Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Marketplace Consumer Refunds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill requiring refunds to original payment and fee prorating for partial or failed food deliveries
Summary
AB 578 would require platforms to refund consumers to their original payment method for missing or partial orders and prorate platform fees and tips to workers; the author said the bill responds to real consumer harm and limited customer‑service access in delivery apps.
The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee passed AB 578, a consumer‑protection bill that would require food delivery platforms and similar services to refund consumers to their original form of payment when orders are missing or only partially delivered, and to prorate marketplace fees when a portion of an order is not fulfilled.
Author Assemblymember Bauer‑Kahan said the bill sprang from a personal incident: she ordered ten pizzas for a large gathering and received only one. The committee heard the author describe difficulty obtaining a refund to the original payment method and said she received instead a platform credit; the author testified she was charged full platform fees and that a disproportionate portion of the collected fees was retained for the fraction of the order delivered. "If you're keeping my $220 and not letting me have that back, that could really make a huge difference for someone," she said.
Committee amendments address the status of tips and direct the tips to workers rather than treating tips as part of base pay; the author said she would continue to negotiate on the treatment of tips to protect delivery workers. Opponents (industry trade groups including the California Chamber of Commerce and TechNet) said they were continuing to review the amended bill and sought additional conversations about operational issues, particularly for independent contractors who deliver orders.
Committee members from both parties said consumers deserve clearer and more accessible customer service and refunds. Several members praised the bill as a reasonable consumer‑protection measure but asked the author and stakeholders to refine technical details and ensure the bill does not raise costs for consumers or unduly harm delivery workers.
The committee approved AB 578 as amended and referred it to the next committee in the process.
Sources and attribution: Assemblymember Bauer‑Kehan (author); Ronak Deilami (CalChamber, opposition); Jose Torres (TechNet, opposition).
