I think there is always a great deal of emphasis on using the recorded call against someone, ie as a threat. The expectation is that one or both parties are cheating or bad.
However in most cases I think this assumption is not true. Its simply that there may be different expectations, assumptions and misunderstandings at work. If both parties had the call recordings easily available situations could be understood and resolved easier. Kind regards, Jochen Mobile: 021 567 853 Phone: 09 630 3425 Email: [email protected] Skype: jochendaum Web: www.automatem.co.nz On Nov 17, 2009 5:15 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: A lot of companies say they record things "for training purposes", which intimates a benign purpose. It is such widely used "new-speak" that it does sound like a euphemism for wanting to know what happened, for their own purposes. Can they use those conversations to justify invoicing a customer for services in dispute? You have a good point, I would be surprised if the act does allow them to re-purpose the collected information, even at the suggestion of the person it was collected from. There is no doubt in my mind that the privacy act prevents any information that is collected for training, derived from a recorded exchange, from being used for any other purpose than training. Certainly there is nothing in Orcon's obsequious welcome message that would warn you that telephone calls might be used against you in any disputes that may arise. I seriously doubt that any company would be successful in obtaining informed consent from potential customers on that basis! On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 14:55:03 +1300, Phill Coxon <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-11-17 at 13:16 +1300, Phill Coxon wrote: > >> A long time ago (8 years?) I had a law... -- NZ PHP Users Group: http://groups.google.com/group/nzphpug To post, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe, send email to [email protected]
