[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6660856,"mediaKeyId","2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999","parentId",2431309,"title","Committee to refine trailer-manufacturers licensing bill after industry testimony and legal questions","audioSeconds",1155,"startMs",2782865,"endMs",3938305,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999&start=2782&end=3938","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999/thumbnail_2782865.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6660856/Georgia/Committee-to-refine-trailer-manufacturers-licensing-bill-after-industry-testimony-and-legal-questions","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6660856-704314ec148005e39a7a2b9966ea5826/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118066&Signature=Dw9rTySHCbgBj0Wfqrrqp-xhcBzWDO4OG3P2Korbwx77J6cXUxyWHP3QdTdCoh1friLFF~82I4dS0iJwHITBMTZOV3o7ob5LEQRX0Miy~lcMcan~1i3y~PXN1lNLdtWUddWeAvvECH41-YQzMXUybjE9fxgPckaU6Zm7QoVtoMNAFnJwsWmsz7oqPtQ9yfoZr-VnhA1XrH0gYCa3PhtQAWtChqqZLV4L0aKxGOnAqMw8kWWT580-4-yxWwXnZaxBWnGz8yTNpz9JTCfIJX4N7aygg1lw~F-xU3xbEJh2Aa7cuGbV3SpDJqSNDg~hTNCbJrrVw9fPj9nY68n0Lk4qLQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","State of Georgia ","date","2025-02-27T15:11:25.913Z","article","Representative Ford presented House Bill 590 to the Regulated Industries Committee, proposing a state board of trailer manufacturers to license and inspect manufacturers, enforce compliance and provide a single oversight authority for trailer production.

Ford said the board would enforce laws already on the books and establish licensing and inspection to protect consumers and legitimate manufacturers. Hal Baxley of Freedom Trailers and chair of the Georgia Association of Trailer Manufacturers testified that unlicensed operations and cash labor were producing trailers that compromise safety and undercut law-abiding businesses. “We’re not trying to create any new laws,” Baxley told the committee. “All we want is the oversight.” He said the trailer-manufacturing sector in Georgia is substantial and that oversight would reassure consumers and level the playing field for compliant manufacturers.

Committee members pressed authors and witnesses on several drafting and implementation issues:

- Definition and scope: Lawmakers asked who would be covered by the definition of “manufacturer.” The bill’s language defines manufacturing as \"any person engaged in the business of constructing or assembling a trailer,\" which several members said was broad enough to capture small-scale or home builders and would need a clearer threshold. Witnesses acknowledged a draft exemption for small homemade builders (the testimony referenced a suggested cap of 10 homemade trailers per year), but legislators asked for a firmer statutory definition rather than ad hoc numerical thresholds.
- Overlap with federal and state inspections: Members asked how the state board would interact with Georgia DOT, NHTSA standards and existing title/VIN processes. Witnesses explained that VIN and data plates convey GVWR (gross vehicle weight rating) and components information and that DOT currently inspects trailers primarily during highway operations (weigh stations) rather than manufacturer inspections.
- Enforcement and administration: Lawmakers raised practical questions about issuing and renewing licenses, staffing and a fiscal note. One member warned that establishing a board can create recurring administrative costs, and the committee suggested coordinating with OPB (Office of Planning and Budget) to estimate expenses.

Baxley and witnesses provided technical details intended to justify oversight: manufacturer-issued VIN-data plates and GVWR ratings are used to communicate payload and axle ratings and to determine CDL thresholds (witnesses noted that vehicles over 26,000 pounds GVWR can trigger CDL requirements).

Several members expressed sympathy for a level playing field but emphasized the need to narrow the bill’s scope and to avoid imposing heavy licensing fees on small businesses. Representative McCall and other members urged the sponsor to refine the definition of manufacturer, consider weight-based or scale-based thresholds, and provide a fiscal estimate for board administration.

Outcome and next steps

The committee did not take a final vote on HB 590. Members agreed to work with the sponsor on revisions, request a fiscal note and seek clearer statutory definitions and exemptions for small/home builders. The committee indicated it would return the bill after staff and the sponsor provide revised language and cost estimates.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Regulated Industries Regulatory Subcommittee 02.27.25","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Ford presented House Bill 590 to create a governor-appointed state board that would license and inspect trailer manufacturers, citing safety concerns and unfair competition from unregulated builders.","taxTitle","Regulated Industries, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Committees, Legislative, Georgia","taxId",17251,"location","Georgia","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6660861,"Committee advances bill to allow vehicle value protection agreements with consumer safeguards",1841,903459,2744665,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999&start=903&end=2744","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999/thumbnail_903459.jpg","/articles/6660861/Georgia/Committee-advances-bill-to-allow-vehicle-value-protection-agreements-with-consumer-safeguards","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6660861-0a632ff1a83feb7aae8381659089718a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118066&Signature=CxVVQIPg9shaCNHI0ci9mjtw3tEyuHEKFUmFO7a8gqyJ4Q8yepq0v1Jxd15MgI4ISsNdixetM2kQGMDSUaJ1REDZWGEfC7xaY~1kq5efKKyNdCTcjwe6NR6~480TLkeMxPPtN8-8P6Gby-spoTmCG4EI~oOvQrt9HwpI4~lvZf-SMWoHHm9kncZDHxOKK4t4YRrRi9FoFDTuT0R0Yd0ZpjzRdQgdiSw~Qyk4lWXPA6LnHSxr~bY5HTZiszerSKRPzSVDT6XUFCmz3tojRYGKhjPNgVrb~1HmjM761WGs5TqUiHqr0Hd6BnUktYYxi-AjUs3wivXXeSg8dCkmaZyGMw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","House Bill 504, which would create a regulatory framework for vehicle value protection agreements, drew extensive questions from committee members and earned a committee \"do pass\" recommendation after testimony from the bill’s presenter.

The bill, presented to the Regulated Industries Committee by Martin Monaghan, would authorize voluntary vehicle value protection agreements (VVPAs) for both financed and cash purchases. Monaghan told the committee that the measure “is a step towards ensuring consumer protection and market competitiveness in Georgia’s automotive industry.” He said the bill sets disclosure requirements, requires providers to maintain financial security, and grants consumers cancellation rights including a minimum 30-day free-look period.

The bill’s supporters said VVPAs differ from traditional gap insurance because they can benefit buyers who paid cash or made large down payments. Monaghan described a typical product offered in other states as a depreciation benefit — for example, a $10,000 benefit over 60 months — and said dealer cost for that product is often about $1,000. He also told the committee the attorney general would have enforcement authority for violations.

Committee members pressed presenters on several consumer-protection details. Representative Sarah Martin asked whether the statute’s definition of the free-look period explicitly required 30 days; Monaghan pointed to the provision that the free-look period must be \"at least 30 days,\" and members suggested making the 30-day minimum clearer in the definition.

Concerns raised during the hearing included:

- Whether providers could cancel coverage after paying a large claim, leaving a consumer unprotected for future losses; a lawmaker recounted a personal claim experience with a company that canceled coverage after payment.
- Whether VVPAs would be sold as loyalty products that pay benefits only toward a replacement at a dealer rather than as a cash payment to the consumer; witnesses confirmed many products apply the benefit toward replacement at a dealer and that providers typically require the purchaser to obtain the replacement vehicle within a set period (witnesses cited roughly 180 days).
- The risk that dealers would mark up the product at point of sale and that the product might be co-marketed with dealers; witnesses acknowledged dealer distribution is common and said the bill prohibits tying the product to vehicle financing (i.e., financing cannot be contingent on purchasing a VVPA).

Monaghan summarized the measure to the committee: “House bill 504 is a pro consumer, pro business bill. By regulating these agreements, we can provide certainty and security to Georgia’s vehicle buyers.” He also emphasized the bill’s consumer protections, including disclosures, refund and cancellation rights, and the AG’s enforcement authority.

After questions and discussion, a committee member indicated a \"do pass\" motion (the record shows the motion was carried forward from Representative Washburn). The committee chair called the voice vote; members responded \"Aye,\" and the chair ruled the bill to pass out of committee for further consideration. The committee did not record a roll-call tally in the transcript; the recorded record shows a voice vote and a chair ruling in favor of passage.

What the bill would do

- Define vehicle value protection agreements and require them to be voluntary and optional.
- Require clear disclosures of terms, benefits, eligibility and refund policies and mandate providers maintain financial security to meet benefits.
- Require a cancellation right with a minimum 30-day free-look period.
- Prohibit conditioning financing on purchase of a VVPA.
- Grant the attorney general authority to enforce the law.

Outstanding questions and next steps

Committee members requested clearer statutory language so the 30-day free-look minimum appears in the definition used across the bill. Members also sought clarification in subsequent drafting about whether benefits may be paid only to dealers, how long consumers have to obtain replacement vehicles to trigger a benefit, and how to prevent bad actors from canceling coverage after paying a first claim. The committee approved a recommendation to advance the bill; committee staff and the bill sponsor were asked to supply drafting clarifications before later stages.

Votes at a glance

- Action: Committee voice \"do pass\" recommendation on HB 504 (motion referenced as inherited from Representative Washburn; second not specified). Vote: voice vote; committee chair ruled the motion passed. Exact roll-call counts were not given in the transcript.

","House Bill 504, which would create a regulatory framework for vehicle value protection agreements, drew extensive questions from committee members and earned a committee \"do pass\" recommendation after testimony from the bill’s presenter.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6660851,"Committee hears homeowner-protection bill seeking caps on closing letters and mediation before liens",920,4112020,5032780,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999&start=4112&end=5032","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2431309-cb11da68620c288526fccedeb2bd9999/thumbnail_4112020.jpg","/articles/6660851/Georgia/Committee-hears-homeowner-protection-bill-seeking-caps-on-closing-letters-and-mediation-before-liens","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6660851-355b78d16361556095213e968961dd67/orig.mp4?Expires=1771118066&Signature=VDZtVpprs3SrB6cuhgZinrygjC-b-lruww8TNugv0PsgUUOC2Md93PYMd9sZPmL7HlyCEqKPW80hvkh7~09KWseKyPa-0L9YvoxQDzpo-4bDh5Qq-WCsol1DY2um0gAojDzF~ab8cItSQyVP2pcLiiwOvCgqEJkGUJJCINuGvsLOg3z2MUE0OTnPsU94rDQVi~BRaxzyCy-9KpxociIoUB4XeYV7G6kiv3hf2dgrCYo6Tf5HMGchCo6coQiS3iY3qP2hsFaV2Wco8qZYJSObmNtB00VVwtgAgucbiSU9B0-BdN-5XLvLBS5sMKf40yINUfNQfR4vIJrNm2ohFHSKjw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A bill proposing new consumer protections for homeowners association (HOA) members — including an annual good-standing letter, a cap on charges for closing letters and a requirement that owners be offered mediation before an HOA may record a lien — was presented and debated in committee testimony and public comment.

The bill’s sponsor (identified in the hearing record as Representative Liz Ward) told the committee that about \"more than 2,000,000 Georgians who live in communities that are governed by associations,\" and said the bill aims to give property owners \"peace and assurance that the associations are not their enemy.\" The sponsor summarized the bill’s central provisions: an annual letter of good standing within 45 days after an association’s fiscal period closes; limits on what associations may charge for a statement of account or closing letter; and a requirement that homeowners be offered mediation before liens are attached to property.

Key provisions described in the hearing record include:

- Annual good-standing letters: Associations would be required to send one letter per homeowner within 45 days after the close of the association’s fiscal period.
- Closing-letter/statement-of-account timing and caps: The sponsor described a cap on closing-letter charges as $250 for a standard closing letter and an expedited charge (three-day response) of $50 in addition to that fee. At another point in the presentation, the bill text as read aloud appeared to reference a ceiling of $5,250 for statements of account; lawmakers and staff requested clarification because the transcript contains both figures.
- Mediation before liens: The bill would require that associations offer mediation procedures or that a homeowner be allowed to invoke mediation before an association may place a lien on a property for unpaid fines or assessments.

During public comment, Deitra Poindexter, who identified herself as a homeowner in Clayton County and as working with the sponsor’s office, described experiences she characterized as punitive HOA enforcement—such as fines imposed without prior discussion and liens placed that cost homeowners thousands of dollars. “If your garbage can ain’t 2 feet away from the curb, she’ll put a fine on you,” Poindexter said, explaining why she supports mediation and clearer procedures.

Committee members raised legal and practical questions. Several legislators noted that Georgia law already allows HOAs to foreclose on property for unpaid assessments and that foreclosure authority in practice raises serious consumer-protection issues. Members requested documentary evidence of the fee and foreclosure practices cited in testimony and asked staff to produce examples showing high closing-letter charges and examples of HOA foreclosures for relatively small sums. Members also noted a senate study committee had recently examined HOAs and foreclosures and suggested coordination.

Outcome and next steps

Committee members did not take a final vote. Several members urged the sponsor to tighten language and to provide supporting documentary evidence of the practices cited by witnesses (for example, copies of closing-letter invoices and examples of liens or foreclosures). A committee member noted that some time limits and deadlines referenced in the bill are existing code provisions moved to the new sections; staff pointed out much of the language repackages current code. The committee indicated it would continue work on the bill and asked the sponsor to provide clarifications and supporting documentation prior to any final action.

","A bill that would require HOAs to send annual letters of good standing, cap some closing-statement fees and offer mediation before liens drew testimony about aggressive fines and foreclosures; the committee asked for supporting documentation and additional drafting before further action.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee to refine trailer-manufacturers licensing bill after industry testimony and legal questions

Committee advances bill to allow vehicle value protection agreements with consumer safeguards

Committee hears homeowner-protection bill seeking caps on closing letters and mediation before liens