BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 3198 |
By: Gonzales, Larry |
Government Efficiency & Reform |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties note that the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board does not have sufficient authority to enforce laws relating to student loan defaults, and they point out that, in order for the coordinating board to sue for the remainder of the loan amount, the attorney general must institute the suit and that venue for such a suit may be the county of residence of the person being sued, the county in which the institution in which the loan recipient was last enrolled is located, or Travis County. The parties contend that venue and jurisdiction of such a suit should be exclusively conferred on a court of competent jurisdiction in Travis County and that the attorney general should be authorized, but not required, to bring the suit. C.S.H.B. 3198 seeks to provide a more effective means of addressing student loan defaults.
|
||||||||||||||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||||||||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 3198 amends the Education Code to make provisions relating to a default on a student loan and a subsequent suit for the remainder of the loan applicable to a person who has cosigned as a guarantor for the student loan; authorizes, rather than requires, the suit for the remaining sum to be instituted by the attorney general; and establishes that the venue for and jurisdiction of such a suit is exclusively conferred upon a court of competent jurisdiction in Travis County. The bill removes provisions providing for the institution of a suit by any county or district attorney acting for the attorney general, establishing as an alternate venue the county of the person's residence or the county in which the institution at which the student was last enrolled is located, and providing for a delay of such suit on the attorney general's finding of reasonable justification.
|
||||||||||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2013.
|
||||||||||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 3198 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and highlighted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||||||||||||
|