West Virginia HB 4909 Proposes Comprehensive Mini-TCPA Expanding “Telephone Solicitation” To Surveys

On January 29, 2026, a group of eleven Republican delegates in the West Virginia House of Delegates introduced House Bill 4909, titled “Relating to consumer protection from fraudulent telephone solicitation.” If enacted, this bill would significantly alter the regulatory environment for outbound calling in West Virginia by establishing a new article, §46A-6O (“TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT”), within the state code. The legislation combines strict operational limits on legitimate businesses with severe criminal and civil penalties for fraudulent actors and telecommunications providers.

HB 4909 encompasses an extremely expansive collection regulated conduct. While many state statutes limit “telephone solicitation” to calls inducing a purchase, Section 46A-6O-1 defines “Telephone Solicitation” as any “organized activity, program, or campaign to communicate by telephone with residents of this state for” the following purposes:

• Selling, leasing, or renting goods or services;
• Offering gifts or prizes;
• Conducting polls or surveys used for marketing purposes; or
• Managing, directing, or supervising such activities.

This language effectively brings market research firms, sweepstakes operators, and lead generators under the same regulatory umbrella as traditional telemarketers. The bill also codifies a definition of “Robocall” as “any telephone call made using an automatic dialing system, prerecorded message, or artificial voice.” And yes, this is going to encompass AI.

Section 46A-6O-3 establishes strict prohibitions/standards for any entity engaging in “telephone solicitations” as defined above:

• It is unlawful to place more than three (3) “telephone solicitations” within a 24-hour period on the same subject matter.
• “Telephone solicitations” are prohibited between 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. local time.
• Callers may not use automated systems or prerecorded/artificial voices without “prior express written consent.” And “prior express written consent” is defined in §46A-6O-1 to mean a written agreement that:
  • 1) Bears the signature of the called party, including an electronic or digital signature recognized under applicable state or federal law;
  • 2) Clearly authorizes the placement of a telephone solicitation using an automated system, prerecorded message, artificial voice, voicemail, or text message; and
  • 3) Is not required, directly or indirectly, as a condition of purchasing any goods or services. consent must be a signed written agreement that clearly authorizes the technology and—crucially—cannot be required as a condition of purchasing goods or services.
• Callers must transmit accurate caller identification information and are prohibited from blocking, disguising, or spoofing this data.

Section 46A-6O-4 states that a violation of the new article constitutes an “unfair, abusive, or deceptive trade practice under §46A-5-101 et seq.” And by linking HB 4909 to the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act, the bill seemingly allows for a private right of action. While the text of §46A-5-101 refers to “creditors or debt collectors,” the cross-reference in the new bill seems to attempt to make these penalties applicable to a “caller.” Subsection (1) of §46A-5-101 grants the consumer the right to sue to recover actual damages. Subsection (4) of §46A-5-101 grants the consumer the right to recover a penalty of $1000 for each violation. And the $1,000 is not static. Section 46A-5-106 mandates it be adjusted for inflation. And under §46A-5-104, a prevailing consumer may recover reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs.

However, it’s odd to link the new article to §46A-5-101 et seq. for penalties and a private right of action when W. Va. Code § 46A-6F-101 et seq. exists–which explicitly deals with telemarketing under the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act. W. Va. Code Ann. § 46A-6F-701 also gives a private right of action for actual damages and provides for penalties to be determined by the court between $100 and $3000.

We will see if the language of the proposed bill is ultimately modified or if any action will be taken to clarify this confusion. But for now, it appears as though a private right of action is the legislative intention.

Now, Section 46A-6O-5 introduces a set of civil and CRIMINAL penalties aimed at telecommunications companies, voice service providers, or other entities providing telephone service to residents West Virginia that engage in spoofing. Telecommunications providers must implement caller ID authentication technology (e.g., STIR/SHAKEN). A provider that knowingly or negligently fails to do so faces a civil penalty of $100 per spoofed call, payable directly to the affected customer. Liable providers must also pay full actual damages plus a fee equal to five times the actual damages.

Additionally, under §46A-6O-5 West Virginia-based company found liable for initiating spoofed calls faces mandatory business license revocation and a $10,000 civil fine per incident.

As for the criminal penalties, individuals who knowingly initiate spoofed calls with intent to defraud are subject to criminal prosecution:

• First Offense: Misdemeanor (confinement up to 100 days).
• Second Offense: Felony (confinement for 1–3 years).
• Third Offense: Felony (confinement for 3–10 years).

HB 4909 has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee.