AB 1795, the Smoke Damage Recovery Act, was enrolled on September 4, 2026 and is awaiting action by the Governor. It is not law. Nothing in it changes what a policy pays today, and every effect described below is proposed. The Governor has until September 30, 2026 to sign or veto legislation passed by the Legislature, so California homeowners with smoke damage have a short window in which to understand what would change and what would not.
The Legislature approved AB 1795, authored by Assemblymember Mike Gipson and sponsored by Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara. The bill would establish the first enforceable science-based framework for investigating, restoring, and ensuring smoke-damaged homes. Smoke damage has been one of the least standardized parts of a wildfire claim: what counts as damage, who pays to find out, and when a home is safe to reoccupy have often been argued case by case. The bill would put standards around those questions.
Proposed smoke-testing and restoration standards
The bill would create a rebuttable presumption that when wildfire smoke is present in a residential property within a wildfire impact zone, the damage resulted from that wildfire. It would also require adequate repair estimates that restore damaged property to at least its pre-loss condition while meeting applicable health and safety standards.
A presumption is not a coverage grant. It would affect who has to prove what, not what a policy covers. Your home insurance policy language would still determine the limits, the exclusions, and the settlement basis for any smoke claim.
A 30-day inspection timeline
The bill would require inspection of smoke-damaged property within 30 days after the insurer receives notice of a claim or gains access to the property. Access matters: in a closed evacuation zone the clock would depend on when entry becomes possible, not only on when the claim was filed.
Additional living expense protection
Insurers would be prohibited from terminating additional living expense coverage, often shortened to ALE, for qualifying smoke damage claims until the home has been restored to pre-loss condition and cleared for human occupancy. This is the provision most likely to matter day to day, because ALE is what pays for somewhere to live while a home is unusable, and its cutoff is a common flashpoint in a long smoke claim.
It would not create ALE where a policy has none, and it would not extend a limit that has been exhausted.
Testing and sampling costs
Insurers would be responsible for necessary testing and sampling costs. Smoke testing is the step that decides whether a home is treated as damaged at all, and it has often been paid for by the homeowner who wanted the answer.
Choice of vendor or contractor
The bill would establish the survivor right to choose the vendor or contractor who performs restoration work, rather than being directed to a particular firm.
Adjuster training and certification
The bill would require training and certification for adjusters handling wildfire smoke damage claims. Standards mean little if the person applying them at your kitchen table has never been trained in them.
The study behind the bill
The Lineage Logistics warehouse fire in Boyle Heights is the study trigger. The California Department of Insurance and CalOES would evaluate insurance, public health, and emergency-response gaps exposed by that event.
What a homeowner can do while the bill is pending
- Document conditions now rather than later. The habits in our guide to wildfire claim documentation apply whether or not the bill is signed.
- Read your current ALE limit and the time cap that goes with it, since neither would be changed retroactively by a bill signed in the future.
- If your carrier has already declined to renew you, the notice rules for California nonrenewal notices are separate from this bill and apply today.
- If the admitted market is closed to your address, understand what the California FAIR Plan does and does not cover before you need it.
A bill awaiting signature is a reason to get your own file in order, not a reason to wait. The documentation that would support a presumption is the same documentation that supports a claim without one.
The Bottom Line
AB 1795 would standardize the parts of a smoke claim that are currently argued case by case: what testing is done, who pays for it, how quickly an inspection happens, who does the restoration, and how long ALE continues. None of that is in force while the bill sits with the Governor, and the deadline for that decision is September 30, 2026.
This article is for general educational purposes and is not legal advice. Claim outcomes depend on the policy language, the facts of each loss, and whether the enrolled bill is signed.