/>iHello everyone. I hope you have all been enjoying March Madness as much as we all have. In the meantime, I wanted to share a recent and interesting ruling that happened in the District Court of Arkansas.
The case, entitled Hastings v. SelectQuote Insurance Services (STANLEY HASTINGS, JR. PLAINTIFF v. SELECTQUOTE INSURANCE SERVICES, et al. DEFENDANTS, No. 4:22-CV-00498 KGB, 2024 WL 1385701 (E.D. Ark. Mar. 31, 2024)), involves a consumer named Stanley Hastings, who sued SelectQuote, an insurance lead generator, alleging violations of the TCPA. Hastings claimed that SelectQuote and/or its vendors made unsolicited calls to him using an autodialer without his prior consent.
In the discovery phase, a dispute arose around SelectQuote’s use of calling “scripts”. Hastings sought production of any scripts or written call guides used by SelectQuote’s agents and/or third-party vendors who made calls on SelectQuote’s behalf.
SelectQuote initially denied having any “scripts”, claiming it did not know what the plaintiff meant by that term. However, Hastings provided evidence that SelectQuote’s own internal communications referred to using “scripts”.
Hastings then deposed Jeff Randolph, an employee of SelectQuote who was directly involved in reviewing telemarketing scripts and TCPA compliance. At the deposition, Randolph continued to claim he did not understand what “scripts” meant. Randolph also admitted he had not reviewed certain SelectQuote systems like Trello where script materials may have been housed, and that he was instructed by his counsel not to review it.
After the deposition, SelectQuote produced some email communications discussing call handling procedures but still did not produce any documents directly referred to as “scripts”. Hastings moved to compel full production of script materials and for Randolph to be re-deposed after proper preparation.
The court rejected SelectQuote’s position that it should not have to produce “scripts” because it did not recognize that term, calling the argument unconvincing. The court ordered SelectQuote to produce any script documents used by its agents and/or vendors, and granted the request for Randolph’s re-deposition.
A shockingly embarrassing and easily avoidable loss here with lots of takeaways.
The lesson learned from this case is that companies engaged in telemarketing should be fully prepared to substantiate their calling practices and procedures in anticipation of potential TCPA litigation. Nobody wants to end up like SelectQuote in this circumstance. By SelectQuote not understanding their own terminologies, as well as not being able to proficiently search the script related materials on Trello, SelectQuote’s arguments (and their attorneys) were completely walked over by an unpersuaded court.
Companies must have full command over their documentation and systems. By maintaining organized records and ensuring all relevant materials can be captured and produced, you gain the upper-hand in defending against TCPA claims. It really is not that difficult to take the time to ensure your company and it’s employees are up to speed on the content and storage of company compliance materials.
Also, always be sure that your corporate representatives are well-informed and knowledgeable in their specialized areas of work. Attorneys can only prepare you for so much in a deposition, so ensuring you have the right representatives for the right potential issues gives you the leg up in anticipation of potential litigation.
It’s the small steps like these above that can save you large amounts of time and monetary losses in the future.
