Maryland House Bill HB66

Maryland 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/11/23
• Refer: 1/11/23
• Report Pass: 2/20/23
• Engrossed: 2/24/23
• Refer: 2/27/23
• Report Pass: 3/30/23
• Enrolled: 4/3/23
• Chaptered: 5/16/23
• Passed: 5/16/23

Caption

Circuit Courts and District Court - Dishonored Checks - Service Charges

Impact

If enacted, HB66 will impact the financial obligations of individuals who write non-honored checks to the courts. By raising the service charge, the bill seeks to alleviate some of the financial strain on the court system resulting from the management of dishonored checks. This change could potentially discourage the writing of checks without sufficient funds, leading to improved compliance among individuals using the court services in Maryland.

Summary

House Bill 66 addresses the issues surrounding dishonored checks in the context of Maryland's Circuit and District Courts. This legislation proposes to increase the maximum service charge that courts can impose on individuals whose checks are not honored by the respective financial institutions from $10 to $30. The primary aim of this change is to adjust the service charge to better reflect current economic conditions and offset the administrative costs incurred by the courts when handling dishonored payments.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB66 appears to be largely supportive among legislators, as evidenced by the voting outcome where the bill passed with a significant majority—42 yeas to 4 nays during its third reading. Supporters argue that the increase in service charges is a necessary step to ensure that courts can effectively manage the financial repercussions of dishonored checks while also setting a more realistic fee in line with the costs associated with processing these transactions.

Contention

One notable point of contention related to HB66 revolves around the implications of increasing service charges for individuals who may already be facing financial hardships. Critics may argue that this increase could disproportionately impact lower-income individuals who rely on writing checks for various court-related fees. Therefore, while the bill is seen as a way to enhance court revenue and efficiency, it raises concerns about accessibility and fairness in the legal system for those facing economic challenges.