The 10% Cash Bail Comparison
Montgomery County sets bail at $30,000 for a defendant charged with theft. The family has $3,000 cash. A bail bondsman, Priya, explains that her surety bond would cost a 10% premium-$3,000-which is nonrefundable. The court also permits a 10% cash bail option: the family could deposit $3,000 with the court, and the court would return it after the case, less any authorized fee, if the defendant appears. The family asks Priya which is better. Priya knows the defendant has missed one prior court date in another county and has a new job. She wants the $3,000 premium. She tells the family the court keeps the cash deposit 'no matter what' and that only a bondsman can prevent a warrant. The family is about to sign. Priya has not given them a written premium quote or indemnitor agreement.
1. Was Priya's statement accurate and ethical? Explain.
Read the worked answer
No. Priya misrepresented the court's 10% cash bail option. Under that option the family deposits $3,000 with the court, and if the defendant appears as required, the court returns the deposit after deducting any authorized fee. Saying the court keeps the money 'no matter what' is false and is designed to steer the family toward the surety bond. Saying that only a bondsman can prevent a warrant is also misleading; the court controls warrants, and a bondsman cannot guarantee that no warrant will issue. Priya's conduct violates the producer duty of honesty and fair dealing, and it may also violate Maryland insurance law on misrepresentation and rebating-adjacent inducements. Her desire for the premium does not justify misleading the family. She should correct the statement before any signature and give a written comparison.
2. Compare the two options factually for this family.
Read the worked answer
Under the 10% cash bail option, the family pays $3,000 to the court. If the defendant appears, the court returns the deposit less any authorized fee. If the defendant fails to appear, the court may forfeit the deposit and issue a warrant. Under the surety bond, the family pays Priya a $3,000 premium that is earned when the bond is posted and is not refunded if the defendant appears. In exchange, Priya's surety posts the full $30,000 bond, and Priya has an incentive and a contractual right to monitor the defendant and help produce him if he fails to appear. The family also signs an indemnity agreement, so it may owe the surety for losses caused by a failure to appear. The family must weigh refundability against the monitoring and the indemnity obligation. Priya should present both options in writing, without pressure.
3. What should Priya do before accepting the case?
Read the worked answer
Priya should correct her misstatement, provide a written premium quote and a written explanation of the court's 10% cash bail option, and give the family time to decide. She should disclose that the $3,000 premium is nonrefundable when the bond is posted, that the family will sign an indemnity agreement, and that the surety may pursue the family if the defendant fails to appear. She should evaluate the prior failure to appear under her surety's underwriting guidelines and obtain any required exception. She should document the defendant's new job, the prior FTA, and the family's ability to indemnify. If she writes the bond, she must use the lawful 10% premium, provide receipts and copies of all documents, and avoid any statement that guarantees the defendant will not be arrested or that the court will never keep cash bail. If she cannot meet those conditions, she should decline.