Connecticut 2013 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB06436

Introduced
2/20/13  
Introduced
2/20/13  
Refer
2/20/13  
Refer
2/20/13  
Report Pass
3/14/13  
Report Pass
3/14/13  
Refer
3/25/13  
Refer
3/25/13  
Report Pass
4/2/13  

Caption

An Act Concerning Attorney's Fees For Travel To A Real Estate Closing.

Impact

The passage of HB 06436 would significantly alter the landscape of attorney-client financial arrangements in real estate transactions. The bill's provisions mean that banks, when represented by attorneys, will no longer need to account for travel expenses in their overall closing costs. This could encourage more banks to engage legal representation during real estate closings, as the elimination of travel fees may lower the barriers to legal services. Moreover, it could streamline the closing process, making it more efficient and cost-effective for banks and their customers alike.

Summary

House Bill 06436 is aimed at addressing the issue of attorney's fees associated with travel to real estate closings. Specifically, the bill prohibits attorneys representing banks that own real estate from charging travel fees incurred while attending these closings. This legislation seeks to alleviate the financial burden on banks involved in real estate transactions, potentially leading to lower costs for consumers as well. By standardizing the fees attorneys can charge for such services, the bill aims to enhance fairness and transparency in real estate dealings in the state.

Sentiment

Overall, the sentiment surrounding HB 06436 appears to be positive among stakeholders within the banking and real estate industries. Proponents argue that the bill promotes more accessible legal services and reduces unnecessary fees, which can burden both banks and consumers. However, there may be concerns from attorneys regarding the impact on their revenue from travel-related fees. Despite these concerns, the general view is that the bill serves the public interest by fostering a more equitable and straightforward environment for property transactions.

Contention

While the bill seems to enjoy support from various stakeholders, there may be points of contention regarding its implementation. Specifically, questions could arise about how the prohibition on travel fees will be enforced and whether existing contracts will be affected. Attorneys may worry about the loss of income from travel expenses, while banks might lobby for further clarifications on other associated legal fees. As with any legislation that alters traditional financial arrangements between service providers and their clients, HB 06436 may require ongoing discussion to ensure that it meets the needs of all involved parties effectively.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.