By: Jeffrey Backman, Esq., Roy Taub, Esq., and Jacob Mars, Esq.
Can a phone call offering a free service constitute telemarketing under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”)? A recent decision from the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado examines that question, highlighting the distinction between promotional communications and calls offering complimentary services.
On October 19, 2026, in Tucker v. Blue Hammer Roofing, Inc., No. 24-cv-01287-NYW-NRN, 2026 WL 3120666 (D. Colo. Oct. 19, 2026), the court addressed whether telephone calls offering free roof inspections qualified as telemarketing under the TCPA. The plaintiff, Preston Tucker, alleged he had received multiple telephone calls from Blue Hammer Roofing, Inc. offering complimentary inspections of his roof. Although the inspections were advertised as free, the dispute centered on whether offering a complimentary inspection could constitute telemarketing when the business providing the inspection also offers roofing-related services.
The distinction matters because the TCPA and its implementing regulations impose restrictions on certain telephone solicitations, including calls made to numbers registered on the National Do Not Call Registry, that qualify as telemarketing. Under those regulations, telemarketing generally involves initiating a telephone call or text message for the purpose of encouraging the purchase, rental, or investment in property, goods, or services. Importantly, the definition focuses on the purpose of the communication rather than simply whether the caller expressly requests payment.
In Tucker, the court determined the calls offering complimentary inspections did not constitute telemarketing communications because the offered inspection was a free service and the defendant did not directly encourage a commercial transaction with the plaintiff. The court rejected the plaintiff’s reading of the regulations that would have extended the definition of telemarketing to calls placed to encourage non-parties to the call, such as the plaintiff’s insurance company, to ultimately purchase the caller’s services.
Tucker illustrates how disputes over seemingly straightforward promotional offers can raise questions about the scope of federal telemarketing restrictions. Businesses across numerous industries offer complimentary consultations, inspections, estimates, and evaluations as part of their customer outreach efforts. Whether communications promoting those services constitute telemarketing can depend on the applicable statutory and regulatory definitions and the circumstances surrounding the calls. As courts continue examining the relationship between complimentary services and commercial solicitation, the distinction between informational outreach and telemarketing remains an issue in TCPA litigation.
However, this area of TCPA jurisprudence remains unsettled and in flux, with courts taking different approaches to determine whether complimentary offers constitute telemarketing. Indeed, some courts may characterize such calls as “dual-purpose” communications where an ostensibly free service also serves the underlying purpose of promoting future commercial transactions.
This publication is provided by Greenspoon Marder LLP is issued for informational purposes only and is not intended to be construed or used as general legal advice nor a solicitation of any type. Please contact the author(s) or your Greenspoon Marder LLP contact if you have any questions regarding the currency of this information. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision. Before you decide, ask for written information about the lawyer’s legal qualifications and experience.
