Jeffrey Nutty Vaccine wrote: » I expect it when calling large companies but was surprised to hear a recorded message notifying me of call recording now at my local vets. Doesn't bother me. Sure aren't we all being recorded by our phones and smart tvs now anyway. (I don't actually know where the line between conspiracy theory and reality lies on that anymore)
Dravokivich wrote: » Chances are it's likely saying you "may" be recorded. It'll take an insane amount of storage to record every call and maintain those recordings. Where I work, 1 of the lines have an opt out for recording. But in general only about 15% of the calls are recorded and its specifically for assessing agent performance. You can't do that sitting down beside them, because they'll put on a show of being better than they are. It's got very little to do with you.
Dravokivich wrote: » Huh? Where did you hear that. Generally at least one person needs to be aware the call is being recorded. If you are recording it, you're aware of it. I'd hate to think you don't consent to much things you do of your own violation.
murpho999 wrote: » What privacy issue would anyone have ringing a service? I'm always amazed how uptight people get about privacy, especially if they have nothing to hide. Do you think the call will be played all over the office, placed on the internet or sold to the media?
mayotom wrote: » I record all of my calls, it really doesn't take up a lot of storage
bennyl10 wrote: » It's why they ahve to tell you at the start of a call that it's being recorded.. both parties need to consent to the recording
Dravokivich wrote: » mayotom wrote: » I record all of my calls, it really doesn't take up a lot of storage Your own calls. In a call centre there is a large number of agents with a lot of time on phones. Maybe some have a better system than ours. But without going into too much detail I'm in a multinational and a client wanted 100% recording, it didn't happen primarily because of the costs for storage.
Dravokivich wrote: » . Maybe some have a better system than ours. But without going into too much detail I'm in a multinational and a client wanted 100% recording, it didn't happen primarily because of the costs for storage.
banie01 wrote: » It is a significant cost to a business but in our case it is offset by the money saved on settlement in your word/our word situations. If a company is dealing with large customer volumes and contract or pricing changes can be initiated by phone, it really is a huge cost saving for any high volume call centre when offset against "goodwill" credits to account that are often the means of resolving those situations.
wexie wrote: » Plenty of examples of this happening all over the internet. Usually when either the customer or the agent is a complete plonker though.
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: » Of course when OP is trying this hard to hide his dealings, he may arouse the suspicion of law enforcement agencies as to what he is hiding.
Dravokivich wrote: » It's primarily focused on soft skills such as how to deal with difficult callers. Then there's the quality of detail they provide. A call such as yours, I wouldn't expect anyone where I work to answer. It's not for them to do so. They provide a service and should be able to control the call on the basis of that service.
Kivaro wrote: » What an odd response. I'll put it down to your lack of understanding of basic privacy concerns and lack of knowledge on how your data is shared and protected. But in this day and age where people share every aspect of their lives on Facebook and other social media platforms, it doesn't surprise me that this type hysteria is exhibited when questions are asked dealing with privacy. A lot of interesting experiences and relevant stories shared by others; some of which are thought provoking. I wouldn't be surprised if the data protection commissioner takes a look at the topic at some stage in the future; especially in light of GDPR.
Kivaro wrote: » A lot of interesting experiences and relevant stories shared by others; some of which are thought provoking. I wouldn't be surprised if the data protection commissioner takes a look at the topic at some stage in the future; especially in light of GDPR.
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: » Out of my entire post you found that bit odd? We have a bit of Poe's law here, because I didn't add :P;):p:D to my post.
seamus wrote: » It's unreasonable to ask to be able to do business with a company and insist that they make no record of that business. In fact, it's probably illegal for a company to not record it.
seamus wrote: » Your paranoia about data sharing it largely unwarranted, since your interactions with any EU-based business are private by default. They can use the calls for training purposes, but only internally. They can't be shared externally.
Kivaro wrote: » I never asked for that. Maybe you could show where I did.
Greyfox wrote: » You stated that you didn't want to be recorded and this recording is whats necessary for the company to have a record of what has been requested. It's totally unreasonable and unfair to ask for the call to not be recorded as customers lie on a regular basis. The data protection commissioner is already very strict on making sure companies keep your info safe. I'd go as far as to say there's times when data protection gets in the way of helping people
Dravokivich wrote: » Chances are it's likely saying you "may" be recorded. It'll take an insane amount of storage to record every call and maintain those recordings.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » Voice minutes in Q2 2017 4,027,995,954 - call it 4 billion Using an 8Kbs codec you can record voice in 60KB a minute It works out at 8 TB every three days. That's not an insane amount of storage, given the price of drives these days a determined individual could easily manage that.
dr.fuzzenstein wrote: » Or OP could start to live off-grid. No bills, no official registration and conduct all his dealings in his immediate sourroundings through a barter system.
Rubberchikken wrote: » I dont get the privacy issue. Theyre hardly going to release it to the public.