The "business telephone" exception interests me considerably. It provides the excuse to record unannounced by either permission or beeps for the obvious purpose of monitoring employee performance by a CA.

It would follow, therefor, that any OTHER use, including divulging the fact that a conversation had been recorded, would be extremely risky.

How ARE these guys doing, performance-wise? Too bad we won't find out any time soon, is it not?

NOTHING on this website encourages you to tap your own phone, and much cautions against doing so, and why.

But what a bonanza, if complaints exist and get confirmed with a "sting."

So if you have first-hand knowledge or experience of possible abuse of the business exemption privilege, even after the fact of an unfavorable judgment in litigation, please post:

WHEN you came by this knowledge or exprerience
HOW you came by this knowledge or experience
PRIOR TO or AFTER commencement of litiagtion?
TYPE OF LITIGATION?

Sample:

On or about July 1, 2001, phone call from CA, prior to my filing suit for violation of FDCPA issues.

Sample:

On or about December 24, 200x, verbal quotation from alleged recording* faxed to me at work infractions to another threat to sue me for a debt that was past the SOL.

*(alluded to as a recording but the caller would not reply the recording, so it could be careful or careless note-taking during a previous conversation)

Another reason why I believe strongly that the playing field needs to be leveled.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup