Skip to content

Bills · 2009-2010 Regular Session

SB 242

Became law Official bill text Atom feed

creating separate regulatory requirements for certain future service contracts.

  1. Introduced, completed
  2. Passes Senate, completed
  3. Passes Assembly, completed
  4. Governor signs, completed
  5. Law, completed

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

Under current law, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer

Protection regulates future service contracts, defined as contracts whose primary

purpose is to provide a customer with the right to purchase goods or services or to rent

video recordings from a contractor. Generally, future service contracts must be in

writing, may not provide the contractor more than 12 months in unearned fees, may

not contain a renewal clause, and must grant customers rights against a successor

to a contractor's interests and the right to cancel the contract within the first three

months of the contract term or within three days after the customer's first purchase

or rental worth more than $25, whichever occurs first. Also under current law, a

contractor must maintain a $25,000 bond to cover customers who lose amounts

prepaid to a contractor because the contractor has become insolvent or has ceased

to conduct business.

This bill creates a new category of future service contracts. Under the bill, these

contracts may have a term not to exceed three years, must grant the customer rights

against a successor to the contractor's interests, must permit the customer to cancel

the contract without penalty until midnight on the third day after entering into the

contract, must contain a notice of the right to cancel on a separate page, and must

permit the customer to cancel an order if the order is not delivered by the date it was

promised or to the address where the customer requested delivery. A contractor who

enters into such a contract must maintain a $250,000 bond to cover customer losses.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Darling (R) , Kreitlow (D) , Plale (D)

10 cosponsors

A. Ott (R) , Brooks (R) , Danou (D) , Fields (D) , Gunderson (R) , Lothian (R) , M. Williams (R) , Nerison (R) , Petrowski (R) , Townsend (R)

Votes

Senate: Report passage recommended by committee on Small Business, Emergency Preparedness, Technical Colleges, and Consumer Protection, Ayes 5, Noes 0

Passed 5–0 Oct 14, 2009 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Assembly: Report concurrence recommended by committee on Consumer Protection, Ayes 9, Noes 0

Passed 9–0 Jan 12, 2010 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Assembly: Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 94, Noes 2

Passed 94–2 Jan 19, 2010 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Jul 23, 2009 · Senate

    Introduced by Senators Kreitlow, Plale and Darling;Cosponsored by Representatives Fields, M. Williams, Townsend, Petrowski, Brooks, A. Ott, Nerison, Lothian, Danou and Gunderson

  2. Jul 23, 2009 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Small Business, Emergency Preparedness, Technical Colleges, and Consumer Protection

  3. Aug 18, 2009 · Senate

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Sep 2, 2009 · Senate

    Public hearing held

  5. Oct 14, 2009 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  6. Oct 14, 2009 · Senate

    Report passage recommended by committee on Small Business, Emergency Preparedness, Technical Colleges, and Consumer Protection, Ayes 5, Noes 0

  7. Oct 14, 2009 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  8. Oct 22, 2009 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 10-27-2009 by committee on Senate Organization

  9. Oct 27, 2009 · Senate

    Rules suspended

  10. Oct 27, 2009 · Senate

    Read a third time and passed

  11. Oct 27, 2009 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  12. Oct 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Received from Senate

  13. Oct 27, 2009 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Consumer Protection

  14. Oct 27, 2009 · Senate

    Read a second time

  15. Oct 27, 2009 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  16. Nov 4, 2009 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  17. Dec 16, 2009 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  18. Jan 12, 2010 · Assembly

    Report concurrence recommended by committee on Consumer Protection, Ayes 9, Noes 0

  19. Jan 12, 2010 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  20. Jan 13, 2010 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 1-19-2010 by committee on Rules

  21. Jan 19, 2010 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  22. Jan 19, 2010 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  23. Jan 19, 2010 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  24. Jan 19, 2010 · Assembly

    Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 94, Noes 2

  25. Jan 19, 2010 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  26. Jan 19, 2010 · Senate

    Received from Assembly concurred in

  27. Jan 22, 2010 · Senate

    Report correctly enrolled on 1-22-2010

  28. Feb 9, 2010 · Senate

    Presented to the Governor on 2-9-2010

  29. Feb 11, 2010 · Senate

    Report approved by the Governor on 2-11-2010. 2009 Wisconsin Act 115

  30. Feb 16, 2010 · Senate

    Published 2-25-2010