Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 42 — BUSINESS, SELLING, TRADING AND COLLECTION PRACTICES · Chapter 735a — Unfair Trade Practices

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110q

Service contract agreements. Fee disclosure required

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) For the purposes of this section: (1) “Service contractor” means a person engaged in the business of repairing, overhauling, adjusting, assembling or disassembling consumer goods; (2) “person” means a natural person, corporation, limited liability company, trust, partnership, incorporated or unincorporated association, and any other legal entity; (3) “consumer goods” means any article purchased, leased or rented primarily for personal, family or commercial purpose; and (4) “service charge” means the fee charged by the service contractor to respond to the request for services.

(b) It shall be an unfair or deceptive trade practice, in violation of this chapter, for any service contractor to fail to disclose to a prospective customer, at the time the prospective customer makes initial contact by any means with the service contractor, that a service call made by the service contractor to the home or business of the prospective customer will require the payment by the prospective customer to the service contractor of separate and distinct fees for the following, if such is the case: (1) Service charge, and (2) labor charge.

(P.A. 77-464, S. 1, 2; P.A. 95-79, S. 155, 189; P.A. 10-32, S. 125.)

History: P.A. 95-79 redefined “person” to include a limited liability company, effective May 31, 1995; P.A. 10-32 made technical changes, effective May 10, 2010.

Cited. 186 C. 507.

Cited. 24 CA 85; 41 CA 754.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1989–2001 · leading case: Ganim v. Smith & Wesson Corp.
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ganim v. Smith & Wesson Corp. (2001) conn · cites it 2× “” General Statutes § 42-110q provides: “Service contract agreements.”
Clement v. American Honda Finance Corp. (1997) ctd · cites it 2× “, Conn. Gen.Stat. § 42-110q; Fla. Stat. § 501.”
Hernandez v. Monterey Village Associates Ltd. Partnership (1989) connappct “The plaintiffs, three tenants residing in Monterey Village, an apartment complex in Norwalk, brought a class action under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes § 42-110a through § 42-110q, on behalf of some 150 tenant families residing at the…”
Martin v. Samulis (1991) connappct · cites it 2× “Thus, the jury only awarded a total of $27,501 of a total judgment of $41,780, which included attorney’s fees and costs of $582 also set by the trial court. The jury’s verdicts can hardly be considered to “shock the conscience” under our standards of law.”
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.