Section 17536 was passed in September 1965. Prior to that enactment, a company deceiving customers would face only the possibility of an injunction preventing it from repeating the deception. Now, such companies also face possible penalties of up to $2,500 for each customer to whom untrue or misleading statements have been made. Among the advantages of the new law is the provision that a single action can be brought against a company and all of its personnel even in those cases where evidence against only one staff member is present. In addition, a civil action can be brought with much less evidence in the hands of a prosecuting agency than in a criminal case. Also, the courts are more likely to give a large civil penalty than to give a heavy criminal penalty in these cases, although both civil and criminal proceedings can be brought against the same offender. A victim is not necessary to a successful civil prosecution since the unlawful or unfair act itself triggers the violation and the susceptibility to penalties. Furthermore, the court can require the defendants to make various types of records available to law enforcement agencies for a certain period of years, or permanently, so that the agency can easily determine whether a violation of an injunction has occurred. In civil cases, the burden of proof (a preponderance of the evidence) is much less than that found in criminal cases (beyond a reasonable doubt); and a temporary restraining order without a hearing can be issued upon the filing of adequate declarations. Also, a preliminary injunction can be issued after a hearing if such declarations have been filed. Finally, the 3-year statute of limitations exceeds that for criminal prosecutions, and the terms of a civil injunction can be individualized to fit the particular case. A list of the types of cases brought under civil proceedings and footnotes are included.