LANSING – With legislation to revive the Consumer Protection Act seeing no movement in the Senate, Democrats announced Monday that they planned to start the action in the House. Supporters of the new legislation said a 1999 Supreme Court ruling essentially gutted the law and the goal of the bill is to overturn that ruling.
“The 1999 ruling eliminated consumer protection,” said Rep. Robert Jones (D-Kalamazoo), sponsor of the House version of the proposal. “Over the years, Michigan has become a buyer-beware state.”
The Supreme Court ruled that the law as worded did not apply to businesses that are licensed or regulated by the state or federal government.
Jones acknowledged that opponents would paint the proposal as anti-business, but he said the change would actually benefit business. “Anyone who says lying and cheating are good for business, I don’t know where they’re doing business, but we don’t want them doing business in Michigan,” he said.
He said the unscrupulous businesses not only take money from customers, but they also take it from legitimate businesses that otherwise might have served those customers.
And Shad Ferrell of Rochester Hills, who is currently suing a contractor for what he said was an improper and ineffective roof repair, said he would have avoided court had he been able to use the Consumer Protection Act. He said he had gotten the contractor to participate in arbitration, but had not been able to enforce the resulting award.
Ferrell’s attorney said prosecuting the case will cost as much or more than the $4,500 he is trying to recover for the roof repair.
Sen. Gretchen Whitmer (D-East Lansing), sponsor of the measure in the Senate, said with the economy as it is, it is important to protect residents’ pocketbooks. “In this economic crisis perhaps now more than ever it’s imperative that we protect the victims,” she said. “And the victims are consumers and honest businesses.”
Though her own bill has been stalled in the Senate for some time, Whitmer said House action could break that loose. “The odds in the Senate are pretty good, especially if it comes out of the House with great gusto,” she said. “These are common-sense reforms.”
Whitmer noted that the act had bipartisan support when it was approved in 1976.
But Whitmer, a candidate for attorney general, apparently won no support from Senate Republican leadership with her argument that all candidates for attorney general should join her is supporting the proposal. That’s a not-so-subtle dig at Senate Majority Leader Mike Bishop (R-Rochester), who’s also running for attorney general.
“We believe it’s really not appropriate for her to be trying to run her attorney general campaign from the Senate floor,” said John Truscott, spokesperson for Bishop’s attorney general campaign. “Senator Bishop will not be bullied into taking up legislation that is basically a full employment act for trial lawyers.”
Of Ferrell’s case, Truscott said the better solution might be to enact limits on attorney fees.m.
“There are far more important issues the Legislature is dealing with,” he said.
This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com
a>>
