Journal of the House of Representatives
of the First Session of the 111th General Assembly
of the State of South Carolina
being the Regular Session Beginning Tuesday, January 10, 1995

Page Finder Index
| Printed Page 2840, May 2 | Printed Page 2860, May 3 |
Printed Page 2850 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
Reps. SIMRILL, KIRSH and S. WHIPPER objected to the Bill.

Rep. KELLEY moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Tuesday, May 9, which was adopted.

S. 46--DEBATE ADJOURNED

Rep. HERDKLOTZ moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Thursday, May 4, which was adopted.

S. 46 -- Senators Jackson, Elliott, Rose and Washington: A BILL TO AMEND SECTIONS 20-7-2730, 20-7-2740, 20-7-2800, 20-7-2810, 20-7-2850, AND 20-7-2900, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

Printed Page 2851 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
1976, RELATING TO THE ISSUANCE OF LICENSES FOR PRIVATE DAY CARE CENTERS AND RENEWAL THEREOF, APPROVAL OF PUBLIC DAY CARE CENTERS AND RENEWAL THEREOF, THE REGISTRATION OF OPERATORS OF FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES, AND THE ISSUANCE OF LICENSES FOR OR THE REGISTERING OF CHURCH DAY CARE CENTERS, SO AS TO REQUIRE THAT ALL PERSONS APPLYING FOR A LICENSE AS AN OPERATOR OF OR AN EMPLOYEE AT DAY CARE FACILITIES MUST UNDERGO A FINGERPRINT REVIEW TO BE CONDUCTED BY THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND TO PROHIBIT THE ISSUANCE OF DAY CARE LICENSES IF SUCH OPERATORS OR EMPLOYEES HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF CERTAIN CRIMES AND TO AMEND CHAPTER 7 OF TITLE 20 BY ADDING SECTION 20-7-2720, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT THE SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION MAY NOT CHARGE MORE THAN TEN DOLLARS FOR STATE BACKGROUND CHECKS REQUIRED FOR CHILD CARE FACILITIES.

S. 602--DEBATE ADJOURNED

Rep. CATO moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Wednesday, May 3, which was adopted.

S. 602 -- Senators Short, Jackson, Gregory and Giese: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 34-29-100, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO RECORDS AND REPORTS OF RESTRICTED LENDERS, BY ADDING INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE REPORTED IN THE ANNUAL REPORT MADE BY RESTRICTED LENDERS; TO AMEND SECTION 34-29-140 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO CHARGES PERMITTED TO RESTRICTED LENDERS, SO AS TO REVISE THE FINANCE CHARGES AND TO PROVIDE LIMITATIONS ON LOAN RENEWALS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-1-301 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO DEFINITIONS UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE, SO AS TO ADD A DEFINITION FOR "DEBT COLLECTOR"; TO AMEND SECTION 37-1-303 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE INDEX OF DEFINITIONS IN TITLE 37, SO AS TO ADD "DEBT COLLECTOR"; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-201 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO LOAN FINANCE CHARGES FOR SUPERVISED LOANS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT SUPERVISED LOANS NOT EXCEEDING SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS SHALL BE MADE IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 34-29-140 RELATING TO

Printed Page 2852 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
FINANCE CHARGES FOR RESTRICTED LOANS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-305 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE POSTING AND FILING OF MAXIMUM RATE SCHEDULES BY SUPERVISED LENDERS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT FOR LOANS NOT EXCEEDING SIX HUNDRED DOLLARS, A RATE MAY NOT BE POSTED WHICH EXCEEDS THE CHARGES IMPOSED IN SECTION 34-29-140; TO AMEND SECTION 37-3-505 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO RECORDS AND ANNUAL REPORTS FOR SUPERVISED LENDERS, SO AS TO ADD INFORMATION REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE ANNUAL REPORT OF SUPERVISED LENDERS; TO AMEND PART 5, CHAPTER 3, TITLE 37 OF THE 1976 CODE, BY ADDING SECTION 37-3-515 SO AS TO PROVIDE A LIMITATION ON LOAN RENEWALS; TO AMEND SECTION 37-5-108 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO UNCONSCIONABILITY UNDER THE CONSUMER PROTECTION CODE, BY ADDING PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES WHICH CONSTITUTE UNCONSCIONABILITY AND PROVIDING REMEDIES; TO AMEND SECTION 37-6-117 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS, SO AS TO REQUIRE THE ADMINISTRATION TO DEVISE A PAMPHLET FOR DISTRIBUTION TO CERTAIN CONSUMERS INFORMING THEM OF THEIR RIGHTS; AND TO AMEND SECTION 37-9-102 OF THE 1976 CODE, RELATING TO THE LICENSURE ELECTION, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT CERTAIN SUPERVISED LENDERS MAY ELECT TO BE RESTRICTED LENDERS.

H. 3057--DEBATE ADJOURNED

Rep. WHITE moved to adjourn debate upon the following Bill until Wednesday, May 10, which was adopted.

H. 3057 -- Reps. Tucker, Simrill, Wofford, D. Smith, Haskins, Vaughn, Harrison, Cooper, Limbaugh, Elliott, Richardson, Gamble, Stuart, Phillips, Knotts and Spearman: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 14-7-130, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE PREPARATION OF CIRCUIT COURT JURY LISTS FROM A TAPE OF THOSE PERSONS HOLDING A VALID SOUTH CAROLINA DRIVER'S LICENSE OR IDENTIFICATION CARD, SO AS TO DELETE THIS PROVISION AND PROVIDE THAT THESE JURY LISTS MUST BE PREPARED BY

Printed Page 2853 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
THE STATE ELECTION COMMISSION FROM THE NAMES OF THE REGISTERED VOTERS IN THE COUNTY.

H. 4000--RECOMMITTED

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 4000 -- Reps. Meacham, Limehouse, Mason, Bailey, Wofford, Kirsh, Cato, Cooper, Simrill, Lanford, Trotter, McCraw, Vaughn, Law, Boan, Dantzler, A. Young, Neilson, Elliott, H. Brown, Haskins and Martin: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-455, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATES, SO AS TO RAISE THE THRESHOLD MONETARY LEVELS WITH RESPECT TO "CHARGEABLE" ACCIDENTS, AND PROVIDE THAT THESE THRESHOLDS MUST BE ADJUSTED PERIODICALLY BY REGULATION OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE BASED UPON CHANGES IN THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX; AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE THRESHOLD AMOUNTS, AS CHANGED BY THIS ACT, APPLY ONLY TO ACCIDENTS OCCURRING AFTER JUNE 30, 1995, AND ALSO APPLY TO ANY MERIT RATING PLAN PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 38-73-760.

Rep. CATO moved to recommit the Bill to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry, which was agreed to.

H. 3985--DEBATE ADJOURNED

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3985 -- Reps. Richardson, Bailey, Simrill, Cato and Mason: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-910, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO INSURANCE RATES, RATE-MAKING, AND RATE FILING AND NOTICE OF HEARING AS A PREREQUISITE TO THE GRANTING OF A RATE INCREASE AND EXCEPTIONS, SO AS TO PROVIDE, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THE REQUIREMENTS OF PUBLIC NOTICES AND PUBLIC HEARINGS DO NOT APPLY TO APPLICATIONS FOR RATE INCREASES WHEN THE APPLICANT INSURER HAD EARNED PREMIUMS IN THIS STATE IN THE PREVIOUS CALENDAR YEAR OF LESS THAN TWO MILLION, RATHER THAN FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE LINE OR TYPE OF INSURANCE FOR WHICH THE RATE

Printed Page 2854 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
INCREASE IS SOUGHT OR IF THE RATE INCREASE IS SOUGHT BY A RATING ORGANIZATION, THE EARNED PREMIUMS ON THIS STATE FOR ALL MEMBERS AND SUBSCRIBERS OF THE ORGANIZATION FOR WHOM AN INCREASE IS SOUGHT WERE LESS THAN TWO MILLION, RATHER THAN FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE PREVIOUS CALENDAR YEAR FOR THE LINE OR TYPE OF INSURANCE FOR WHICH THE RATE INCREASE IS SOUGHT.

Rep. RICHARDSON explained the Bill.

Rep. ANDERSON moved to adjourn debate upon the Bill until Wednesday, May 10, which was adopted.

H. 3337--RECOMMITTED

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3337 -- Rep. Scott: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 38-73-455, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE RATES, SO AS TO RAISE THE THRESHOLD MONETARY LEVELS WITH RESPECT TO "CHARGEABLE" ACCIDENTS; AND TO PROVIDE THAT THE THRESHOLD AMOUNTS, AS CHANGED BY THIS ACT, APPLY ONLY TO ACCIDENTS OCCURRING AFTER JUNE 30, 1995, AND ALSO APPLY TO ANY MERIT RATING PLAN PROMULGATED PURSUANT TO SECTION 38-73-760.

Rep. CATO moved to recommit the Bill to the Committee on Labor, Commerce and Industry, which was agreed to.

H. 3779--OBJECTIONS

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3779 -- Reps. Elliott, Knotts, Littlejohn, Cato, Simrill, Cain, Mason, Govan, Stuart, Delleney, Neilson, Stille, Tucker, Jennings, Hines, R. Smith, T. Brown, Wright and Riser: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 40-57-155, AS AMENDED, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO CONTINUING EDUCATION FOR REAL ESTATE BROKERS AND SALES AGENTS, SO AS TO APPLY THE REQUIREMENTS TO REAL ESTATE PROPERTY MANAGERS, AND PROVIDE THAT, FOR PROPERTY MANAGERS, THE EIGHT HOURS MUST INCLUDE A MINIMUM OF TWO HOURS OF INSTRUCTION ON FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS AFFECTING

Printed Page 2855 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
PROPERTY MANAGERS AND THAT THE REMAINING HOURS MUST INCLUDE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT RELATED COURSES.

The Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\BBM\10193JM.95).

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking Section 40-57-155(A), as contained in SECTION 1 and inserting:

/"(A) As a condition of license renewal, a broker, or sales agent, or property manager must satisfactorily complete eight hours of approved course instruction biennially as prescribed by the commission by a course provider approved by the commission. The eight hours for sales and broker agents must include a minimum of two hours of instruction on changes in federal and state law affecting licensees. For property managers, the eight hours must include a minimum of two hours of instruction on federal and state laws affecting property managers, and the remaining hours must include property management related courses as approved by the commission. A licensee having successfully completed a thirty-hour course for qualification as a broker is not required to participate in the continuing education program for that particular year. A licensee who decides to become inactive is not required to participate in the continuing education program but must complete the eight-hour requirement before returning to active status."/

Amend title to conform.

Rep. ELLIOTT explained the amendment.

Rep. TOWNSEND objected to the Bill.

Rep. ELLIOTT continued speaking.

Reps. KIRSH, COOPER, INABINETT and SCOTT objected to the Bill.

H. 3852--AMENDED AND ORDERED TO THIRD READING

The following Bill was taken up.

H. 3852 -- Rep. Fair: A BILL TO AMEND SECTION 44-79-50, CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, RELATING TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF PHYSICAL FITNESS SERVICES CONTRACTS, SO AS TO PROVIDE THEY ARE UNENFORCEABLE IF THE CONTRACT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH STATE OR FEDERAL LAW; TO AMEND SECTION 44-79-70, RELATING TO RIGHTS

Printed Page 2856 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
AGAINST SUCCESSORS TO CONTRACT, SO AS TO PROVIDE THAT NO PURCHASER OF A CONTRACT ASSOCIATED WITH PROVIDING PHYSICAL FITNESS SERVICES MAY COLLECT ON THE CONTRACT OR REPORT A DELINQUENCY UNDER THE CONTRACT IF THE CONTRACT IS IN VIOLATION OF THE CHAPTER; AND TO AMEND SECTION 44-79-80, RELATING TO FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO INCLUDE IN THE EXEMPTION FROM CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS, FACILITIES THAT HAVE BEEN IN CONTINUOUS OPERATION FOR TEN OR MORE YEARS.

The Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee proposed the following Amendment No. 1 (Doc Name L:\council\legis\amend\BBM\10196AC.95), which was adopted.

Amend the bill, as and if amended, by striking SECTION 3 in its entirety and inserting the following:

/SECTION 3. Section 44-79-80 of the 1976 Code is amended to read:

"Section 44-79-80. (1)(A)Every A center which enters into prepaid or credit contracts for physical fitness services of over three months' duration or over two hundred dollars in amount shall maintain with the administrator a surety bond in a sum to be determined by the administrator based on the estimated future costs to service contracts sold, but not to exceed fifty thousand dollars.

(2)(B) In lieu of the bond required in this section, the center may furnish under penalty of perjury information which reasonably demonstrates financial responsibility as will enable the center to satisfy the possible claims against the bond. In the event the center is controlled by, under common control with, or controls other corporations and the other corporation agrees in writing to satisfy the claims against a bond allowed under this section, the financial responsibility of the other corporation must be considered in determining the requirement for a bond. In determining whether the center has the requisite financial responsibility, the administrator may consider the operating and business history, reputation, and management within and without the State, as well as and the operating and business history and reputation of any a business controlled by, under common control with, or controlling the center. The provisions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section This subsection and subsection (A) do not apply to physical fitness service facilities that have been in operation for five years ten or more on the effective date of this Chapter consecutive years in this State under the same sole ownership or corporate ownership by the same principals at the time of renewal for its

Printed Page 2857 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
certificate of authority. Documentation acceptable to the administrator or the administrator's designee must be submitted to receive an exemption under this section from the financial responsibility requirements of subsections (A) and (B).

(C) A physical fitness center which has been provided with an exemption from the financial responsibility requirements under subsection (B) must have a written contract which contains the following statement in all capitals and boldface type, which is larger and bolder than any other type in the contract and in at least 14 point boldface:

`NOTICE

STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE INFORM YOU THAT IF YOU (THE BUYER) CHOOSE TO PAY FOR ANY PART OF THIS AGREEMENT IN ADVANCE, BE AWARE THAT YOU ARE PAYING FOR FUTURE SERVICES AND MAY BE RISKING LOSS OF YOUR MONEY IN THE EVENT THIS HEALTH SPA CEASES TO CONDUCT BUSINESS. THIS HEALTH SPA IS NOT REQUIRED TO POST A BOND, AND THERE MAY BE NO OTHER PROTECTIONS PROVIDED TO YOU IF YOU CHOOSE TO PAY IN ADVANCE.'

This notice must be separately signed and dated by the consumer.
 (3)(D) Each A center is required to notify the administrator upon substantial change of its financial status and to submit an annual report.

(4)(E) No person may offer physical fitness services in this State without first obtaining a certificate of authority from the administrator. A certificate of authority must be issued by the administrator upon submission of items (a)(1) through (f)(6) of this section. The applicant must submit:

(a)(1) A formal application for the certificate in such form and detail as the administrator requires.

(b)(2) A certified copy of its charter or articles of incorporation and its bylaws, if any.

(c)(3) If a corporation, a certified copy of the certificate of authority or good standing certificate from the Secretary of State of South Carolina.

(d)(4) A copy of its membership agreement.

(e)(5) A copy of any contract to be issued.

(f)(6) A list of outlets at which physical fitness services will be offered.

(g)(7) Any other relevant information required by the administrator.

(5)(F) No certificate of authority may be issued by the administrator until the center pays an initial certificate of authority fee of fifty dollars an outlet. Certificates of authority may be renewed upon payment of an

Printed Page 2858 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
annual renewal fee of fifty dollars an outlet on or before December thirty-first.

(6)(G) A copy of the certificate of authority required by this chapter must be posted conspicuously at every location where monies or contracts are received by the center.

(7)(H) It is unlawful for any a center or person acting on behalf of a center required to obtain and maintain a certificate of authority under this chapter to advertise, sell, or offer to sell the use of physical fitness services when a valid certificate is not on file with the administrator.

(8)(I) The administrator may order the center to cease and desist, or may revoke, suspend, or refuse to continue the certificate of authority of a center, whenever if, after a hearing and for causes shown, he the administrator determines that the center has violated or failed to comply with any provisions of this chapter or regulations promulgated under the authority of this chapter, or if, after notice and opportunity for a hearing, it is shown that:

(a)(1) any a document or declaration required by subsection (4)(E), items (a)(1) through (g)(7) were false or misleading; or

(b)(2) by clear and convincing evidence the center or its agents, officers, or employees have engaged in false, fraudulent, or deceptive conduct in its dealings with customers;

(9)(J) In lieu of revocation, suspension, or refusal to continue a certificate of authority of a center, the administrator in his discretion may assess an administrative penalty for a violation of subsection (4) (E) or (8) of this section (I) not to exceed five hundred dollars for each violation, not to exceed five thousand dollars for matters commenced in any a calendar year. These penalties may be assessed in connection with orders to cease and desist."/

Amend title to conform.

Rep. FAIR explained the amendment.

The amendment was then adopted.

The Bill, as amended, was read the second time and ordered to third reading.

Rep. CATO moved that the House do now adjourn, which was adopted.


Printed Page 2859 . . . . . Tuesday, May 2, 1995
ADJOURNMENT

At 12:55 P.M. the House in accordance with the motion of Rep. WRIGHT adjourned in memory of Chilton W. Ellett of Chapin, to meet at 10:00 A.M. tomorrow.

* * *

| Printed Page 2840, May 2 | Printed Page 2860, May 3 |
Page Finder Index