Emergency Contacts and References: Whose Consent Covers Their Number?

A customer who lists a relative as an emergency contact has given you that relative’s number, but not the relative’s consent. The TCPA asks for the consent of the person called, and the FCC reads that to mean the current subscriber or a customary user of the line. A business that robocalls or auto-texts reference numbers is relying on permission the reference never gave, except where a real emergency is involved. The safer practice is to treat those numbers as a narrow channel for specific purposes.

Whose consent do the TCPA calling rules require?

The statute requires “the prior express consent of the called party” for calls to cell phones using an autodialer or an artificial or prerecorded voice, per 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(A). The FCC defined the “called party” in its 2015 order. It concluded that the phrase means “the subscriber to whom the dialed wireless number is assigned” along with a non-subscriber customary user, since each is “the person whose privacy is interrupted by unwanted calls.”

A reference listed on someone else’s application is typically neither the person who applied nor a customary user of the applicant’s phone. The reference is the subscriber of their own line, and they haven’t dealt with your business. Under the FCC’s reading, the applicant’s consent doesn’t extend to the reference’s number.

The FCC’s consent cases run the other way for the person who gives a number about themselves. The same order recited that “persons who knowingly release their phone numbers have in effect given their invitation or permission to be called at the number which they have given, absent instructions to the contrary,” and that someone who gives a wireless number on a credit application “reasonably evidences prior express consent by the cell phone subscriber to be contacted at the number regarding the debt,” in paragraph 141. Both statements concern the person who released their own number. Neither says that one person can release another’s.

Does the autodialer ruling solve this?

Often, for texts and calls placed on ordinary platforms. The Supreme Court held in Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid that an autodialer is a device that “must have the capacity either to store a telephone number using a random or sequential generator or to produce a telephone number using a random or sequential number generator.” A call a person places by hand to a reference, without a prerecorded voice, falls outside the autodialer and prerecorded-voice provisions, which is where the called-party consent requirement lives.

Don’t take too much comfort. A prerecorded message left for a reference triggers the statute whatever device placed it, and a state law or another federal rule may apply to the content of the call. I’d also note that after McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Corp., a court in a private suit “should interpret the TCPA under ordinary principles of statutory interpretation, affording appropriate respect to the agency’s interpretation,” so a court could read “called party” differently from the FCC. The reading that helps a plaintiff is the narrower one, so I wouldn’t plan around the broader one.

When can you call an emergency contact?

The statute carves out calls “made for emergency purposes.” The FCC’s rule defines the term in 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(f)(4) as “calls made necessary in any situation affecting the health and safety of consumers.” A call to the emergency contact after the customer is hurt on your premises, or after a safety recall that puts a customer at risk, has a better claim to that exception than a payment reminder or a request to confirm a delivery.

I’d draw a bright line between the two. If the call is about the customer’s health or safety, the exception may apply. If it is about the account, a delinquency, or a marketing offer, it doesn’t. Employees who dial reference numbers need scripts that say which category they are in.

How should an intake form handle other people’s numbers?

Write the form so that it asks for what you need and no more. A field labeled emergency contact should say what you will use it for, for example to reach the person if the customer is injured or can’t be found for a safety reason. A field labeled reference should say that you will contact the person only to verify what the customer told you. Those labels set expectations for the staff who later dial the number, and they give you a record of why the number was collected.

I’d also add a line telling the customer that they should list only people who know they’ve been listed. It doesn’t create the third party’s consent. It does show that you asked the customer to be careful, which helps if the contact later says they were surprised.

Finally, keep third-party numbers out of marketing and collections lists. The most common way these claims arise is not an emergency call at all. It is a number that was collected for one purpose and later migrated into a dialer file used for another, and the person on the other end has no idea why they’re being called. A data field that records the purpose for each number, and a rule that purpose cannot change without review, prevents that migration.

What about collection calls to references?

California adds its own limits for businesses collecting consumer debts. Under Civil Code § 1788.12(b), a debt collector may not engage in “Communicating information regarding a consumer debt to any member of the debtor’s family, other than the debtor’s spouse or the parents or guardians of the debtor who is either a minor or who resides in the same household with that parent or guardian, prior to obtaining a judgment against the debtor, except where the purpose of the communication is to locate the debtor, or where the debtor or their attorney has consented in writing to that communication.”

That rule is about what you say, not about consent to be called. Whether your company counts as a debt collector under that Act is a separate question. Even if it doesn’t, the same facts make a TCPA claim and a state-law claim easy to plead together.

What to gather when a third party says they never consented

1. Pull the application or form where the third-party number was listed, with the customer’s name and the date.
2. Export every call and text to the number: date, time, who or what placed it, and the script or message.
3. Record how the number was labeled in your system: reference, emergency contact, co-signer, or other.
4. Note whether any automated or prerecorded message was used and what it said.
5. Wait to respond to a demand letter or contact the third party until a lawyer has reviewed the file.

The firm’s TCPA defense lawyers page describes how these claims move through court. For related reading, see the earlier post on whether a phone number covers every call or text.

Questions businesses ask about reference and emergency numbers

Can we text an emergency contact to say the customer’s appointment was canceled?

I wouldn’t. The relative hasn’t consented to your business’s messages, and an appointment change isn’t an emergency. Tell the customer, who gave you their own number.

What if the customer says in the form that the contact agreed?

That statement helps, but it’s the customer’s assertion about someone else’s consent. The better record is one where the contact confirms for themselves, for example by replying to a verification message the contact can ignore.

Does a customer’s family-plan phone make the family member a customary user?

Possibly. The FCC’s examples include a relative on a family calling plan. A relative who lives elsewhere and holds their own plan isn’t obviously in that group.

Can we ask the customer to get the contact’s permission first?

Yes, and it’s a reasonable step. Ask the customer to tell the contact, and give the contact a way to confirm or opt out directly. The confirmation is stronger evidence than the customer’s statement that the contact agreed.

What if the reference asks us to stop?

Stop, and record the request on the number itself. A reference who asked to be left alone and then got another call is a stronger plaintiff than one who never complained.

Defending claims by people who were never customers

If your company has been sued or received a demand letter from someone who says they were called only because a customer listed their number, the form, the call log, and the way the number was labeled will decide the case. Rosenberger + Kawabata represents businesses defending TCPA lawsuits and class actions through its business litigation practice, including claims involving calls to references and emergency contacts. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a free and confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.

Sources

The statutes are the Telephone Consumer Protection Act at 47 U.S.C. § 227 and California Civil Code § 1788.12. The FCC’s rules are at 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200, as published in the eCFR on April 7, 2026. The FCC order is FCC 15-72 (July 10, 2015).

The court decisions are Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 592 U.S. 395 (2021), and McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Corp., 606 U.S. 146 (2025).

This post is general information about the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and related laws as of April 7, 2026. It is not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Courts and the FCC change the rules in this area often, and the outcome of any claim depends on its facts. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.