View original: From the court |
Our backup
¶ 27 The Staff Commentary on this regulation further explains, "[I]f a security interest is taken
in A's ownership interest in a house and that house is A's principal dwelling, A is a consumer for
purposes of rescission, even if A is not liable, either primarily or secondarily, on the underlying
consumer credit transaction." (Emphasis added.) 12 C.F.R. pt. 226, Supp. I, § 226.2(a)(11), Note 2
(2010).
¶ 28 Clearly, Regulation Z and the Staff Commentary support Pendleton's position that she was
entitled to TILA disclosures, because she was a consumer whose ownership interest in her home
was subject to the mortgage. It makes no difference whether she was liable on the note, as long as
her principal dwelling was used as security for the loan, which it unquestionably was. .......
. . .
- 12 -
¶ 36 For the reasons stated above, we vacate the trial court's dismissal of Pendleton's
counterclaim and third-party complaint and its striking of Pendleton's affirmative defenses. We
remand for further proceedings.
¶ 37 Vacated and remanded.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
SEE ALSO: (Referenced in above decision.)
2(a)(11) Consumer.
{Note}
2.
Rescission rules. For purposes of rescission under §§
226.15 and
226.23, a consumer includes any natural
person whose ownership interest in his or her principal dwelling is subject to the risk of loss. Thus, if a security
interest is taken in A's ownership interest in a house and that house is A's principal dwelling, A is a consumer
for purposes of rescission, even if A is not liable, either primarily or secondarily, on the underlying consumer
credit transaction. An ownership interest does not include, for example, leaseholds or inchoate rights, such as
dower.
_______________________________________________________
[PDF]
Sep 24, 2015 - On October 14,
2010, plaintiff, OneWest Bank N.A.. 1 filed a complaint
..... See
12 C.F.R. pt.
226,
Supp. I, §
226.2(a)(11),
Note 2 (
2010). ¶ 24.
