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

Rules for political robocalls are routinely ignored

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok

California has no-nonsense rules for political robocalls. The California Public Utilities Code states that robocalls must begin with a real person, and that person should immediately inform you of the reason behind the call. They should then ask for your permission to play the recording.

This sounds like a nice experience. Unfortunately, most robocalls in California don’t do the dance.

When are political robocalls legal?

The Telephone Consumer Protection Act is in place to regulate and restrict all robocalls. Telemarketers must follow a strict set of guidelines to stay inside legal bounds. In addition, California bans robocalls unless you have an existing relationship with the caller. Even then, the prerecording can only start after you give permission to the person on the line.

Spotting the loopholes

Out-of-state call centers don’t necessarily need to follow state laws. Politicians know this. Most of them operate from various states, and each state has some of their own rules. Since campaigners are calling from different states, they can be immune to wrath of state officials. As a result, you might receive robocalls that skip over the necessary introduction and dive straight into the agenda. This can leave California residents feeling angry and violated.

What can be done?

Registering your number on the National Do Not Call list is a good start when working around legal telemarketing calls. However, it does not always protect you against unwanted political robocalls. Political parties don’t have to stop calling when you ask, and they don’t have to maintain a do not call list.

On the bright side, most robocalls are only legal to landline phones. Cellphone users often avoid the annoyance, unless organizations find a way around it. If that happens, blocking applications are available for download.

If you feel like an organization’s robocalls are breaking state or federal laws, be sure to consult a lawyer. There’s a possibility that others are noticing the same thing, and a lawsuit may need to be filed.

Quick Navigation

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.