Recording Telephone Calls in Calif. Requires All Parties’ Consent

Phone call recording laws in California offer protection and make it illegal for businesses, individuals, and even consumers to be recorded for not only inbound calls but outbound calls as well without their consent and agreement.

Recording telephone calls without a consumer’s explicit consent violates their privacy rights and phone recording laws if the telephone conversation has been recorded without consent and warning.

Under the California Invasion of Privacy Act, not getting the permission of all parties involved in a recorded telephone conversation is a violation of the law.

An investigation is now looking into whether 99 Cents Only Stores may have violated these consumer privacy rights. The company is known of being an American price-point retailer chain based in Commerce, Calif. 99 Cents Only Stores offers all products at 99 cents or less.

California is known for having a long history of protecting the privacy rights of its citizens through its laws, and the inalienable right of privacy is also explicitly stated in the California state constitution.

With the production of new technology throughout the years, California has also kept up in passing new laws to address any issues in privacy violations. The 99 Cents Only Stores are being allegedly considered for violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, as California adamantly protects and prohibits telephone call recording without a clear warning to all parties involved in the call.

California’s wiretapping law, Cal. Penal Code 632, is a “two-party consent law,” making it clear that recording telephone calls within explicit consent of all parties to the conversation makes it a crime. It also makes it a crime to eavesdrop on a telephone conversation as well.

The recording of a telephone conversation in secret is illegal; all parties must be notified of the act. Sometimes businesses record phone calls to help maintain strong customer service etiquette, quality assurance purposes, and for training purposes. It is also fairly common for a consumer to hear the warning of the recording of a conversation in advance.

Businesses like 99 Cents Only Stores are known to regularly record telephone conversations with the consumers. Traditionally, staying on the line after being notified of the recording admits consent and approval for the recorded telephone conversation.

Under Cal. Penal Code 632., any person injured by the violation of the California Right to Privacy Act has the right to sue the perpetrator for damages of either $5,000 per violation, or up to three times worth of damages sustained, whichever amount is greater.

The California “two-party consent” law was further established under the case in a California Supreme Court decision in 2006, Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.

The court determined under the case that California’s two-party consent law took precedence over Georgia’s law. The court held that “California law should apply in determining whether the alleged secret recording of telephone conversations [between an out-of-state party and a California party]… constitutes an unlawful invasion of privacy.”

The court determined that recording telephone calls between a brokerage firm in Georgia and clients in California could not be recorded without the consent of both parties, regardless of where the original call was coming from.

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