Bill Commons

CA SB 95

dead

Sellers of travel: travel consolidators: fraud.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Follow this bill’s action updates (Atom)

Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.

Quick answers

Did CA SB 95 pass?

No. CA SB 95 did not pass — it was defeated or died in the legislative process. Latest recorded action (2026-02-02): Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

What is CA SB 95 about?

Existing law regulates sellers of travel, as defined, and requires a seller of travel to annually register with the Attorney General. Existing law, unless an exception applies, requires a seller of travel to establish a trust fund to deposit money received from persons for travel services and prohibits the seller of travel from withdrawing money from the trust account except for specified purposes, including to make refunds to the passenger. Existing law exempts a seller of travel from the requirement to establish a trust account under specified circumstances, including if the seller of travel is a participant in a Consumer Protection Deposit Plan or uses a Consumer Protection Escrow Plan and meets specified requirements. Existing law imposes an obligation on a seller of travel either to provide the air or sea transportation or travel service purchased by the passenger or to make a refund within a certain period of time, except as specified. Existing law establishes the Travel Consumer Restitution Corporation to provide restitution to a person aggrieved, as defined, and provides for payment of claims from the Travel Consumer Restitution Fund established by the Travel Consumer Restitution Corporation. This bill would specify the term "seller of travel" includes a travel consolidator, as defined. The bill would require an air carrier to refund a person who purchased a ticket or voucher for air transportation from a seller of travel if the person is a victim of fraud committed by the seller of travel, the air carrier had actual knowledge of the seller of travel's fraudulent business practice, and the person was unable to procure a refund from the seller of travel within a reasonable time. If the seller of travel is not registered, the bill would specify that the sale is voidable by the purchaser. Because a violation of the provisions regulating sellers of travel is a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances, this bill would expand the scope of a crime and would therefore impose a state-mandated local crime. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Who sponsors CA SB 95?

Umberg is the primary sponsor of CA SB 95.

Description

Existing law regulates sellers of travel, as defined, and requires a seller of travel to annually register with the Attorney General. Existing law, unless an exception applies, requires a seller of travel to establish a trust fund to deposit money received from persons for travel services and prohibits the seller of travel from withdrawing money from the trust account except for specified purposes, including to make refunds to the passenger. Existing law exempts a seller of travel from the requirement to establish a trust account under specified circumstances, including if the seller of travel is a participant in a Consumer Protection Deposit Plan or uses a Consumer Protection Escrow Plan and meets specified requirements. Existing law imposes an obligation on a seller of travel either to provide the air or sea transportation or travel service purchased by the passenger or to make a refund within a certain period of time, except as specified. Existing law establishes the Travel Consumer Restitution Corporation to provide restitution to a person aggrieved, as defined, and provides for payment of claims from the Travel Consumer Restitution Fund established by the Travel Consumer Restitution Corporation. This bill would specify the term "seller of travel" includes a travel consolidator, as defined. The bill would require an air carrier to refund a person who purchased a ticket or voucher for air transportation from a seller of travel if the person is a victim of fraud committed by the seller of travel, the air carrier had actual knowledge of the seller of travel's fraudulent business practice, and the person was unable to procure a refund from the seller of travel within a reasonable time. If the seller of travel is not registered, the bill would specify that the sale is voidable by the purchaser. Because a violation of the provisions regulating sellers of travel is a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the circumstances, this bill would expand the scope of a crime and would therefore impose a state-mandated local crime. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Introduced
2025-01-23
Latest action
2026-02-02 — Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Umbergauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-02-02

    Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

    failure

  2. 2025-05-23

    May 23 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  3. 2025-05-16

    Set for hearing May 23.

  4. 2025-05-05

    May 5 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  5. 2025-04-25

    Set for hearing May 5.

  6. 2025-04-23

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 833.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  7. 2025-04-10

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  8. 2025-04-07

    From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 10. Noes 0. Page 679.) (April 7). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

    committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  9. 2025-04-01

    Set for hearing April 22 in JUD. pending receipt.

  10. 2025-03-26

    Set for hearing April 7.

  11. 2025-03-19

    Re-referred to Coms. on B. P. & E.D. and JUD.

    referral-committee

  12. 2025-03-12

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  13. 2025-02-05

    Referred to Com. on RLS.

    referral-committee

  14. 2025-01-24

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 23.

  15. 2025-01-23

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

Versions

  • 01/23/25 - Introduced — 2025-01-23Compare
  • 03/12/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-03-12Compare
  • 04/10/25 - Amended Senate — 2025-04-10Compare
  • SB95Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Judiciary]

    2025-04-07 · pass · 10-0

    Member-level votes (11)
    • Choi: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Menjivar: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Smallwood-Cuevas: yes
    • Archuleta: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • Strickland: other

  • Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2025-04-22 · pass · 13-0

    Member-level votes (13)
    • Allen: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Arreguín: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Valladares: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • Wiener: yes

  • Placed on suspense file

    2025-05-05 · pass · 7-0

    Member-level votes (7)
    • Richardson: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Wahab: yes

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB95

Attribution

Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z

Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:

Source and document changesStatus and relationship changes

Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:

Bulk imports for this sessionSession dates and activity

Use this data

Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=SB 95. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.

Known limitations

  • Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
  • Committee referrals are not yet captured.
  • Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.

See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.