Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Veterans Benefit Protection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly panel advances bill to bar unaccredited firms from charging veterans for VA claims
Summary
AB 826, authored by Assemblymember Jeff Gonzales, would impose civil penalties on unaccredited individuals or businesses that charge veterans to file VA benefit claims; it passed the committee and was re-referred to Judiciary after extended testimony both supporting and opposing the bill.
Assemblymember Jeff Gonzales presented AB 826 to the Assembly Committee on Military and Veteran Affairs and described it as a consumer-protection measure to address "unregulated, unlicensed" businesses charging veterans fees to help file claims with the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. "These businesses and individuals have been operating freely and are unregulated, unlicensed, and operate with no oversight or obligation to prioritize the veterans' well-being," Assemblymember Gonzales said. The bill would establish a $2,000 civil penalty per violation and direct half of that fine to the veterans service office fund and the other half to the filing district attorney.
Supporters included the California Association of County Veterans Service Officers, American Legion representatives and county veterans service officers. Yolanda Benson of the California Association of County Veterans Service Officers told the committee that accredited county VSOs are trained and regulated and that a profit-driven industry has arisen to take advantage of veterans. Seth Reeb, representing AMVETS and other veterans groups, said the bill is "essential" because women and other veterans face disproportionate harms when claims are mishandled.
Opposition speakers said they supported regulation of bad actors but argued the bill as drafted would eliminate veterans' access to legitimate paid services and private-sector assistance. Joshua Prado, a Navy veteran, said he appreciated the bill's intent but cautioned that "AB 826 risks going too far by restricting legitimate ethical assistance, and in the process, it may hurt the very people it's trying to protect." Representatives of private companies that assist veterans, including Lisa Caucous of Veteran Benefits Guide and William Taylor of Veterans Guardian VA Claims Consulting, said their organizations help veterans secure higher ratings or faster decisions and recommended narrower, consumer-protection-oriented amendments such as fee caps, contingent fees, written consent and limits on offshore processing.
Committee members pressed both sides on enforcement and federal law. A committee witness noted that federal law generally requires accreditation for representation before the VA and that gaps in federal enforcement after 2006 left a state enforcement gap. Supporters described cases where veterans faced large retroactive overpayments and liens after using unaccredited services; opponents countered that outright bans on private paid assistance could reduce choices for veterans who seek alternatives to free VSOs.
After extended testimony and committee discussion, the committee voted to pass AB 826 and re-refer it to the Committee on Judiciary. The roll call in the hearing record shows members recorded as voting "aye," and the committee chair announced the bill "is out" to the Judiciary Committee with an 8-0 tally.
Ending: The bill advances to the Judiciary Committee, where members signaled amendments and more detailed enforcement language will be considered.
