California Two Party Consent Telephone Laws are Among the Strictest

The State of California two party consent telephone recording laws are among the strictest in the nation.

While there are about 11 other states that also require the permission of both parties involved in a telephone call prior to recording the interaction, California two party consent law is legally enforced on a more frequent basis.

The reasons for this are open to debate, but one of them might be heightened awareness on the part of California’s citizens that take the matter to court more often.

The State of California has a long history of protecting the privacy of its citizens through law. The State’s Invasion of Privacy Act, Penal Code 630-638 is the legal basis for California two party consent and is often referred to as the “wiretapping law” or the “eavesdropping law.”

While these codes do not criminalize listening in on a private conversation between two people who may not realize their interaction can be heard, it does prohibit the use of any electronic device to enhance the hearing of a conversation or to record the conversation.

What is Criminal Eavesdropping in California?

One element of criminal eavesdropping in California is intent. An accidentally overheard conversation where the two parties involved assumed privacy that wasn’t there is not prosecutable.

We all have ears and are unable to turn those off at will. What is illegal and prosecutable is to intentionally go out of the way to hear private conversations behind closed doors by using mechanical aids such as an amplifier or recorder.

Even if one conversant knows this is taking place, it is against California two party consent law wherein both need to give permission.

California two party consent law applies to both inbound and outbound phone calls and has lots of application to businesses. A business can reside anywhere in the U.S. or abroad and receive a customer service phone call from a California resident.

If they record that conversation without permission, they are in violation of the “wiretapping law.” Recently, several businesses have been under suspicion of doing just that—recording and failing to warn or get permission. Here is a list of some of those companies:

• American Airlines: Lost Baggage, Cancelled Flight, Emergency Information Numbers
• AMF Bowling
• British Airways
• Czech Airlines
• Fisher & Paykel
• Malaysia Airlines
• Miele
• Pei Wei Asian Diner
• TGI Friday’s
• 99 Cents Only Stores

Notably listed are certain customer service numbers related to American Airlines, British Airways, Czech Airlines, and Malaysia Airlines—air carriers that should be well apprised of the law.

Pre-Recorded Warnings and Implied Consent

We have all heard the infamous pre-recorded warning of pending intent to “record for quality-control or training purposes” when calling a business customer service telephone line.

When that message is heard by the caller and the caller does not abort the conversation by hanging up, a concept of “implied consent” becomes active legally. In other words, the caller chose to stay on the line in the light of the information provided so has given their tacit permission to record.

If you feel your right to privacy has been invaded by a failure to warn or ask permission by Malaysia Airlines or any of the other businesses under investigation, an attorney can guide you as to whether you have a potential case.

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