New York Senate Bill S10202

New York 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/5/26
• Refer: 5/5/26

Caption

Removes certain conditional language relating to the submission of requests for reconsideration of creditor determinations.

Summary

S10202 amends the General Business Law to revise a provision governing how a debtor may ask a creditor to reconsider a determination to recommence collection activities. Under current law as reflected in the bill text, a debtor who receives written notice that collection activities will resume may request reconsideration within 30 days and submit additional documentation of coerced debt. The creditor must review the request and any supporting materials within 30 days, and any further reconsideration remains at the creditor’s discretion. The bill’s main change is to remove a sentence stating that submitting a reconsideration request is not a condition to bringing an action under section 604-cc of the article. The measure is tied to chapter 90 of the laws of 2026 and would take effect in the same manner and on the same date as that chapter. In practical terms, it narrows the statutory language around reconsideration requests without changing the core reconsideration process itself.

Impact

The bill would amend section 604-bb of the General Business Law, affecting the procedural rights of debtors and the obligations of creditors in cases involving alleged coerced debt and recommenced collection activity. Its legal effect is limited to deleting conditional language about whether a reconsideration request is required before filing an action under section 604-cc, while leaving intact the notice, documentation, and 30-day review framework. Creditors, debtors, and attorneys handling coerced-debt disputes would be the primary affected parties.

Sentiment

There is little recorded public or legislative sentiment available in the provided materials because there are no committee transcripts or votes. Based on the bill’s narrow drafting and technical nature, it appears to be a targeted cleanup or clarification measure rather than a controversial policy change. The absence of recorded opposition or support makes the overall sentiment indeterminate, though the bill’s sponsor appears to be advancing a specific procedural adjustment.

Contention

The only notable point of contention apparent from the text is the removal of language stating that a reconsideration request is not a prerequisite to bringing an action under section 604-cc. That deletion could matter to debtors seeking to preserve direct access to court and to creditors seeking a clearer administrative review process before litigation. Because no committee debate or vote history is provided, there is no evidence of broader disagreement, but the statutory relationship between reconsideration and enforcement actions is the likely issue if the bill is discussed further.