California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB766

Introduced
2/21/25  
Refer
3/12/25  
Report Pass
4/9/25  

Caption

California Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Act.

Impact

The enactment of SB 766 would affect existing legislation that regulates conditional sale contracts in the motor vehicle sector. By removing the contract cancellation option agreement mandates— which currently allow buyers to return vehicles within a defined period—the bill introduces a new 10-day, 3-business-day right to cancel vehicle purchases. This modification aims to ensure consumers have the ability to withdraw from a transaction that might not meet their expectations, bolstering consumer rights in vehicle transactions and reducing instances of auto retail scams.

Summary

Senate Bill 766, known as the California Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Act, aims to enhance consumer protection in the auto retail industry by addressing deceptive practices. The bill proposes to repeal existing disclosure requirements related to vehicle sale contracts and, in their place, mandates that dealers refrain from making any misrepresentations concerning the costs or terms of vehicle purchases. By instituting clearer guidelines on disclosures related to pricing and financing, the bill attempts to foster a more transparent buying process, thereby protecting consumers from potential fraud or misinformation.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB 766 appears to be broadly positive among consumer advocacy groups, as it addresses concerns over auto dealer practices that have long been a source of public frustration. While proponents laud the bill for paving the way for increased consumer rights and more robust protection against auto scams, there may be apprehension from some dealers who see these regulatory changes as burdensome or restrictive. Overall, the sentiment reflects a strong emphasis on consumer protection while balancing the interests of auto dealers.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding SB 766 relate to the balance between regulation and dealer autonomy. Critics may argue that the new requirements could impose additional compliance costs and complexities on dealers, potentially leading to unintended consequences such as increased prices for consumers. Moreover, there may be concerns regarding how effectively these protections can be enforced, and whether the new framework truly addresses the root causes of scams in the auto retail space. Engaging all stakeholders in further discussions may help to refine the bill and its implications more thoroughly.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB931

State Bar Act: consumer legal funding.

VA SB1161

Artificial Intelligence Transparency Act; established.

VA HB2554

Artificial Intelligence Transparency Act; established.

VA SB1212

Virginia Consumer Protection Act; prohibited practices, mandatory fees or surcharges disclosure.

VA HB2374

Athlete agents; deregulation.

VA HB2515

Virginia Consumer Protection Act; prohibited practices, mandatory fees or surcharges disclosure.

VA SB1285

Professional & Occupational Reg., Dept. of; deregulation of residential building energy analysts.

VA HB2112

Safeguarding American Veteran Empowerment Act; created, prohibited practices, penalties.