However, customers calling Navy Federal never have any reason to believe a third party is involved, according to the suit.
Instead, customers are told the call is being recorded “for quality assurance purposes,” which only “tells reasonable consumers that Navy Federal itself may use the recording to train its customer service agents or improve its products,” the suit says.
“It does not tell reasonable consumers that a third party (Verint) will intercept, record, and use the call for its own purposes,” the suit says.
The parties did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday.
The proposed class is represented by Stephen Andrews and Christin Cho of Dovel & Luner LLP.
Counsel information for Navy Federal and Verint was not immediately available.
The suit is Paulino v. Navy Federal Credit Union et al., case number 3:24-cv-03298, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
