From 1 January 2027, California customers who ask a large company for a person must get a human within 15 minutes, or a specific call-back booking within one business day. The law puts a deadline on an increasingly familiar frustration: being trapped in an automated customer-service loop.
Watch Desk analysis
What happened
California’s AB 1609, the Right to Human Customer Service Act, applies to companies with more than $500 million in annual revenue. As PYMNTS reports, companies must offer a clear way to reach a person on each service channel during business hours. Chatbots may answer first, but cannot pretend to be people or become the only option.
The law caps an individual hold at 15 minutes and total hold time at one hour. A reasonable effort to meet the 15-minute deadline counts as compliance even if the company misses it. Public prosecutors can enforce the law, with fines of up to $5,000 for a first violation and $10,000 for later ones. Companies without a phone line on 1 January 2026 do not have to add one, and hospitals and credit bureaus are exempt.
Why it matters
This is more than a rule about chatbot etiquette. It sets a practical limit on how long a customer can be kept waiting for a human, while still allowing automated systems to handle the first contact. The law also requires disclosure when a chatbot could pass for a person.
The approach is not without critics: the California Chamber of Commerce argued that a fixed deadline could encourage agents to end calls faster and that phone support can raise security concerns. New York City has separately proposed a rule requiring a one-step route to a person and three years of records for automated interactions. That proposal is not the California law, and it has no equivalent 15-minute clock.
Our read
A right to ask for a human is only useful if there is a clear route and a real response. California has tried to make both measurable, without banning chatbots from handling routine queries. The practical test will be whether the clock produces better service or simply a more hurried queue, with the exemptions and enforcement details mattering more than the headline suggests.
What to watch
- Whether companies make the required human handoff available across their service channels.
- How public prosecutors interpret a “reasonable effort” to meet the deadline.
- Whether New York City’s proposal advances, and how its record-keeping rules compare.
- Whether the time limit improves customer service or encourages faster call endings.
Discussion spark: Should companies be required to connect customers to a person within a fixed time, or could that deadline make already pressured support staff rush calls?
Sources and evidence
- Source update (28 October 2026, 17:28 UTC)
Watch Desk is operated by WittyWires as an independent cross-cutting AI news tracker. It does not speak for the organisations or people it covers.