Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 36a — THE BANKING LAW OF CONNECTICUT · Chapter 669 — Regulated Activities
Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-646 (2026)

(Formerly Sec. 36-243b). Prohibited acts

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
No creditor shall use any abusive, harassing, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading representation, device or practice to collect or attempt to collect any debt.

(P.A. 77-418, S. 2.)

History: Sec. 36-243b transferred to Sec. 36a-646 in 1995.

Annotations to former section 36-243b:

Cited. 216 C. 458; 231 C. 707.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2004–2022 · leading case: Aviles v. Wayside Auto Body, Inc., 49 F. Supp. 3d 216 (D. Conn. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Aviles v. Wayside Auto Body, Inc., 49 F. Supp. 3d 216 (D. Conn. 2014). · cites it 3× “” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-646. Wells Fargo argues that they cannot be liable for plaintiffs CCPA claim arising from an alleged breach of the peace during the repossession of the Honda because Wayside was an independent contractor.”
Parola v. Citibank (South Dakota) N.A., 894 F. Supp. 2d 188 (D. Conn. 2012). · cites it 3× “Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-646 provides that “[n]o creditor shall use any abusive, harassing, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading representation, device or practice to collect or attempt to collect any debt.”
Dina v. Cuda & Assocs., 950 F. Supp. 2d 396 (D. Conn. 2013). · cites it 2× “” Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-646 (emphasis added).”
Bruce v. Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc., 308 F. Supp. 2d 72 (D. Conn. 2004). · cites it 3× “Defendant also contends that Plaintiff cannot rely on Connecticut’s Creditor’s Collection Practices Act, Conn. Gen.Stat. § 36a-646 3 (“CCPA”), to support a violation of CUTPA because Plaintiff has not alleged an “ascertainable loss” as a result of that conduct.”
Williams v. Countrywide Bank, FSB (D. Conn. 2020). · cites it 2× “, as to all Defendants; and (10) violation of the Connecticut Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“CFDCPA”), Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-646 et seq., as to all Defendants.”
Doody v. Bank of Am., N.A. (D. Conn. 2022). · cites it 2× “§ 36a-646. While the amended complaint is not a model of clarity, count 21 incorporates by reference the allegations in count 19, which include the allegation that Seterus continued to provide plaintiff with erroneous mortgage statements and mortgage payment amounts even after…”
Malick v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2d Cir. 2019). “Malick further did not establish that JPM violated the Connecticut Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-646 (“No creditor shall use any abusive, harassing, fraudulent, deceptive or misleading representation, device or practice to collect or attempt to…”
Williams v. Countrywide Bank, FSB (D. Conn. 2019). “§ 36a-646 et seq. Compl., Counts III, IV, V, VI, IX, and X.”
Cotterell v. Gen. Motors LLC (D. Conn. 2019). “§ 36a-646; § 36a-645 (defining “[c]reditor” as “any person to whom a debt is owed by a consumer debtor” and “any person to whom such debt is assigned”).”
Hagwood-EL v. Allied Interstate (D. Conn. 2020). “§ 36a-646. Defendants argue that Ascendium, ADP, and Home Depot are not debt collectors within the meaning of the FDCPA.”
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.