California Law Requires Sellers of Travel to Be Registered
J Carnaghie
I came across this information on the web and thought it would be of
interest to this newsgroup as well.
From the California Attorney General's Office:
http://www.ag.ca.gov/travel/
**********************************************************
"California requires all sellers of travel to register with the
Attorney General's Office and to display the registration number on
all advertising. While not assuring that a company is reputable, a
valid registration signals that the seller of travel has at least
followed the law to be registered.
When you're at a travel agency, ask to see the seller of travel's
registration acknowledgment – a one-page document issued by the
Attorney General's Seller of Travel Registration Unit. Be sure to
check the expiration date to determine whether the registration is
still valid.
You also may use the "Seller Search" feature on this website to assist
you in evaluating travel sellers and entrusting travel arrangements
with registered travel operators.
If you prefer, you can find out whether a travel seller is registered
by writing the Seller of Travel Registration Unit at 300 South Spring
Street, Los Angeles, CA 90013; or fax your query to (213) 897-8846.
Since there are many similar seller of travel names, please spell out
the full name and address of the company."
***********************************************************
It appears that at least one regular poster to this newsgroup is
offering travel services, is a resident of and in California, and is
not registered with the Attorney General as required by law.
Anybody know who that might be? Is it important?
Cheers to All, and remember it's your money!
John on the Left Coast
Ray Goldenberg
<jacarnagh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>It appears that at least one regular poster to this newsgroup is
>offering travel services, is a resident of and in California, and is
>not registered with the Attorney General as required by law.
Hi John,
ALL travel agents that are selling in California are suppose to be
registered with the California Attorney General and pay the
registration fee. This applies, whether they are residents and/or
have offices in California. If they have an office in California,
they not only have register but pay into the state restitution fund.
This fund protects Californians from losing money because of a seller
of travel. FWIW, Lighthouse Travel's registration # is 1001914-40.
Best regards,
Ray
LIGHTHOUSE TRAVEL
800-719-9917 or 805-566-3905
http://www.lighthousetravel.com
--
kurtu...@yahoo.com
> Hi John,
>
> ALL travel agents that are selling in California are suppose to be
> registered with the California Attorney General and pay the
> registration fee. This applies, whether they are residents and/or
> have offices in California. If they have an office in California,
> they not only have register but pay into the state restitution fund.
> This fund protects Californians from losing money because of a seller
> of travel. FWIW, Lighthouse Travel's registration # is 1001914-40.
So how does that work if someone, in say Indiana, has a website
and the random California person wanders in. Do they still have to be
registered even if they don't have an actual presence in Californy?
Ray Goldenberg
<kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> So how does that work if someone, in say Indiana, has a website
>and the random California person wanders in. Do they still have to be
>registered even if they don't have an actual presence in Californy?
Hi Kurt,
It is my understanding that if you sell to a California resident then
you must be registered if you are not to be in violation of the law.
This law was fought by many out of state travel & in-state agents
including myself. It was opposed by the Association of Retail Travel
Agents (ARTA) of which I was a member. It was supported by the
American Society of Travel Agents (ASTA).
Andrew J. Perrin
> On 9 Feb 2007 13:08:48 -0800, "kurtu...@yahoo.com"
> <kurtu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> So how does that work if someone, in say Indiana, has a website
>>and the random California person wanders in. Do they still have to be
>>registered even if they don't have an actual presence in Californy?
>
> Hi Kurt,
>
> It is my understanding that if you sell to a California resident then
> you must be registered if you are not to be in violation of the law.
IANAL, but how exactly is this allowed under the interstate commerce
clause? California law does not have jurisdiction over transactions
occurring outside of, or across the borders of, the state, regardless
of the residence of those carrying out the transactions.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew J Perrin - andrew...@unc.edu - http://perrin.socsci.unc.edu
Assistant Professor of Sociology; Book Review Editor, _Social Forces_
University of North Carolina - CB#3210, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3210 USA
New Book: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/hfs.cgi/00/178592.ctl
Ray Goldenberg
(Andrew J. Perrin) wrote:
>IANAL, but how exactly is this allowed under the interstate commerce
>clause? California law does not have jurisdiction over transactions
>occurring outside of, or across the borders of, the state, regardless
>of the residence of those carrying out the transactions.
Hi,
As I said, I opposed it. You will have to argue this with the
California Attorney General. He collects both fees from Lighthouse
Travel. On our behalf, I wish you luck. <;+)
kurtu...@yahoo.com
my understanding that if you sell to a California resident then
> you must be registered if you are not to be in violation of the law.
> This law was fought by many out of state travel & in-state agents
> including myself. It was opposed by the Association of Retail Travel
> Agents (ARTA) of which I was a member. It was supported by the
> American Society of Travel Agents (ASTA).
Interesting. I would think they would run afoul of the Interstate
Commerce Clause of the Constitution trying to regulate someone not
domiciled or with a physical presence in their state. Guess that is
why I am not called upon to be a constiutional lawyer too often (g).
Joseph Coulter
>
> Interesting. I would think they would run afoul of the Interstate
> Commerce Clause of the Constitution trying to regulate someone not
> domiciled or with a physical presence in their state. Guess that is
> why I am not called upon to be a constiutional lawyer too often (g).
>
You will find that it is the nexus combined with the California that
means that CA has a right to regulate the trade in protection of her
citizens. As a Florida resident I do not have to do business with CA
residents. Not that I like the deal either, but I am registered here
through my host and have to petition each year to remain so.