A BILL FOR AN ACT to amend the Indiana Code concerning trade regulation.
Summary
HB 1125 amends Indiana’s deceptive acts law in IC 24-5-0.5 to expressly make it a deceptive act, enforceable by the attorney general, for a person to convey or attempt to convey title to real property by recording a false or fraudulent deed or affidavit, or to conspire to do so. The bill also adds a new remedy provision specifically for these real-property fraud cases, allowing a court to issue an injunction, quiet title to the property, and award monetary relief to the person harmed by the false filing.
Beyond the new real-estate fraud language, the bill revises the consumer protection statute to clarify and expand existing deceptive-act provisions and remedies. It retains the general prohibition on unfair, abusive, or deceptive acts in consumer transactions, lists numerous specific deceptive practices already covered by the chapter, and preserves attorney general enforcement authority, civil penalties, restitution, and injunctive relief. The bill also includes a written-estimate requirement for certain repair and replacement work and makes technical and conforming changes to related enforcement provisions.
Impact
The bill would expand Indiana’s consumer-protection framework by explicitly bringing false or fraudulent deed and affidavit filings within the state’s deceptive-acts statute, giving the attorney general a clear enforcement path. It would also create a specific civil remedy for victims of deed fraud, including quiet-title relief and enhanced damages, which could affect property owners, title holders, and anyone involved in recording or relying on real-property documents. The bill amends IC 24-5-0.5 and related enforcement sections, with an effective date of July 1, 2026.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment appears to be supportive and consumer-protection oriented. The measure is framed as a response to fraudulent real-estate conveyances and as an extension of existing deceptive-practices law rather than a major policy shift. No formal opposition, amendments, or divided vote history is shown in the materials provided.
Contention
The main policy issue is the scope of enforcement and remedies for false deed and affidavit filings. Supporters would likely view the bill as a needed tool to combat deed fraud, protect homeowners, and restore title quickly through attorney general action and quiet-title relief. Potential points of contention could include the expansion of attorney general authority, the availability of treble or punitive damages in real-property fraud cases, and how broadly the deceptive-acts statute should reach beyond traditional consumer transactions. However, no specific objections or competing viewpoints are documented in the provided context.