Lawsuit Alleges Mayflower Transit Recorded Californians’ Phone Calls Without Consent

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action alleges Mayflower Transit, LLC has secretly recorded calls with California consumers without their knowledge or consent.

Filed by a Los Angeles County resident, the 16-page case alleges the Missouri-headquartered moving company has overstepped a California state law that bars parties from recording communications involving a cellular or cordless telephone without the consent of both parties to the conversation.

The lawsuit claims the plaintiff contacted Mayflower Transit around June 2020 to inquire about having his personal property and vehicle moved from California to Minnesota. The plaintiff says he later contacted Mayflower on June 18 to inquire about additional charges involving the transportation of his vehicle that he believed were included in the original quote.

During the course of the conversation, Mayflower’s representative revealed to the plaintiff that his earlier call with the company had, unbeknownst to him, been recorded, the lawsuit relays. Per the suit, the plaintiff was “completely unaware” that Mayflower had recorded his call until the company’s representative, during the second call, noted he had reviewed the recording of the prior phone conversation.

“These conversations at issue herein were all related to Plaintiff’s private moving plans,” the suit says. “As such, the telephone communications at issue herein were all ‘confidential’ as a matter of law and thus subject to the protection of [the] California Penal Code.”

At the inception of the first call, the defendant never informed the plaintiff that the conversation would be recorded, nor did man consent to such, according to the case.

“Nonetheless, Defendant was in fact surreptitiously recording the entirety of the lengthy phone conversation between Plaintiff and Defendant,” the complaint claims.

The plaintiff says he was “shocked, upset and angry” upon learning that Mayflower had recorded his call without his knowledge or consent.

The lawsuit alleges the defendant owes the plaintiff and proposed class members—anyone in California whose conversation or cellular telephone conversations were recorded without their consent by the defendant or its agents within the past year—$5,000 for each violation of state  law.

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s newsletter here.