Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Consumer Protection Motor Vehicle Repair topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Utah House rejects bill allowing repair shops to retain vehicles after bounced checks
Summary
The House voted 21–47 to reject a measure that would have allowed motor-vehicle repair facilities to reclaim vehicles when customers pay with bad checks over $500 after 15 days' notice; sponsors said the bill protected small businesses while opponents warned against industry-specific carve-outs.
The Utah House on Feb. 27 rejected Second Substitute Senate Bill 106, a proposal that would have given motor-vehicle repair shops the right to retake possession of vehicles when customers paid by a check that later bounced. The roll call closed with 21 in favor and 47 opposed, sending the substitute bill back to the Senate.
Sponsor Representative Snow told colleagues the bill targeted checks over $500 and was intended to help small businesses recover payment: "This bill deals with motor vehicle repair facilities ... It deals with all checks over $500," and it requires the repair facility to give "notice to the owner that the check bounced and 15 days to correct it." Snow said the measure included protections for prior lienholders and rules to preserve the vehicle while the issue is resolved.
During questioning, Representative Donaldson asked whether a repair facility could take a vehicle back if a check later bounced; Snow replied that the facility would have to proceed "lawfully, which means, through the judicial process ... not go out and repossess himself." Donaldson pressed practical concerns about enforcement and safety; Snow repeated the sponsor's position that the bill simply provides a lawful remedy after notice.
Opponents argued the measure granted a narrow industry-specific remedy when general judicial options already exist. Representative Daniels cautioned against "making special deals," noting existing remedies such as judgments and wage garnishment. Representative Hansen and others raised hypotheticals about resale and liability when ownership changes after a repair.
Because the House vote failed, Second Substitute SB106 will be returned to the Senate for further consideration or revision. The record shows the principal policy issues debated were the threshold ($500), the 15-day notice requirement, and preserving prior-lien holders' rights.
What happens next: the sponsor or interested parties may seek revisions in the Senate or pursue alternative remedies; the House record shows clear majority opposition in its present form.
