Archives by Tag ' 15 USC §1635 '
major hat-tip to Charles Cox in Nevada. Federal Judge’s response to chicken little argument: [2] RMS argues that enforcing the statute as written would upend the mortgage industry. As noted, lending institutions faced with a notice of rescission have many options to protect their interests and ensure that the borrower is able to tender the […]
The simple answer is that the debt, or the claim on the debt, ends 20 days after notice of rescission. Otherwise the statute 15 U.S.C. §1635 and SCOTUS would have had no meaning when it says that the rescission is effective by operation of law at the time the notice is delivered. It provides a […]
If you slow down and logically go through the statute and the Jesinoski decision it is easy to analyze the situation and come to a correct conclusion. This is not argument of law, it is the application of logic. SCOTUS and the statute state unequivocally that the rescission is effective WHEN it is mailed, by […]
I have been getting the same questions from multiple attorneys and homeowners. One of them is preparing a brief to the U.S. Supreme Court on rescission, but is wondering, as things stand whether she has any right to sue for damages. When our team prepares a complaint or other pleading for a lawyer or homeowner […]
Lecturing Courts on Their Duty to Comply with SCOTUS Decisions Thursdays LIVE! Click in to the The Neil Garfield Show Or call in at (347) 850-1260, 6pm Eastern Thursdays While the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) unanimously (9-0) put to bed all of the arguments against the effectiveness of a notice of rescission under 15 […]
10 years ago, seeing where the foreclosure wave was going and watching court cases, I said on these pages that the only solution to these foreclosures is Mandamus. First to stop judges from applying legal PRESUMPTIONS and second to stop judges from ignoring TILA rescission. Now someone has done it and others might follow suit, […]
50 years ago Congress decided to slap punitive measures on lenders who ignore or attempt to go around (table-funded loans) existing laws on required disclosures — instead of creating a super agency that would review every loan closing before it could be consummated. So it made the punishment so severe that only the stupidest lenders […]
The menu of items that are due to the borrower as a condition precedent to making a claim for repayment is expansive and frankly in many cases is equivalent or nearly equivalent to the total amount of the principal claimed as loan repayment. Get a consult! 202-838-6345 https://www.vcita.com/v/lendinglies to schedule CONSULT, leave message or make payments. […]
The “free house” mythology will have become reality. That is what happens when you break the laws governing deceptive and predatory lending. … for those who don’t give up, the reward is substantial when TILA rescission is reluctantly recognized by the Courts as effective upon mailing. Get a consult! 202-838-6345 CALL NOW FOR TONIGHT’S SMALL […]
1sT Appellate District US Bank v Naifeh: “… we conclude that a borrower may rescind the loan transaction under TILA without filing a lawsuit, but when the rescission is challenged in litigation, the court has authority to decide whether the rescission notice is timely and whether the the procedure set forth in the TILA (sic) […]
Search Our Blog
Categories
Contact Our National Headquarters Phone: 844-583-5339
Connect with us
Contact Our National Headquarters
- 844-583-5339
- Available 24/7
-
200 S. Andrews Ave. Ste. 604
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301