Who sent this, and how do I reach them?
The register check keeps you off the wrong numbers. The identification rules make sure the people you do message can see who is behind the send and reply, opt out, or complain. Two short duties carry the weight: s.44 (identify the sender and give valid contact info, on every specified message) and s.45 (do not hide the calling line on voice or fax). Get both into your send template once and you stop thinking about them.
Identify the sender (s.44) 8 min live
Section 44 says every specified message must let the recipient see who sent it and how to contact them. It is simple to state and easy to forget - the "from" and the reply route are exactly what gets stripped when a template is trimmed for length. Here is the anatomy of a message that satisfies it.
LiveWhat s.44 actually requires3 min▶
Every specified message must clearly and accurately identify the sender - the person who sent it or authorised the send - and tell the recipient how they can readily contact that sender. Both parts, together, on every marketing message.
- Clear and accurate. A vague "from a partner" or a brand the recipient will not recognise does not satisfy it. The identity has to be one the recipient can actually tie to who is marketing to them.
- Readily contactable. A reply route the recipient can use without jumping through hoops - a phone number, an email, an address. It has to actually reach the sender.
- It applies to every channel. SMS, email, voice, fax - if it is a specified message, s.44 is in force. Small screens and short scripts are not an exemption.
LiveThe contact info must stay valid (~30 days) + the URL rule3 min▶
The contact information you give has to be reasonably likely to remain valid for at least 30 days after the message is sent. A number you are about to retire, or a mailbox nobody reads, does not count - the recipient must be able to reach you after the fact.
- The ~30-day validity is about contactability, not about the register. It says "the reply route you gave still works a month later" - nothing about re-checking numbers.
- A website address counts only if the sender is identifiable from it. A URL satisfies s.44 when the recipient can tell who sent the message from the URL itself or the landing page it opens. A bare, unbranded short link does not.
- Do not conflate the two 30-day/21-day rules. The s.44 "~30 days" is the sender-contact validity. The 21-day rule from b1 is the register-check validity. Different sections, different clocks - see the callout below.
Do not hide the number (s.45) 8 min live
On top of identifying yourself, if the specified message is a voice call or a fax, you must not conceal or withhold the calling line identity - the number the recipient sees. A blocked or spoofed caller ID on a marketing call is its own breach, separate from s.44. Here is what each channel needs.
Lives.45 and the per-channel checklist3 min▶
Section 45 targets one thing: on a voice call or a fax carrying a specified message, you must not conceal or withhold the calling line identity. The recipient has to be able to see the number the message came from.
| Channel | s.44 sender ID | s.45 calling line |
|---|---|---|
| Voice call | Required | Required - show the number |
| SMS / text | Required | Not applicable |
| Fax | Required | Required - show the number |
- s.44 applies to all three channels. Sender identity and contact info are never optional.
- s.45 adds the calling-line duty for voice and fax. Withholding or spoofing the number is the breach, even when everything else is in order.
LiveMarina's SMS - and the clock trap again3 min▶
Marina Retail's headerless SMS. Marina's team sent a promo SMS from a plain long-code number with no brand name in the body and no reply route - just "20% off this weekend, tap here" over an unbranded short link. The register check had passed, so they assumed they were fine. They were not: with no identifiable sender and no working contact, the message failed s.44. The fix was one line in the template - a sender name plus "Reply STOP or care@marinaretail.sg" - not a new process.
Self-studyWhere these duties break in real send stacks4 min read▶
The identification duties rarely fail because someone decided to hide. They fail because a template was trimmed, a channel was swapped, or a tool defaulted to something unbranded. The recurring failure modes:
- The trimmed SMS. A body cut to fit one segment drops the sender name or the "Reply STOP" line. Both are s.44 content - a length budget is not a defence.
- The shared short link. A campaign reuses a generic bit.ly-style link that resolves to a page with no clear sender. The URL then does not satisfy s.44, because the sender is not identifiable from it.
- The dialler default. An outbound calling platform set to withhold or randomise caller ID trips s.45 on every marketing call, silently, until someone checks a handset.
- The retired mailbox. A reply-to address or number that is decommissioned inside the month breaks the ~30-day contact validity even though it was correct when the message went out.
The fix for all four is the same shape: set the sender identity, reply route, and caller ID at the platform or template level, and put a periodic check on the list so a decommissioned route is caught before the next send.
Audit a Marina message ★ 10 min
The whole session collapses into three questions you can run on any message in under a minute. Pull a real Marina Retail send - or one of your own - and walk it through.
Is the sender identifiable? Read only the message, as the recipient would. Can you tell who is marketing to you, clearly and accurately? If a URL is the only clue, is the sender identifiable from the link or its landing page?
Are they contactable? Is there a reply route - phone, email, address - that actually reaches the sender, and is it reasonably likely to still work in ~30 days? A retired number fails.
Voice or fax? Is the number shown? If the send is a call or a fax, confirm the calling line identity is not blocked, withheld, or spoofed. SMS and email skip this one.
Fix it in the template. Whatever failed, patch it once at the template level so every future send inherits the fix. Note the change and who owns the send template.
Before session b5 ◐ 40 min total
- Pull your three most-used marketing templates and audit each against the s.44 two questions - sender identifiable, contact valid ~30 days.
- List every channel you market on and confirm which ones are voice or fax; for those, verify the calling line is shown, not blocked.
- Find who owns each send template and where the sender ID + reply route are set - so a fix sticks instead of being retyped per campaign.
- Read: the PDPC Advisory Guidelines on the Do Not Call Provisions, Part IV (message identification and calling line).
Official sources covered
Taught from the PDPC's own DNC guidance. This page covers the identification duties - the sender-ID and calling-line rules that apply to every specified message.
Three questions before you go 🎯 ◐ 90 seconds
1 · Under s.44, the contact information in a marketing message must be reasonably likely to stay valid for at least...
s.44 requires the sender contact info to be reasonably likely to remain valid for at least 30 days. Do not confuse this with the 21-day register-check validity from b1 - separate rule, separate clock.
2 · A marketing SMS passes the register check but shows no sender name and no reply route. It is...
s.44 applies to every channel. Passing the register check is necessary but not sufficient - a message with no identifiable sender and no contact route fails on s.44.
3 · Which duty applies to a voice marketing call but NOT to a marketing SMS?
s.45 - the calling-line duty - applies to voice and fax only. s.44 sender identification applies to every channel, and the register check applies to whichever register covers the channel.