Motor vehicle repair; creating the Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Consumer Protection Act; requiring certain written consent for certain service work; directing Insurance Department to adjust certain maximum daily storage rates. Emergency.
SB 784 creates the “Oklahoma Motor Vehicle Consumer Protection Act” and establishes a detailed set of rules for motor vehicle repair facilities and garages. The bill requires written or documented verbal consent before service work begins, along with a written estimate that itemizes fees, charges, costs, and an estimated completion date. It also requires repair facilities to document the consent process, including the date, time, method of consent, and the people involved.
The bill adds specific limits on tear-down work for total-loss vehicles and on administrative charges, tying both to a market labor hourly rate set at $65 per hour on the effective date and capped at four hours. It directs the Insurance Commissioner to adjust that market labor rate beginning July 1, 2030, and every five years thereafter. The bill also sets maximum daily storage rates for vehicles held by repair facilities, allows storage rates to increase by 12% every four years, and bars storage charges on vehicles that are repaired. Repair facilities must provide written invoices within eight business hours and present charges in a separate, signed written document.
SB 784 would also prohibit repair facilities from marking up towing or wrecker charges and would treat those costs as a pass-through sublet item. It permits a possessory lien filing fee only if the required notice and documentation to the registered owner are completed. The bill expressly states that nothing in it prevents an insurance company from offering incentives to insureds to use a particular repair facility. The measure is drafted as an emergency bill, meaning it would take effect immediately upon passage and approval.
The bill’s impact would be to impose new consumer-protection and billing-disclosure requirements on Oklahoma auto repair businesses, while also regulating storage, tear-down, and administrative fees. It would affect repair shops, garages, towing-related billing practices, insurers, vehicle owners, and the Insurance Commissioner, and it would be codified primarily in Title 36 of the Oklahoma Statutes. It also interacts with existing lien procedures under Title 42 and vehicle definitions under Title 47.
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll calls. Based on the bill’s structure and caption, it appears aimed at consumer protection and transparency in repair billing, but the detailed fee caps and documentation requirements could be contentious for repair facilities and industry stakeholders. Likely points of contention include the four-hour caps on tear-down and administrative charges, the fixed storage-rate schedule, the prohibition on markup of towing charges, and the administrative burden of the required documentation and invoicing rules.
SB 784 would create new statutory provisions in Title 36 governing motor vehicle repair facilities, including mandatory pre-service consent, written estimates, invoice timing, fee disclosure, and limits on tear-down, administrative, and storage charges. It would also require the Insurance Commissioner to set and periodically adjust the market labor hourly rate and storage-rate increases, while preserving existing insurance-company incentives for repair-facility selection. The bill would affect repair shops, vehicle owners, insurers, towing/wrecker charges, and possessory lien filings, and it would take effect immediately if enacted because of the emergency clause.
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from legislative debate. The bill’s caption and provisions suggest a consumer-protection framing focused on transparency and cost control in auto repair, which may appeal to consumers and regulators. At the same time, the detailed fee caps, documentation requirements, and restrictions on billing practices suggest likely resistance from repair facilities and related industry groups.
The main likely points of contention are the bill’s limits on what repair facilities can charge and how they must document charges. Repair businesses may object to the four-hour caps on tear-down and administrative charges, the fixed storage-rate schedule, the prohibition on marking up towing charges, and the requirement to provide signed standalone invoices and detailed consent records. Consumer advocates and regulators may support those provisions as protections against surprise billing and excessive fees. The bill also preserves insurer incentives for preferred repair shops, which may reduce conflict with insurers but could still draw scrutiny from independent repair facilities.