West Virginia House Bill HB3168

West Virginia 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/5/25
• Refer: 3/5/25
• Engrossed: 3/24/25
• Refer: 3/25/25

Caption

Allow customers to make changes to their accounts by phone or mail.

Summary

HB3168, titled the Rosi Act, requires businesses, corporations, organizations, and other entities that provide goods, services, or utilities to West Virginia customers to permit changes to an electronic or online account by telephone or by mail. The bill applies to account changes for goods, services, or utilities and requires that identity verification measures be used when those changes are made through phone or mail rather than online. The bill is framed as a consumer-access measure, ensuring that customers who cannot or do not wish to use online systems still have a way to manage their accounts. It specifically overrides any conflicting state law, including provisions in the state’s electronic transaction law, to the extent necessary to require these alternative account-change methods.

Impact

HB3168 would add a new article to the West Virginia Code, creating §46A-6O-1 and making noncompliance a violation of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act. That means affected businesses could face enforcement by the Attorney General for failing to allow telephone or mail account changes, while utilities would instead be enforced by the Public Service Commission. The bill would therefore expand consumer protection obligations for a broad range of service providers and create a new compliance requirement for account management practices.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill was generally well received in the House, passing 84-9. That margin indicates broad support for the idea of giving consumers non-digital options to manage accounts, likely reflecting concern for accessibility, convenience, and fairness. No committee transcript is available, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the vote suggests the measure was not highly controversial overall.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the burden the bill places on businesses and utilities to maintain phone and mail-based account-change processes, including identity verification procedures. Another possible issue is the enforcement split: most covered entities would be subject to Attorney General enforcement under the Consumer Credit and Protection Act, while utilities would fall under the Public Service Commission. The bill also expressly overrides conflicting law, which could raise questions about interaction with electronic transaction rules and existing account-security practices.