Date: 02/23/2010

Final
BILL SUMMARY for HB10-1222

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AFFAIRS AND LABOR

Votes: View--> Action Taken:
Moved amendment L.002 (Attachment J). The motion
Moved to refer House Bill 10-1222, as amended, to 		Pass Without Objection
PASS



12:32 PM -- House Bill 10-1222

Representative Middleton, prime sponsor, presented House Bill 10-1222 concerning continuation of the requirement that a collection agency maintain an office in Colorado. Under current law, the requirement that a collection agency doing business in the state must maintain an office in Colorado is repealed, effective July 1, 2010. This bill makes that requirement permanent, as recommended in the Department of Regulatory Agency's 2009 Sunset Review. The bill also requires that the collection agency office accept payments made physically at the office and notify consumers of the address of the local office.

12:33 PM -- Laura Udis, representing the Attorney General's Office, testified that the Attorney General's Office opposes the in-state office requirement. Ms. Udis explained that this should be a business decision and not a requirement whether a business decides to provide an in-state office. She talked about Amendment L.002 that would address the question of when notice is required under the bill.

12:36 PM -- Irv Borenstein, an attorney representing collection agencies, Allen Stokes, a collection agency attorney in Denver, and Jacques Machol, Jr., representing a law firm that represents 50 out-of-state agencies, came up to testify together and distributed a handout (Attachment I). Representative Liston commented on the bill and Representative Soper asked why there is a safety clause.

100223AttachI.pdf

12:43 PM -- Brian Tobias, representing DORA, testified in support of the bill. He explained the bill. He responded to the safety clause question, stating that sunset bills typically have a safety clause because the program would end before the bill went into effect if there was not one. Representative Rice talked about the changes the amendments will attempt to address.

12:46 PM -- Gary Merenstein, who runs a local office for 13 different collection agencies and speaking on behalf of consumer debtors, testified in support of the in-state office requirement. He talked about the consumers who regularly deal with collection agencies, including immigrants who do not speak English very well. Mr. Merenstein talked about companies that outsource to other countries and the language barriers and problems it can create for consumers. Representative Liston asked whether the consumer can get a better deal if they go into a local office. Mr. Merenstein said going into the office can connect the consumer with a higher level employee such as a manager. Mr. Merenstein addressed the danger of consumers coming into these offices. He stated that he does not see why that is a concern, since that is part of the business.

12:52 PM -- Beverly Hill, who runs an in-state office in her home, testified in support of the in-state office requirement for collection agencies. She talked about her experiences running an in-state office. She explained that people need someone to contact and a place to go to speak with a person rather than talk to numerous people over the phone. Ms. Hill also addressed the concerns over security.

BILL:HB10-1222
TIME: 12:57:20 PM
MOVED:Middleton
MOTION:Moved amendment L.002 (Attachment J). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:Gagliardi
VOTE
Balmer
Bradford
Casso
Kerr A.
Liston
Middleton
Priola
Soper
Stephens
Gagliardi
Rice
Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

100223AttachJ.pdf

BILL:HB10-1222
TIME: 12:59:48 PM
MOVED:Middleton
MOTION:Moved to refer House Bill 10-1222, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion passed 10-0.
SECONDED:Kerr A.
VOTE
Balmer
Yes
Bradford
Yes
Casso
Yes
Kerr A.
Yes
Liston
Yes
Middleton
Yes
Priola
Yes
Soper
Yes
Stephens
Excused
Gagliardi
Yes
Rice
Yes
Final YES: 10 NO: 0 EXC: 1 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS




01:01 PM

The committee adjourned.