Now you can record your phone call without peeing your pants about whether it’s legal to do so in your state, or worrying that the rep will end the call right after you inform them you’re recording. Ron Burley starts every customer service interaction with getting the rep’s name, employee number, direct line, and call center location. Then he follows up with this
Me: Boy, I sound just like you guys. [Chuckle. Then state clearly:] This call may be recorded for training purposes. [Little laugh.] Maybe you could put in a good word for me?
Representative: [Laughs] Sure.
Me: [Laugh] Thanks. Anyway, here’s what’s going on with me today……He’s been informed, and therefore I am within my rights to record the conversation. It’s not my problem that the customer service representative might not have taken my statement seriously.”
It’s easy to get started recording customer service calls using your computer and free or low-cost software, learn how here.
More From Consumerist
-
Cable Companies Should Be Worrying About Kids Who Have No Plans For Ever Getting Cable
-
B2B Telemarketer Rage: A Perspective From The Other End Of The Phone Line
-
Chicago Public Library's Amnesty Period Prompts Woman To Return Copy Of 'Dorian Gray' Overdue By 78 Years
-
Delta Misplaces My Backpack Of Essentials, Shrugs
-
Poop Cruise 2: Passengers Not Pleased After 410 Toilets Stop Working On Carnival Ship
Man, it almost sounds like some of you WANT customers and CSRs to be mortal enemies…
I’m a CSR for a high-end furniture company, and I have been recorded by customers in the past. I’m not thrilled about that fact, but I also have nothing to hide; I’ll stand behind every word I’ve ever said to a customer. With that said, if you record me and I find out, you can bet I’ll note it for the next CSR who talks to you, as well as my supervisors.
And while I can’t speak for any other companies, the one I work for records EVERY call in every department. It keeps us honest, and it helps keep our customers honest (I see several fraudulent orders a day). But personally, I don’t care, record me if you like.
For training and security purposes all telephone calls may be monitored or recorded.
That is what my answering machine at home says. Doesn’t stop telewhores from leaving messages.
When the machine tells you the call may be recorded, you are being given a choice of staying on the line and consenting to being recorded or hanging up and going away silently.
In Canada, as far as I have been told, you do have to obtain consent from the other party in order to record. Trickery or assuming the machine gave you permission probably won’t hold up in court as permission. Some of the government lines actually require a verbal “yes” to be recorded (how do they get permission to record the yes/no answer?).
I’d personally like to see a law that says they can’t refuse to do business if you don’t want to be recorded… but that’s another story.
If you are attempting to record evidence to be used in court, or if you suspect that they’re attempting to do the same… then my suggestion is to consult with a police officer or a lawyer.
Anecdote: Let’s just say I was sitting in a courtroom once and saw a very solid piece of evidence dismissed on the grounds that the collector of said evidence didn’t have permission from the defendant or a warrant. The case was still won, but it cost someone hefty fines and the trial was extended CONSIDERABLY by the setback.
@Troy F.:
I am not a CSR and on the rare occurrence that someone does call and either wants the call to be recorded or on the record, I ask them to please state their concerns in written form. Legally that is often the best move…
All calls, emails, and mail are logged and archived however it is to keep me honest… I am not a traitor but still do not love that is the case…
Sounds to me like if you were to trick someone in this manner, you might be guilt of wire fraud, since your demeanor is that you are joking about recording the call.
It takes a real class act to be an ass that would stoop this low… IMO.
1. If companies are giving us a choice of consenting to a recording then receiving assistance then they should also give us the choice of refusing and still receive their assistance. That’s the foremost reason that we call them anyway – to get their assistance. It shouldn’t be a choice between consent or hang-up.
2. Question – if i consent to their recording, can i request a copy of that record? Shouldn’t we be entitled to that recording being that we contributed to it?
@Rectilinear Propagation:
You’d be suprised at the people who call in demanding to be sent a recording of their call.
I’m serious.
I will usually respond, “So, you are telling me that it is OK that WE are being recorded?” The response is always, “Yes.”
Permission thus granted.
Laws differ by state. Most states allow recordings to be used in court as long as “one-party” (you) know you’re being recorded:
[www.rcfp.org]
Man, that is some seriously bad advice for several reasons:
- First of all, just randomly saying the words “this call may be recorded for training purposes” is not enough to establish consent. Saying the phrase incomprehensibly fast, or in an extremely low whisper doesn’t count either: the recording needs to show that the CSR is in a position to understand what s/he is consenting to.
- Second, even if tricking the CSR was acceptable, you’re going to have a hell of a lot of trouble explaining to the judge what training purposes you were talking about…
- Third, you can’t record ANY PART OF THE CONVERSATION until consent has been given, so the whole first part of the call, where you set up the scam by asking a bunch of questions to the CSR is off limits and can’t be recorded.
I’ve been recording customer service calls for a few months now, always expicitly saying “I am recording this call, is that OK with you?” as soon as they pick up the phone, and I have yet to find a company that wouldn’t consent. Granted, I’m not calling hundreds of call centers, and I’m sure there are a few out there who will hang up on you, but honesty seems to be the best policy. If they do hang up on you your best bet is probably to call back a few times until you get a CS who will let you record him/her.
@mattbrown: The problem arises when any of the two parties isn’t in a one-party consent state. For example, let’s say I’m in MA and you’re in NJ. If you give me a call and record it without telling me, you’re OK in NJ, but you still committed a crime in MA under our two-party-consent laws.
From the website you posted: “For example, a reporter located in the District of Columbia who records a telephone conversation without the consent of a party located in Maryland would not violate District of Columbia law, but could be liable under Maryland law. A court located in the District of Columbia may apply Maryland law, depending on its “conflict of laws” rules. Therefore, an aggrieved party may choose to file suit in either jurisdiction, depending on which law is more favorable to the party s claim.”
@zolielo:
Sure, but in a customer-service situation you can’t pre-emptively send a letter expressing your concern that in a future conversation with a customer service rep, you may be abused, lied to, cheated, yelled at or otherwise screwed with…
EPIPHANY MOMENT:
Since the CSR begins the call by iforming you the conversation may be recorded that means both parties know the phone conversation may be recorded, which fulfills all the requirements of the law, which therefore legally allows you to ALSO record the conversation.
Just because you decide to record the conversation AS WELL doesn’t mean jack in the eyes of the law: both parties know the conversation is being recorded, PERIOD.
as much power as they want you to think they do.
So if some sleazebag corporate lawyer ever tried to crap on me with this hollow threats about not getting consent to record a CSR conversation, I would send them the recording of the disclaimer from the CSR-side informing both parties that the conversation might be recorded.
Nothing in the law says that once both parties know a phone conversation is being recorded, only ONE side is actually allowed to record it.
When the CSR inform you the phone conversation my be recorded, the only way you can not give consent to this is to hang up and not be given service. That’s not asking for consent. That’s giving you a choice to have your conversation recorded or hang up. But legally speaking this also gives you consent to record the conversation.
Don’t listen to these creepy lawyer types hear trying to scare you:
When you consent to this CSR disclaimer, this legally allows you to ALSO record the conversation, P.E.R.I.O.D.
“Now you can record your phone call without peeing your pants about whether it’s legal to do so in your state…”
Not using this advice. Now, I’m not your lawyer, and I’m not giving you legal advice, but I (along with your common sense) can tell you that any consent obtained through tricks or fraud is invalid.
Fortunately, most people live in states where one-party consent is sufficient. It is important to know whether your state is a one-party state or not (mine, Florida, is a two-party state) because people do get prosecuted for this kind of thing every once in a while. It’s usually a misdemeanor charge resulting in a small fine, but who needs that on their record?
Also, an illegally recorded conversation may, in some states, be inadmissible as evidence in a courtroom, so if that’s your purpose, you’re SOL.
Finally, if the call opens with a notice that the call “may be recorded for [training, quality control, intimidation, blackmail, or any other] purposes” then that party has consented to the call being recorded, period. Just make sure to get it in the recording if possible. (If not, write down the exact wording the best you can – maybe make a second call to get it exactly right.)
Good luck, prospective phone call recorders. By the way, it’s usually easier to make a record in letter form. Judges love paper.
It’s really a matter of semantics. Think about it.
The announcement “This call may be recorded…” doesn’t always emphasize the word “may” in a manner that implies that the company/call center is the only party that has the right to record the call.
So, it’s absolutely possible that a caller could interpret the “may” as the company/call center giving permission for the consumer to record the call as well.
Say it with me with that thought in mind: “This call may be recorded …”
It’s unassailable logic! The company can’t deny that those particular words are used in its recording. As far as the interpretation/meaning of the words goes, well, it’s all in the ears of the beholder.
Because this has been a very recent revelation, I’ve only tried this out twice, albeit unsuccessfully.
However, I escalated both calls up the food chain, and have been able to get each person to agree that my interpretation of implied permission is possible.
An attorney friend of mine says that armed with sufficient documentation of those calls, I might have a good case in court, should the need arise.
And, at the very least, I’m sending this documentation to the exceutive mucky-mucks, and as many government and media outlets as I can.
While I still may not be able to record calls with CSRs, I might be able to get them to spend time and money to change their systems. To me, it’s worth the effort.
Oops – in the last paragraph, I should have said “I might be able to get the companies to spend the time and money …”. Guess I should practice what I preach, eh what?
In other words: technically speaking the only way to decline consent is to hang up and not call customer service reps.
Imagine if every time somebody called my house, and automated voice said the conversation might be recorded. How would to give consent if the recording is recording you denying consent and asking me to turn off the recording device?
By the I’ve already broken the law, right?
So the companies that have this disclaimer are, technically speaking, breaking the law in states that require consent to record phone conversations, because the only way to express your desire directly to a human being not to be recorded is to be recorded asking that person not to record the conversation, right? (Whereupon, of course, the CSR person will say “sorry, sir, I have no control over that. If you don’t want to be recorded, please hang up.” To which my reply would be: “You’re recording my conversation right now as I speak, as I am specifically requesting not to be recorded you are recording my conversation.”)
So if were going to dwell on the intent of the law, it’s not US breaking the law; it’s THEM. This website is called Consumerist, not Corporatist.
@CHRISHAD95- the laws of the state where the call is being recorded (i.e. in this case the customer) take precedence over the laws in the state (or country) in which the person is being recorded (i.e. the call center).
If that wasn’t the case, then credit card interest rates would be a lot more varied (and reasonable). Credit card co’s can get away with charging what are in effect usury rates in most states because they’re incorporated out of Delaware, Nevada, and South Dakota, and the financial laws of those states take precedence over the laws in the state where the credit card owner lives.
For one party consent states, as long as the actually recording is being done in the one party consent state, it is TOTALLY LEGAL. The state backs you up, as does federal statute.
a) This method is pretty low. Just say you’re recording the call if you’re recording it, no need for shenanigans.
b) Not all call center employees have “employee numbers,” so if you try this and someone tells you they don’t have an employee number, accept it – don’t harrass them. Same thing if they won’t give you their last name – most call centers won’t allow their employees to give out last names for privacy reasons.
c) Direct line! HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. Ron Burkle is LYING if he says he’s getting direct line phone numbers from call center staff.
d) Call center location you should be able to get, with no hassle.
I don’t like the ‘trickiness’ of laughing so they think you are joking and won’t actually record.
Isn’t the whole reason you’d want to record a call because you are sick of people trying to trick or cheat you?
I agree with the “tell them you are recording and move on” idea.
After reading all of these responses all I can say is thank God I live in Texas where we keep it simple…we can carry concealed weapons with a permit and record telephone conversations to protect ourselves.
I would like to echo the others who say this route is decidedly NOT a good idea. The legality of this is questionable at best and shame on the Consumerist for posting something like this that can get its readers into serious trouble.
Consult a lawyer before ever trying anything like this.
Speaking as someone who works for one of the major cell phone companies as a CSR… if anyone did try and sneak on by that they were recording calls, your account would be flagged 5 ways from Sunday with notes reflecting this. And forevermore you’d be outright asked by us every call if you were recording–if so, we wouldn’t proceed with the call, and we’d ask you to stop recording or hang up.
When it says a call is recorded for training purposes, they’re serious–you hear examples of good calls when you get trained, and bad calls. We don’t keep the hundreds of thousands of calls daily to every call centre saved. There’s just no way. We don’t keep them to later use against you, either–but if the call was recorded (not all of them are) and you were threatening harm against the person you spoke to, then we may review that and take some kind of action. but we don’t just keep a cache of all of your calls somewhere.
I like 321calllog.com for many reasons, but one is that there’s a computer that cuts in right at the beginning of the call (and periodically throughout) and informs the CSR (or whoever) that the call is being recorded. Because it’s not me saying it, and CSRs are used to the computers being on their side of the operation, I’ve never had anyone break off a call because of it, and I don’t have to worry about whether or not to notify. Once a particularly belligerent lady said, “Was that just a computer?” and I answered, “I didn’t hear anything” (which is true; you don’t hear the computer on your end” — and that was that.
@kuntaldaftary: If a call is recorded “for training purposes” then the recording exists and is publicly known to exist, ergo, it becomes “discoverable”. At which point, if it is deleted before being subpoenaed then it is OK to have deleted it, but when one becomes aware of a case that might involve this recording and then deletes it, it would be considered spoilage…. (way off topic)
I.E. if you create a legal contract document, and have a statement at the bottom that states that “This document may be used for training purposes only” it still may be used against you in court….
This call “may” be recorded. People think of the word “may” in this situation to mean “might” when actually since the word “may” is also an affirmation permission statement, you absolutely can record the call. As far as I know, even they judged that it means, might, if they are recording you, you have inferred permission to do the same.
Service Rep: Hi, my name is …. How can I help you today?
You: Hi. I’d just like to confirm that this call is being recorded?
Service Rep: Yes it is.
You: Alright.
There you go. He acknowledged that the call is being recorded, implying his consent to have the conversation recorded (similar to how you consent to having the conversation recorded by being informed that the conversation is being recorded.)
Well just incase anyone from canada is reading this…you can probably sue if sony does not co-operate in such a situation citing the sale of goods act section 17-20.
@Ratty:
“We don’t keep the hundreds of thousands of calls daily to every call centre saved. There’s just no way. We don’t keep them to later use against you, either–”
Tell that to the Bush Administration.
If a company won’t take my call because I say I’m recording it, how is a customer who doesn’t want to be recorded supposed to contact the company?
I’ve always wondered if the phrase “This call may be recorded for training purposes” was a statement that admits both sides can record the conversation.
Have there been any cases where someone used that as a defense in any trial associated with taped call conversations.
I live in Illinois, and the law seems ambiguous, it is a two party consent law but but case law says it’s a one party consent for private citizens, but in reading further it seems to pertain only to special circumstances, such as “enhanced note taking” and that doesn’t seem to apply to electronic recording devices.
So two party consent is needed, but does that mean both parties have to state they are recording the call? or just one? Such as the business/customer service you are calling.
Oh and it’s also illegal in Illinois to “monitor a cordless phone…..Wonder if that applies to Cell Phones, and maybe even Governor Blagojavich…Maybe his laywers will find a loophole even though a federal judge allowed the warranted wiretap. ope he signed off on Cordless phones.
The nice thing is that knowing the law and the practices of call service centers because of sites like Consumerist, customers have a way of legal resource through lawful means.