Clinical	High	Align marketing consent practice with your data protection policy.
Retreat/Centre	Medium	Check partner-shared guest lists for genuine consent.

Best before

Best before: revisit this once the ICO issues actual guidance or hands out a first fine under the new cap, and verify the figures against a primary source rather than a law firm's blog. Talk to Sunlight Creations when it's time to check.

The Thoughtful Ones Always Make It To The Bottom.

Well done, thinker. We love thinkers and they love our careful ways - our listening wind, story garden and visual river are all waiting for you in a twenty-five-minute coffee conversation that helps you rekindle faith in growing your practice. Milk and sugar?

Find your Sunlight ▶