Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vehicle History Data topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Samantha Fitzgerald of bumper.com tells Senate Transportation committee vehicle-history accuracy hinges on state data
Summary
A representative of bumper.com told the Senate Transportation committee on April 22 that vehicle-history reports rely on data from state and private sources, that errors typically originate in source records, and offered to review proposed amendment language; CARFAX will submit written testimony.
Samantha Fitzgerald, a representative of bumper.com, told the Senate Transportation committee on April 22 that vehicle-history reports depend on data gathered from state and private sources and that the companies' accuracy is limited by the quality and timeliness of those records.
"Vehicle history companies are only as good as the data that they get," Fitzgerald said, adding that her firm "combines data from all 50 states from public and private sources" and that "no personal information goes into these reports." She offered the company's help to the committee in reviewing recently added amendment language and said she would follow up with suggested tweaks by email.
Why it matters: The committee is considering amendment language that staff said was added late in the drafting process. Fitzgerald and other industry representatives could influence how the committee phrases any requirement that state agencies or vendors provide records, and those drafting choices would affect how often and in what form data flows into consumer-facing reports.
Fitzgerald told committee members that when inaccuracies appear in reports, "generally, the errors are not coming from the vehicle history companies. They'll be coming from the source," and said the industry has worked in recent years to reduce data lags. "It's definitely improved in the last 5 to 10 years," she said, while noting some states and sources remain less modernized and data lag is still "real."
Committee members asked about other industry participants. The committee chair said CARFAX could not attend the live session but would submit written testimony. The chair also said a third company had suggested adding language to the draft report that would require the committee to "consult with the industry." Fitzgerald confirmed she and her colleagues were available to review language and provide technical feedback.
The exchange focused on technical and procedural points rather than a policy dispute: Fitzgerald repeatedly offered to share processes and examples of end-language the industry uses, and the committee said it would accept written comment and emails from industry representatives. The committee then moved on to scheduling and witness-list logistics for upcoming sessions.
The committee said it will review CARFAX's written testimony and invited additional comments by email; Fitzgerald said she would send follow-up recommendations on the amendment language.
