BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 1160
                                                                  Page  1

          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
          AB 1160 (Fong)
          As Amended  September 3, 2009
          Majority vote
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |48-20|(June 18, 2009) |SENATE: |26-14|(September 8,  |
          |           |     |                |        |     |2009)          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
            
           Original Committee Reference:    B. & F.  

           SUMMARY  :  Provides that if loan or extension of credit secured  
          by real property is negotiated in Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog,  
          Vietnamese, or Korean then the borrower must be provided a  
          translation of the key terms of the transaction at least three  
          days after initial application for the loan.  Specifically,  this  
          bill  :  

          1)Specifies that anyone engaged in a trade or business that  
            negotiates mortgage loan transactions in Spanish, Chinese,  
            Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean shall provide a translation to  
            the contracting consumer.

          2)Exempts the translation requirement for extensions of credit  
            by federally chartered banks or credit unions.

          3)Requires the Department of Corporations (DOC) and Department  
            of Financial Institutions (DFI) to create a translated summary  
            of key terms of a mortgage transaction.

          4)Specifies that the licensing agency may impose a penalty,  
            addition to any civil liability, in the amount of $2,500 for  
            the first violation, $5,000 for the second violation, $10,000  
            for the third violation, and each subsequent violation. 

          5)Provides that nothing shall be construed to prevent any  
            enforcement by a governmental entity against any person who  
            originates a loan and who is exempt or excluded from licensure  
            by all of the licensing agencies, based on a violation of any  
            provision of this section. 

          6)Provides that a financial institution that has satisfied  
            translation requirements that exist under current law will not  
            have to comply with the new provisions.








                                                                  AB 1160
                                                                  Page  2


          7)Specifies that the provisions of this bill shall not be  
            construed to create or enhance any claim, right of action, or  
            civil liability that did not previously exist under state law,  
            or limit any claim, right of action, or civil liability that  
            otherwise exists under state law.

          8)Established that a licensed person who violates the  
            requirements of this bill will have also been deemed to have  
            violated their licensing law.

          9)Provides for an operative date beginning 90 days after  
            issuance of the Forms, but no later than July 1, 2010.
           
          The Senate amendments  clarify:

          1)That the provisions of AB 1160 do not create or enhance any  
            claim, right of action, or civil liability that did not  
            previously exist under state law, or limit any claim, right of  
            action, or civil liability that otherwise exists under state  
            law.  

          2)The remedies that are available depending on the entity that  
            has committee a violation. 

          3)Make other technical and clarifying changes.

           
          EXISTING LAW  :

          1)Requires a person in a trade or business who negotiates  
            certain specified contracts or agreements primarily in   
            Spanish, Chinese, Tagalog, Vietnamese, or Korean must provide  
            an unexecuted translation of the contract or agreement in the  
            language in which the contract or agreement was negotiated  
            prior to its execution.  In addition, any subsequent document  
            making substantial changes in the rights and obligations of  
            the parties must also be translated.  Provides that this  
            requirement does not apply if the consumer negotiates the  
            terms of the contract through an interpreter.  The contracts  
            covered by this requirement are:

             a)   Retail installment or automobile conditional sales  
               contracts;









                                                                  AB 1160
                                                                  Page  3

             b)   Unsecured loans or extensions of credit for use  
               primarily for personal, family or household purposes;

             c)   A lease, sublease, or rental contract or agreement; 

             d)   A loan or extension of credit for use primarily for  
               personal, family or household purposes where the loan is  
               subject to the Industrial Loan Law (involving industrial  
               banks or industrial loan companies) or the California  
               Finance Lenders Law (generally involving higher-end  
               consumer loans, but may also include some home loans), or  
               loans involving a real estate broker (in which case only  
               specified information must be translated); 

             e)   A reverse mortgage; and,

             f)   Legal services agreements.  (Civil Code Section 1632.   
               Unless otherwise stated, all further statutory references  
               are to that code.)

          2)Provides that the requirement to provide translated copies of   
            agreements is deemed complied with if a supervised financial  
            organization, which includes a bank, savings association or  
            credit union, provides a translation of the disclosures  
            required by Regulation M (consumer leasing) or Regulation Z   
            (consumer lending) of the federal Truth in Lending Act.   
            (Section 1632.)

          3)Specifies that the executed English-language contract shall  
            determine the rights and obligations of the parties, but  
            provides that the translation may be admissible in evidence  
            only to show that no contract was entered into because of a  
            substantial difference between the contract and the  
            translation.  (Section 1632.)

          4)Provides that the consumer may rescind the contract if a  
            required translation is not provided.  If the contract has  
            been sold or assigned to a financial institution, the consumer  
            must make restitution to, and have restitution made by, the  
            person with whom he or she made the contract.  In addition,  
            the assignor is required to promptly repurchase the contract  
            from the assignee.  (Section 1632.)
           

          AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY  , this bill was substantially similar  








                                                                  AB 1160
                                                                  Page  4

          to the bill currently under consideration.
           
          FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:

          1)DOC, DFI, and DRE indicate that the translation of documents  
            will result in minor and probably absorbable costs.

          2)Minor examination and enforcement costs to DOC and DFI (less  
            than $50,000 annually combined), potentially offset by higher  
            administrative penalties.

           COMMENTS  :

           Need for bill  .  According to the author, "For the most  
          consumers, mortgages are the largest and most complex financial  
          transactions of their lives.  For many non-English speakers,  
          failure to translate the documents results in limited or an  
          incorrect understanding of key loan terms like interest rate  
          adjustments and prepayment penalties.  As a result, many end up  
          with excessively costly loans or loans that will result in high  
          levels of default and foreclosure.  Lack of Translation  
          compounds other problems that have contributed to sharply  
          increasing defaults and foreclosures in the subprime mortgage  
          market."

           Background  :  Contracts covered by the current translation  
          requirement include automobile sales and leases, consumer credit  
          agreements, retail installment contracts, rental agreements,  
          certain types of loans, and legal service contracts.  This  
          requirement was established in 1974 to prevent certain trades or  
          businesses from taking "unfair advantage" of Spanish-speaking  
          consumers.  The additional four languages were added in 2003, in  
          response to the 2000 Census which revealed that approximately  
          4.3 million Californians speak a non-English language other than  
          Spanish in their homes.  

          Media reports from 2007, specifically a series of articles from  
          the San Jose Mercury News (The Harsh Side of the Housing Boom,  
          March 11, 2007) detailed the problems of borrowers with limited  
          English skills unable to understand the complex disclosures or  
          key terms relating to their loans.  The subprime housing boom  
          found particular strength in minority communities, specifically  
          non-English speaking.  As the aforementioned article relays,  
          several mortgage companies hired teams of Spanish speakers to  








                                                                  AB 1160
                                                                  Page  5

          call borrowers and negotiate strictly in Spanish.  The article  
          goes on to say that many of these borrowers were not offered  
          translations of the loan documents.  Yet, and in spite of the  
          difficulties presented regarding translations, another factor  
          increasing the problem associated with these mortgages was the  
          prevalence and use of no-documentation loans, or the use of  
          teaser rate loans that were in themselves, endemic with risks  
          and the potential for default.  Couple these risky features with  
          multiple languages and the likelihood of default skyrockets.

           Previous legislation  :  AB 309 (Chu), Chapter 330, Statutes of  
          2003, expanded translation requirements beyond, what was then a  
          requirement for only Spanish translations, to Chinese, Tagalog,  
          Vietnamese, or Korean.  AB 309 was a contentious measure pitting  
          several consumer organizations against organizations  
          representing concerns of various different affected industries.   
           

          In 2007, AB 512 (Lieber) was introduced in response to a concern  
          that some non-English speaking mortgage loan borrowers were not  
          being supplied with a translation of the mortgage loan  
          documents, and thus unable to understand the key terms of their  
          mortgage loan.  AB 512 would have required supervised financial  
          organizations, as defined, who negotiate any material term of a  
          contract or agreement, in one of five listed foreign languages,  
          to provide either an approved disclosure form or a translated  
          copy of the contract or agreement to the borrower, as specified;  
          would subject violators of this section to specified penalties  
          for failure to comply; and would give aggrieved borrowers  
          certain rights to rescind contracts.   The bill was held in  
          Senate Banking, Finance and Insurance.
           

          Analysis Prepared by :    Mark Farouk / B. & F. / (916) 319-3081


                                                                FN: 0002917