BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 675 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 14, 2015 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY Mark Stone, Chair AB 675 (Alejo) - As Amended March 26, 2015 As Proposed to be Amended SUBJECT: Rental vehicles: separately stated charges: disclosures KEY ISSUES: 1)Should a rental car company be permitted to LIST rental rate charges SEPARATELY from government-imposed fees, if any, so long as the quote provided to the consumer clearly and conspicuously states the total price? 2)Should a required damage waiver disclosure be updated to account for the fact that most people now reserve rental vehicles online? 3)Should the period of time after which a rental car company may use location data from a rental vehicle's GPS device be reduced from seven DAYS to three days after the contracted return date, if the car has not been returned by that date AND NO extension OF THE RENTAL CONTRACT HAS BEEN requested? AB 675 Page 2 SYNOPSIS This bill makes several changes in the statute governing rental agreements between rental car companies and their customers, in large measure to reflect new government surcharges and the shift to online reservations. Existing law requires rental car companies, when quoting a price to a prospective customer, to quote the total cost: the base rental fee, plus any surcharges that are typically added to the base fee. Existing law allows the rental car company to provide a statement that separates the company's rental fee from specified government charges, but unfortunately the statute specifically identifies only those charges that were in place when the statute was last amended. Since then, the list of mandatory fees has grown. This bill would authorize separation of these newer fees along with any fees still to come, by permitting the rental car company to separately state its rental fees from any "additional mandatory charges," defined as any charges imposed by a government entity. The bill would make two other substantive changes. First, a damage waiver disclosure that currently must be made orally at the rental counter could, under this bill, be made online if the car is reserved online. (Relatedly, the bill eliminates an existing requirement that a redundant disclosure be hung from the rear-view mirror.) Second, in order to better prevent theft and facilitate recovery of unreturned vehicles, a rental company would be permitted to use the car's GPS device to locate a car three days after the contracted return date (instead of the one week period specified under existing law.) Finally, the bill makes several technical and organizational changes in order to create a more logical ordering of provisions, eliminate adjacent statutes that have become inoperative, and move the operative parts of the deleted statutes into the principle statute, Civil Code Section 1936. The analysis reflects amendments to be taken AB 675 Page 3 in this Committee. There is no known opposition to this bill. SUMMARY: Revises the statute governing agreements between rental car companies and their customers in order to achieve relatively non-controversial changes. Specifically, this bill: 1)Permits a rental car company, when providing a quote or imposing charges, to separately state the rental rate, additional mandatory charges, if any, and a mileage charge, if any, that a renter must pay to hire or lease the vehicle for the period of time to which the rental rate applies. 2)Provides, consistent with existing law, that if additional mandatory charges apply, the rental company shall do the following: a) Provide the person receiving the quote, at the time the quote is given, with a good faith estimate of the rental rate and all mandatory charges, as well as the total charges for the entire rental. Specifies that if quotes and total charges are provided online, then the total charges shall be displayed in a typeface at least as large as any rental rate and shall be obtainable by the person receiving the quote by following links through no more than two Internet web site pages, including the page on which the rental rate is first provided. b) Clearly and conspicuously disclose in the rental contract the total of the rental rate, additional mandatory charges, for the entire rental period, exclusive of charges that cannot be determined at the time the rental commences. Prohibits the rental car company from charging more than the quoted amount unless the renter makes changes AB 675 Page 4 subsequent to making the reservation. 3)Provides that if a damage waiver is offered orally at the rental counter, a rental company shall orally disclose at the time of the offer that the damage waiver may be duplicative of coverage provided by the customer's own motor vehicle insurance policy. However, if the damage waiver is obtained online, then the rental car company may forgo the oral disclosure and instead provide a clear and conspicuous written disclosure on the company's Internet Web site, at the time the quote is given. 4)Permits the rental car company to use information from the rental vehicle's electronic surveillance technology if the rental vehicle has not been returned three days following the contracted return date, or three days following the end of an extension of the return date. 5)Eliminates a requirement that the rental car company hang on the rear-view mirror of all rental vehicles a paper hanger that duplicates the damage waiver information that is already disclosed when offered at the counter or online. 6)Defines "additional mandatory charges" to mean any charges imposed by a government entity that the renter must pay, including, but not limited to, a customer facility charge, airport concession fee, tourism commission assessment, vehicle license recovery fee, or other government imposed taxes or fees. 7)Makes several organizational changes to account for provisions that have become inoperative, to consolidate sections so as to avoid redundancy, or otherwise provide a more logical structure to the existing statute. AB 675 Page 5 EXISTING LAW: 1)Sets forth general rules governing contracts between rental car companies and their customers on a variety of matters, including, but not limited to, the manner in which rental car companies advertise and quote rental charges and additional fees, the renter's liability or lack thereof for damages to a rental vehicle, the amount that rental car companies may charge for damage waivers and the manner in which they are offered, and the conditions under which a rental car company may access, obtain, and use geo-location and other information from the rental vehicle's electronic surveillance technology. (Civil Code Section 1936; subsequent citations refer to the Civil Code unless otherwise indicated.) 2)Requires a rental car company that offers a damage waiver to disclose specified information to the renter in a prescribed manner, including providing an oral disclosure at the counter that the damage waiver may be duplicative of coverage that the customer maintains under his or her own motor vehicle insurance policy. (Section 1936 (g).) 3)Provides that a rental car company shall only advertise, quote, and charge a rental rate that includes the entire amount that the renter must pay to hire or lease the vehicle for the period of time to which the rental rate applies. (Section 1936 (m).) 4)Permits a rental car company to separately state the rental rate from fees and charges imposed by other entities, including any customer facility charge, airport concession fee, or tourism commission assessment, so long as the advertised or quoted rental rate includes the entire amount. AB 675 Page 6 (Civil Code Section 1936.01 (b).) 5)Prohibits a rental car company from using, accessing, or obtaining any information relating to the renter's use of the rental vehicle that was obtained using electronic surveillance technology, subject to certain exceptions, including when the technology is used to locate a stolen, abandoned, or missing rental vehicle after one of the following: a) The renter or law enforcement has informed the rental car company that the vehicle is missing or has been stolen or abandoned. b) The rental vehicle has not been returned following one week after the contracted return date, or one week following the end of an extension of that return date. c) The rental car company discovers that the vehicle has been stolen or abandoned and, if stolen, reports the vehicle stolen to law enforcement by filing a stolen vehicle report. (Section 1936 (n) (1) (i)-(iii).) FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed non-fiscal. COMMENTS: According to the author, the purpose of this bill is to "modernize" Civil Code Section 1936, which regulates rental car contracts. The author believes that this measure will promote transparency by clearly delineating the private charges imposed by the rental car company from the many government-imposed exactions, including tourism fees, airport concession and facility fees, vehicle fees, and related fees and surcharges. According to the author, delineation will allow the AB 675 Page 7 consumer to know which parts of the total charge reflect the rental company's fees, and which parts represent government-imposed fees. However, the author stresses, the existing consumer protection that requires the rental car company to clearly and conspicuously quote the total charge will be preserved in this bill. The author contends that the other changes proposed by this bill - such as allowing disclosures to be made online when a rental vehicle is reserved online - "simply modernize the code." The bill, in fact, makes many changes to existing law; however, the changes are not nearly as extensive as they appear at first glance. For example, many of the changes - some of which were apparently made by Legislative Counsel - delete sections or subdivisions that have become inoperative or redundant. For example, part of the adjacent statute, Section 1936.01, duplicates much of Section 1936 except for some provisions that have become inoperative. Therefore, this bill deletes Section 1936.01 but re-inserts the still operative parts of that statute into Section 1936. Other changes move substantive provisions that were awkwardly placed in definitional sections into more appropriate substantive sections. In brief, there are three substantive changes made by this bill that merit attention: (1) updating a provision that allows a rental car company to separate its rental fees from government-imposed charges in order to reflect more recently imposed charges; (2) eliminating a requirement that damage waiver disclosures be made orally to reflect the fact that an increasing number of people reserve rental vehicles online; and (3) notwithstanding a general prohibition on the use of information obtained from the rental vehicle's GPS device, permitting the company to access and use GPS information to locate the vehicle if the vehicle is not returned within three days after the contracted return date, shortened from the one week period in existing law. Separation of Private and Public Fees: Civil Code Section 1936 AB 675 Page 8 sets forth the general rules governing rental car contracts and the respective duties and liabilities of rental car companies and their customers. One of the key issues that prompted the initial legislation, and which has been the subject of several amendments over the years, concerns the various taxes, assessments, and surcharges typically tacked on to the rental company's fees and the manner in which the company may quote those fees and charges to customers. For example, consumer advocates previously alleged that rental companies used a "bait and switch" technique of advertising or quoting only the base amount of the total rental rate to customers, meaning customers only learned of the additional charges when they picked up the vehicle at the rental location. Legislation addressing this issue was first enacted in 1988, amended in 1996, and substantially re-written in 2001. Among other things, past measures required a rental car company to quote the entire amount, with the rental fees and additional surcharges "bundled" together into a single quote. Because rental car companies understandably wanted their customers to know which part of the total was attributable to the rental car company and which part represented government-imposed fees, the statute was amended again in 2007 to authorize rental car companies to separate, or effectively itemize, company fees from charges required by some other entity, such as a government surcharge to expand or maintain airport facilities, so long as the total charge was clearly and conspicuously quoted to the consumer. The problem with existing law on this point, however, is that it specifically names the fees and charges that may be separated, instead of identifying additional mandatory charges, such as government fees, in general. Since last amended, several new mandatory charges have been imposed, but they cannot be separately listed with the other specified mandatory charges. This bill would address this shortcoming by permitting the rental car company to separate its rental charges from any "additional mandatory charges," which are defined to include any government-imposed charges. Damage Waiver Disclosure: Another previous criticism that AB 675 Page 9 consumer groups have made against rental car companies in the past was about both the cost and the necessity of the "damage waiver" offered by rental car companies. Consumer groups alleged that these waivers - which supposedly relieved the renter from liability for damage to the vehicle - were often quite limited in what they covered and, moreover, were often unnecessary insofar as they duplicated coverage by the renter's personal car insurance policy. To address this, the law was amended to require the company to disclose to the consumer that the damage waiver may be duplicative of his or her personal car insurance policy. Since 2001, existing law has mandated that this disclosure must be made orally at the counter and at the time when the damage waiver is offered. However, since 2001, the method by which rental vehicles are reserved and rental agreements are entered into has changed dramatically because of the Internet. Today, many if not most consumers reserve rental vehicles online and select available options, including the option of whether to accept the damage waiver offer. Most people make these choices in advance so they can simply pick up their vehicles without having to stand in line and have an employee at the counter explain the options and make the required disclosures in person. This bill would acknowledge this reality by allowing the disclosure to be made online if the vehicle is reserved online. If the customer reserves the vehicle or selects the damage waiver option at the counter, then the disclosure must still have to be made orally. Relatedly, this bill would eliminate an existing requirement for a paper "hanger," repeating the damage waiver disclosure, to be hung from the rear-view mirror of every vehicle. Presumably, the paper hanger gives the renter one last chance to opt for the damage waiver, if he or she had refused, or to refuse it, if he or she had accepted. According to the sponsor, most of these paper hangers end up on the floors or in the back seats of the rental vehicles and are rarely, if ever, used. This no doubt reflects the fact that the customer is not likely to change his or her mind between the walk from the counter - where the disclosure and option may have just been provided - and the lot. AB 675 Page 10 If the customer has reserved the vehicle online so as to avoid interacting with an employee at the counter, existing law only makes the paper hanger effective if it is handed to an employee at the counter. Given that the disclosure is already made online or at the counter - and if made at the counter provided only moments before the customer is likely to see the paper hanger before leaving the lot - the author and sponsor believe that the paper hanger disclosure is ineffective, inefficient, and wasteful. It is difficult to disagree. Use of GPS Information: California is one of just a handful of states that prohibit rental car companies from using information obtained from the rental vehicle's GPS device to locate their vehicles, except in a few narrowly defined situations. A high-profile court case in Connecticut involved a rental company that used GPS information to charge customers extra fees for "recklessly" using the vehicle, or driving a vehicle out-of-state or otherwise outside of a contractually-restricted geographical area. A customer sued the company and a court found that the charges, at least under the terms of the specific contract, were unwarranted. In response to this case, a small number of states, most notably Connecticut, New York, and California, passed laws that limit the ability of rental car companies to use GPS information for such purposes. Indeed, California enacted a general prohibition against the use of this information, unless it is to provide the customer with requested services. Otherwise, current law prohibits GPS information from being accessed until the vehicle is returned, unless the vehicle is missing, abandoned, or stolen, or the customer fails to return the vehicle within one week of the contracted return date or any extension thereof. The author and sponsor contend, not unreasonably, that one week is a long time to wait before using GPS to try to determine the whereabouts of a vehicle that has not been returned, and where the renter has failed to notify the rental company or sought to extend the contracted return date. This bill would reduce the period from one week to three days after the contracted return date. AB 675 Page 11 ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the sponsors - the major car rental companies, Avis, Enterprise, and Hertz - this bill "seeks to modernize the relevant rental car code sections by making them more consistent with practices in other states and promoting transparency in pricing for consumers. In lieu of outdated practices, the bill also requires internet disclosure for the optional damage waiver and to combat theft, allows rental car companies to locate missing vehicles sooner. . . .[T]his bill makes a few small updates to the codes written nearly 30 years ago. As technology changes and the market follows, it is imperative that our code section allows us to continue serving customers while maintaining the critical consumer protections envisioned when originally crafted." Proposed Author Amendments: The author will take the following amendments in this Committee. The first three amendments listed below are technical and clarifying in nature. The fourth changes the time frame for using GPS information from two days following failure to return the vehicle to three days following failure to return. - On page 4 line 11 after "charges" insert: imposed by a government entity, and on lines 11 to 13 delete "in addition to a per period base rental and mileage charge, if any" - On page 8 after line 17 add a new paragraph (16) which reads: "Vehicle Registration Fee" means any fee imposed pursuant to any provision of Division 3, Chapter 6 of the AB 675 Page 12 Vehicle Code. - On page 8 line 18 change "(16)" to "(17)" and on line 19 after "fees" insert: and vehicle registrations fees - On page 24 on line 23 change "two" to three in both places in which it occurs in line 23. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Avis Rental Cars Enterprise Rental Cars Hertz Rental Cars Opposition None on file Analysis Prepared by:Thomas Clark / JUD. / (916) 319-2334 AB 675 Page 13