Dialpad Sued For Allegedly Snooping On Customer Calls

Case Overview: A class action claims Dialpad secretly listens to consumer calls and uses personal conversations to fuel its artificial intelligence tools, without getting permission from the people on the line.

Consumers Affected: California residents who called T-Mobile and had their conversations allegedly intercepted and recorded by Dialpad.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

A new lawsuit accuses tech company Dialpad of secretly listening in on consumer calls and using personal conversations to fuel its artificial intelligence tools, without getting permission from the people on the line.

According to the proposed class action, filed in California, Dialpad’s AI-powered “conversation intelligence” software records, transcribes, and analyzes calls between customers and businesses like T-Mobile. 

The platform is marketed as a way for companies to improve customer service and spot trends, but the lawsuit says consumers were never told that a third-party AI system was also listening in and learning from their private conversations.

Plaintiff Says AI System Listened Without Consent

William Terrill, who filed the proposed class action lawsuit, says he had no idea anyone besides T-Mobile was on the other end when he called the company in March 2025. Like many consumers, he assumed the call might be recorded by T-Mobile for quality assurance. 

But what he didn’t expect, the lawsuit says, was that his call would be sent to Dialpad, transcribed in real time, and analyzed by an AI model trained on billions of minutes of past calls.

Terrill alleges that Dialpad was able to extract details from his call, including speech patterns and intent, using a range of tools such as keyword tracking, sentiment analysis, and AI-based satisfaction predictions. 

The lawsuit claims neither T-Mobile nor Dialpad informed him that the call would be shared with a third party or that the data might be used for reasons beyond customer support.

Dialpad's "Conversation Intelligence" Tools Questioned for Transparency

Dialpad’s software suite goes well beyond basic call recording. It includes real-time transcription, tracking of specific phrases like “cancel” or “money back,” and even sentiment analysis to gauge customer frustration. 

It can use speech patterns to predict satisfaction scores without needing post-call surveys and helps companies intervene during calls flagged as high-risk, according to the lawsuit.

But all that insight requires access to live customer conversations. The lawsuit argues that Dialpad isn’t just a silent backend processor—it’s an active participant in capturing and analyzing calls it has no business listening to, especially when the customers haven’t consented.

The case claims Dialpad violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act and seeks to stop the company from further data collection without transparency or consent.

Tech Companies Face Growing Data Privacy Challenges

Dialpad is far from the only company facing legal heat over AI-powered data harvesting, and as AI-powered platforms become more common across industries, these lawsuits highlight growing concerns about what companies do with private conversations, and who else might be listening. 

In recent months, LifeLong Adoptions was hit with a lawsuit for allegedly embedding tools on its website that shared sensitive information about prospective birth mothers with Facebook and Google. 

Weight-loss company Nutrisystem has also been accused of sending customer data to outside marketing firms, while CVS and GoodRx have faced lawsuits over unauthorized health data sharing.

Even school software isn’t safe. A lawsuit against Canvas, the online learning platform, claims the company collected and monetized data from children, without their parents’ knowledge.

In his lawsuit against Dialpad, Terrill wants to represent anyone in California who called T-Mobile and had their conversations intercepted and recorded by Dialpad. He is suing for violations of the state’s Invasion Of Privacy Act and seeks damages, injunctive relief, restitution, fees, costs, and interest.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Terrill v. Dialpad, Inc.
• Case Number: 3:25-cv-04509
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorney:

• Adrian Gucovschi and Nathaniel Haim Sari (Gucovschi Rozenshteyn, PLLC)
• Alec M. Leslie (Bursor & Fisher, P.A.)

Have you spoken with a business using Dialpad's services? Share your thoughts on AI listening to calls below.