- Middleton v. GUARANTEED RATE, INC., No. 2: 15-cv-00943-RCJ-GWF (D. Nev. June 25, 2015).
- Middleton v. GUARANTEED RATE, INC., No. 2: 15-cv-00943-RCJ-GWF (D. Nev. Nov. 9, 2015).
Middletons sued creditors for TILA rescission of a purchase money loan. They had given notice of rescission 4 days before the statue of repose tolled, and sued 6 days after it tolled. They did not tender, but the court acknowledged that it had the authority under TILA to require tender in order to unwind the loan.
The court opined that TILA rescission applies only to loans for property that does not become the security for purchasing it. The court denied restitution, fees, and costs to the borrower, and granted the creditors’ motion to dismiss. The court affirmed its decision when the borrower moved to reconsider.
These borrowers must have clung onto Neil Garfield’s malarkey suggesting that every home loan borrower send a notice of rescission and enforce it through a lawsuit. The Middletons wasted a bunch of money filing this ridiculously frivolous lawsuit, and they should sue the attorney who advised them to do it.
Another Garfield Clingon bites the dust.
To make matters worse, the foolish family never bothered hiring a competent professional to examine her loan-related documents. Had they done that, they probably would have learned of numerous legitimate causes of action against those who injured them, such as appraisal fraud and mortgage fraud, for which they might have won huge punitive damages.
If you find yourself in a situation like the Middletons’, contact me for more info on a path to salvation. 727 669 5511.