DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY v. Gardner, 2015 PA Super 219 – Pa: Superior Court 2015
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5819170402171567967
In this TILA rescission appeal the court explained exactly why the borrower must tender in order to complete the rescission, and why the court has the power to rearrange the process, including the tender and lien removal sequence and mechanism. The court also explained the difference between old money and new money tender. And, most importantly the court explained that it can relieve the borrower of the obligation to tender ONLY in the case of creditor cheating or deceit.
“However, those cases relieving the borrower of his or her tender obligation, resulting in a forfeiture by the lender, are limited to “situations where creditors have tried to deceive or cheat the consumer.”/In re Williams,/291 B.R. 636, 655 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2003) (quoting/Michel v. Beneficial Consumer Discount Co.,/140 B.R. 92, 101 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 1992)) (declining to hold that the borrower “should be relieved of her `tender obligation’” under TILA even though it adopted the minority view that termination of the lender’s security interest could not be conditioned upon tender).”
“We hold that, with this absence of any proof of an intent by Deutsche Bank or any of its predecessors to deceive or cheat Gardner, the trial court abused its discretion in ruling that rescission was appropriate, and in ordering the termination of Deutsche Bank’s security interest obtained in the 2005 refinance transaction, without also requiring Gardner to fulfill his tender obligation.”
I rightly point out that the borrower’s failure to find and lodge cheating/deceit causes of action against the lender team, such as appraisal or loan application fraud, constituted a COLOSSAL error that COST the borrower a LOT OF MONEY.
This of course vindicates my OFTEN REPEATED assertion that all home loan borrowers should purchase a COMPREHENSIVE MORTGAGE EXAMINATION from a COMPETENT PROFESSIONAL… BEFORE seeking a rescission or defending against a foreclosure attack.
People interested in much more info can call me at 727 669 5511, because I know Neil Garfield cannot or will not give it to them.
LivingLiesTheTruth 
“BEFORE” is the key word. Neil Garfield caters to the “Let’s paddle upstream AFTER the sky falls on my head and hope for the best” kind of people.
To this day, and after 6 years of telling them, people still don’t get it: in all recorded history, the best defense has always been… a good offense. Don’t wait for the bank to attack. Don’t even wait until you get in trouble to study your documents and prepare to defend. At the first hint that you may get in trouble, be proactive. Just in case.
It cost a lot more to defend the undefensible (you stopped paying first: you breached the contract first) than it does to attack (bank breached first… hard to overcome and try and foreclose after the fact!)
LikeLike