Whether or not you initiated the call, a California law requires your permission before another party records the content of your telephone conversation. In fact, because California is one of eleven states with two-party consent laws in place, both or all people involved in the conversation must give recording permission.

As an example of alleged violation of the law, the Tupperware customer service line has been the subject of numerous consumer complaints recently. Consumer advocates suspect the Tupperware customer service line may be recording customer calls without giving the customer notice of the recording.

Pre-recorded Caveat and Implied Consent

We have all become accustomed to hearing this message when going about making phone calls to deal with consumer issues. From the business side of the equation, having the recorded message that immediately kicks on when entering a voice mail system is less than ideal; however, it informs consumers that they are being recorded and covers a company against liability for the failure to recognize California Invasion of Privacy Act statutes (CIPA) if it operates correctly.

In the case of the kitchen storage company, if a consumer hears a prerecorded warning while on hold with the Tupperware customer service line and chooses to wait until a company representative picks up, he or she has given their implied consent or permission to record the telephone interaction.

Ideally, the customer service representative (CSR) answering the Tupperware customer service call will—live and in person—directly ask the caller for their consent. This legally covers a business on a second and hopefully less fallible level.

Consumers have registered issues with Tupperware customer service for allegedly not doing what it takes to get either implied or traditional consent prior to recording telephone transactions.

California Right to Privacy

California’s consumer constituents enjoy strong protection of their privacy rights under state law. The state has been on the forefront of legislation to protect its citizens right to privacy since its inception—it is a part of the constitutional document.

As new technologies have advanced and commercially unfolded, California’s state government has kept current and disallowed devices to betray what it considers to be a basic and unalienable right.

Whether or not the business resides in California, if the involved citizen is a resident, all parties to a phone call must give permission for the call’s content to be recorded through any means. Other businesses under investigation for possibly improper call recording include:

• American Airlines: Lost Baggage, Cancelled Flight, Emergency Information Numbers
• British Airways
• Cannondale Bicycle Corporation
• Czech Airlines
• Dermalogica
• Fisher & Paykel
• Harman Audio
• Hunter Boots
• JBL Audio
• Malaysia Airlines
• Romano’s Macaroni Grill

The statutory consequences for failing to get permission to record a call is up to $5,000 per violation or three times the amount of damages suffered. This fine can be especially steep if plaintiffs gather their legal complaints together in a class action lawsuit.