BILL ANALYSIS ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2455| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ CONSENT Bill No: AB 2455 Author: Nava (D) Amended: As introduced Vote: 21 SENATE VETERANS AFFAIRS COMMITTEE : 4-0, 6/22/10 AYES: Denham, Correa, Negrete McLeod, Cedillo NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland, Vacancy, Vacancy ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 4/8/10 - See last page for vote SUBJECT : Military service: benefits SOURCE : Military Department DIGEST : This bill authorize members of the military to defer payment on up to two loans on vehicles. In addition, this bill provides that a spouse or legal dependent, or both, of a member of the military is entitled to the deferral of payment benefits accorded to a member, if the member is eligible for those benefits. ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes members of the United States Military Reserve and National Guard who are called to active duty as a result of the Iraq or Afghanistan conflicts to defer payments on specified obligations for the period of active duty including up to two loans subject to the Automobile Sales Finance Act. In 2003, the Service Members Civil Relief Act (SCRA) was CONTINUED AB 2455 Page 2 signed into federal law. This was a new federal statute that revised the protections included in the outdated the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act (SSCRA) to reflect new economic realities. Previous legislation was intended to augment the federal SCRA and provide financial protection benefits to California's service members that are superior to the benefits already granted them pursuant to SCRA. When the existing law was put into practice, attorneys in the Staff Judge Advocate Corps of the California National Guard found that the law needed minor revisions to ensure that "members" and their families are provided all of the intended protections. Specifically, California National Guard legal staff found ambiguity in the manner that vehicle loans were subject to the Automobile Sales Finance Act, which led to some "members" having their vehicle loan deferment request denied by some financial institutions. The author's office believes the true intent of "The California Military Families Financial Relief Act" can not be carried out when considering that the companion statute to the Military and Veterans Code (MVC) Sections 800-811 specifically extends the protections and financial relief to a "member's" family, possibly due to legislative oversight in omitting the family in MVC Sections 800-811. Currently, MVC Section 800(a)(5) provides for the deferment of two vehicle loans subject to Civil Code Section 2981. Civil Code Section 2981, as written, applies to the sales contract of a motor vehicle between a buyer and a seller. Subsequent case law (not related to MVC issues), extended the benefits of Civil Code Section 2981 to seller-assisted financing, such as when the car dealer finds a lender for the buyer. Unfortunately, Civil Code Section 2981 does not directly address the scenario whereby a buyer goes directly to his own bank to obtain a car loan. Several financial institutions have used this loophole to deny deferments to "members" who obtain the loans directly from them. The author's office has stated this correction to the statute is necessary to ensure that members of the California National Guard and Reserves, deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan, are able to obtain the full benefit of the AB 2455 Page 3 spirit of the law. The existing California Military and Veterans' Code Section 800(a)(5) is intended to help "members" and their families avoid the financial hardships that can occur with prolonged deployments into a war zone. Due to the reference of Civil Code Section 2981 in MVC Section 800(a)(5), some financial institutions use a loophole that allows them to exclude certain vehicle loans and are not complying with the full intent of the law. A companion statute within the MVC involving deferments of obligations, Section 409.5, extends the benefits of MVC Sections 406-409.4 to the dependents of "members". The intent of the law is to provide relief to "members" and their families. The failure to extend all protections and benefits under Sections 800-811 to the spouses and legal dependents of "members" is inconsistent with the spirit of the law. The author's office goes on to state, "this amendment is critical as more and more Californians are ordered to active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan and their families suffer the hardships of deployment. When a "members" is deployed and the family income decreases due to the "members" making less on military pay versus their civilian pay, many families are unable to maintain all of their financial obligations, regardless of whether the obligation/loan is in the name of the "members" or the spouse/legal dependent." FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 6/24/10) Military Department (source) California Bankers Association California Credit Union League California State Commanders Veterans Council National Guard Association of California ASSEMBLY FLOOR : AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, AB 2455 Page 4 Bradford, Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Hagman, Hall, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu, Bonnie Lowenthal, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada NO VOTE RECORDED: Bass, Gilmore, Harkey, Huber, Logue, Ma, V. Manuel Perez, John A. Perez, Vacancy TSM:do 6/24/10 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****