Connecticut General Statutes

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-647 (2026)

(Formerly Sec. 36-243c). Enforcement powers of commissioner. Regulations

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The commissioner may adopt such regulations in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54 as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of sections 36a-645 to 36a-647, inclusive, including, but not limited to, specifying those acts which are deemed to be in violation of section 36a-646.

(b) The commissioner may receive and investigate complaints and may receive assurances of voluntary compliance with the provisions of sections 36a-645 to 36a-647, inclusive, or forward such complaints to the appropriate prosecuting officials at the commissioner's discretion. No action taken by the commissioner against a creditor in accordance with section 36a-50 relieves the creditor from civil liability.

(c) Whenever the commissioner has reason to believe that any person has violated, is violating or is about to violate any provision of sections 36a-645 to 36a-647, inclusive, or any regulation adopted under this section, the commissioner may take action against such person in accordance with sections 36a-50 and 36a-52.

(d) Nothing contained in sections 36a-645 to 36a-647, inclusive, shall be construed as a limitation upon the power or authority of the state, the Attorney General or the commissioner to seek administrative, legal or equitable relief as provided by other statutes or at common law.

(P.A. 77-418, S. 3; P.A. 82-174, S. 3, 14; P.A. 88-230, S. 1, 12; P.A. 90-98, S. 1, 2; P.A. 93-142, S. 4, 7, 8; P.A. 94-122, S. 294, 340; P.A. 09-208, S. 22.)

History: P.A. 82-174 amended Subsec. (b) by authorizing the commissioner to issue, after notice, cease and desist orders, unless a hearing is requested, and authorizing him to bring an action to enforce any such order; P.A. 88-230 replaced “judicial district of Hartford-New Britain” with “judicial district of Hartford”, effective September 1, 1991; P.A. 90-98 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1991, to September 1, 1993; P.A. 93-142 changed the effective date of P.A. 88-230 from September 1, 1993, to September 1, 1996, effective June 14, 1993; P.A. 94-122 made technical changes, effective January 1, 1995; Sec. 36-243c transferred to Sec. 36a-647 in 1995; P.A. 09-208 amended Subsec. (c) to add reference to Sec. 36a-52.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)

(Return to
List of Chapters)

(Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1996–2014 · leading case: Blumenthal v. Barnes, 804 A.2d 152 (Conn. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Blumenthal v. Barnes, 804 A.2d 152 (Conn. 2002). · cites it 2× “” General Statutes § 21a-225; accord General Statutes §§ 36a-647 (d), 42-110m (b), 42-150, 47-112 and 47a-21 (Z).”

Krutchkoff v. Fleet Bank, N.A., 960 F. Supp. 541 (D. Conn. 1996). · cites it 4× “Primarily, Krutchkoff alleges that the bank failed to comply with what now are titled Conn. Gen.Stat. § 36a-647, and Conn. Agencies Regs.”

Aviles v. Wayside Auto Body, Inc., 49 F. Supp. 3d 216 (D. Conn. 2014). “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, device or practice to collect…”

Parola v. Citibank (South Dakota) N.A., 894 F. Supp. 2d 188 (D. Conn. 2012). · cites it 2× “July 14, 2011) (quoting Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-647(a)). Parola alleges that Citibank violated five regulations promulgated under the CCPA which the Court will examine in turn.”

— Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-647(a) — 1 case

Parola v. Citibank (South Dakota) N.A., 894 F. Supp. 2d 188 (D. Conn. 2012). “July 14, 2011) (quoting Conn. Gen. Stat. § 36a-647(a)). Parola alleges that Citibank violated five regulations promulgated under the CCPA which the Court will examine in turn.”

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.