[G]ov. Phil Scott has allowed a consumer protection bill,, opposed by some businesses to become law without his signature.
Scott, who last year vetoed a similar bill over concerns it would damage Vermont’s outdoor recreation industry by opening it up to frivolous lawsuits, said this week that lawmakers in the House and the Senate had addressed most of his concerns with the legislation this session.
The bill, S.18, which prohibits companies from using legal terms that may unfairly exempt them from liability, received pushback from AT&T, other telecommunication companies and members of the outdoor recreation industry during the legislative session.
The argument from industry representatives was that the bill would open up companies to liability lawsuits without customers needing to prove damage, and that consumers would have Vermont’s six-year statute of limitations under which to make a claim.
Proponents of the legislation say it is an important step forward to make sure Vermonters are not signing away basic individual rights when they are forced to agree to long complicated contracts written by industry lawyers.
Vermont’s outdoor recreation sector told lawmakers it could not support the bill without language that would provide it an exemption.
Lawmakers, in an effort to win Scott’s support for the legislation, decided to carve out an exemption for all recreation and not just the outdoor industry.
Sen. Dick Sears, D-Bennington, one of the bill’s sponsors, said he was glad to see the measure become law and that “in the age of click and accept,” the new statute will go a long way in curbing contract practices commonly used by the telecommunications and credit card industry.
“I’m happy he allowed it to become law,” Sears said. “Once we exempted the entire recreation industry, not just the outdoor industry, a lot of the opposition went away with the governor and he allowed it to become law.”
Though the governor allowed the bill to become law, it did not receive his full support. In a letter explaining his decision, Scott said he believed the legislation is “misleading and confusing to consumers.”
“I can now support the consumer protection goals of the bill,” the governor said. “However, I cannot sign it because, in my view, it is technically flawed.”
Scott said he is worried the legislation, which goes into effect Oct. 1, 2020, may run afoul of federal statutes and may be unenforceable.
Lobbyists for AT&T made a similar argument to lawmakers during the session, saying that exempting certain industries but not others could potentially violate the U.S. Constitution.
Charles Martin, director of government affairs for the Vermont Chamber of Commerce, said he is disappointed with the governor’s decision to let the bill become law and said it will open Vermont businesses up to more lawsuits.
“We’re upset that it will become law because it is somewhat duplicative,” Martin said. “I think Vermont courts have already shown they do a reasonable job of dealing with contract decisions and this may do more to muddy waters that are already clear.”
However, Sen. Chris Pearson, P/D-Chittenden, the legislation’s lead sponsor, said though he is happy the governor decided to allow the measure become law, pushback from business makes him think this should be the first step in more consumer protections.
“Whether it is telecoms or the car rental industry, they are not pleased to even see this small step. That makes me think we are on to something,” Pearson said.
“I see this is as a meaningful first step. It does not achieve my goal of protecting Vermonters from abusive contracts but it does in that it puts the corporate world on notice that they will not be allowed to manipulate our basic rights through contracts,” he added.
