Not home repair, per set ... but voice recording home repairmen question

Do you know of a good voice activated voice recorder that uses AA batteries?

A while back, I had an air conditioning guy try to swindle me (he told me point blank after I paid him $200 to test my AC that I needed an entire new air conditioning system when the problem wasn't even related to the home AC. The problem was a bad circuit breaker in the main fuse panel!).

So, from now on, I want to RECORD these guys quoting me stuff, just in case.

My wife uses an Olympus VN-8100PC, is voice activated and lasts for about

24 hours - and the MP3 files can be transferred by USB to the PC - but the batteries are AAA (triple A) and I hate triple A things!

Do you know of a good voice activated voice recorder that uses AA batteries?

PS: Is it legal to stick a voice recorder in my pocket when talking to these guys? (I think it is but I'm not in the legal profession.)

------------------- Why you ask do I hate AAA? Because they give have the life for the same amount of money as AA and because I then have to stock yet another size battery when I'm already stocking C (kids toys) and D (flashlights) and

9V (smoke alarms), and my battery charger doesn't handle AAA batteries, etc.
Reply to
James Gagney
Loading thread data ...

I had to make secret recordings once at work. They told me to do it. I had to keep changing batteries. I had to do it for hours. I don't see you needing much time.

Greg

Reply to
gregz

Believe it or not, in a few jurisdictions it IS illegal to record a conversation without both parties consent (California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington).

Best do a web search.

Reply to
HeyBub

So ask for their consent. As a contractor, I might think it a little strange, but it wouldn't be a deal breaker unless your plan is to lie.

Reply to
thunder

I'm in California - and I don't see anything in the web that says you can't stick a recorder in your pocket to record man-on-the-street conversations.

Do you have a cite?

Reply to
James Gagney

I don't think you need consent to record a conversation between two people standing right next to each other - but the idea of asking them is similar to the tactic I used when calling phone support.

I 'tell' them I'm recording it - that way I ensure they give more honest answers, even though I'm not recording it.

Reply to
James Gagney

He just stated that he doesn't have a cite. "Absence of evidence ..."

Reply to
Smitty Two

Most such laws pertain to telecommunications (wire tapping) devices. If the conversation is truly "in the public eye", then there is no need to ask permission. As expectation of privacy has been diminished.

That's how tv camera crews get away with video recording people being investigated by the cops.

Even though bad ass cops who don't know the laws will use their muscle and get you to stop recording.

Just record it. If it gets to court, let the judge decide.

Reply to
richard

Yes, look up the wiretapping laws...

You can make recordings of people when the devices used to make the recording are not concealed, when in public no consent is required... Covert recordings require two-party consent unless you want to be slapped with a wiretapping charge...

Reply to
Evan

Here is a good web site to use

formatting link

Reply to
Roy

None of these statements is true in general. Anyone who wants to record conversations legally needs to check the laws of his jurisdiction.

Most laws pertain to wiretapping and not face-to-face conversation, but California's law is broader.

Some states require only one-party consent, so that you can record your own phone conversations; some states require two-party.

When consent is required and denied, it will be no defense to claim that the device was "not concealed."

Generally, there is no expectation of privacy in public, but California's law covers "confidential" conversations.

Reply to
deadrat

Which judge? The civil case judge if he sues the contractor and the judge won't allow the recording as evidence because it's illegal? Or the criminal judge after the contractor has criminal charges filed against him for making an illegal recording?

As was correctly pointed out, in a few states it's a criminal offense to make a recording as the OP intends to do.

Reply to
trader4

In any case, it is an unenforceable crime, so I will (and do) break it regularly. I purchased a Tascam GT-R1 recorder which is small enough to hide in my pocket, sensitive enough to pick up any and all conversations (and music) in the area, and has excellent fidelity. So the liberals stupid law can't be enforced anyway, and was made to be broken by all reasonable human beings.

Reply to
Bill Graham

Yeah, but if you are using a multi- hundred/thousand device, such as an expensive camera, you risk getting it trashed by the cop and/or person you are recording. This is where, the new electronics really comes to your aid. They are making devices that are so small they can actually run them up your arteries and take pictures of your insides. It would be very easy to install such a device in your car that would record the cop while you are getting a ticket without his knowledge. After all, the cops themselves do it with their bait cars, and use the recordings in court against the car thief. (as well as sell them to the TV show producers)

Reply to
Bill Graham

The "liberals [sic] stupid law" is there to protect your privacy and everyone else's.

Reply to
deadrat

I don't know on what basis BG concludes it's a liberal law. It's a law in a few states. I don't know the history of how those laws were passed and by whom and I doubt BG does either. That kind of privacy issue, concerning what someone may or may not record, could just as well be argued by a conservative as well as a liberal

Reply to
trader4

Its very simple. If the law is unenforceable, then it is a stupid law. Therefore it must have been conceived of by, and implimented into law by, liberals... QED

Reply to
Bill Graham

You see, only a dumb liberal would be too stupid to be able to forsee the day when cameras and digital recorders would become so small that they could be carried in rings, necklasses and wristwatches. The fact that Morton Gould, back in the forties, conceived of cell phones that could be carried on te wrist don't make no never mind to a liberal idiot. So any law that outlaws clandestine recording/photographing, is, or at least will be, unenforceable.... Also, they can make its use in court illegal, but thast is also stupid, because courtrooms are, or should be, interested in the truth, and recording devices are manufactured for the primary purpose of aiding in the discovery of truth. So, eventually, they will have to be legalized no matter how hard stupid people work to keep them out of the courtroom. Some things are so easy to predict that even a dumb liberal should be able to do so......

Reply to
Bill Graham

Just get it in writing.

Greg

Reply to
gregz

UPDATE: The California voice recording law is apparently thus:

formatting link
California Recording Law

Note: This page covers information specific to California. For general information concerning the use of recording devices see the Recording Phone Calls, Conversations, Meetings and Hearings section of this guide. California Wiretapping Law

California's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. California makes it a crime to record or eavesdrop on any confidential communication, including a private conversation or telephone call, without the consent of all parties to the conversation. See Cal. Penal Code § 632. The statute applies to "confidential communications" -- i.e., conversations in which one of the parties has an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation. See Flanagan v. Flanagan, 41 P.3d 575, 576-77, 578-82 (Cal. 2002). A California appellate court has ruled that this statute applies to the use of hidden video cameras to record conversations as well. See California v. Gibbons, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1204 (Cal Ct. App. 1989).

If you are recording someone without their knowledge in a public or semi- public place like a street or restaurant, the person whom you're recording may or may not have "an objectively reasonable expectation that no one is listening in or overhearing the conversation," and the reasonableness of the expectation would depend on the particular factual circumstances. Therefore, you cannot necessarily assume that you are in the clear simply because you are in a public place.

If you are operating in California, you should always get the consent of all parties before recording any conversation that common sense tells you might be "private" or "confidential." In addition to subjecting you to criminal prosecution, violating the California wiretapping law can expose you to a civil lawsuit for damages by an injured party. See Cal. Penal Code § 637.2.

Consult The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press's Can We Tape?: California for more information on California wiretapping law. California Law on Recording Court Hearings and Public Meetings

Court Hearings

In a California state courtroom, you may be able to use a recording device if specific requirements are met. Anyone may use an inconspicuous personal recording device for note-taking purposes with the advance permission of the judge. For photographing, recording (other than as above), or broadcasting a court proceeding, you must file official media coverage request forms. These forms must be filed with the court at least five days before the event to be covered. The court has broad discretion to grant or deny such requests based on a number of factors. See Rule

1.150 of the California Rules of Court for details.

Federal courts in California are part of the Ninth Circuit. In Ninth Circuit appellate proceedings, cameras and recording devices are permitted at the discretion of the presiding panel of judges. To get permission, you need to file an Application for Permission to Photograph, Record, or Broadcast from the Courtroom three days in advance, although the panel can waive the advance notice requirement. Recording devices and cameras generally are prohibited in federal district courts in California.

For information on your right of access to court proceedings, please consult the Access to Government Information section of the guide.

Public Meetings

If you attend a public meeting (i.e., a meeting of a governmental body required to be open to the public by law) in California, you may make an audio or video recording unless the state or local body holding the meeting determines that the recording disrupts the proceedings by noise, illumination, or obstruction of view. Cal. Gov't Code § 11124.1(a); Cal Gov't Code §§ 54953.5(a),-.6.

For details on your right of access to public meetings, see the Access section and the The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press's Open Government Guide: California.

For information on your right of access to public meetings, please consult the Access to Government Information section of the guide.

Reply to
Bob Stevens

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.