California, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania residents who called U.S. Bank customer service may be covered by a proposed class action alleging Pegasystems’ Pega Voice AI listened to, transcribed and analyzed their calls without consent. No class has been certified and there is nothing to file yet.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Pegasystems Inc. has not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
Four U.S. Bank account holders filed a proposed class action against Pegasystems Inc. on October 2, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, where the software company is based. The case, Juarez v. Pegasystems Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14506, alleges that Pegasystems’ Pega Voice AI, which U.S. Bank uses in its call centers, received and analyzed callers’ conversations with bank representatives without the callers’ consent.The plaintiffs say that violates wiretap laws in California, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, which require consent before a conversation is recorded or listened to. U.S. Bank is not a defendant. Pegasystems has not yet responded, and none of the allegations has been tested in court.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
What the Complaint Says Pega Voice AI Does
Pega Voice AI is a tool that helps call center agents during live phone calls. According to the complaint, which quotes Pegasystems’ own training materials, the software streams both sides of a call to Pegasystems’ speech service, transcribes it in real time, and runs the transcript through language-processing systems that suggest answers, fill in forms and remind agents to follow their scripts. The complaint cites a Pegasystems customer story describing U.S. Bank’s use of Voice AI.The plaintiffs argue that makes Pegasystems a separate third party listening to the call, not just a recording tool the bank uses for itself. They also allege Pegasystems has the capability to use call contents to train and improve its AI models. According to the complaint, callers are not told before the conversation starts that an outside company is receiving it in real time.
The four plaintiffs, from California, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, say they called U.S. Bank on several occasions between late 2025 and August 2026 and discussed account details with representatives.
Who Is in the Proposed Classes?
The complaint proposes three classes:- California Class: California residents who called U.S. Bank from a home, workplace or business in California and had the conversation recorded, monitored or listened to by Pegasystems
- Massachusetts Class: the same group for Massachusetts residents calling from Massachusetts
- Pennsylvania Class: the same group for Pennsylvania residents calling from Pennsylvania
The Legal Claims and What the Case Asks For
The complaint brings claims under sections 631 and 632 of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, the Massachusetts Wiretapping Statute, and the Pennsylvania Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act. California’s law allows $5,000 per violation, and the Massachusetts and Pennsylvania statutes allow actual damages of at least $100 a day or $1,000, whichever is higher, plus punitive damages and attorneys’ fees.The plaintiffs ask for those statutory damages and an order stopping the alleged conduct. Similar claims have been brought against other AI tools that sit inside conversations; OCA’s explainer on chatbot wiretapping lawsuits covers how courts have treated them.
What Happens Next?
Pegasystems will have a chance to respond, typically with an answer or a motion to dismiss. Whether Pegasystems counts as an outside party listening in, or only as a tool U.S. Bank uses on its own calls, is the central question the complaint raises. A class has not been certified, and there is no settlement or claim form.Questions
Is U.S. Bank being sued in the Pega Voice AI lawsuit?
No. The only defendant is Pegasystems Inc., the software company that makes Pega Voice AI. The complaint describes U.S. Bank as a customer that uses the software in its call centers, but it does not name U.S. Bank as a defendant.
Who is covered by the Pegasystems call lawsuit?
The complaint proposes three classes: residents of California, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania who called U.S. Bank from inside their state and had their conversations recorded, monitored or listened to by Pegasystems. Callers from other states are not in the proposed classes. No class has been certified.
What does the lawsuit say Pega Voice AI does on calls?
According to the complaint, Pega Voice AI streams both sides of a live call to Pegasystems’ speech service, transcribes it in real time and analyzes it to suggest next steps, fill in forms and check script adherence for the bank’s agent. The plaintiffs say callers are not told that a third party is receiving the conversation. Pegasystems has not responded in court.
Is there any money to claim from the Pegasystems lawsuit?
No. The case was just filed and there is no settlement, certified class or claim form. If the case settles or a class is certified, class members would be notified of any way to take part.
Sources
• Class Action Complaint — Juarez v. Pegasystems Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Case No. 1:26-cv-14506 (filed October 2, 2026), via CourtListener: Complaint (PDF)• Docket for Juarez v. Pegasystems Inc., No. 1:26-cv-14506 (D. Mass.), via CourtListener: CourtListener Docket
