Legislature(2013 - 2014)BARNES 124
04/09/2014 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
Board of Professional Counselors | |
HB206 | |
HB116 | |
HB384 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
*+ | HB 206 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HB 116 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+= | HB 203 | TELECONFERENCED | |
*+ | HB 384 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 206-MOTOR VEHICLE SERVICE CONTRACTS 3:33:39 PM CHAIR OLSON announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 206, "An Act relating to motor vehicle service contracts; and exempting motor vehicle service contracts from regulation as insurance." 3:33:53 PM REPRESENTATIVE GABRIELLE LEDOUX, Alaska State Legislature, stated that HB 206 will bring Alaska's regulation of motor vehicle service contracts in line with how the industry is regulated in most of the states. She said that similar laws have been passed in 38 states and have been endorsed by a variety of entities, including the Automobile Protection Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Ally Financial, CNA National Warranty Company, Toyota Financial Services, the Service Contract Industry Council, and the National Trade Association. This bill would protect consumers and and ensure the long-term viability of the motor vehicle service contract industry. This bill is necessary, not only for motor vehicle service contract providers and automobile providers, but it is also good for Alaskan consumers. She urged members to support HB 206. 3:35:12 PM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 206, labeled 28-LS0501\C, Wallace, 2/6/14 as the working document. CHAIR OLSON objected for the purpose of discussion. 3:35:33 PM THOMAS BROWN, Staff, Representative Gabrielle LeDoux, Alaska State Legislature, stated that HB 206 brings forth a fair and comprehensive regulatory framework for motor vehicle service contracts that protects consumers and ensures the long-term viability of the motor vehicle contract industry. He said that at the moment Alaska law is unclear at best as to how a motor vehicle service contract provider should do business in the state. He related that HB 206 sets a clear path for how a motor vehicle service contract provider is regulated in Alaska, consistent with the treatment of the industry in the majority of the states. The industry supports this bill since it will provide regulatory certainty and increased uniformity for motor vehicle service contract programs. This bill would also create a level playing field for providers to transact motor vehicle service contracts and provides consumer protections. Additionally, it would provide protection to consumers by requiring providers to allow consumers to review the contract after purchase and cancel the contract within a specified period of time and receive a full refund of the purchase price. MR. BROWN stated that HB 206 provides clear directives as to how the industry is regulated and protects Alaska's consumers by creating a regulatory structure which will allow the Division of Insurance (DOI) to ensure that Alaskan consumers are treated uniformly with other state consumers when purchasing a motor vehicle service contract. 3:37:38 PM MR BROWN reviewed the section-by-section analysis of the bill. Section 1 would amend current law to remove motor vehicle service contracts from the list of items excluded from the current law's definition of "service contract." Section 2 creates new subsections clarifying certain provisions of motor vehicle service contracts including which ones are governed by Alaska law and defining the provisions of the contracts. Section 3 makes a change to existing statutes that is necessary as a result of HB 206. Section 4 would clarify that these laws do not apply to a person but apply to the motor vehicle service contract provider. MR. BROWN related that Section 5 adds a new title to AS 21.61 which sets forth the following: It identifies specific services that would be offered through any motor vehicle service contract and identifies specific disclosures that must be included on a motor vehicle service contract, including cancellation rights, coverage provided, name and contact information, and "so forth." 3:39:23 PM MR. BROWN continued his section-by-section analysis of HB 206. Section 5, AS 21.61, includes language on party identification and exemptions to the motor vehicle service contract. This section contains provisions related to providing receipts and copies of the motor vehicle service contract within a specified period of time. Proposed AS 21.61.050 requires biennial renewal of motor vehicle service contract provider license. Proposed AS 21.61.060 would require registration of an entity providing motor vehicle service contracts and AS 21.61.070 would provide the requirements for return and cancellation of a motor vehicle service contract, including refunds, and information that must be provided by the contractor to the consumer. MR. BROWN stated that proposed AS 21.61.080 provides financial responsibility requirements for motor vehicle service contract providers to the consumer and liabilities that may accrue. Proposed AS 21.60.090 and AS 21.60.100 would set forth definitions and authorize the director of the Division of Insurance to conduct examinations or investigations of licensees and contract providers. Finally, Section 6 would clarify any language used in these new sections. 3:41:11 PM CHAIR OLSON stated that his office has not received any calls or e-mails in opposition to HB 206. He asked whether the sponsor has received any calls. MR. BROWN responded that they had not. 3:41:26 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether he could provide a little more information on service contracts and differentiate between service contracts and maintenance agreements. He further asked whether this is something provided by the dealers. 3:42:20 PM STEPHEN MCDANIEL, Assistant Executive Director and Assistant General Counsel, Service Contract Industry Council (SCIC), related that HB 206 is consistent with the regulatory treatment of the service contract industry across the country and will bring Alaska's law into line with how the service providers and industry is regulated. It puts forth important consumer protections by providing for cancellation rights and acquiring financial responsibility of those providers of service contracts that are being sold in Alaska, while it creates regulatory certainty for the industry with respect to how business is done in the state. The language in HB 206 is largely based on a model act adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners in the early 1980s. This has been the foundation for similar legislation adopted across the country. The SCIC's 67 member companies support this, and it is a good step forward for the regulation of motor vehicle service contracts in Alaska. 3:43:54 PM REPRESENTATIVE JOSEPHSON asked whether the bill was seen as being mutually beneficial for salesmen and the purchaser. MR. MCDANIEL indicated this bill provides a regulatory framework that the industry believes is beneficial to the salesmen. Typically, auto dealers sell these contracts to the consumers. It ensures individuals and entities that are making the promises in service contracts have the financial ability on contractual promises to consumers and customers of the automobile dealers. In the worst case scenario, if the providers "go under" the consumer would be left "holding the bag." A dealer will honor the contract since they don't want the consumer to go away upset. Also, the bill would ensure that appropriate financial backing for the providers is available as well as to clarify the way they are to be offered in the state. This is good for the sellers, consumers, and contract providers, he said. 3:45:39 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for clarification on service contracts and a sense of how important this is to dealers. MR. MCDANIEL answered that typically the contracts offer coverage for defects in materials and workmanship as well as some additional provisions for things such as road hazards, which would cover tire and wheels for punctures. The benefits vary from provider to provider, but typically will range from five to seven years. The terms are chosen by the consumers and by and large it is an extension of the manufacturer's warranty and includes emergency roadside assistance to assist consumers when the vehicle has a breakdown. 3:47:12 PM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER related his understanding that this is not a network of mechanical shops but is an actual service that arranges coverage and reimburses shops in Alaska for consumers who have purchased contracts. MR. MCDANIEL answered that is correct. The providers actually pay for the repair so it isn't a reimbursement to consumers in most instances. There is usually no outlay from the consumer unless the contract has a deductible. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for an estimate of the annual cost to consumers. MR. MCDANIEL responded that it would depend on contract. He suggested that the standard cost for five years runs between $1,200 to $1,500. 3:48:19 PM REPRESENTATIVE CHENAULT recalled the service contract package may provide oil changes and brake pads and can be crafted to include all sorts of things can go wrong once the regular warranty is up. 3:49:15 PM LORI WING-HIER, Director, Division of Insurance, Department of Commerce, Community & Economic Development, related that this bill has been worked on for several years and the division has finally reached a consensus that this bill will protect consumers. She thanked the sponsor's staff and Mr. McDaniel, who have been very patient with the division. She indicated that the division is comfortable with Version C of HB 206. 3:50:03 PM CHAIR OLSON, after first determining no one else wished to testify, closed public testimony on HB 206. CHAIR OLSON withdrew his objection. 3:50:47 PM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD moved to report the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 206, labeled 28-LS0501\C, Wallace, 2/6/14 out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal note. There being no objection, CSHB 206(L&C) was reported from the House Labor and Commerce Standing Committee.