Is it legal to record a client call in Washington?
Short answer: Washington is an all-party (two-party) consent state. Every participant on a call, including your client, has to agree before it can be recorded. This is general information, not legal advice. Confirm current requirements with your own counsel before changing how your firm records calls.
What this means for a personal injury intake call in Washington
An intake call is usually the first time a caller has ever spoken to a lawyer about their case, often while still dealing with an injury, and often without knowing that the call might be recorded at all. In Washington, that caller's consent isn't optional. Recording without it can expose a firm to civil or criminal liability under state law, can get the recording excluded as evidence, and can raise a professional-responsibility problem with the bar independent of whether a wiretapping claim would ever actually be brought.
Washington's privacy law is unusual in explicitly covering private conversations in general, not just phone calls, and Washington courts have applied it to a wide range of recorded exchanges.
The safest practice, regardless of the exact rule
The simplest, most defensible approach is an audible disclosure at the start of every call: stating plainly that the call is being recorded, and letting the caller continue (or not) with that knowledge. In most jurisdictions, continuing the conversation after that disclosure is treated as consent. It doesn't replace knowing Washington's specific rule, but it's a sound baseline that works whether the caller is in Washington or calling in from somewhere else.
- Disclose at the start of the call, every time, not just when someone asks.
- Record which consent mode applied to a given call and keep that record with the file.
- Set consent policy at the firm level, not left to whichever staff member takes the call.
How Astrid handles this
Astrid's consent mode is a firm-level setting: self-attestation, automatic detection, or both. Meetings joined by Astrid's notetaker bot include an audible disclosure that it's recording, and every call carries a consent record, visible in the workspace and included in exports. None of this replaces a firm's own legal judgment about a specific call or client, it exists to help a firm document and check its own compliance consistently. See Recording and Consent for the full policy, or the full state-by-state guide for how Washington compares to the other all-party states.
Frequently asked questions
Does Washington require consent from every participant on a call?
Yes. Washington is generally treated as an all-party (two-party) consent state, meaning every participant on a call, including the client, has to consent before it can be recorded, not just the person doing the recording. This is general information, not legal advice; confirm current requirements with your own counsel.
What if the client is calling from outside Washington?
A call that crosses state lines can pull in more than one state's law, and courts don't always resolve that consistently. The safer default is to treat the call as if the stricter of the two states' rules applies, and get consent from everyone on the line regardless of where they're physically located.
Does announcing the recording out loud at the start of the call solve this?
An audible disclosure that the call is being recorded, followed by the caller continuing the conversation, is generally treated as consent in most jurisdictions, including all-party states. It's a reasonable default that doesn't depend on correctly guessing which state's rule applies, though it doesn't replace legal advice on a specific matter.