Bail bond language appeared in another bill last week, SB464. It is similar to the language in the HB628 and HB777, with several new language changes.
1) The Lee Clause is repealed, but this version of the bill specifically details that an SIS is not considered a conviction, is not required to be disclosed, and shall not serve as a basis for denial of licensure.
2) Requires that an agent be licensed for 4 years before becoming eligible to become a general agent or the officer of a bail bond corporation.
3) Requires general agents licensed after August 28th, to assign a $50,000 CD.
4) Requires general agents to assign a $5,000 CD for each new agent licensed after August 28th. In this bill, the language has been clarified to exclude the $5,000 CD for any agent working before or on the date the bill becomes law.
This is a Senate bill which was amended in the House Insurance Committee. The bill is currently in the Rules Committee.
Monday, April 27, 2009
5 comments:
Although Missouri Bondsman encourages debate on topics of interest to the bail industry, please be aware that comments are moderated. Please observe the posting rules. No comments will be printed that contain spam, profanity, or libelous comments. Please post comments in a civil, professional manner.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If you're in the bail bond business, then you need to READ THIS BILL!
ReplyDeleteI don't care how you cut it, the language in this legislation that pertains to Chapter 374 serves no other purpose than to put smaller operations out of business!
Further, it creates an executive directive, by which the director of DIFP can exercise unlimited latitude with respect as to who pays and who doesn't, and how much!
This measure is written to benefit ONLY BIG BUSINESS! If it's passed as written, the "little guy" is finished in the bail bond industry. Contact your legislators and urge them to work diligently to defeat this measure.
I am not one of the fat cats, I consider myself one of the little guys. I only have a couple agents writing for me, and I am not opposed to this bill.
ReplyDeleteTo stay in business I would certainly, but not gladly, assign my $50,000.00. If a general agent can't come up with, or afford to assign, a measly $50,000 what are they doing in this business?
To address the $5,000.00 per agent - I would not want to assign $5,000.00 per agent if I hired every Tom, Dick, or Jane that came down the pike. Hire quality agents and a general doesn't have to worry about all of this.
If all generals were prudent about their hiring practices we wouldn't be addressing this at all.
I hope you are satisfied, if this passes as is, we the small bail bond business will suffer
ReplyDeletegreatly.
Jerry Cox
I agree with you Mr. Cox. Laws are already in place to deal with companies that dont pay forfeitures. If you look on the department website, you will see that its not a problem.
ReplyDeleteThis legislation is going to hurt the small guy. The only reason for this bill is to thin out competition. If this passes, look for the near future to bring legislation to require some astronomical figure of property to be assigned to the courts, forcing everyone to go the insurance route.
I believe in competition and free enterprise.
The last commentor hit the nail on the head!
ReplyDeleteThe sole purpose of this legislation is to lead this state into an insurance backed bail bond industry ONLY, and eliminate the smaller asset backed agencies. The language referenced in these posts has been introduced in four separate measures, and thus far, we've "kept 'em on the run".
That's right, WE'VE done it! A small number of us have fought this measure every step of the way. But the end of the session is just around the corner, and WE NEED YOUR HELP! I implore every bail bond agent in the state to READ AND LEARN this proposed legislation. Read between the lines, and see, big business is after your livelyhood!
Then, each and every one of you needs to call, email and VISIT your legislators! Go to their offices, visit them at their homes if you know them on a personal basis. TELL them to consider what this will do, not just to our families, but to the state's economy as a whole. We can't afford any more unemployment in Missouri, and I for one don't want to be in that number!
DO YOUR PART!