Texas House Bill HB2559

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 3/8/11
• Out of House Committee: 4/11/11
• Voted on by House: 4/19/11
• Refer: 3/15/11
• Out of Senate Committee: 5/3/11
• Report Pass: 4/5/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/10/11
• Engrossed: 4/19/11
• Governor Action: 5/21/11
• Refer: 4/26/11
• Report Pass: 5/3/11
• Enrolled: 5/11/11
• Passed: 5/21/11

Caption

Relating to commercial motor vehicle installment sales.

Impact

The legislation modifies existing statutes under the Finance Code dealing with retail installment transactions. Notably, it aims to clarify how retail installment contracts can incorporate various charges, including insurance premiums, as part of their structure. This adjustment is significant as it sets explicit maximum charges for different tiers of vehicles—new, used, and heavy commercial vehicles. It ensures that consumers are informed about additional charges and protects them from excessive fees that may have previously gone unregulated.

Summary

House Bill 2559 focuses on the regulation of installment sales for commercial motor vehicles in Texas. This bill restructures aspects of the Finance Code, providing guidelines on how installment contracts should be crafted, while ensuring that certain fees and charges associated with these contracts comply with state regulations. It introduces provisions for documenting insurance charges related to commercial vehicles within installment agreements, enhancing consumer protections and offering clearer guidelines for both lenders and borrowers.

Contention

Some notable points of contention surrounding this bill center around the regulation of fees in installment contracts and how these provisions align with consumer protections. There is concern that while the bill aims to offer clearer guidelines, the potential for additional charges may place an undue burden on consumers who may already be facing financial difficulties. Furthermore, the appropriateness of maintaining such regulations in a way that balances the interests of financing companies against consumer rights continues to be a topic of debate among stakeholders.