TCPA Claims in California Small Claims Court: How a Business Responds

Twelve thousand five hundred dollars is the most an individual can ask for in a California small claims case, enough room for 25 alleged TCPA violations at the $500-per-violation figure. A consumer can file one without a lawyer, and at the hearing lawyers generally can’t represent either side. A business that sends the right person with the right records has real defenses, and if it appears, it keeps an appeal right the consumer doesn’t have.

Can a consumer bring a TCPA claim in small claims court?

Yes. The Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s private-claim provisions expressly point to state courts: a person “may, if otherwise permitted by the laws or rules of court of a State, bring in an appropriate court of that State” an action for damages, under 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3). The Do Not Call provision in § 227(c)(5) uses nearly identical wording. In Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, the Supreme Court settled that federal courts can hear these cases too: “We hold, therefore, that federal and state courts have concurrent jurisdiction over private suits arising under the TCPA.” So a TCPA claim can start in a California small claims court, as long as the amount demanded fits the court’s limits and the venue is proper.

The statute sets $500 in damages for each violation of § 227(b), or actual loss if that’s greater. Section 227(b) covers unsolicited fax ads and certain calls made without the required consent using a prerecorded or artificial voice or an autodialer, meaning equipment that can store or produce numbers using a random or sequential number generator and dial them. It allows up to $500 for each violation of the Do Not Call rules under § 227(c), which include the National Do Not Call Registry, the federal list of people who don’t want telemarketing calls. Under § 227(c)(5), that Do Not Call claim belongs only to a person who received “more than one telephone call within any 12-month period by or on behalf of the same entity” in violation of the rules. A court may increase either award up to three times if it finds the violation was willful or knowing. Those numbers are why small claims works for a consumer with a handful of calls or texts. Eight violations at the tripled maximum, or 25 at the base rate, fit under the cap for an individual.

California’s Small Claims Act sets two limits. A natural person can sue for up to $12,500 under Code of Civil Procedure § 116.221. Any other plaintiff, such as a corporation or LLC that received junk faxes, is held to $6,250 under § 116.220(a)(1). Both figures took effect on January 1, 2024, when SB 71 raised them. A plaintiff with a bigger claim can still file in small claims, because under § 116.220(d) “the excess may be waived, but any waiver is not operative until judgment.”

There’s also a frequency limit that matters with repeat TCPA filers. Under § 116.231(a), “no person may file more than two small claims actions in which the amount demanded exceeds two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), anywhere in the state in any calendar year.” A plaintiff demanding more than $2,500 must sign a declaration under penalty of perjury that the limit hasn’t been exceeded. Claims at or under $2,500 don’t count toward that limit. If a plaintiff’s demand is over $2,500, I’d check the court records for that person’s other filings that year before the hearing.

Who speaks for the company when lawyers can’t?

An employee, officer, or director who has a real job at the company. Section 116.530(a) provides that “no attorney may take part in the conduct or defense of a small claims action,” with exceptions for lawyers suing or being sued themselves or through all-lawyer firms. A corporation appears only through “a regular employee, or a duly appointed or elected officer or director, who is employed, appointed, or elected for purposes other than solely representing the corporation in small claims court,” under § 116.540(b). LLCs and partnerships follow a parallel rule in § 116.540(c), and a partnership can also send a partner.

The representative has to file a declaration at the hearing stating that they’re authorized to appear, the basis for that authority, and that they aren’t employed solely to represent the company in small claims court. Prepare it in advance and have it signed. A professional representative hired from outside doesn’t qualify, and neither does the texting vendor.

One mistake I’d avoid is sending in-house counsel as the company’s representative. Even though they’re employees, § 116.540(m) says nothing in that section authorizes “an attorney to participate in a small claims action except as expressly provided in Section 116.530.” The safer pick is the person who runs the texting program or the compliance function and can explain how the records were made.

A lawyer still has a role before and after the hearing. Section 116.530(c) says nothing in it prevents an attorney from “Providing advice to a party to a small claims action, either before or after the commencement of the action.” Our lawyers can’t appear at the small claims hearing, but they can advise the company on its defense and help it prepare the representative and the records that person will present. The same subsection allows a lawyer to represent a party in an appeal to the superior court and in enforcing a judgment.

Can the business move the case out of small claims?

Sometimes, but in my view leaving is often a worse deal than staying. Venue rules and removal are the main exits, and an arbitration clause may matter too.

Venue. Under § 116.370(a), “Venue and court location requirements in small claims actions shall be the same as in other civil actions.” Among other places, a corporation can be sued where its principal place of business is, or where “the obligation or liability arises,” under CCP § 395.5. A plaintiff may argue that liability for a call or text arose where it was received, which is often the plaintiff’s home county. Even if the company doesn’t object, § 116.370(c) requires the court to look into whether venue is proper. If the case is filed somewhere with no tie to the calls or the company, § 116.370(b) lets the defendant challenge venue in writing, mailed to the other parties, without appearing at the hearing. An out-of-state corporation that hasn’t designated a principal office in California may have little to argue, though. In Easton v. Superior Court (1970) 12 Cal.App.3d 243, a California appellate court held that a foreign corporation in that position could be sued in any county.

Removal. A TCPA claim arises under federal law, so a defendant can generally remove it to federal court under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), within a short statutory deadline. In federal court, a company has to hire a lawyer, because “a corporation may appear in the federal courts only through licensed counsel,” as the Supreme Court noted in Rowland v. California Men’s Colony. The case also picks up discovery and motion practice. I think removal is worth it for a small claims TCPA case only when there’s a pattern behind it, such as a repeat filer or a lawyer coordinating many claims against the company. Our earlier post on removing a TCPA case to federal court walks through the mechanics.

Arbitration. Read the company’s arbitration clause for a small claims carve-out first. If it has one, a plaintiff in small claims court may be exactly where the clause allows. If it doesn’t, the company may be able to raise the clause, but compare what an arbitration will cost the company with what the plaintiff is asking for. The post on defending TCPA mass arbitration covers how those fees and small claims options play out when the claims come in volume.

What if nobody shows up for the company, or it loses?

I’d rank missing the hearing as the most expensive mistake a business can make in small claims. The plaintiff still has to prove the claim, because § 116.520(b) provides: “If the defendant fails to appear, the court shall still require the plaintiff to present evidence to prove his or her claim.” With no one there to answer it, a screenshot of texts and the plaintiff’s account can be enough. A defendant that didn’t appear also loses its right to appeal the judgment itself. Under § 116.710(d), its options are a motion to vacate the judgment and an appeal if that motion is denied. The motion needs good cause under § 116.730 and has a short filing deadline. If the company was never properly served, § 116.740 offers a separate motion, also with a time limit.

A company that appears and loses gets a second chance. The plaintiff can’t appeal on its own claim: “The plaintiff in a small claims action shall have no right to appeal the judgment on the plaintiff’s claim,” under § 116.710(a). The defendant can. Under § 116.770(a), the appeal is “a new hearing before a judicial officer other than the judicial officer who heard the action in the small claims division.” The appeal hearing is still informal, with no discovery and no jury, but subsection (c) of that section applies the small claims hearing rules “except that attorneys may participate.”

That asymmetry is a big reason small claims isn’t a bad forum for a business. A company that wins at the first hearing is usually done with that claim. A company that loses can try the case again in front of a new judge, with a lawyer this time. The notice of appeal has a strict deadline that starts when the clerk mails or delivers notice of the judgment, so calendar it the day the notice arrives.

How should the representative prepare for the hearing?

I’d treat it as a short trial and plan to show documents instead of explaining from memory. Small claims has no formal discovery; § 116.310(b) states that “The pretrial discovery procedures described in Section 2019.010 are not permitted in small claims actions.” The plaintiff can’t serve document demands for your dialer logs, and you can’t depose the plaintiff. Either side can still subpoena a witness or records to the hearing itself, using the Judicial Council’s small claims subpoena form. Whatever the company wants the judge to see, its representative has to bring, in printed copies for the judge and the plaintiff.

The representative should be able to say how each record is created and kept, because that’s what makes a printout believable. In my view the strongest small claims defenses are the boring ones, like a dated consent record for the number or an opt-out log showing the request was processed before the next message went out. For a Do Not Call claim, those records also support the defense written into § 227(c)(5): it’s an affirmative defense that the defendant “has established and implemented, with due care, reasonable practices and procedures to effectively prevent telephone solicitations in violation of the regulations prescribed under this subsection.” Before the hearing, the company should:

1. Preserve everything tied to the plaintiff’s number under a litigation hold, from call and text logs and dialer or texting-platform data to the consent record.
2. Print the opt-out and internal do-not-call entries for the number, with the dates each was received and processed.
3. Print the Registry scrub results for each campaign that reached the number, with the date of the Registry download it used.
4. Gather the vendor or lead-source contract, the scripts and message templates, and any prerecorded or AI-voice audio.
5. Get legal advice before answering the plaintiff, calling them, or offering money.

The firm’s page for TCPA defense attorneys in California covers how claims involving marketing calls and texts are evaluated, from the records to the first response.

When does paying the claim make more sense than fighting it?

When the records are bad and the claim is small. If the consent record is missing or the opt-out wasn’t honored, the company is paying for an employee’s day in court to lose. A negotiated payment before the hearing can cost less than the judgment.

Pay only with paperwork. Exchange the payment for a signed release and a request for dismissal of the small claims case with prejudice, and suppress the number across every platform the company uses. Our post on individual TCPA settlement release terms covers what that release should say. I’d also think about who else is watching. A quick payment to a repeat filer can bring the next claim. In my view, a company that fights the cases its records can win sends a better message than one that pays every demand.

Questions businesses ask about small claims TCPA cases

Can our lawyer come to the small claims hearing with us?

Not to present the company’s case. Section 116.530 bars lawyers from taking part in the conduct or defense of a small claims action, with narrow exceptions for lawyers who are parties themselves or whose all-lawyer partnership or professional corporation is the party. A lawyer may testify about facts they know firsthand. A lawyer can advise the company before and after the hearing, including on how to prepare the representative and the records. If the company appeals, a lawyer can represent it at the new hearing in superior court.

If the company wins, can the plaintiff appeal?

Not on the plaintiff’s own claim. Section 116.710(a) gives the plaintiff no right to appeal the judgment on its claim. A plaintiff who missed the hearing can ask to vacate the judgment instead. The right to appeal the plaintiff’s claim belongs to the defendant.

Who should the company send as its representative?

Send a regular employee or officer who knows how the calling or texting program works and can explain the records. The statute requires someone employed or appointed for purposes other than solely representing the company in small claims court. A compliance manager or the person who runs the texting platform usually fits better than a senior executive who has never seen the logs.

Can a plaintiff with a larger TCPA claim still use small claims?

Yes. A plaintiff can waive the amount over the limit and sue for the cap, and the waiver doesn’t take effect until judgment. For the plaintiff, the trade is giving up the excess in exchange for a faster, simpler forum with no pretrial discovery.

Sued in small claims over calls or texts?

If your company has been served with a small claims TCPA case, the choice of representative and the records that person brings to the hearing can matter as much as the law. Rosenberger + Kawabata represents businesses defending TCPA lawsuits and class actions through its business litigation practice, including claims involving marketing calls and texts. Contact Rosenberger + Kawabata online for a free and confidential consultation, or call (310) 894-6921.

Sources

The statute is the Telephone Consumer Protection Act at 47 U.S.C. § 227. The federal removal statute is 28 U.S.C. § 1441. California’s Small Claims Act provisions are Code of Civil Procedure sections 116.220, 116.221, 116.231, 116.310, 116.370, 116.520, 116.530, 116.540, 116.710, 116.730, 116.740, and 116.770, as in force on October 7, 2025. The venue statute is CCP § 395.5, and the subpoena form is Judicial Council form SC-107.

The court decisions are Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC, 565 U.S. 368 (2012); Rowland v. California Men’s Colony, Unit II Men’s Advisory Council, 506 U.S. 194 (1993); and Easton v. Superior Court (1970) 12 Cal.App.3d 243.

This post is general information about the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and related laws as of October 7, 2025. 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.