California Two Party Consent Law Protects Privacy in Phone Conversations

According to California privacy laws, there is a California two party consent law that makes it illegal for telephone calls to be recorded without the explicit consent of all parties involved.

Currently, however, investigators have recently suspected Teva, a footwear company, of unlawfully violating telephone recording laws.

According to Teva’s website, the company was created in the Grand Canyon back in 1984. They state of their brand that “a river guide rigged two Velcro watchbands to an old pair of flip flops and created a shoe that wouldn’t float away.” Today, the company is famous for sandals designed for outdoor recreational use.

California’s wiretapping law, Cal. Penal Code 632., is a “two party consent law.” It makes it a crime in California to record any confidential communication unless all parties to the communication consent to the recording.

Many businesses like Teva may record customer service calls, telemarketing calls, or other telephone calls to aid in improving their customer service or for training purposes. The rule, though, is that they have to let consumers know about the recording.

Litigation over the California two party consent law also includes violations for this statute which may include fines of $5,000 per call or three times the actual damages that were suffered, depending on which one is greater.

Questions may arise when a conversation happens across state lines. Can the California two party consent rule still apply when one party to the conversation is in a sate that doesn’t require unanimous consent to record?

The answer is yes, according to a California Supreme Court decision in 2006, Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney. The Court determined that the California two party consent law took precedence over that of Georgia, a one-party state. It was decided that the California two party consent law took precedence because California has an interest in protecting its citizens or residents’ privacy and setting a precedence with Georgia would thereby impair that interest.

Additionally, the Court also decided that “if a business informs a client or customer at the outset of a telephone call that the call is being recorded, the recording would not violate the applicable California statute.”

Other questions such as whether the California two party consent law can apply to calls being recorded by an employer at work. According to the Cal. Penal Code 632., an employer is considered a “person” under the law, and therefore is subject to the California two party consent law. According to the law, the phone calls may be recorded on a company’s telephone if permission was given from the outset. It’s possible that an employee gave their consent to be recorded by their employer when they originally accepted the employment. Consent could be implied if, for example, notice of the recording is given in an employment contract or an employee manual that the employee has accepted.

Additionally, if the employer required that calls be recorded as a condition employment, then any calls made within the company can be recorded without further consent or notice to the employee.

However, calls made with a party outside the company may only be recorded with the explicit consent and permission of all parties involved in the call.

Join a FREE California Call Recording Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you live in California and you did not receive a warning when calling a toll-free number, your call may have been recorded in violation of California law, and you may be entitled to compensation. See if you qualify to file a California call recording class action lawsuit.

Join Now