GOVERNOR'S VETO EXPLANATION

Pursuant to Article V, Section 6 of the Constitution of Virginia, I am vetoing House Bill 852.

The Future Services Contract Act established under this bill interferes with the right to contract in regard to various services, and is objectionable on that basis.

However, even the salutary pro-consumer intent underlying the bill is unlikely to be well served by its provisions, since the bill's very limited scope and geographic reach are likely to confound more than protect consumers.

The bill applies only to three types of "future services" contracts which encompass only a minuscule percentage of all service-related contracts. Its reach also is limited to Fairfax County. Thus, a consumer in Fairfax County who contracts for instruction in martial arts would be afforded the protections of this act, but a consumer of identical services a few miles down the road in another jurisdiction would be outside the bill's protections. Indeed, a Fairfax County neighbor who contracted for instruction in the sport of golf rather than the art of self-defense would not be covered by this legislation.

Such fine line-drawing based on subject matter and geography will make little sense to ordinary consumers and poses a treacherous trap for the unwary. Those consumers not well schooled in the details of this legislation -- which, of course, is virtually all consumers -- are likely to be baffled by the contrasting legal rights of persons who seem, for all relevant purposes, to be similarly situated.

In short, in an effort to protect a discrete group of consumers, this legislation threatens to confuse and mislead many more. Accordingly, I am disapproving the bill.