BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 686
Page 1
Date of Hearing: July 2, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION
Richard S. Gordon, Chair
SB 686 (Jackson) - As Amended: May 24, 2013
SENATE VOTE : 22-12
SUBJECT : Vehicles: vehicle dealers.
SUMMARY : Prohibits a vehicle dealer from selling, leasing,
renting, loaning, or otherwise transferring ownership of a used
vehicle if the dealer knows or should have known that the
vehicle is subject to an manufacturer's safety recall, and
places similar restrictions on the sale or transfer of ownership
of a used vehicle by a rental car company that is also a
licensed dealer.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits the holder of any vehicle dealer's license from
advertising or selling a used vehicle as "certified" or any
similar descriptive term that implies the vehicle has been
certified to meet the terms of a used vehicle certification
program if the dealer knows or should have known that the
vehicle is subject to a manufacturer's safety recall, and the
repairs required to correct the defect have not been performed
on the vehicle.
2)Prohibits a dealer from selling, leasing for a term of less
than four months, renting, loaning, or otherwise transferring
ownership of a used vehicle, as specified, if the dealer knows
or should have known that the vehicle is subject to a
manufacturer's safety recall, unless the repairs required to
correct the defect have been performed on the vehicle.
3)Prohibits a rental car company that is also a licensed dealer
from selling or otherwise transferring ownership of a used
vehicle, if the rental company knows or should have known that
the vehicle is subject to a manufacturer's safety recall,
unless the repairs required to correct the defect have been
performed on the vehicle.
4)Generally provides that these advertising and sale
prohibitions shall only become operative on the initial
SB 686
Page 2
effective date of regulations adopted pursuant to the federal
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (Public Law
112-141) (MAP-21 Act).
5)Provides that a dealer is deemed to have knowledge of a
manufacturer's safety recall if either: (a) the dealer
receives notification from the manufacturer; or (b) the dealer
is a franchisee of the manufacturer.
6)Provides that a rental car company is deemed to have knowledge
when it receives notification of the manufacturer's safety
recall pursuant to federal law.
7)Provides that, in the absence of knowledge and until auto
manufacturers are required to provide vehicle safety recall
data on a publicly accessible Internet Web site as specified,
a dealer and/or rental car company must obtain information
about a vehicle's safety recall status prior to completing a
transaction, as specified, from at least one of the following
sources: (a) the Internet Web site of the manufacturer; (b) a
toll-free telephone; (c) another dealer that is a franchisee
of the manufacturer; or (d) a commonly available vehicle
history report, provided that the safety recall status of the
vehicle is available.
8)Provides that, when auto manufacturers are required to provide
vehicle safety recall data on a publicly accessible Internet
Web site, as specified, a dealer and/or car rental company
shall obtain information about a used vehicle's safety recall
status from that database instead.
9)States that a violation of these provisions is actionable
under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, the Unfair Competition
Law, Business and Professions Code Section 17500 (related to
false advertising), or any other applicable statute or federal
law, and further states that such rights and remedies are
cumulative and not to be construed as restricting any right or
remedy that is otherwise available.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW
1)Establishes MAP-21 and requires the Secretary of the United
States Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) to promulgate
regulations by July 6, 2013, requiring motor vehicle safety
recall information to be publicly available online and
SB 686
Page 3
searchable by vehicle make, model, and vehicle identification
number (VIN). (Public Law 112-141, 112th Congress, Section
31301)
2)Sets forth in federal regulations the requirements for when
manufacturers must notify vehicle owners, dealers, and
distributors about a defect that relates to motor vehicle
safety or noncompliance with a federal motor vehicle safety
standard. (49 Code of Federal Regulations 577.1 et seq.)
EXISTING STATE LAW
3)Establishes the Car Buyer's Bill of Rights and prohibits a car
dealer from selling or advertising for sale a used car as
"certified" if any of the following apply:
a) The dealer knows or should have known that the odometer
has been rolled back or altered to show fewer miles than
actually driven;
b) The dealer knows or should have known that the vehicle
was reacquired by the vehicle's manufacturer or a dealer
pursuant to state or federal warranty laws;
c) The title to the vehicle has been inscribed with the
notation "Lemon Law Buyback," "manufacturer repurchase,"
"salvage," "junk," "nonrepairable," "flood," or similar
title designation required by this state or another state;
d) The vehicle has sustained damage in an impact, fire, or
flood, that after repair and prior to sale substantially
impairs the use or safety of the vehicle;
e) The dealer knows or should have known that the vehicle
has sustained frame damage;
f) The dealer disclaims any warranties of merchantability
on the vehicle;
g) The vehicle is sold "AS IS"; or,
h) The term "certified" or any similar descriptive term is
used in any manner that is untrue or misleading or that
would cause any advertisement to be in violation of the
provisions prohibiting a car dealer from scheming not sell
SB 686
Page 4
a vehicle or service at a price other than advertised in
accordance with the Vehicle Code, or the unfair competition
laws contained in the Business and Professions Code.
(Civil Code Section 11713.18.)
4)Prohibits any person from acting as a dealer, remanufacturer,
manufacturer, or transporter, as specified, without having
first been issued a license or temporary permit, as specified.
(Vehicle Code (VC) Section 11700)
5)Prohibits a holder of a license from, among other things,
making or disseminating any statement which is untrue or
misleading and which is known, or which by the reasonable
exercise of case should be known to be untrue or misleading,
as specified. (VC 11713(a))
6)Prohibits a dealer or person holding a retail seller's permit
from selling a new or used vehicle that is not in compliance
with the Vehicle Code and departmental regulations, unless the
vehicle is sold to another dealer, sold for the purpose of
being legally wrecked or dismantled, or sold exclusively for
off-highway use, as specified. (VC 24007 (a)(1))
7)Provides that when a federal motor vehicle standard is
established under federal law, as specified, no dealer sell or
offer for sale a vehicle to which the standard is applicable,
and no person shall sell or offer for an item of equipment
sale for use upon a vehicle to which the standard is
applicable unless: (a) the vehicle conforms to the applicable
federal standard; or (b) the vehicle or equipment bears a
certification, as specified. (VC 24011)
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of this bill . This bill would prohibit any sale, short
term lease, rental or loan of a used car - certified and
noncertified - by a dealer if the dealer knew or should have
known that the car is subject to a manufacturer's safety
recall. Rental car companies would also be prohibited from
selling such cars, but would not be restricted by this bill
from renting, leasing or loaning used cars with an outstanding
recall notice. These prohibitions would become operational
once a centralized database of searchable recall information
SB 686
Page 5
required by federal regulations is implemented. This bill is
sponsored by Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety.
2)Author's statement . According to the author, "Franchised new
car dealers are prohibited by federal law from selling or
leasing new vehicles that are under a safety recall, but there
is no prohibition against selling, loaning, renting or leasing
used cars that have outstanding, unrepaired safety recalls
pending?
"The sales of unrepaired recalled used vehicles to unsuspecting
used car buyers is a serious problem that has been documented
by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in a recent
June 2011 report, as well as numerous news reports, including
widely reported investigations by the major TV networks and
news organizations throughout California. In some cases,
consumers have experienced life-threatening defects that were
subject to safety recalls, and became manifest shortly after
purchase. For example, some vehicles caught fire. Another had
an axle that broke and caused the vehicle to flip over...
"This bill will protect consumers from potentially harmful
vehicle defects by helping to ensure that the vehicles they
purchase are free from outstanding, unrepaired safety
recalls."
3)Understanding vehicle recalls . The National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act (Act) gives the Department of
Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) authority to issue vehicle safety
standards and to require manufacturers to recall vehicles that
have safety-related defects or do not meet federal safety
standards.
Manufacturers voluntarily initiate some of these recalls, while
many others are either influenced by NHTSA investigations or
ordered by NHTSA via the courts. If a safety defect is
discovered, the manufacturer must notify NHTSA, as well as
vehicle or equipment owners, dealers, and distributors. The
manufacturer is then required to remedy the problem at no
charge to the owner (for vehicles sold up to 10 years before
the recall). NHTSA is responsible for monitoring the
manufacturer's corrective action to ensure successful
completion of the recall campaign.
SB 686
Page 6
A vehicle manufacturer may issue a voluntary safety recall to
address a defect in the performance, construction, or
component of a vehicle. In such a case, the manufacturer will
contact vehicle owners and cover the costs to correct the
defect without involving NHTSA. These voluntary recalls are
not posted online on NHTSA's affiliate Web site, but may be
posted on a vehicle manufacturer's Web site.
Conversely, NHTSA may have received enough complaints and
information about the operation of a vehicle that it finds
there is a significant threat to public safety and initiates a
mandatory recall. NHTSA can perform an investigation with a
review by engineers and experts and work with the vehicle
manufacturer to recall vehicles. These recalls are
facilitated through direct relationships between
manufacturers, franchised dealerships, and owners who
purchased the new vehicles. Manufacturers may dispute a
mandatory recall by petitioning NHTSA or bringing suit in
court.
However, the process of alerting owners of used vehicles is more
difficult because the vehicles may have changed hands several
times, and manufacturers may not have established
communications with used vehicle dealers who buy and sell
multiple different types of cars.
4)GAO report finds lack of recall information for used cars a
'significant risk' . According to a June 2011 GAO report that
examined the federal safety recall process, "NHTSA cannot
require used-car dealers (or franchised dealerships that sell
used vehicles) to notify potential buyers of an outstanding
safety defect or require that they get the defect remedied
prior to sale." The report pointed out that, with 35 million
used cars sold in used and franchised dealerships in 2009
alone, unknown recalls "could pose a significant risk to the
safety of millions of vehicle drivers and may have a negative
impact on recall completion rates." It adds, "NHTSA also
currently lacks the authority to require manufacturers to
notify used-car dealerships - which sold 11 million cars in
2009 - of recalls or require these dealerships to notify
potential buyers of an outstanding recall. As a result, many
consumers may be unknowingly putting their lives at risk by
purchasing a defective vehicle."
According to a February 4, 2013 press release by private-sector
SB 686
Page 7
vehicle information provider Carfax, "Nearly 2.1 million cars
with open recalls were for sale online in 2012, an improvement
from 2.7 million in 2011. Florida, California and Texas lead
the nation with the highest number of cars in both years."
5)Defining the "safety recall" . The current version of this
bill pertains to vehicles "subject to a manufacturer's safety
recall". This is an important distinction because not all
recalls are safety-related under the Act, and would not
trigger the provisions of this bill.
According to NHTSA, the Act defines motor vehicle safety as "the
performance of a motor vehicle or motor vehicle equipment in a
way that protects the public against unreasonable risk of
accidents occurring because of the design, construction, or
performance of a motor vehicle, and against unreasonable risk
of death or injury in an accident, and includes nonoperational
safety of a motor vehicle." A defect includes "any defect in
performance, construction, a component, or material of a motor
vehicle or motor vehicle equipment." Generally, a safety
defect is defined as a problem that exists in a motor vehicle
or item of motor vehicle equipment that poses a risk to motor
vehicle safety, and may exist in a group of vehicles of the
same design or manufacture, or items of equipment of the same
type and manufacture.
As examples of what would constitute a "safety-related" defect,
NHTSA points to problems with steering components, fuel
systems, accelerator controls, air bags, wiring or child
safety seats, among other things, that have the potential to
cause harm or increase the risk of a crash. NHTSA also
provides a partial list of what would not constitute a
safety-related defect: air conditioners and radios that do not
operate properly, ordinary wear of equipment that must be
periodically maintained or repaired, nonstructural rust, paint
or cosmetic blemishes, and excessive oil consumption.
According to the author, this bill would "NOT apply to any
non-safety recalls or 'service campaigns'. It applies only to
safety recalls pursuant to the National Traffic and Motor
Vehicle Safety Act."
6)Existing rights and resources for used-car buyers . The Car
Buyer's Bill of Rights, established pursuant to AB 68
(Monta�ez), Chapter 128, Statutes of 2005, prohibits car
SB 686
Page 8
dealers from advertising or selling a used vehicle as
"certified" if certain conditions are present, including
odometer rollbacks, salvage titles, and damage that
substantially impairs the vehicle's use or safety. However,
there is no such sale restriction concerning outstanding
safety recall notices.
According to a June 25, 2013 letter from NHTSA, "An auto dealer
(or any vehicle owner) today may easily access up-to-date, VIN
[vehicle identification number]-specific information regarding
the safety recall status of a used car. Such information may
be accessed through the manufacturer's publicly accessible
VIN-look up website, through a commercial VIN-look up service
for registered owners, or through the manufacturer's toll-free
number.
"By entering a unique VIN on the vehicle manufacturer's publicly
accessible VIN-look-up website, an auto dealer can access
VIN-specific recall information from such manufacturers as
General Motors, Toyota, Ford, Honda, Chrysler, Hyundai/Kia,
Volkswagen, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz, Suzuki, Mitsubishi, Volvo,
and Porsche. Mazda, Subaru, and Harley-Davidson also provide
VIN-specific recall information on their publicly accessible
websites, but only after the vehicle owner enters contact
information and creates a website account. An auto dealer also
can access the website of a VIN-look-up service, such as
CARFAX, to find VIN-specific recall information. Finally, all
light vehicle manufacturers offer VIN-specific recall
information through their toll-free, customer service
telephone numbers."
Car dealers and consumers may also purchase vehicle history
reports from private companies such as Carfax, which compiles
vehicle accident history information from multiple sources,
including the Department of Motor Vehicles, insurance
companies, and law enforcement. Carfax also maintains a free
public website (recall.carfax.com) that allows consumers to
check for open recall information by VIN number for 36 major
manufacturers, if that information has been reported to the
company.
7)Recent changes in federal law on vehicle safety recall
information . In 2012, Congress enacted the MAP-21 Act, a
funding and authorization bill to govern federal
transportation spending that contains a provision requiring
SB 686
Page 9
motor vehicle safety recall information about outstanding
recalls to be posted online in a format that preserves
consumer privacy and is searchable by vehicle make, model, and
VIN.
The MAP-21 Act requires U.S. DOT to promulgate regulations by
July 6, 2013 requiring each vehicle manufacturer to provide
vehicle recall information on a public Web site and to car
dealers. While those regulations have not yet been
promulgated, the information system that will be required by
MAP-21 is expected to aid the implementation of this bill by
allowing car dealers and consumers to access vehicle recall
information via the Web rather than contacting manufacturers
directly.
In its current form, the requirements of SB 686 would not become
operational until the effective date of the regulations.
8)Arguments in support . According to the sponsor, Consumers for
Auto Reliability and Safety, "Enactment of SB 686 is necessary
to protect the motoring public because, while franchised new
car dealers are prohibited by federal law from selling or
leasing new vehicles that are under a safety recall, there is
no specific federal prohibition against auto dealers selling,
loaning, renting, or leasing used cars that have been
recalled, but not repaired - even though the cars are equally
unsafe?
"[T]he impetus for this bill arises from the reckless
practices of some auto dealers, who fail to take easy steps to
ensure that the cars they provide to their customers are safe.
In some tragic cases, consumers have been killed or injured
due to defects in used vehicles that were subject to safety
recalls. Sometimes the crashes were entirely preventable, with
even minimal effort on the part of the dealer.
"Existing law in California is not sufficient to stop auto
dealers from selling recalled used cars. Vehicle Code sections
24007 and 24011 place restrictions on licensed dealers that
prohibit them from selling vehicles that are not in compliance
with certain provisions of federal or state law and
regulations. However, some dealers publicly admit that they
fail to even check whether vehicles are subject to safety
recalls, before providing them to the public.
SB 686
Page 10
"In order to determine whether a vehicle has an open safety
recall, dealers have several quick, easy, no-cost options?Some
auto dealers already take those steps and have instituted
'best practices' to ensure that used cars they obtain are
safe, prior to offering them to their customers."
Noting the disparity between existing laws prohibiting the
sale of new vehicles under an outstanding recall, but not for
used vehicles, the Consumer Attorneys of California contend
that "SB 686 would correct these inconsistencies and provide
much-needed protection to California consumers....Unsuspecting
car buyers have experienced life-threatening defects that were
subject to safety recalls, including one driver who had an
axle break, causing his vehicle to flip over. Consumers pay
substantially more for certified used cars and, based on the
dealers' claims, tend not to have their vehicles inspected,
believing the vehicle has already passed a rigorous
inspection."
The Center for Public Interest Law and Children's Advocacy
Center writes that "[t]he measure prohibits an auto dealer
from selling or transferring a vehicle that has suffered an
official notice of a defect. Indeed, if there is such a
problem and the auto is then sold or loaned without repair or
even warning, the liability implications should lead most
prudent dealers to embrace this measure. It does involve the
burden of monitoring defect notices. But these dealers are in
the business of selling this very product - one with obvious
safety implications not only for the purchaser, but for those
who may suffer collision with the vehicle. In contrast, the
average consumer is not in an advantageous position to monitor
these notices, particularly where they occur in advance of his
interest in a particular model car."
9)Arguments in opposition . The Californian New Car Dealers
Association oppose this bill on multiple grounds:
"SB 686 wrongly targets all car dealers for a problem that has
been brought about by the rental car industry. The rental car
industry has faced scrutiny in recent years for renting
defective vehicles to consumers despite being informed of open
safety recalls. Bills were introduced in Sacramento and then
in Congress to require rental car companies to remove recalled
vehicles from their rental fleets until repaired. These bills
failed passage. Rather than focusing on rental car companies,
SB 686
Page 11
SB 686 targets every dealer - regardless of how minor the
recall is, or whether the dealer has access to information
about the recall.
"Changing the focus of regulation from rental car companies to
dealers creates more, not less, compliance issues. While a
rental car company is notified directly by the manufacturer
when a vehicle it owns is recalled, car dealers receive no
such notification (unless franchised to sell that make). For
example, a Chevrolet dealer will not be notified by Toyota if
a used Toyota in inventory is recalled. Nor does that dealer
have access to information concerning whether the vehicle has
been recalled, or, if so, whether the defect has been
repaired. While we believe a recall mandate is premature as
described below, any such mandate whenever imposed should
include both dealers and rental car companies.
"In recognition of these concerns, Congress passed legislation
last year requiring the creation of a free internet
database?Unless and until this database is operational,
compliance with SB 686 would be impossible. CNCDA opposes SB
686 because it would require dealers to determine whether
vehicles are subject to recall, and the federal database
necessary to do so has not been created. California should
not enact legislation that guarantees non-compliance and
needless litigation.
"Recent amendments fail to delay the bill's implementation date
until the database is operational. Instead, these amendments
delay the bill's provisions until the 'initial effective date'
on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's
regulations. What's important is the operation of the
database, not the 'initial' effective date of the regulations.
Furthermore, SB 686 still requires that dealers make phone
calls, internet searches or other dealer contacts. While such
steps appear routine, in reality they provide dealers with no
certainty that the vehicle is not subject to recall and will
subject them to DMV discipline and potentially limitless
litigation. The lack of certainty about recalls is exactly
why Congress required the creation of a national recall
database. These amendments will make dealer compliance more,
not less, difficult.
"SB 686 is not just premature and unnecessary but is also poorly
conceived and ambiguous. The bill fails to define
SB 686
Page 12
manufacturer's safety recall and other key terms.
Additionally, it fails to specify when a dealer must verify a
vehicle's recall status or provide any protection for a dealer
once an inquiry has been made. Without providing any clear
avenues for dealers to comply with its provisions, SB 686 is
problematic and creates havoc in the used car market as
dealers and consumers struggle to discover the recall status
of their vehicles."
Copart, Inc., a salvage pool company, also opposes the measure
for reasons previously stated and requests an amendment to
exempt used vehicles where the evidence of ownership is a
salvage certificate, a non-repairable vehicle certificate, or
an acquisition bill of sale, or any other vehicle sold by or
through a salvage pool.
Additional concerns raised by other opponents include a lack
of clarity as to when the dealer must check for the required
information in order to avoid liability, a lack of certainty
as to what exactly constitutes a safety recall, concerns about
recalls that do not provide for immediate repair, and the
contention that this bill misses the bulk of the danger in
that roughly two-thirds of used car sales occur as
transactions between individuals that would be unaffected by
this bill.
10)Comments and questions for the Committee . As noted above,
many opponents have expressed concerns about the prohibitions
of this bill becoming operational before the
federally-mandated database itself becomes operational. The
recommended Committee amendments provided below would make
this bill's prohibitions effective upon the initial
implementation date of the database (or web portal, other
means of digital access required by the MAP-21 regulations, as
the final form is not yet certain), instead of the
implementation date of the regulations that require it.
However, some opponents maintain that even this delay is
insufficient, as there is no guarantee that the database will
be fully functional on the initial implementation date.
Accordingly, opponents ask that this bill's requirements be
delayed until a 3d party, perhaps the Commissioner of the
California Highway Patrol or Director of the Department of
Motor Vehicles, can certify that the database is fully
operational.
SB 686
Page 13
Opponents have also raised concerns about the precise meaning
of a "safety recall." In an attempt to address those concerns,
the Committee recommends an amendment to define a
"manufacturer's safety recall" as any recall initiated
pursuant to a particular section of the federal Act. However,
some opponents contend that this definition remains overbroad
because not all safety recalls under the Act concern defects
that render a vehicle unsafe to operate.
Finally, opponents argue that it is fundamentally unfair for
the bill to impose broad prohibitions on the sale, leasing and
loan of vehicle dealers when rental car companies are
permitted to continue to renting and leasing used vehicles
without a similar requirement to check for recall notices.
They contend that an unknown safety defect in a used car is
equally dangerous to a consumer and others the road whether
the car is purchased or rented, and the law should reflect
that equal danger. The author's office claims that rental car
companies should be exempt for now because they operate in a
different and more complicated legal framework (interstate
commerce) than in-state sales. The author also expects the
issue to be addressed in pending federal legislation (S. 921
(Schumer)) that would impose similar restrictions on rental
car companies. S. 921 is currently pending in the Senate
Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.
The Committee may wish to inquire of the author as to the
likelihood of success of those federal efforts, and whether or
not it would be more prudent from a consumer protection
standpoint to impose the prohibition equally on dealers and
rental companies alike, perhaps with an amendment explicitly
acknowledging the precedence any federal legislation would
enjoy related to recall requirements. This would ensure the
maximum amount of consumer protection, particularly if the
expected federal legislation fails to pass.
11)Suggested Committee amendments . The primary concern raised by
opponents involves the operational date of the provisions of
this bill. As currently written, the prohibitions of SB 686
become effective on "the initial effective date" of the MAP-21
regulations. However, there is a great deal of concern that
the recall information system required by the regulations will
not be operational as of that date. The author of this bill,
speaking in support of this bill on May 29, 2013 on the Senate
Floor, committed to amending the bill, saying "My intent is to
SB 686
Page 14
make sure that the bill becomes operative only when the
database is implemented." The following amendments would
effect that change, while deleting language made obsolete by
tying operation of the statute to operation of the database.
Amend page 3, lines 38, to replace the word "effective"
with "implementation"; and add before the word
"regulations" the following: "database, Internet Web site,
or other electronic means of public access required by the"
Delete page 4, lines 31-38, and page 5, lines 1-9,
inclusive.
Amend page 5, line 26, to replace the word "effective" with
"implementation"; and add before the word "regulations" the
following: "database, Internet Web site, or other
electronic means of public access required by the"
Delete page 6, lines 4-21, inclusive.
Amend page 6, line 39, to replace the word "effective" with
"implementation"; and add before the word "regulations" the
following: "database, Internet Web site, or other
electronic means of public access required by the"
Another concern raised by opponents is the lack of clarity as
to what constitutes a manufacturer's safety recall. In order
to provide greater specificity, the following amendment ties
the term 'manufacturer's safety recall' to the federal recall
statute, which covers any "defect related to motor vehicle
safety or does not comply with an applicable motor vehicle
safety standard prescribed" under the Act.
Add Section 390 to the Vehicle Code to read:
"Manufacturer's safety recall" means a recall pursuant to
Section 30118 of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle
Safety Act, 49 U.S.C. Sections 30101, et seq. It does not
include service campaigns or emissions recalls where the
manufacturer has not issued a safety recall notice to
owners of the affected vehicles, pursuant to Section 30118
of the National Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 49 U.S.C Section
30101, et seq."
The requirement of this bill that the dealer must check the
SB 686
Page 15
MAP-21 database does not specify when the database must be
checked. In order to prevent a scenario where a dealer may
check the recall status of a vehicle immediately on taking
possession but allow months to elapse before the vehicle is
sold without an additional check, the language should be
clarified to state that the check must be made immediately
before the transaction is finalized.
Amend page 4, line 27 to replace "either" with "any"
Amend page 4, line 29, after the word "manufacturer", add
"about the manufacturer's safety recall for that vehicle.
Add subdivision (b)(3) at page 4, line 31, to read: "(3)
The manufacturer has made information about the
manufacturer's safety recall regarding that specific
vehicle available on the manufacturer's internet website,
searchable by VIN, stating that the manufacturer's safety
recall repairs have not been performed, prior to sale,
lease, loan, rental, or other transfer of ownership at
retail of the vehicle."
Amend page 5, lines 39-40 and page 6, lines 1-3, to read:
"(b) For purposes of this section, a rental company is
deemed to have knowledge of a manufacturer's safety
recall if either of the following applies:
(1) The rental company receives notification of
the manufacturer's safety recall pursuant to
subdivision (b) or (c) of Section 30118 or Section
30119 of Title 49 of the United States Code.
(2) The manufacturer has made information about
the manufacturer's safety recall regarding that
specific vehicle available on the manufacturer's
internet website, searchable by VIN, stating that the
manufacturer's safety recall repairs have not been
performed, prior to sale or other transfer of
ownership at retail of the vehicle."
12)Double-referral . This bill is double-referred to the
Assembly Judiciary Committee.
13)Related legislation . AB 964 (Bonta) of 2013 would have
SB 686
Page 16
prohibited a vehicle from being advertised or sold if the
dealer knows or should have known that the vehicle is subject
to a manufacturer's safety recall, and would have required
written disclosure of specified problems with the vehicle. AB
964 is currently on the inactive file on the Assembly Floor.
14)Previous legislation . SB 990 (Vargas) of 2012 would have
allowed a car dealer selling a used car to obtain data from a
commercial entity, rather than the federal government, to
provide required information to consumers on the vehicle's
title history. SB 990 was held in the Senate Transportation
and Housing Committee.
AB 753 (Monning) of 2011 would have expressly prohibited a
rental car company from renting a vehicle that is subject to a
recall notice unless the vehicle has been repaired a specified
in the notice. AB 753 failed passage in the Senate
Appropriations Committee.
AB 68 (Monta�ez), Chapter 128, Statutes of 2005, enacts the
Car Buyer's Bill of Rights, provided that a car dealer may not
advertise of sell as "certified" a used or pre-owned motor
vehicle, as defined, unless specified conditions are
satisfied, and further provided that vehicles sold as
"certified" may not be sold "as is," or if the dealer has
disclaimed any warranties.
SB 114 (Bowen) of 2005 would have enhanced the process by
which attempts are made to notify an owner of a motor vehicle
of a required safety-related vehicle recall. SB 114 was held
on the Suspense File in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
AB 1215 (Blumenfield), Chapter 329, Statutes of 2001, requires
new car dealers to participate in a program to electronically
title and register vehicles that they sell and to post
specified warning notices on some used cars.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety (sponsor)
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
California Nurses Association
California Public Interest Research Group (CALPIRG)
SB 686
Page 17
Center for Public Interest Law/Children's Advocacy Institute
Consumer Action
Consumer Attorneys of California
Consumer Federation of America
Consumer Federation of California
Consumer Watchdog
Consumers Union
Enterprise Holdings
Hertz Corporation
Latin Business Association
National Consumers League
Safe Kids California
State Farm
Trauma Foundation
1 private individual
Opposition
California Chamber of Commerce
California New Car Dealers Association
CarMax Auto Superstores, Inc.
Copart, Inc.
Independent Automobile Dealers Association (unless amended)
Analysis Prepared by : Hank Dempsey / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301