codename_fortyseven Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 Hey, I've been thinking about something, and someone please help me out here. I know there are various state/federal laws on phone recording. One party or two party and such as far as who is aware. I don't think it would be problematic in either case to use a phone recording as the basis for a call transcript, which I presume should be admissable in court with no problem. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blrogs Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 Wouldn,t think so , these could be for mental notes later? in addressing a problem? wait for the pro,s to jump in on this ! I,m Still learning Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 Using a phone recording to transcribe notes is one of those grey areas of law (as if any of it was black or white). As long as you don't mention the recording in court, you should be okay...they'd have to prove you recorded the call without their knowledge, and the judge could decide whether he wants to hear it...or charge you with wire tapping. On the other hand, without the recording itself admitted as evidence, it boils down to your word against theirs.Actually, I usually started each conversation with an OC or CA by saying, "okay, I'm starting my recorder now". If they objected, I hung up. There really isn't a good reason to talk with them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codename_fortyseven Posted February 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 It also depends on the state. I know texas is a one party recording state, so as long as one party knows that a recording is being made, it is legal. I don't know if it would be allowed in court, though. The whole wiretapping thing usually comes into play when neither party is privy to a recording being made, such as you tapping your neighbor's phone. I wonder, with many businesses, they give you the disclaimer that "we may record phone calls for quality assurance, etc..." That is effectively giving two party notice, would it not? I'd figure that after hearing that, any recording by any party is fair game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willingtocope Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 You're right about the one-party / two-party thing...and, if their message to you says they're recording...and you have that on tape...then they could hardly object to you recording. It still boils down to what the judge will allow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdaddyroy Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 This is good info. I am passing this on to my sister-in-law..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 You do have to be careful. In most states it is a crime to illegally tape a phone call. And some states give a private right of action to sue for illegal taping, and damages there can be significant. If you are a one party state, that is fine. If the other person is in a two party state, then you have to tell them you are taping. If you do not, then you probably can't get the phone conversation admitted into evidence and you may face some other action if the other side is pissy. I suppose you could use a recorded phone conversation to refresh your recollection. I have used a great service, www.tel-biz.com. You can download conversations as a .wav file, and I believe they will trasncribe for you. I have no financial interest in the company, just think it is a good product. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codename_fortyseven Posted February 14, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 http://www.callcorder.com/phone-recording-law-america.htm#The%20US%20Federal%20LawHere is what I have seen regarding state/federal phone recording laws. Federal law requires one party be privy, but doesn't supercede state laws UNLESS the phone call crosses state lines. Check the exact statues, this isn't legal advice, check with a lawyer, etc...I believe the law was intended to keep me from recording my neighbors phone calls. Also, there is a business clause, so as long as you record all business phone calls, you can use it as evidence. Recovering, you are correct that it can be tricky, but I think with most businesses that give the standard "this call may be recorded for quality assurance." you should be able to record away, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted February 14, 2005 Report Share Posted February 14, 2005 Look in the resources page, there are good guides to state laws about recording. If you call a business ( CA or CRA) and get the " this call will be recorded, you are certainly okay to record it yourself, as at that point both parties know the call will be recorded. If it says the call may be recorded, I'd follow the law or your state or both states. I'm not sure that reference to the federal law is accurate. The trend seems to be going to 2 parties. And the FCC, in the tariffs, at least teh ones I have seen, require two party notice. Which is why you sometimes hear a beep when you are calling. That is a tacit way to let the participants know the call i sbeing recorded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRDTNogood Posted February 15, 2005 Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 Recovering, aren't there exceptions under the Penal Code though? If you are recording it because of a criminal act???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recovering Attorney Posted February 15, 2005 Report Share Posted February 15, 2005 that applies to law enforcement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methuss Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 If you want to simply get around the whole issue, just include the following line in your DV/dispute/C&D letter:"All further communications by telephone will be recorded. This is your notice of my intent to do so."Once they get your letter by certified mail, you will have someone's signature on file that they were notified of your intent to record. You will no longer have to tell each person who calls you that you are recording since they received written notice of said intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codename_fortyseven Posted February 23, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 Methuss, Some people may be inclined to be a bit more careful with what they say if you note that you will record, or they may plainly ask if the call is being recorded, which I think you would have to answer truthfully. Why negotiate with these CA idiots or give them a heads up that you know what you are doing?Why give them any warning? Be as subtle as you are dangerous. I HOPE I get some CA that likes to run over the little guy, cursing, talking about my mom, threatening, etc... I think someone mentioned how to set them up by answering:Gosh, this sounds serious...Can I go to jail?Are you going to garnish my wages? (I live in Tx)etc...From what I have read, the best response is to just go as poor Joe consumer who is being beaten up by the CA. Record away, and in court when they deny the FDCA violations break out the tapes/transcript. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methuss Posted February 23, 2005 Report Share Posted February 23, 2005 bigcraig79,To answer your questions: Firstly, I find that 99% of the time this notice stops all calls. The CAs are not totally stupid (just mostly) and rarely risk calling when there is even the slightest chance of being recorded. Most people here simply have a hard time getting a CA to "put-it-in-writing." If you are combining this with a C&D on calls anyways, then this just gives you the ability to gather proof of violations.Second, you don't have to talk to a CA...ever. You certainly don't have to answer their questions. If they ask about being recorded, just don't answer. Let them prattle on while you record, if they are dumb enough to call. Better yet, ask them why they are calling after getting a C&D notice, and drill them with dates and names of when their company signed for it when the CA agent pleads ignorance.Lastly, giving them the warning is required in some States where both parties must know the recording is being made. You as a consumer are not responsible for their internal communications problems if they fail to mark the file as "do not call." This warning, in writing, is proof positive that they got notice and makes your recording legally admissable as evidence in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
codename_fortyseven Posted February 24, 2005 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2005 Methuss, I think you probably are correct about CA's dropping the phone when they know they are going to be recorded. Agree 100% on not talking to CA, which is probably good advice for most. Unless, you get bored easily like myself and want to hammer home a pont to said sleazy companies. I would answer their "are you recording this?" with an "Why, are you?" Although not answering is probably best.heheHeck, I've even heard recordings left by CA's on answering machines and voicemails. Stupid, stupid, stupid, as those sort of things REALLY have a bad habit of coming back to haunt you. Saw them on a consumer lawyer's page, and was quite humerous to listen to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts