A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Do you know if they are recording the call?

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

You receive a call from a company – a creditor or collections agent, perhaps. In most of these calls, they will ask you some questions, and some of these questions will involve very personal information about your finances. But what if that call is being recorded without your knowing it? And what if something happened to compromise the safety of that information?

While most people simply assume that their calls are not being recorded. But the truth is, companies know that the practice of recording calls is illegal, but they do it anyway. This practice puts your financial security in jeopardy. In fact, a recent class action suit tells this familiar story.

$6.5 Million Settlement for Nationstar Taping Calls

Nationstar Mortgage was the defendant in a recent class action claim in which the mortgage company agreed to a $6.5 million settlement.

The charges against the defendant company involved recording customer phone calls without telling the customers. The plaintiff class included 44,000 people who were physically present in California and using cellphones with California area codes.

The complaint alleges that Nationstar violated California privacy laws.

What This Means

A class action case like this is a big win for consumers in California and throughout the country. Every time we win a case like this, it brings justice to the individuals who were harmed and it gives warning to corporate entities throughout the country that there are consequences to violating people’s privacy rights.

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.