Consumers who received a call from a Mears Transportation contact number may have had their phone call recorded without consent.

Attorneys are currently investigating several businesses to see if they violated California state law by recording consumer calls without consent and without warning customers. Companies under investigation by legal professionals include: Dermalogica, Swarovski, Drs. Foster & Smith, Mears Transportation Group, Romano’s Macaroni Grill, Southwest Rapid Rewards (800-445-5764 calls only), United Airlines Pet Safe (800-575-3335 calls only), Cannondale Bicycle Corporation, and Czech Airlines.

If consumers received a call from a Mears Transportation contact number and did not hear a warning that their call may be recorded, the business may have violated California state law by recording calls without consent.

In California, the privacy of the state’s residents is considered to be very important – privacy is even defined in the state’s constitution as an inalienable right. To reflect this high standard, California enforces some of the strictest privacy laws in the United States. A powerful law protecting California citizens is the California Invasion of Privacy Act, which was passed by state legislators in 1967 amid the growing threat of technological invasions of privacy.

The California Invasion of Privacy Act prohibits a variety of privacy invasions including “maliciously and without the consent of all parties to the communication, [intercepting], [receiving], or [assisting] in intercepting or receiving a communication” between cell phones, landline phones, and radio telephones.

In order to circumvent the law, some businesses include a call recording warning at the beginning of their calls to inform their customers of the call recording. If customers stay on the line after this warning is given, it is generally considered consenting to the call recording. However, calls from a Mears Transportation contact number may have fallen short of this tactic by failing to include a warning. This means that they may have recorded calls without consumer consent.

Businesses faced with California call recording lawsuits may attempt to wiggle out of liability by arguing that they recorded calls for non-nefarious purposes such as training or customer service. However, the California Invasion of Privacy Act does not consider whether or not call recording is malicious – only whether or not a call was recorded without the consent of all parties.

Consumers who were called by a Mears Transportation contact number and believe their call was recorded may be eligible to file a California call recording lawsuit. Plaintiffs in these lawsuits may be able to recover up to $5,000 per violation under the California Invasion of Privacy Act if the lawsuits go to trial.

Some lawsuits may not go to trial and are instead settled out of court by businesses hoping to avoid the risks and costs associated with continued litigation. Compensation will vary far more in a California call recording settlement compared to a trial verdict, but settlements still provide a reliable way for consumers to recover compensation for having their call from a Mears Transportation contact number or other business number recorded without their express consent.