This article was posted on Thursday, Apr 30, 2026
law
CalPSA — AB 2042 Annotated Bill Text — March 16, 2026 Version
April 2026

ANNOTATED BILL TEXT

AB 2042 (Kalra) — As Amended March 16, 2026

Official Bill Text with Problem Provisions Highlighted and Explained

Prepared by CalPSA — California Process Servers Association • April 2026

COLOR KEY RED = Problem
provision		 ORANGE = Warning
provision		 GREEN = Existing / OK
provision

SECTION 1 — Civil Code § 1788.61 — The Consumer Debt Provision

SCOPE
This section applies ONLY to debt enforcement actions brought by buyers of consumer debt. It does NOT apply to landlords or evictions. A landlord is not a debt buyer. An eviction is not a debt enforcement action. 
line 1   SECTION 1. Section 1788.61 of the Civil Code is amended
line 2   to read:
line 3   1788.61. (a) (1) Notwithstanding Section 473.5 of the Code
line 4   of Civil Procedure, if service of a summons was lawfully effected
line 5   but has not resulted in actual notice to a person in time to defend
line 6   an action brought by a debt buyer and a default or default judgment
line 7   has been entered against the person in the action, the person may
line 8   serve and file a notice of motion and motion to set aside the default
line 9   or default judgment and for leave to defend the action.
line 10  (2) Except as provided in paragraph (3), the notice of motion
line 11  shall be served and filed within a reasonable time, but in no event
line 12  exceeding the earlier of:
line 13  (A) Six years after entry of the default or default judgment
line 14  against the person.
line 15  (B) One hundred eighty days of the first actual notice of
line 16  the action.
NOTE
The 6-year window in lines 13-14 applies only to consumer debt cases under Civil Code § 1788.61. The separate CCP § 473.2 provision in Section 3 below governs all other civil actions including evictions.
- Advertisers -

SECTION 2 — CCP § 417.10 — Proof of Service Requirements (Non-Substantive)

SCOPE
The bill describes this as making “nonsubstantive changes” to the proof of service requirements originally enacted by AB 747. This section largely re-states existing AB 747 requirements. The key provision for landlords and process servers is the photograph and GPS requirement effective January 1, 2027. 
line 27  SEC. 2. Section 417.10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, as
line 28  added by Section 9 of Chapter 563 of the Statutes of 2025, is
line 29  amended to read:
line 30  417.10. Proof that a summons was served on a person within
line 31  this state shall be made:
line 32  (a) If served under Section 415.10, 415.20, 415.30, or 415.45,
line 33  by the affidavit of the person making the service showing the time,
line 34  place, and manner of service and facts showing that the service
line 35  was made in accordance with this chapter.
(1) If served under Section 415.10, 415.20, or 415.45, the proof
of service shall include one or more photographs of the site of each
effected or attempted service of the summons and complaint.
(A) Each photograph shall contain a readable stamp that
establishes and automatically records the date, time, and global
positioning system (GPS) or equivalent coordinates.
AB 747
REQUIREMENT
This is the GPS photo requirement from the SPARE Act (AB 747), operative January 1, 2027. Process servers must photograph every serve with a GPS timestamp. This provision is not in dispute — it is existing law being carried forward.

SECTION 3 — CCP § 473.2 — THE CRITICAL SECTION — Read Every Word

This is the section that affects landlords, process servers,
licensed investigators, and every civil litigant in California.
Every highlighted provision below is at issue in our advocacy.

CCP § 473.2(a) — The Motion to Set Aside AND the Dismissal Power

line 23  SEC. 3. Section 473.2 of the Code of Civil Procedure is
line 24  amended to read:
line 25  473.2. (a) A party that was not served with a summons and
line 26  complaint in accordance with this chapter may file and serve a
line 27  motion to set aside or vacate the default or default judgment and
line 28  for leave to defend the action
line 28  or move for dismissal as permitted by
line 29  law.
PROBLEM
1
DISMISSAL. The phrase “or move for dismissal as permitted by law” adds a new weapon for tenants and defendants. Under existing law, a party could set aside a default and re-enter the case. AB 2042 adds the power to move for DISMISSAL — throwing the landlord’s entire case out. Set aside = fight again. Dismissal = the case is over. This is the most drastic remedy in civil procedure. The Author says this only clarifies existing dismissal grounds — but the language is ambiguous and will be litigated.

CCP § 473.2(b)(1) — The Bare Sworn Denial — No Corroboration Required

line 30  (b) (1) A party moving to set aside or vacate a default or a
line 31  default judgment pursuant to subdivision (a) shall proffer evidence,
line 32  through a sworn affidavit or otherwise, that service was not
line 33  lawfully effected. Proffering evidence that service was not lawfully
line 34  effected rebuts a presumption of the facts stated in the process
line 35  server’s return.
PROBLEM
2
THE “OR OTHERWISE” LOOPHOLE. The two words “or otherwise” set the evidentiary bar so low that virtually anything qualifies as evidence. An informal letter. An unsigned note. A verbal statement. The statute never defines what “otherwise” means. No corroborating evidence is required. The defendant’s own self-serving statement alone legally destroys the Evidence Code § 647 presumption that has protected registered process servers since 1978. This is the heart of the problem.

CCP § 473.2(b)(2) — The Photo Grandfather Clause — Two Different Standards

line 36  (2) If a process server files their return before the operative date
line 37  of this section, the absence of the photograph required by Section
line 38  417.10 shall not by itself render the proof of service unlawful or
line 39  insufficient.
PROBLEM
3
TWO DIFFERENT STANDARDS. Proofs of service filed BEFORE January 1, 2027 (no GPS photo required) get only a bare signed declaration to challenge them — the easiest possible standard. Proofs filed AFTER January 1, 2027 (GPS photo required) need additional corroboration. This means every eviction judgment entered before 2027 is MORE vulnerable to challenge than new ones. This is backwards — older judgments where records are harder to find face the lowest bar.

CCP § 473.2(c) — The Burden Shift to the Landlord

line 1   (c) In responding to a motion that is filed pursuant to this section
line 2   and that complies with subdivision (b), the party seeking a default
line 3   or default judgment has the burden of proving by a preponderance
line 4   of the evidence that service of the summons and complaint was
line 5   lawful.
PROBLEM
4
THE BURDEN SHIFT. Once the defendant files their declaration — with or without corroboration — the burden flips entirely. The party who won the judgment (the landlord) must now PROVE service was lawful by a preponderance of the evidence. You won your case. You have a judgment. A tenant signs a piece of paper — and now you must prove your own case all over again.

CCP § 473.2(d) — The Mandatory Hearing — The Word “Shall”

line 6   (d) In deciding a motion filed pursuant to subdivision (a), the
line 7   court shall take evidence as to the lawfulness of the service of
line 8   process and shall not deny a reasonable request by either party to
line 9   conduct a hearing and permit oral testimony.
PROBLEM
5
“SHALL” = MANDATORY. In California law, “shall” means the court has no choice. If either party requests a hearing, the court must hold one with live oral testimony. There is no judicial gatekeeping. No ability to reject a frivolous motion. No threshold the tenant must meet before the hearing is triggered. Your process server is subpoenaed. You pay your attorney. The hearing is automatic — every time, any case. This is the dead witness problem.

CCP § 473.2(e) — Other Remedies Preserved

line 10  (e) This section does not limit any other remedies available
line 11  under law.
NOTE
This subdivision preserves existing remedies for both parties. Landlords retain their existing rights under CCP §§ 473(b), 473(d), and 473.5. However, this also means that all of AB 2042’s new mechanisms are ADDED on top of existing remedies — not substituted for them.

CCP § 473.2(f) — Operative Date — January 1, 2027

line 12  (f) This section shall apply to a proof of service filed on or after
line 13  January 1, 2027.
WARNING
OPERATIVE DATE. This section applies to ALL proofs of service filed on or after January 1, 2027. That means every eviction you file after that date is subject to these new challenge mechanisms. Combined with the 15-year judgment enforcement period (10 years + 5-year renewal), proofs of service filed in 2027 could be challenged under this section as late as 2042.

CCP § 473.2(g) — Pre-2027 Court Authority Preserved

line 14  (g) Nothing in this section alters a court’s existing authority to
line 15  adjudicate a motion made pursuant to Section 473, or otherwise
line 16  to vacate or set aside a judgment, with respect to a proof of service
line 17  filed before January 1, 2027.
NOTE
This subdivision confirms that courts retain their existing authority to handle challenges to proofs of service filed before 2027 under the existing CCP § 473 framework. It does not create new rights for pre-2027 challenges — it simply preserves what already existed.

Summary: Five Problems in One Bill

# Provision The Problem
1 § 473.2(a) — Dismissal The phrase “or move for dismissal as permitted by law” adds outright dismissal as a remedy. Set aside lets you fight again. Dismissal ends your case entirely.
2 § 473.2(b)(1) — “Or Otherwise” The words “or otherwise” mean any evidence qualifies — even a bare unsigned note. No corroboration required. One signed declaration destroys 48 years of § 647 protection.
3 § 473.2(b)(2) — Two Standards Pre-2027 judgments face a lower bar than post-2027 ones. Older judgments where records are harder to find are the most vulnerable.
4 § 473.2(c) — Burden Shift Once any evidence is proffered, the burden flips entirely to the landlord to prove service was lawful by a preponderance. You won. Now prove it again.
5 § 473.2(d) — “Shall” The word “shall” makes the evidentiary hearing mandatory. No judicial gatekeeping. No frivolous motion filter. Your process server is subpoenaed. Automatic. Every time.

What CalPSA Is Asking the Senate to Fix:

(1) Require corroborating evidence alongside any declaration

(2) Remove or clarify the dismissal power in UD proceedings

(3) Add judicial gatekeeping before mandatory hearings are triggered

If the author will not accept any amendment — vote no.

Sources: AB 2042 (Kalra) official California Legislative text, March 16, 2026 amendment; Assembly Floor Analysis April 2026; Evidence Code § 647; Palm Property Investments, LLC v. Yadegar (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 1419.

Prepared by CalPSA — California Process Servers Association • April 2026

Contact Your State Senator TODAY

Category: New Laws