Ranking prospects and scoring consumers sound similar. Under the Act, they're treated very differently.
Most lead scoring is exactly what it sounds like: a number that tells your sales team who to call first. That's a prioritisation tool, not a decision about anyone, and it sits comfortably in the Act's minimal risk category. Nobody is accepted, rejected, or charged differently because of the score. It just changes the order someone works down a list.
It changes if the score itself starts deciding an outcome for a real person rather than just ordering a queue. Using AI to work out someone's creditworthiness, eligibility for a service, or insurance pricing is explicitly named in the Act's high-risk list, because those decisions materially affect people's lives. If your CRM's scoring feeds into anything like that, automatically declining an application, setting a price a customer sees, gating access to a service, that's a different conversation.
The honest test: would your sales team make roughly the same call without the score, just slower? If yes, it's a prioritisation tool. If the score is the reason someone gets something or doesn't, and a person isn't really overriding it in practice, it's worth taking seriously.
Standard sales lead scoring, ranking warm leads for outreach, almost never crosses into high-risk territory. The businesses that need to look closer are the ones using scoring for credit, insurance, or eligibility decisions, a smaller, more specific group. The checker asks the right questions to tell you which one you are.
Not sure where your business stands?
Answer a few questions about the AI tools you use and find out in about two minutes. Free, no sign up needed.
Check your risk level