Pegasystems listened to customer service calls to U.S. Bank without consent, a new class action alleges.

Ruben Juarez, Sean Marin, Brian Shultz and Benedict Lacovetti filed a class action lawsuit against Pegasystems Inc. on Oct. 2, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

The plaintiffs allege U.S. Bank's AI software listened to, transcribed and analyzed their calls with the bank's customer service agents without their consent.

What is Pega Voice AI?

Pegasystems, known as Pega, sells Pega Voice AI, a software service that assists customer service agents during live phone calls. The complaint says it converts both sides of a call into text in real time then uses natural language processing to suggest next steps, fill in forms and write call summaries.

Pega features U.S. Bank as a Voice AI customer on its website, and the filing claims the bank operates the tool in its contact centers.

What is the lawsuit about?

The lawsuit alleges audio from U.S. Bank customer calls streams to Pega's cloud servers, where the company's systems transcribe and analyze each conversation as it happens. Those servers belong to the company not the bank.

The complaint contends that arrangement makes Pega an outside party to each call rather than a simple recording tool with the ability to use the call content to train and improve its own AI models.

What the plaintiffs say they shared on the calls

All four plaintiffs say they called U.S. Bank's customer service line from home and spoke with a human agent. During those calls, they disclosed details such as home addresses, account numbers, dates of birth, account balances and the last four digits of a debit card.

Pega's software reportedly monitored each call from start to finish and sent real-time suggestions to the agent on the other end. None of the plaintiffs expected or knew an outside company would hear those conversations, the proposed class action contends. They claim they never knew about or consented to Pega's involvement and that the interception severely invaded their privacy.

The legal claims

The lawsuit brings four claims:


  • California Invasion of Privacy Act, Section 631(a), which bars reading or learning the contents of a communication in transit without the consent of all parties

  • California Invasion of Privacy Act, Section 632(a), which bars using a recording device to listen in on or record a confidential conversation without everyone's consent

  • Massachusetts Wiretapping Statute, which prohibits secretly hearing or recording phone and in-person conversations

  • Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, which bars intercepting phone, electronic or in-person communications

The plaintiffs seek $5,000 per violation for California class members and at least $1,000 per violation for those in Massachusetts and Pennsylvania along with punitive damages, attorneys' fees and a court order ending the alleged interception.

What the lawsuit means for U.S. Bank customers

The proposed classes cover residents of California, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania who called U.S. Bank from a home, workplace or business in their own state and had Pega record, monitor or listen to the conversation.

As of this writing, there is no settlement, no claims process and no money available.