California Assembly Bill AB1197

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/25
• Refer: 3/28/25
• Report Pass: 3/28/25
• Refer: 4/1/25
• Report Pass: 4/10/25
• Refer: 4/21/25
• Report Pass: 4/24/25
• Refer: 4/28/25
• Report Pass: 4/30/25
• Refer: 4/30/25
• Report Pass: 5/7/25
• Engrossed: 5/23/25
• Refer: 5/23/25
• Refer: 6/4/25
• Report Pass: 6/25/25
• Refer: 6/26/25
• Report Pass: 7/15/25
• Enrolled: 9/10/25
• Chaptered: 10/7/25
• Passed: 10/7/25

Caption

An act to amend Sections 1939.03 and 1939.23 of the Civil Code, relating to rental passenger vehicles.

Impact

The revisions introduce a presumption that renters would not be liable for theft of a rented vehicle, provided they return the ignition key. This change is significant as it formalizes protections for renters, while also allowing rental companies the necessary tools to track vehicles in instances of unauthorized use or theft. The bill emphasizes the delicate balance between enabling firms to protect their assets while safeguarding consumer rights concerning personal information and privacy.

Summary

Assembly Bill No. 1197, introduced by Calderon, amends Sections 1939.03 and 1939.23 of the Civil Code concerning rental passenger vehicles. The bill modifies current regulations to allow rental companies to employ geofence technology to monitor rental vehicle movement under specific circumstances. It aims to update existing laws that limit the use of electronic surveillance technology by rental companies, particularly around the tracking of vehicles for theft recovery purposes while establishing clearer liability guidelines for renters in case of theft or damage to the rented vehicle.

Sentiment

Overall, supporters of AB 1197 are positive about the bill, viewing it as necessary to modernize rental practices in an era where technological capabilities are advancing. Conversely, there may be apprehensions regarding the implications for privacy and the potential misuse of surveillance technologies. Hence, stakeholders including consumer advocacy groups may voice concerns regarding how this technology could impact renter privacy rights.

Contention

One point of contention centers on the extent of liability assigned to renters and the implications of using surveillance tech like geofencing. Critics may argue that while the intent is to prevent theft and manage risk for companies, it could lead to overreach where renters' privacy might be compromised. Moreover, there's a need for transparency on how data from electronic surveillance will be used and stored to ensure that renters are not unfairly penalized.