As used in sections
36a-645 to
36a-647, inclusive, unless the context otherwise requires:
(1) “Consumer debtor” means any natural person residing in this state who owes a debt to a creditor.
(2) “Creditor” means (A) any person to whom a debt is owed by a consumer debtor and such debt results from a transaction occurring in the ordinary course of such person's business, or (B) any person to whom such debt is assigned. “Creditor” shall not include a consumer collection agency, as defined in section 36a-800, or any department or agency of the United States, this state, any other state, or any political subdivision thereof.
(3) “Debt” means an obligation or alleged obligation arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, goods or services which are the subject of the transaction are for personal, family or household purposes, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment.
(P.A. 77-418, S. 1; 77-614, S. 161, 587, 610; P.A. 78-303, S. 85, 136; P.A. 80-482, S. 252, 345, 348; P.A. 87-9, S. 2, 3; P.A. 91-357, S. 53, 78; P.A. 92-12, S. 70; P.A. 94-122, S. 293, 340; P.A. 97-207, S. 1; P.A. 04-69, S. 23; P.A. 05-288, S. 208.)
History: P.A. 77-614 and P.A. 78-303 replaced bank commissioner with banking commissioner and made banking department a division within the department of business regulation, effective January 1, 1979; P.A. 80-482 restored banking division as independent department with commissioner as its head and abolished the department of business regulation, thereby allowing revision of commissioner's title to omit reference to that department; (Revisor's note: Pursuant to P.A. 87-9 “banking commissioner” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “commissioner of banking”); P.A. 91-357 made a technical change in Subsec. (c); P.A. 92-12 redesignated Subdivs.; P.A. 94-122 deleted the definitions of “person” and “commissioner” and alphabetized the remaining definitions, effective January 1, 1995; Sec. 36-243a transferred to Sec. 36a-645 in 1995; P.A. 97-207 redefined “consumer debtor”, “creditor” and “debt”, and deleted definition of “credit”; P.A. 04-69 amended Subdiv. (2) to insert clause (i) and (ii) designators and add “any person to whom such debt is assigned” as clause (ii); P.A. 05-288 made technical changes in Subdiv. (2), effective July 13, 2005.
Annotation to former section 36-243a:
Cited. 231 C. 707.
Notes of Decisions
Patrowicz v. Transamerica HomeFirst, Inc., 359 F. Supp. 2d 140 (D. Conn. 2005).
· cites it 4× “00 for a reconveyance preparation fee that was unauthorized by the mortgage agreement in violation of Connecticut’s Creditors’ Collection Act, Conn. Gen.Stat. § 36a-645 to -647, and CUTPA (Complaint, Third Count ¶ 32, attached as Ex.”
Heim v. California Fed. Bank, 828 A.2d 129 (Conn. App. Ct. 2003).
· cites it 2× “1996), the District Court addressed whether General Statutes §§ 36a-645, 36a-646 and 36a-347 mirrored the act.”
Musso v. Seiders, 194 F.R.D. 43 (D. Conn. 1999).
· cites it 2× “and the Creditors’ Collection Practices Act, Conn. Gen.Stat. § 36a-645 et seq. II. DISCUSSION The defendant raises two arguments in his motion.”
Aviles v. Wayside Auto Body, Inc., 49 F. Supp. 3d 216 (D. Conn. 2014).
“Wells Fargo’s challenge to Soto’s standing under the CCPA ignores the text of the section that creates the right of action, which provides that: “A creditor, as defined in section 36a-645, who uses any abusive, harassing, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading representation,…”
Pabon v. Recko, 122 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D. Conn. 2000).
· cites it 4× “(“FDCPA”); the Connecticut Creditors’ Collection Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat. §§ 36a-645 et seq. (“CCPA”); the Connecticut Consumer Collection Agency Act, Conn.”
Parola v. Citibank (South Dakota) N.A., 894 F. Supp. 2d 188 (D. Conn. 2012).
· cites it 2× “In the amended complaint, Parola asserts state law causes of action for breach of contract, fraud, violations of Connecticut’s Creditor Collection Practices Act (“CCPA”), Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 36a-645 et Seq., and violations of Connecticut’s Unfair Trade Practices Act (“CUTPA”)…”
Tragianese v. Blackmon, 993 F. Supp. 96 (D. Conn. 1997).
· cites it 2× “CUTPA The plaintiff also moves for partial summary judgment on the second count of the complaint, wherein she claims that the defendant violated CUTPA based on his alleged violations of the Creditor’s Collection Practices Act (“CCPA”), Conn.Gen.Stat. § 36a-645, et seq., and the…”
Jones v. Midland Funding, LLC, 755 F. Supp. 2d 393 (D. Conn. 2010).
“§§ 36a-645, et seq. (“CCPA”) and the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (“CUTPA”), Conn.”
21st Century North Am. Ins. Co. v. Perez, 173 A.3d 64 (Conn. App. Ct. 2017).
· cites it 2× “10 III In his appellate brief, the administrator attempts to raise what he characterizes as "alternative grounds" of affirmance, arguing that the cancellation notice violates the Connecticut Unfair Insurance Practices Act (CUIPA), General Statutes § 38a-815 et seq.”
Bruce v. Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc., 308 F. Supp. 2d 72 (D. Conn. 2004).
· cites it 2× “economic loss as a result of any alleged violation of public policy embodied in the Connecticut Creditors’ Collection Practices Act, Conn. Gen.Stat. §§ 36a-645, et seq. Defendant argues that “[t]he factual allegations of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint do nothing more than…”
Cerrato v. Peter T. Roach & Assocs., P.C., 51 Misc. 3d 39 (N.Y. App. Term. 2016).
· cites it 3× “In an action she brought against defendant in Connecticut, plaintiff claimed that defendant was a “creditor” within the meaning of the Connecticut Banking Law (see Conn Gen Stat Ann § 36a-645 [2]), that defendant had failed to comply with plaintiff’s demand that it cease and…”
— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-645(2) — 1 case
Pabon v. Recko, 122 F. Supp. 2d 311 (D. Conn. 2000).
“(“FDCPA”); the Connecticut Creditors’ Collection Practices Act, Conn.Gen.Stat. §§ 36a-645 et seq. (“CCPA”); the Connecticut Consumer Collection Agency Act, Conn.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.