Indecopi fined Interbank S/411,840 for spam calls found by AI-audited recordings

On 18 August 2026, Peru's consumer authority Indecopi announced a first-instance fine on Banco Internacional del Perú (Interbank) of 74.88 UIT — S/411,840 — for making commercial calls without accredited prior consumer consent, the practice known as spam calling. The decision, issued by Commission for Consumer Protection No. 3, is public under number 33-2026/CC3 in the regulator's resolution search.

The enforcement method is the story: Indecopi's Directorate of Supervision used AI and data-science tools to review large volumes of telephone recordings and flag those containing commercial content; technical staff then checked the calls where the bank could not prove consent. Holding a card, loan or other product does not by itself authorise commercial calls, the regulator stressed, and it classified the practice as an aggressive commercial method. Since July 2025, Law 32323 has made unconsented call-centre selling a very serious infringement and lets consumers withdraw consent at any time.

Interbank has 15 business days to appeal to the Specialized Chamber for Consumer Protection. The penalty regime runs up to 450 UIT, and in June 2026 the chamber confirmed a second-instance fine of 11.6 UIT against another bank for a single unconsented advertising call. In the same month, the same commission fined three other Peruvian banks S/281,160 for putting obstacles in the way of complaints — many of which originate in exactly these calls.

Fine of 74.88 UIT — S/411,840 (about US$110,000) — first instance, appeal open; the regime caps such fines at 450 UIT

The bank treated an existing customer relationship as blanket marketing consent — the consumer code requires informed, express and unequivocal consent for commercial communications.

Consent was never captured in a form the bank could produce, and the burden of proof sits with the caller, so every flagged call was unprovable.

The July 2025 reform repriced an old habit mid-stream: conduct that used to draw minor fines became a very serious infringement under Law 32323.

Indecopi's AI audit removed the practical hiding place — a dialer generating thousands of calls now generates thousands of evidence files for the regulator.

Outbound sales scale faster than consent paperwork. Once the regulator can machine-read every recorded call, the absence of a consent trail stops being a gap and becomes the evidence.

Resolution 33-2026/CC3 is public and Interbank's appeal window ran 15 business days from notification. The fine lands inside a tightened regime: since July 2025, Law 32323 lets consumers withdraw marketing consent at any time and classes unconsented call-centre selling as an aggressive, deceptive method — a very serious infringement with fines up to 450 UIT. In June 2026 the chamber confirmed, in final instance, an 11.6 UIT fine on an unnamed bank for a single unconsented advertising call. Indecopi has published spam-call guidance since November 2025 — a sustained campaign, not a one-off.