Texting, Lead Generation, AI Outreach and Revocation Rules Under the TCPA Auto dealers continue to face substantial exposure under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) as they increasingly rely on digital marketing, customer relationship management (CRM) automation, lead-generation vendors and AI-enabled customer engagement tools. What was once primarily a robocall statute has evolved into one of the most active sources of consumer class-action litigation affecting the automotive retail industry. With statutory damages ranging from $500 to $1,500 per alleged violation, even routine sales or service campaigns can create significant litigation risk if consent practices are not carefully managed. This article covers different risk areas and offers practical steps dealerships can take now to stay compliant. Text Messages Continue to Drive Litigation Risk Dealers should remember that text messages are generally treated the same as telemarketing calls under the TCPA. When a dealership sends marketing or promotional text messages using an automated platform, the business will often need to establish that it obtained the consumer’s prior express written consent before sending the communication. This issue frequently arises in connection with: • internet lead forms; • OEM-driven campaigns; • equity mining initiatives; • CRM reactivation efforts; • marketing initiatives misclassified as servicing; • “we want to buy your car” campaigns; and • service-to-sales marketing transitions. Dealerships should ensure that consent disclosures are clear and conspicuous, separate from general terms and conditions, not pre-checked by default, and appropriately retained for evidentiary purposes. Importantly, the dealership bears the burden of proving consent if challenged. As a result, you should have policies and procedures in place to maintain, preserve and store consent forms. Third-Party Lead Providers Present Ongoing Exposure One of the most significant TCPA risk areas for dealerships remains the use of purchased or shared internet leads. Although the FCC removed its proposed “one-to-one consent” rule after a federal appeals court struck it down, dealers should not assume that lead-generator consent language is sufficient merely because a vendor represents that consent was obtained. Instead, dealerships should independently evaluate: • the lead form language; • the placement and visibility of disclosures; • whether consent specifically contemplated dealership outreach; • whether automated texting or calling was disclosed; and • how consent records are stored and retrieved. Dealers should also consider contractual protections with vendors, including indemnification provisions, compliance warranties, audit rights and record-retention obligations. Consumers May Revoke Consent in Broad Ways The TCPA’s revocation rules continue to expand, creating operational challenges for dealerships. Consumers may revoke consent through virtually any reasonable means, including: • replying “STOP” to a text; • verbally requesting no further contact; • emailing dealership personnel; • communicating through website forms; • requesting removal during service or sales interactions; or • withdrawing consent for only certain communications but not others. This creates risk where dealership departments operate independently or use separate communication platforms. For example, a customer who opts out through the service department may still inadvertently receive sales or finance marketing if suppression systems are not centralized. You should carefully review What Dealerships Need to Know By Fisher Phillips 28
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTg3NDExNQ==