ADI - Policy of Bad Behavior

It's not illegal in AZ.

Arizona Wiretapping Law

Arizona's wiretapping law is a "one-party consent" law. Arizona makes it a crime to intercept a "wire or electronic communication" or a "conversation or discussion" unless you are a party to the communication, present during the conversation or discussion, or one party to the communication or conversation consents. A.R.S. § 13-3005,

-3012(9). Therefore, if you operate in Arizona, you may record a conversation or phone call if you are a party to the conversation or you get permission from one party to the conversation in advance. That said, if you intend to record conversations involving people located in more than one state, you should abide by the recording law of the most restrictive state involved, or play it safe and get the consent of all parties.

I'll have to do some research. I thought federal law required that for a party to record a telephone conversation legally they had to notify the other party/s, or play a tone every so many seconds indicating the conversation is being recorded. (without a wire tapping warrant)

Wow! Looks like I was wrong. Federal law is one party consent also. Well, ADI still sucks.

Without notification to othes it's still underhanded and sneaky.

Must have 2 party consent in Pa. so it is illegal to do it in Pa regardless of federal law. and companys have had criminal charges lodged against them

Your are correct Nick. I have told my customers that there is not enough legal documents they can sign that would possibly keep me out of the witness stand if someone decided to sue them for recording voices in a discussion or other wise.

However, here in these parts there are convenience stores that have Louroe Verifact A LE-070 microphones on the ceiling above the registers. A sign on the door states "Audio and Video Recordings are being made and retained", etc etc.

Now in my book that is not correct and proper legally. I just don't talk while in the store. It does make you wonder what loop hole they think they are using to make it OK??

Les

Your are correct Nick. I have told my customers that there is not enough legal documents they can sign that would possibly keep me out of the witness stand if someone decided to sue them for recording voices in a discussion or other wise.

However, here in these parts there are convenience stores that have Louroe Verifact A LE-070 microphones on the ceiling above the registers. A sign on the door states "Audio and Video Recordings are being made and retained", etc etc.

Now in my book that is not correct and proper legally. I just don't talk while in the store. It does make you wonder what loop hole they think they are using to make it OK??

Les

of a verbal scuffle. When I told them what they said they said that was no t what they said, and then informed me that they were recording all the cal ls, and they would play it back to me. .. ... .... ..... Did that sink in y et? It took me a minute too. They are recording telephone conversations wit hout notifying you in advance or playing a recording notification tone. I'm pretty sure that is illegal. Ok, more than pretty sure. Either the person on the other end is in the habit of lying to customers routinely, or ADI ha s a corporate policy of illegal behavior. -- Bob La Londe The Security Cons ultant PO Box 5720 Yuma, Az 85366 (928) 782-9765 ofc (928) 782-7873 fax ^ u nderscore Residential & Commercial Licensed and Serving Yuma Since 1994 ROC 103044 & ROC 103047

Ummmm , I doubt that they are ..... but here in NY, a third party cannot re cord the conversation of two other people but ........... as long a one per son having the conversation is aware that it is being recorded .... that's ok. And no notification is required. ADI is there only if you REEEEEEALY n eed something that you can't get someplace else conveniently.

I should know better. I just placed an order with them because they said they had everything. I just checked my orders on-line, and every single thing is coming from a different warehouse.

Company policy of bad behavior. Sigh.

I boils down to "expectation of privacy" here. In a convenience store (or any store) you have none. In the bathrooms and fitting/changing rooms you do in those same stores, but not at the registers.

So, no cameras or microphones in a bathroom or changing room (that would include locker rooms at gyms too). All else is fair game in Texas at least. I don't think a sign is even necessary.

I was asked by a doctor (a psychiatrist at that) to install a microphone above his desk so he could record the patients. I asked if he planned to tell the patients they were being recorded and he said no. I temporarily declined the job until he produced a letter from his lawyer that exsolved me of any crime and pointed to a legal clause that allowed such recordings (which IMO is an area with an expectation of privacy, even though the recordings are for the doctor's notes only). I never heard back from him.

Basically he decided to either find someone else who didn't care or decided to get creative and do it himself.

As I said above there is not enough legal paperwork to keep me off the witness stand. With that, my stress and BP is markedly lower on the issue. Which really works for me. :-)

Les

So, did they play back the recording?

Doug

I turned down doing Sunoco gas stores for that exact reason and told them never to call and ask for my help again . There are no exceptions here in P a. They went after hempfield school district decade back because they had v ideo recorders on buses they moved from bus to bus which had a mic .

I have refused to give automatic record permission when calling places with the prerecorded message they are recording for training and told them to turn it off or I would see they are prosecuted . They have to do it if doing business in pa.

LOL

I did not know that Hempfield SD had the issue. I "personally" know the guy that installed the camera boxes in the buses. I know he never had a camera to test. I (I mean He) just had to wire up to the ignition and mounted the boxes. Not sure but I think (HE) did about 10 or 12 of the Hempfield buses at the time. At the time (HE) thought it was just a portable camera/recorder they had. Small world.

I just did a google search on the topic and the law suit that I found had to do with bus drivers being recorded on break at the shop. Apparently is was during a time when negotiations were going on with getting another bus company to hire or something, plus a lot of other issues.

At this point I would guess I am safe. The statue of limitations would have expired.. :-)

Something I had a law enforcement officer (a senior supervisor) tell me about recently might make a few people rethink comments like that. The statute of limitations does not start until there is awareness that the offense has been committed for criminal matters or when damage or loss is discovered in civil matters and can be further extended to not begin until age of majority if a minor is the victim or plaintiff.

Now you went and burst my bubble. :-)

Interesting comment though..............................

I have a feeling my guy did too!

True. Better safe than sorry.

Why would you have to worry, after all it was (HE) that did it! ;-)