BRB's Public Records Blog

Pennsylvania Fee Increase for Recordings and Civil Actions

House Bill 1607, signed by Pennsylvania Governor Rendell on October 9, 2009, amended Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedures) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes. Now known as ACT 49, this law adds an additional $13.50 to a number of document fees. The increase is added specifically to all documents that currently are assessed an Access to Justice (Judicial Computer System) JCS fee of $10.00. As of December 8, 2009, the new fee will be $23.50, rather than $10.00, on all documents covered per the original law for the JCS portion. 
 
In simple English, the added fee affects all recorded Deeds, Mortgages; Mortgage Assignments; Mortgage Releases; Mortgage Satisfaction Pieces; Installment Sales Agreements; Easements; and Rights of Way. 
 
Also, the JCS fee is currently part of the fee charged on filing certain civil court actions and appeals. Thus, the court costs associated with a number of filings will also increase $13.50.
 
The fee increase does not affect record searches or copy fees. A copy of the bill can be found at www.legis.state.pa.us.

Hawaii Latest State to Put Limits on Use of Credit Reports

Over the Governor’s veto, the Hawaiian legislature passed a new law effective July 1, 2009 that put limits on the use of employment credit history or credit reports unless it “directly related to a bona fide occupations qualification,” or falls under another exception.

The bill amends the Hawaiian Fair Employment Practices Act by making it an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer to refuse to hire or employ, continue employment or to bar or discharge from employment, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual in compensation or in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment of any individual because of the individual's credit history or credit report, unless the information in the individual's credit history or credit report directly relates to a bona fide occupational qualification. Hawaii Revised Statues Sec. 378-2(8).

The new law also indicates that in terms of hiring in the first place, the employer can only inquire into the credit history or credit report on a prospective employee only after there has been a conditional job offer, and only if the information is directly related to a bona fide occupational qualification.

The law makes exceptions for employers that are expressly permitted to inquire into credit history or a credit report by federal or state law, financial institutions that are insured by a federal agency or to managerial or supervisory employees. The law sets out a specific definition of what constitutes a “Managerial” or “Supervisory” employee.

The Governor’s strong veto message (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2009/Bills/GM813_.pdf ) argued that employers should not be subject to, “another restriction on employers that could impact their ability to protect the safety and financial security of their workplaces.” The Governor indicated that credit reports can have value in particular situations and that Congress has regulated the use of credit reports in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

For a copy and history of the new law, see: http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2009/lists/measure_indiv.aspx?billtype=HB&billnumber=31

It should be noted that even without the new law, an employer that obtains a credit report for employment does NOT obtain a credit score or FICO number. A credit score is not part of an employment credit report since it is not a valid predictor of job performance. However, as noted in an article in USA Today where ESR President Lester Rosen was quoted, credit reports have been strongly criticized for preventing some consumers from obtaining employment. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-02-12-creditcheckinside_N.htm

The California legislature, in fact, passed a law in 2008 that would have severely restricted employment credit reports, but it was vetoed by the Governor and did not become law. The new Hawaii law is similar to a restriction passed in the State of Washington in 2007, that required a credit report to be substantially job-related and for the employer's reasons for the use of such information to be disclosed to the consumer in writing. http://www.esrcheck.com/newsletter/archives/June_2007.php#T2

It is likely that more states will be reviewing the use of credit reports and employment in the future.

This posting was provided by ESR Newsletter and Legal Update and Lester Rosen, Atty at Law.

Minnesota Increases Certain Court Fees

As of July 1st, 2009, a number of fee increases will take place involving the Minnesota Court System. Most of the specified increases affect filings of civil cases, marriage dissolution actions, and the filing of motions or responses. However, there are two fees which will affect record access. The fee for a non-certified copy of any instrument from a civil or criminal proceeding increases from $5.00 to $8.00, and the fee for a certified copy increases from $10.00 to $14.00.

Finding a copy of all the fee increases is tricky. Go to www.leg.state.mn.us/, click on Statutes, Laws and Rules, then click on 2009 Session Laws, and finally on Chapter 83. This will bring up the bill in its entirety. Look for Article 2 and the Amendment to section 357.021, subdivision 2.

Ohio Redaction Law on Court Records to Take Affect Soon

Per Ohio’s Public Access Rules and Public Records Act, as of July 1, 2009 the redaction of certain personal identifiers contained on court documents seen by the public will go into affect. “Personal identifiers” means Social Security Numbers, except for the last four digits; financial account numbers, including but not limited to debit card, charge card, and credit card numbers; employer and employee identification numbers; and a juvenile’s name in an abuse, neglect, or dependency case, except for the juvenile’s initials or a generic abbreviation such as “CV” for “child victim.”
For a copy of the text and a summary of the rules visit www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/Boards/superintendence/PAR/default.asp.

New Utah Law for Employers Using Personal Identifiers

The Utah legislation has enacted H.B. 206. The legislation prohibits employers from requesting a SSN, DOB or DL# until either 1) the time in the hiring process when a criminal background check, credit history, or driving record is going to be run or 2) a conditional offer of employment is made. In general, H.B. 206 affects employers with 15 or more employees. This means that the SSN, DOB or DL should not be indicated on the initial job application form. This is not out of the ordinary, since this procedure is common for employers who work with and are advised by a pre-employment screening agency. However, vendors who provide employment screening on occasion for their employer clients may want to make sure to supply the proper forms to an employer at the appropriate time when a background check is initiated or public records are checked.
An excellent overview of the new law is provided by the Employer’s Council (which covers Idaho, Nevada, Utah, and Wyoming) at www.ecutah.org/newsampl.pdf.

NH Looks to Increase Fees for Driving Records

 
A bill recently introduced in the New Hampshire Legislation would increase the cost of a driving record from $8.00 to $15.00 for paper copies, and from $8.00 to $14.00 for electronic copies.  Interestingly, the language in HB 540 states "The department may issue a copy of any motor vehicle record upon the request of an insurance company or any other authorized agent, and notwithstanding RSA 91-A shall require payment by the insurance company or authorized agent of a fee of [$8] $14 for email or other computer-generated requests where payment is debited against an account established with the department, or $15 for all other requests..."

While New Hampshire is known to be very restrictive in regards to motor vehicle record access, it does permit employers, such as trucking companies, record access under the proper circumstances and with consent. Yet the bill only specifically mentions insurance companies and their agents. There is a question of what the other permissible requesters would pay for a record. Also, the NH DMV currently sells a ten-year certified for $10, yet this record was not addressed by the legislation.

Two Bills Introduced in New Mexico to Permit Email Requests of Public Records

Two bills were recently introduced in the New Mexico Legislation that would permit the public to request via email copies of public records.

Bill 598 Amends Section 14-2-8 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1993,
Chapter 258, Section 5) and states "For the purposes of this section, "written request" includes an electronic communication, including email or facsimile; provided that the request complies with the requirements of Subsection C of this section."

Bill 507 states that "A written request may be made in electronic or paper form. Information on how to make requests for public records shall be prominently displayed on a publicly accessible web site maintained by or for the public body holding the public records. And the record custodian shall make public records available in electronic form accessible from a remote location, upon request, for a fee of twenty-five cents ($.25) or less per page."

Both bills received a do-pass recommendation from the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee. View the bills at http://legis.state.nm.us/lcs/_locatorcom.aspx?year=09 

Pennsylvania Sets Copy Fee Range For Public Records

The newly created Office of Open Records has mandated that as of January 1, 2009 Pennsylvania government entities must charge between $.10 and $.25 for copies of public record documents, except in the case of oversized documents. The Courts, the State House and Senate are exempt, as are any agency that per statute is authorized to charge a set amount for a certain type of record. For example, a Recorder of Deeds may charge a copy fee of $.50 per uncertified page and $1.50 per certified page under 42 P.S. § 21051 and police departments have the authority to charge up to $15.00 per report for providing a copy of a vehicle accident report.

For details, visit http://openrecords.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt?? 

RI "Quash and Destroy" Bill Vetoed

(See April 28 Posting)

A bill that would have enabled thousands of convicted criminals to tell state licensing boards and prospective employers that they have never been convicted of a crime was vetoed by the Rhode Island Governor.  The legislature would need to hold a special session before January to address the veto and rescue the bill.

View bill folder.

Florida to Raise Court Fees, Providing Governor Signs Bill

Effective July 1, 2008, the filing fees, search fees and copy fees will increase for Florida Circuit, County and Appellate Courts. The fee increase is part of Senate Bill 1790 which is awaiting the governor's signature.

In general, fees will raise approximately 15% for filing and 33% for record searches and copies. The fee for a copy will increase from $1.50 to $2.00. The fee for a name search at the county level courts will increase from $1.50 per year to $2.00 per year.  The bill also increases fees for misdemeanors, felonies, and criminal traffic offenses. And there is a significant increase from $75 to $265 for "removal of tenant action."

According to a spokesperson at the Florida State Court Administration, the likelihood of the bill being signed by the governor is quite high.  To view a copy of the bill, go to www.flsenate.gov/Welcome/ and type in 1790 under the Jump to Bill tab on the left.