Facts

Marvin Wennekamp sued defendants in relation to the home loan he rescinded pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Wennekamp alleged that the home loan in question was never consummated and he was not provided accurate material disclosures or two copies of notices of right to cancel in a form he could keep. Wennekamp further alleged that the parties to the loan were misrepresented, and the source of funds was an entity other than the designated lender. Wennekamp claimed he rescinded his loan pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act, and a mortgage loan audit indicated the subject loan's chain of title was broken such that the loan was never consummated.

DEFENDANTS' CONTENTIONS: Defendants argued that Wennekamp's rescission attempt was time-barred and even if it was not time-barred, Wennekamp did not properly rescind the relevant loan.

Result

The court granted defendant's motion to dismiss, finding Wennekamp's claim was time-barred. The court found that the deed of trust and first amended complaint established the loan was executed on May 6, 2008, and Wennekamp's conditional right to rescind the loan transaction expired on May 6, 2011, under TILA. Further, the court concluded Wennekamp only sent notice of rescission to defendants on Nov.20, 2015, and his rescission notice was time-barred and his claim to enforce the rescission must be dismissed.

Other Information

The court found that the loan in question was in fact consummated on May 6, 2008. If plaintiff's alternative theory, that the loan was never consummated, was correct that would have precluded any cause of action for rescission, as there would be no loan to rescind under TILA. As the TILA rescission period is a statute of repose rather than limitation, it was not subject to extension for equitable tolling or discovery.