House committee approves Towing Recovery Reform Efficiency Act after lengthy debate

The House Public Transportation Committee voted to pass House Bill 18‑97, known as the Towing Recovery Reform Efficiency Act, after more than two hours of testimony on how to balance consumer protections and the financial risks facing tow operators. Representative Stetson Painter (R‑District 3), the bill sponsor, closed debate and asked for a vote that carried as amended.

The bill would require clearer, itemized invoices and give the towing and recovery board authority to set maximum towing, storage and administrative fees and to post those rates online. It also creates an option allowing a cargo owner or the owner’s representative to pay up to 35 percent of the towing invoice to secure release of cargo while the remainder of the invoice remains subject to lien and later recovery.

Committee testimony was sharply divided. Daryl Bassett, secretary of the Arkansas Department of Labor and Licensing, described the bill as an attempt to protect both consumers and business: “What this bill attempts to do is be somewhat solemnic. That is to address the interest of the consumer as well as the interest of business and industry,” he said. Lacey, general counsel for the Department, explained how the 35 percent figure would operate: the fee is “35% of the towing invoice for all of the services,” and “the tow company can actually potentially get 135% of their fees for the tow service” because the company may still perfect a lien on the trailer or tractor for the remainder of the invoice.

Tow operators and some industry witnesses warned the committee the new release option could produce unrecoverable losses and push companies off non‑consent rotations. Charles Tankersley, co‑owner of Jay Hook Towing & Recovery, said his firm already itemizes invoices and worries about litigation exposure when third parties transload on tow company property. “There is no blanket insurance policy,” he said, describing scenarios where insurers’ policy limits could leave significant exposure for tow companies.

Steve Rogers, a former director of the towing and recovery board and an advisor to the Foundation for Responsible Towing, urged delay and more stakeholder discussion. He said the bill’s cargo‑release provision “guarantees a loss for the tow company for every big truck accident they work” and warned it would drive some companies away from non‑consent tows.

Representatives from the Arkansas Trucking Association urged passage while noting the bill is an imperfect compromise. Shannon Newton, the association’s president, said the measure reconstitutes and strengthens the towing and recovery board, requires invoices to note the complaint process and centralizes complaint handling — steps she said would improve policy over time.

Committee members pressed on several points during debate: whether the 35 percent is applied to the towing invoice only (not to the cargo’s retail value); whether the fee would be deductible from the ultimate invoice if the transporter later pays in full; how the bill treats perishable cargo; and whether the bill could invite double‑charging of consumers. Representative Tim Hawk, who repeatedly pressed for stronger consumer protections, said he would work with the sponsor on amendments to guard against double‑dipping.

The committee adopted amendments that, among other changes discussed in testimony, reduced a proposed criminal penalty from a felony to a misdemeanor and set a 35 percent cap in the release provision. After debate the committee’s motion to pass the bill as amended carried in a roll call and the chair announced, “Bill passes with 11 votes.”

The committee hearing record shows extensive requests from both towing operators and trucking interests to continue negotiations; several witnesses asked for the measure to go to interim study so stakeholders can refine rules and procedures. The sponsor said he would keep working with stakeholders on language and implementation details as the bill advances.

For now, HB 18‑97 advances with requirements aimed at greater invoice transparency, new maximum fee authority, an expedited complaint process through the towing and recovery board, and a capped cargo‑release option that supporters say gives cargo owners an alternative to paying the full invoice to recover property.

Future steps: the bill will proceed out of committee to the full House. Committee members and witnesses said they expect follow‑up through rulemaking by the towing and recovery board if the bill becomes law.