Texas House Bill HB1822

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 2/24/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/8/11
• Voted on by House: 4/25/11
• Refer: 3/10/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/19/11
• Report Pass: 4/4/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/25/11
• Engrossed: 4/25/11
• Governor Action: 6/17/11
• Refer: 4/29/11
• Report Pass: 5/19/11
• Enrolled: 5/27/11
• Passed: 6/17/11

Caption

Relating to the withdrawal of security by a bail bond surety.

Impact

The impact of HB1822 on state laws includes amendments to Section 1704.210 of the Occupations Code. Under the new provisions, a license holder in good standing could request a withdrawal of security, provided three conditions are met: they must have sufficient remaining security to meet the minimum requirements, maintain necessary ratios, and not have any outstanding judgments. This change can potentially enhance the operational efficiency of bail bond businesses as they manage their financial obligations while still remaining compliant with regulatory standards.

Summary

House Bill 1822 aims to modify the provisions regarding the withdrawal of security by bail bond sureties in the state of Texas. The bill primarily focuses on allowing a licensed bail bond surety to withdraw all or part of their deposited security, provided they comply with certain conditions. This proposal is aligned with the objective of streamlining processes for license holders, granting them greater flexibility over their financial securities related to bail bonding activities.

Conclusion

Overall, HB1822 adjusts the regulatory framework for bail bond sureties in Texas, emphasizing a more liberal approach to security withdrawals while maintaining essential safeguards. This bill, if enacted, is indicative of the ongoing evolution within the bail bond profession, highlighting the need for regulations that keep pace with the operational dynamics of the industry while securing the interests of the judicial process.

Contention

One notable point of contention surrounding the bill stems from the balancing act between providing bail bond professionals with more financial autonomy and ensuring that there are adequate protections for consumers and the legal system. Critics may argue that such flexibility could pose risks if not regulated appropriately, as less stringent requirements could result in challenges in fulfilling financial obligations related to bail bonds, particularly in instances of forfeiture or non-compliance with the law. The legislative discussions may need to address these concerns to ensure that the new provisions do not inadvertently undermine the effectiveness of the bail system.