Altamirano-v-Copiague (TILA)

Posted on January 12, 2009. Filed under: Case Law, Mortgage Law, Truth in Lending Act | Tags: , , , , , |


“Assuming arguendo that the final disclosures had been TILA compliant, Plaintiffs would still be entitled to summary judgment because the initial Truth in Lending Act estimates given to Plaintiffs were not compliant with TILA standards. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1631(c), estimates may satisfy the statutory standards of the Truth in Lending Act. However, these estimates may only be given “where the provider of such information is not in a position to know exact information.” Id. Estimates must be based information available to the creditor, and if “any information necessary for an accurate disclosure is unknown to the creditor, the creditor shall make the disclosure on the best information reasonably available at the time the disclosure is provided to the consumer and shall state clearly that the disclosure is an estimate.” 12 C.F.R. § 226.17(c)(2). While “variance between estimates and terms of actual loans is not per se evidence of TILA violations,” the Good Faith Estimate and the estimated TILA disclosure given to Plaintiffs not only conflicted with the final TILA disclosure form and the First Payment Letter, they also conflicted with one another.”

Altamirano-v-Copiague

Advertisements

Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: