CO SB157

Amends the Colorado Consumer Protection Act to make it easier for certain vulnerable populations—seniors (60+), active duty military, veterans, Gold Star spouses, people with disabilities, and pregnant individuals—to prove a deceptive trade practice "significantly impacts the public" by showing the practice violated existing law or injured/could injure others

Addresses the 1998 Colorado Supreme Court ruling in Hall v. Walter that required plaintiffs to prove "significant public impact," a burden the legislature finds is not in the original statute's text and exists in only 7 states nationwide

Clarifies that breach of contract claims alone, negligence claims alone, or professional services claims (providing advice/judgment/opinion) do not constitute deceptive trade practices without additional deceptive conduct

Preserves deceptive trade practice claims against professionals when there is express misrepresentation of material fact, intentional failure to disclose known information to induce a transaction, conduct beyond advice-giving, or breach of express warranty

Colorado ranks 15th nationally in per-capita consumer fraud reports, above the national average