Since the passage of California’s SPARE Act (AB 747), One Legal has received hundreds of questions from legal professionals seeking to understand how the law will impact service of process beginning January 1, 2027.
To help answer those questions, we compiled some of the most common inquiries from our webinars, customer conversations, and industry discussions. This blog is part of a four-part series designed to provide practical guidance on the SPARE Act’s requirements and what legal professionals should be doing now to prepare.
In this first installment, we focus on the fundamentals: what AB 747 applies to, what it changes, and where its requirements begin and end.
What is the purpose of AB 747?
The stated purpose of AB 747 is to address “sewer service,” the practice of falsely claiming that service was completed when it was not. According to the bill, the law is intended to increase accountability and transparency in service of process by creating more consistent documentation and diligence requirements.
The legislation primarily affects how service of process is performed and documented in California civil cases.
When does AB 747 take effect?
The law takes effect on January 1, 2027.
While implementation guidance and revised Judicial Council forms are still being finalized, legal professionals should begin familiarizing themselves with the new requirements now, particularly those related to diligence standards and documentation.
What types of cases does AB 747 apply to?
AB 747 applies to civil cases served on or after January 1, 2027.
The law amends provisions within the California Code of Civil Procedure and is specifically focused on civil service of process requirements. It does not apply to criminal matters.
Does AB 747 affect criminal cases?
No.
The law applies only to civil service of process. The bill amends sections of the California Code of Civil Procedure (and one change to the Business & Professions Code) and repeatedly limits its scope to civil matters.
Does AB 747 apply to unlawful detainer matters?
Yes, although some provisions apply broadly to all civil cases, others are specific to unlawful detainer actions.
The following changes apply generally across civil cases:
- The public register of process servers
- The new definition of reasonable diligence
- Photo, date, time, and GPS documentation requirements
- Expanded remedies relating to improper service and default judgments
The following provisions are specific to unlawful detainer matters:
- New diligence requirements related to posting
- A requirement that unlawful detainer complaints state the date, time, location, and method used to serve the termination notice
Does AB 747 apply only to service of summons and complaints?
Generally, yes.
The law’s diligence requirements focus on service of the summons and complaint. It does not change the rules governing routine service of filings after parties have appeared in a case.
Once a defendant has been properly brought into the action and litigation is underway, existing service rules for subsequent filings remain unchanged.
Does AB 747 affect termination notices or three-day notices?
The new diligence requirements apply to service of summonses and complaints, not termination notices.
However, the law does create a new unlawful detainer requirement. Under revised CCP 1166(a)(5), an unlawful detainer complaint must state the method used to serve the termination notice, along with the date, time, and location of that service.
Does AB 747 change service rules for government employees?
No special rules were created for government employees.
When serving a government employee in an official capacity, the same diligence and documentation requirements generally apply as they would for any other authorized representative being served at an official office or workplace.
Does AB 747 change substituted service requirements?
Yes.
One of the most significant changes in the law involves substituted service. AB 747 creates a defined reasonable diligence standard, requires documentation of service attempts, and introduces additional requirements in certain consumer debt matters.
Because these changes are substantial, we will cover them in detail in the next article in this series.
Does AB 747 affect service by email or other alternative methods?
No.
The SPARE Act does not modify California’s existing rules governing alternative service.
The law leaves intact provisions relating to:
- Service on opposing counsel
- Court-ordered alternative service
- Service by publication
- Alternative service methods authorized under existing California law
AB 747 is primarily focused on personal service, substituted service, and posting requirements in unlawful detainer matters.
Does AB 747 apply to subpoenas?
No.
The law applies to service of summonses and complaints and does not change existing rules governing subpoena service.
Does AB 747 apply when serving business entities?
The law generally treats service at commercial properties and residential properties similarly. The documentation requirements, public registry provisions, and other major changes apply regardless of whether service occurs at a residence or business.
However, there are important distinctions when serving business entities.
For example, substituted service on corporations and other business entities under CCP 415.20(a) did not change, and does not require the same three-attempt diligence showing that applies to substituted service on individuals under CCP 415.20(b).
Similarly, the consumer debt requirement that at least one service attempt be made at a defendant’s dwelling applies only to individuals and does not apply to service on businesses.
What about virtual businesses?
AB 747 does not change the existing framework for serving virtual businesses.
California entities must maintain a designated agent for service of process with a California street address on file with the Secretary of State. Service is generally directed to that registered address, even if it is a virtual office, coworking space, or commercial mail-receiving agency.
The SPARE Act primarily changes how service attempts are documented. It does not alter the existing statutory framework for serving business entities or seeking alternative service when traditional methods prove unsuccessful.
Final thoughts
AB 747 represents one of the most significant changes to California service of process requirements in recent years. While implementation details will continue to develop through Judicial Council forms and guidance, understanding the law now can help legal professionals avoid surprises later.
In our next article, we will take a closer look at one of the most discussed aspects of the SPARE Act: the new photo, GPS, and documentation requirements that will accompany proofs of service beginning in 2027.
If you would like to learn more about the SPARE Act, watch One Legal’s on-demand webinar or explore future articles in our AB 747 blog series.
