Cassino's Complaint to Enforce TILA Rescission
RESEARCH AND ADD:
Please review and implement the guidelines from Administrative Procedures Act found at Title 5 USC
Banks are well aware of the fact that TILA guidelines were not properly followed in 99.9% of the loans originated after 1964.
Very few people asked for and received a Deposit slip from the Bank when the title company deposited their note (SECURITY)
Most all the deposit confirmation TRANSACTION RECEIPT 's are found within the Collaterral Jacket at every Title Company .
You get one (TRANSACTION RECEPT) every time you go to the bank and make a deposit
If you did not receive a TRANSACTION RECEIPT after you signed the Promissory NOTE ( SECURITY) , there may be a Failure of full disclosure under TILA and the State bank Regulations where you inhabit a dwelling.
Always remember the Three year Statute of Limitations on Rescission only begins to run, . . . . AFTER full disclosure has been made.
See your state BANK codes and their implementing REGULATIONS to support the previous statement .
NOTE: This is a rough draft as of Friday 7/31/2015 will be updated after research using WestlawNext at Sturm Law library http://www.law.du.edu/index.php/library/about-the-library/hours#restricted and LoisLaw with rough draft for attorney review completion 6/29-30/2015.
All 3 Exhibits are included in the 7 page complaint and are also on the home page which also explains timeline of this case.
Please review and implement the guidelines from Administrative Procedures Act found at Title 5 USC
Banks are well aware of the fact that TILA guidelines were not properly followed in 99.9% of the loans originated after 1964.
Very few people asked for and received a Deposit slip from the Bank when the title company deposited their note (SECURITY)
Most all the deposit confirmation TRANSACTION RECEIPT 's are found within the Collaterral Jacket at every Title Company .
You get one (TRANSACTION RECEPT) every time you go to the bank and make a deposit
If you did not receive a TRANSACTION RECEIPT after you signed the Promissory NOTE ( SECURITY) , there may be a Failure of full disclosure under TILA and the State bank Regulations where you inhabit a dwelling.
Always remember the Three year Statute of Limitations on Rescission only begins to run, . . . . AFTER full disclosure has been made.
See your state BANK codes and their implementing REGULATIONS to support the previous statement .
NOTE: This is a rough draft as of Friday 7/31/2015 will be updated after research using WestlawNext at Sturm Law library http://www.law.du.edu/index.php/library/about-the-library/hours#restricted and LoisLaw with rough draft for attorney review completion 6/29-30/2015.
All 3 Exhibits are included in the 7 page complaint and are also on the home page which also explains timeline of this case.
NOTE: The legal doctrine called equitable tolling could suspend the start of the running of the statute of limitations for TILA rescission and TILA claims. “The equitable tolling principles are to be read into every Federal Statute of Limitations unless Congress expressly provides to the contrary in clear and unambiguous language, see: Rotella v. Wood 528, 549, 560-61,120 S. Ct. 1075, 145 L. Ed. 2d 1047(2000). Since TILA does not evidence a contrary Congressional intent, it’s statute of limitations must be read to be subject to equitable tolling, particularly since the Act is to be construed liberally in favor of consumers.”
NOTE: it is not finally decided on whether best to file in federal court or state court?
? Maybe add as 2nd cause of action Bank of America Hit with FDCPA Damages PLUS PUNITIVE Damages $100,000 Posted on July 8, 2015 by Neil Garfield
NOTE: it is not finally decided on whether best to file in federal court or state court?
? Maybe add as 2nd cause of action Bank of America Hit with FDCPA Damages PLUS PUNITIVE Damages $100,000 Posted on July 8, 2015 by Neil Garfield
add as of Friday 5/15 to the complaint above this cite when and if needed (hats off to James Macklin who sent me (Neil Garfield) this email):
Hang on to your hats fella’s…in Sargis’ ruling … back in 2012…he confirms the equitable tolling principles of TILA as I had argued…just saw this again while reviewing…to wit:
“The Ninth Circuit applies equitable tolling to TILA’s … statute of limitations (King v. California, 784 F.2d 910, 914 (9th Cir. 1986).
“Equitable Tolling is applied to effectuate the congressional intent of TILA.”, Id.
“Courts have construed TILA as a remedial statute, interpreting it liberally for the consumer.” (Id. Citing Riggs v. Gov’t Emps. Fin. Corp., 623 F.2d 68, 70-71 (9th Cir. 1980).
Specifically the 9th Circuit held: “[T]he limitations period in section 1640(e) runs from the date of consummation of the transaction but that the doctrine of equitable tolling may, in appropriate circumstances, suspend the limitations period until the borrower discovers or had the reasonable to discover the fraud or non-disclosures that form the basis of the TILA action.”
Gentlemen…I give you proof positive that the statute tolls and the fact that the term “consummation” is also subject to broad interpretation as we know…the loan could not have consummated if what we allege is found to be true… However, the non-disclosures language used by the 9th Circuit gives rise to possible myriad rescissions upon discovery of those non-disclosures…
James L. Macklin, Managing Director
Secure Document Research(Paralegal Services/Legal Project Management)
530-888-9600
Hang on to your hats fella’s…in Sargis’ ruling … back in 2012…he confirms the equitable tolling principles of TILA as I had argued…just saw this again while reviewing…to wit:
“The Ninth Circuit applies equitable tolling to TILA’s … statute of limitations (King v. California, 784 F.2d 910, 914 (9th Cir. 1986).
“Equitable Tolling is applied to effectuate the congressional intent of TILA.”, Id.
“Courts have construed TILA as a remedial statute, interpreting it liberally for the consumer.” (Id. Citing Riggs v. Gov’t Emps. Fin. Corp., 623 F.2d 68, 70-71 (9th Cir. 1980).
Specifically the 9th Circuit held: “[T]he limitations period in section 1640(e) runs from the date of consummation of the transaction but that the doctrine of equitable tolling may, in appropriate circumstances, suspend the limitations period until the borrower discovers or had the reasonable to discover the fraud or non-disclosures that form the basis of the TILA action.”
Gentlemen…I give you proof positive that the statute tolls and the fact that the term “consummation” is also subject to broad interpretation as we know…the loan could not have consummated if what we allege is found to be true… However, the non-disclosures language used by the 9th Circuit gives rise to possible myriad rescissions upon discovery of those non-disclosures…
James L. Macklin, Managing Director
Secure Document Research(Paralegal Services/Legal Project Management)
530-888-9600