HOUSE BILL REPORT

HB 1178

BYRepresentatives Vekich, Patrick, Cole and Wang; by request of Attorney General

Regulating sales of water treatment devices.

House Committe on Commerce & Labor

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendment.  (10)

      Signed by Representatives Vekich, Chair; Cole, Vice Chair; Patrick, Ranking Republican Member; Jones, R. King, Leonard, Prentice, C. Smith, Walker and Wolfe.

House Staff:Gwen Griffin (786-7623) and Joan Elgee (786-7166)

AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE & LABOR JANUARY 20, 1989

BACKGROUND:

The state does not currently regulate the sale of water treatment devices.  Water treatment devices are installed to filter contaminants from drinking water.  The devices are usually installed either at the tap to filter drinking water or elsewhere in the home to filter all water used.  These filters have been sold for between $100 and $3,000 dollars.

The attorney general has found unfair and deceptive practices by some sellers of water treatment devices, including the use of false and misleading statements.  Further, the business practices of certain water treatment companies may work financial hardship upon some consumers because the current law allows liens on real property to secure financing for water treatment devices.

SUMMARY:

BILL AS AMENDED:  Unfair advertising, sales, and business practices relating to the sale of water treatment devices are prohibited. Water treatment device does not include a product for which the only claim made is that it will soften water.  Persons selling, leasing, or renting water treatment devices are prohibited from making any claim regarding the presence of contaminants in a consumer's water unless the claim is based on scientifically or medically accepted factual data and the consumer receives a written summary of the data.  Test results of a consumer's water quality must be disclosed to the consumer.  Other prohibited practices are also specified.

Liens on real property to secure financing for water treatment devices are prohibited.

A violation of these provisions constitutes a consumer protection act violation.

AMENDED BILL COMPARED TO ORIGINAL:  The definition of "water treatment device" is modified to exclude a product for which the only claim made is that it will soften the consumer's water.

Fiscal Note:      Requested January 16, 1989.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    Karl Boettner, Office of the Attorney General; Joy Eveland, consumer; John Eveland, consumer; and John C. Kirner, Tacoma City Water.

House Committee - Testified Against:      John Brown, Amway Corporation; Evelyn Jarvis-Ferris, Shaklee Corporation; Jan Gee, Washington Retail Association.

House Committee - Testimony For:    Consumers need protection from scare tactics, groundless attacks on public water supplies and other unfair sales practices used by sellers of water treatment devices.  Consumers need truthful information about the performance of a water treatment device and written evidence supporting any claims about contaminants and a consumer's water quality to make informed decisions.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      The current consumer protection laws are sufficient.  Any regulation of water treatment devices should not include water softeners.  Requiring a written statement about a consumer's water quality is unnecessary and burdensome.