Virginia’s Telephone Privacy Protection Act and Marketing Texts

Virginia’s Telephone Privacy Protection Act reaches marketing text messages to Virginia numbers, and it is harder on repeat violators than the federal law is. A stop request has to be honored for at least ten years. Damages start at $500 and climb to $5,000 for later violations, with fees available to a winning plaintiff. A business that texts customers nationwide should find out whether its suppression logic would survive a Virginia claim.

What does the Virginia statute cover?

The Act is Chapter 44 of Title 59.1 of the Code of Virginia. It defines a telephone solicitation to include a text. Under Va. Code § 59.1-510, the term includes “any text message sent to any wireless telephone with a Virginia area code or to a wireless telephone registered to any natural person who is a resident of the Commonwealth” for the purpose of offering or advertising property, goods, or services. Calls fall within the definition when they go to a Virginia residence or to a landline or wireless phone with a Virginia area code, or to a phone registered to a Virginia resident.

The section’s history note shows it was last amended in 2025, in Chapter 626 of the Acts of Assembly. I didn’t trace the bill, so I can’t say from the Code alone exactly which words changed in 2025, and I’d compare the current text to the version your compliance program was built on.

The Act applies by area code or by residence. That is a wide net for a company with a national customer list, because a customer who moved to Virginia and kept an out-of-state number is covered by the second prong.

What are the hours and the stop rule?

Calling hours track the federal window. Under § 59.1-511, “No telephone solicitor shall initiate, or cause to be initiated, a telephone solicitation at any time other than between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. local time at the contacted person’s location, unless the telephone solicitor has obtained the prior consent of the contacted person.”

The stop rule is where Virginia departs from the federal rule. Section 59.1-514(A) bars a solicitation to a number “when a person at such telephone number previously has stated that he does not wish to receive a telephone solicitation made by or on behalf of the person on whose behalf the telephone solicitation is being made.” For texts, the statement is made “by replying to the text message with the word” UNSUBSCRIBE or STOP. And, in the same subsection, “Any such request not to receive telephone solicitations shall be honored for at least 10 years from the time the request is made.”

Two consequences. First, a suppression list that purges old opt-outs on a schedule shorter than the statute’s duration can create a violation years later when a purged number gets texted again. Second, the statute names the two words that count for text replies, which is narrower than the FCC’s list of words that revoke consent under 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(10), so a system built for the federal rule should recognize the Virginia words as well as the FCC’s.

What defenses and exemptions are there?

Subsection (D) of § 59.1-514 excludes calls to a person “with that person’s prior express invitation or permission as evidenced by a signed, written agreement stating that the person agrees to be contacted by or on behalf of a specific party and including the telephone number to which the call may be placed,” calls to people with whom the seller has an established business relationship, and calls where the solicitor has a personal relationship. It then adds a limit that matters, in the same subsection: “The exemption for an established business relationship or a personal relationship shall not apply when the person called previously has stated that he does not wish to receive telephone solicitations as provided in subsection A.”

Subsection (C) supplies an affirmative defense for a defendant that “has established and implemented, with due care, reasonable practices and procedures to effectively prevent telephone solicitations in violation of this section, including using in accordance with applicable federal regulations a version of the National Do Not Call Registry obtained from the administrator of the registry no more than 31 days prior to the date any telephone solicitation is made.” The Registry rule in subsection (B) bars solicitations to numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry.

The practical reading is that a documented compliance program is a defense, and a customer relationship is not a shield once the customer has said stop.

It’s also worth comparing Virginia’s defense to the federal one. The federal statute gives a Do Not Call defendant a similar affirmative defense for “reasonable practices and procedures,” per 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5). A company that builds one documented program, with written procedures, training, a registry scrub within the required window, and suppression that lasts as long as the strictest state requires, can use the same evidence for both. A company that treats each state separately tends to have gaps between them.

What does a violation cost?

Section 59.1-515 gives an aggrieved natural person a claim against any “responsible person,” meaning the telephone solicitor or the seller on whose behalf the message was sent. The statute allows “damages in the amount of $500 for a first violation, $1,000 for a second violation, and $5,000 for each subsequent violation,” and says “If the court finds a willful violation, the court may, in its discretion, increase the amount of any damages awarded for a first or second violation under subsection A to an amount not exceeding $5,000.” A winning plaintiff may also recover “reasonable attorney fees and court costs,” under subsection C of the same section.

The same section allows an action for damages in a general district court or small claims court, within their jurisdictional limits, and requires an action that includes a request for an injunction to be filed in circuit court. For a business, that means a claim can arrive in a low-cost forum with a fee-shifting provision attached.

How should a national sender adjust its systems?

Start with suppression duration. Many marketing platforms let an administrator purge opt-outs after a period or when a list is rebuilt. For Virginia numbers, I’d lock that function, keep every stop request on a permanent suppression table, and treat any deletion as a legal-hold decision. A ten-year rule means the table has to survive vendor changes, platform migrations, and staff turnover.

Next, identify Virginia recipients by more than area code. The definition also reaches phones registered to Virginia residents, so a customer’s billing or shipping state belongs in the logic. A customer with an out-of-state number and a Virginia address can still be a Virginia recipient.

Last, keep the proof of each message’s local send time. The 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. window is measured at the contacted person’s location, and the only way to show compliance is a log that stores the recipient’s time zone along with the send time.

What to gather when a Virginia claim arrives

1. Pull the plaintiff’s number and its area code, and the address or registration that makes the person a Virginia resident.
2. Export every message to the number with the date and the time in the recipient’s time zone.
3. Pull the stop request and the suppression entry, and show how long the entry has been kept.
4. Collect the written permission or the relationship facts that support an exemption.
5. Wait to respond to a demand letter or contact the recipient 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 posts on Texas SB 140 and on the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act.

Questions businesses ask about the Virginia statute

Does Virginia’s law apply to a company outside Virginia?

It applies to solicitations to Virginia area codes or to phones registered to Virginia residents. The caller’s location is not the test.

How long do we have to honor a Virginia opt-out?

The statute says at least ten years from the time the request is made. Set your suppression retention to match or exceed it.

Can we rely on an existing customer relationship to keep texting?

Not after the customer has said stop. The statute removes the established business relationship exemption once the person has stated they do not want solicitations.

Is a small claims court claim a real concern?

It can be, because the statute authorizes actions in general district and small claims courts and allows fees. The amounts are modest in a single case and add up across many.

Defending claims under a state calling statute

If your company has been sued or received a demand letter under Virginia’s statute, the suppression history, the recipient’s area code and residence, and the compliance program will drive the defense. Rosenberger + Kawabata represents businesses defending TCPA lawsuits and class actions through its business litigation practice, including claims involving state calling and texting statutes. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a free and confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.

Sources

The Virginia statutes are Va. Code § 59.1-510, § 59.1-511, § 59.1-514, and § 59.1-515, as published on the Virginia Legislative Information System.

This post is general information about the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and related laws as of June 22, 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.