Illinois law about recording the phone call

Shanna, in Illinois, you will have to notify the other party before recording the phone call. If any legal action is taken from your side and the recording does not state your permission taken, you might fail to prove your case. Things will take a reverse turn and the other party can sue you.

You can confirm the law from the local attorney general office in your area. While recording the call, clearly mention the statement that you are recording the phone call for legal purpose and if the person continues to talk after hearing the message, the permission will be considered to be obtained.

If you want to know some information about allied interstate, you can visit this thread.
http://forums.debtcc.com/allied-interstate.html

There are two sets of issues to deal with when you determine whether or not you want to record a telephone call. First is whether your state's version of the Eavesdropping, Wiretapping, and Electronic Surveillance Act prohibits recording unless every party to the conversation knows and consents, or if only one party is required to know and consent. Most states and federal law are in the latter category. Last time I checked, there were six states that had the "everybody must know" rule, and that list included Illinois, along with Pennsylvania, Maryland, Hawaii, and others I don't recall. Note that these are all states with a history of political corruption; the theory I heard is that the legislative and executive powers in those states were in fear of prosecution for their own misdeeds and wanted to make it as hard as possible for law enforcement to obtain evidence against them, hence the "everyone must consent" rule. It's easy enough to get consent, just tell the person you're talking to that you're recording and say, "ok? if not, please hang up now, I will be recording, so if you choose to say anything, that's consent to being recorded." If you get a recording calling you, it's perfectly ok to record that, it's not a "person" who is capable of either giving or withholding consent. If the recording says, "this call may be monitored or recorded..." that's consent. Just be sure you get the consent on the tape.

The second set of issues has to do with the use of the tape as evidence. That is usually a matter of wholly different rules. It may be objectionable as "hearsay" or for failure to follow some technical statute prescribing how such things may be used. In Virginia, if you state at the beginning of the recording the names of all parties concerned, the time and date of the recording, and get the other person to acknowedge the names, time and date, and then at the end make the same kind of statement, then the tape may be admissible subject to other (e.g., hearsay) rules.

Note that it is a felony to violate the Eavesdropping, Wiretapping, and Electronic Surveillance Act everywhere in the U.S., and any kind of recording, possession of a recording, or use of a recording can be a violation. It can also subject you to civil penalties of thousands of dollars. However, it only protects "private conversations" - that's "fourth-amendment" privacy, not "first-amendment" privacy. If a person has no reason to believe that he's speaking privately (i.e., he's checked to make sure he's in a secure place with limited opportunities for being overheard) then it's not a "private conversation". People listening in on extension telephones is not "eavesdropping" under the statute.

I have been reading a great deal on this issue, and I'm still a little unsure about the legalities of recording a conversation with a person who works for a business that you may have a problem with. That sentence even confused me. Let me explain with this example. When you call a company about a disputed bill and, before you get through to their representative, you hear the phrase "this conversation may be monitored or recorded for, either quality or training purposes. After that point is it legally mandatory that you let them know you want to record the conversation as well? It seems everytime I ask if it's alright if I record the conversation, they say no. I would rather both parties have records of the conversation, but I guess the question is if one party has already confirmed that they are recording, does that give the second party the right to record without authorization. Thanks for your time!