California Call Recording Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Illegal Conversation Recording

SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union is facing a California call recordings class action lawsuit, from a woman alleging the company violated state law when they recorded her without consent.

The woman is filing this California call recording class actionlawsuit on behalf of herself and other state residents, who also allegedly had their conversations recorded by SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union without their knowledge or consent.

Plaintiff Jenny Ho is leading the charge in this California call recording class action lawsuit, alleging the credit union willfully violated state privacy laws when recording consumers. Ho says she received a call from the company on May 18, 2017, and spoke with a representative named “Grace”, who then asked her a serious of questions to verify her identity.

Ho’s California call recording class action lawsuit reiterates the fact that there was quite a bit of personally identifiable information (PPI) released in the call, which was allegedly recorded without her consent. Ho also alleges the credit union did not warn her that the call may be recorded, and it was done so without her knowledge.

Ho was shocked to discover the call had been recorded and promptly filed this California call recording class-action lawsuit after learning the credit union may have done the same to other consumers.

Overview of California Call Recording Law

Under the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA), a conversation cannot be legally recorded without the consent of all parties involved. This law was passed in 1967 to help protect the privacy rights of California citizens, which applies to conversations on both landlines and cellphones.

This law especially applies to businesses that regularly conduct customer service calls to customers, which often involves crucial personal information for verification purposes. For this reason, California call recording laws require companies to give a disclosure during the call and then to get the consent of the consumer before any recording is done.

The disclosure must be made at some point during the call, often at the beginning, and the customer must be asked to give their consent to potential call recording. Oftentimes customers will be asked to push a button on their dial pad or stay on the line, which is considered implied consent under California recording laws.

While numerous companies have designated customer service lines for incoming and outcome calls, it is important for them to follow state and federal privacy laws. Call recording is often done for employee training purposes, and can also be useful for documentation in the case of any confusion.

With this in mind, it is crucial for companies to adhere to California privacy laws to avoid fines and to protect the privacy of their customers. Even for big companies, potential penalties can quickly add up with the number of customer service calls often made on a daily basis.

Ho states SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union failed to follow state privacy laws, and knowingly violated California call recording laws. Ho is filing this California call recording class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and others similarly situated and is seeking $5,000 per violation.

This California Call Recording Class Action Lawsuit is Jenny Ho v. SchoolsFirst Federal Credit Union, Case No. 3:18-cv-00181-BEN-MDD, in the U.S. District Court of Southern California.

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