SB 946 repeals Civil Code section 1785.28.6 — the provision that would have automatically repealed the Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act rules applicable to escrow agent rating services and escrow agents on January 1, 2027. In short: the bill eliminates the scheduled sunsetting of those statutory provisions so the existing duties and consumer protections continue past 2027.
That change matters for two groups in particular. Entities that operate escrow-agent rating services must keep meeting CCRAA-style obligations (including policies to safeguard personally identifiable information), and escrow agents remain treated as "consumers" for purposes of the Act — preserving dispute rights and potential statutory remedies.
The repeal reduces regulatory uncertainty but also locks in compliance and liability exposures for businesses in the escrow-rating ecosystem.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill removes the statutory sunset by repealing Civil Code §1785.28.6, which had scheduled the repeal of CCRAA provisions that apply to escrow agent rating services on January 1, 2027. By deleting the sunset clause, the CCRAA obligations continue indefinitely unless changed by later legislation.
Who It Affects
Directly affected parties are escrow agent rating services and escrow agents; indirectly affected are escrow companies, title companies, lenders and third-party data processors that feed rating services. Compliance, privacy, and legal teams managing consumer-reporting exposures will need to maintain or expand existing programs.
Why It Matters
Removing the sunset converts a temporary regulatory regime into a standing one — preserving protections (and litigation risk) tied to CCRAA duties such as PII safeguards and consumer dispute remedies. That permanence changes how businesses budget, structure contracts, and assess legal exposure.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
California added a limited set of Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (CCRAA) rules to cover escrow agent rating services and to treat escrow agents themselves as "consumers" for purposes of those rules. Those measures required rating services to adopt policies and procedures to protect personally identifiable information they obtain from escrow agents and subjected the rating ecosystem to CCRAA obligations such as accuracy, dispute handling, and civil remedies.
Section 1785.28.6 of the Civil Code contained a single line: a sunset clause that would repeal those special escrow-related CCRAA provisions on January 1, 2027. SB 946 deletes that sunset clause.
The immediate legal effect is simple: the escrow-specific CCRAA rules do not expire on the 2027 date and remain part of the Civil Code unless the Legislature later changes them.For practitioners that means ongoing, not temporary, obligations. Rating services must continue maintaining PII safeguard policies and dispute procedures; escrow agents retain the status and associated rights that enable them to challenge inaccurate ratings or seek statutory remedies under the CCRAA.
For businesses and counsel, the repeal changes planning: compliance programs, vendor contracts, insurance, and litigation exposure must be treated as permanent fixtures rather than short-term administrative burdens.The bill does not itself change the content of the CCRAA provisions that apply to escrow rating services — it only removes the scheduled termination. That leaves open all existing questions about scope (which entities qualify as rating services), interplay with other California privacy statutes, and how private litigation will be managed under the CCRAA framework now that the provisions are permanent.
The Five Things You Need to Know
SB 946 repeals Civil Code §1785.28.6 — the single-section sunset clause that would have terminated escrow-related CCRAA provisions on January 1, 2027.
The existing escrow-specific rules treat escrow agents as "consumers" under the CCRAA and require escrow agent rating services to implement policies to safeguard personally identifiable information obtained from escrow agents.
By removing the sunset, the bill makes those escrow-related CCRAA obligations permanent unless and until the Legislature amends them.
Escrow agents retain CCRAA rights — including the ability to dispute inaccurate information and pursue statutory remedies — because the repeal preserves the underlying consumer-status designation.
The bill is narrowly drafted: it does not add new duties or penalties, but it preserves the current compliance, recordkeeping, and litigation exposure attached to the existing statutory regime.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Repeal of the sunset clause (Civil Code §1785.28.6)
This single operative provision removes the statutory text that scheduled repeal of the escrow-related CCRAA provisions on January 1, 2027. Practically, deleting §1785.28.6 converts a temporary sunset into indefinite operation for the provisions that had been tied to that clause. The bill contains no savings clause or substantive amendments to the CCRAA provisions themselves; it performs only a timing change.
Escrow agent rating-service rules remain in force
Although SB 946 does not recite the other sections it leaves intact, the repeal keeps in place the prior legislative additions that applied CCRAA obligations to escrow agent rating services and designated escrow agents as consumers. Those intact rules continue to require accuracy, dispute procedures, and data-protection policies for rating services that handle escrow-agent information, preserving both administrative obligations and the Act's remedies.
Timing and scope — what the repeal does not do
The bill does not change definitions, compliance deadlines, or enforcement mechanisms that already apply under the CCRAA; it merely eliminates the automatic termination date. That means any interpretive or implementation questions courts or agencies have been resolving under the escrow-specific provisions remain relevant and binding going forward unless the Legislature takes further action.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Finance across all five countries.
Explore Finance in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Escrow agent rating services — gain regulatory certainty because the rules that govern their data-handling and dispute procedures will not expire on a fixed date, allowing multi-year compliance planning and investment.
- Escrow agents — retain the status of 'consumers' under the CCRAA, preserving the ability to dispute inaccurate ratings and seek statutory remedies tied to consumer-reporting protections.
- Regulators and consumer-advocacy organizations — keep an established statutory tool for oversight and enforcement of how escrow-related information is collected, stored, and communicated.
- Buyers of compliance services (legal, privacy, and technology vendors) — benefit from sustained demand for CCRAA-focused compliance programs and audits in the escrow-rating sector.
Who Bears the Cost
- Escrow agent rating services — must continue absorbing the operational costs of CCRAA compliance (PII safeguards, dispute resolution systems, documentation and training) on a permanent basis rather than temporarily.
- Small escrow companies and independent agents — face continuing risk that inaccurate ratings could trigger disputes or litigation, and may incur costs to monitor, correct, or defend against ratings.
- Third-party processors and data brokers that supply information to rating services — may face additional contractual and technical obligations as rating services seek to demonstrate compliance with CCRAA safeguards.
- California agencies and courts — while the bill contains no appropriation, indefinite enforcement preserves ongoing administrative and judicial workloads tied to disputes and potential litigation under the CCRAA.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
SB 946 settles a timing question by preserving protections and legal remedies for escrow agents and oversight tools for regulators, but it also converts what was a temporary experiment into a standing regulatory burden: the Legislature must choose between indefinite consumer protections and the sustained compliance and litigation costs those protections impose on a specialized industry.
The repeal is legally narrow but practically consequential. Deleting the sunset does not resolve open questions about who qualifies as an "escrow agent rating service," how courts should apply CCRAA standards in a business-to-business-adjacent context, or how the CCRAA interacts with California's other privacy laws (for example, CCPA/CPRA obligations and data-security statutes).
Those interpretive disputes — already brewing in administrative guidance and potential litigation — remain live and now operate against a permanent statutory backdrop.
There is a tension between regulatory certainty and persistent compliance cost. Making the regime permanent helps rating services plan and avoid churn from repeatedly changing rules, but it also locks in a set of obligations that the affected industry may view as ill-fitted to nontraditional consumer-reporting contexts.
The bill provides no phased compliance relief, no funding for enforcement, and no clarifying definitions, so affected parties must weigh ongoing litigation risk and contract remediation costs against the benefits of predictability.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.