Anatomy of a Rescission with 3 yr extended right-I think this qualifies

[Social Apocalypse]

Hi, it's me, hogging the Attorney Forum again. Maybe this simple diagram that I am asking for opinions on can help others learn what a violation of TILA/Reg Z is or isn't...

If I am understanding TILA/Reg Z correctly (and I have put a lot of faith into my decision) my Truth In Lending Disclosure document contains, all by itself, everything needed to satisfy a judge that my mortgage broker was using a defective calculator.

Please let me know what you think, just for fun, I won't disclose what I determined are the violations.

Here are the contents of the boxes:

Interest Rate:
7.75% (not on TILA, but will illustrate from where they invented the payment amount...)

Loan Amount:
$344,000
APR:
7.936%
Finance Charge:
$551,169.67
Amount Financed:
$336,035.93
Total of Payments:
$887,205.60
Number of payments:
$360
Amount of payment:
$2446.46

It's a conventional 30 year loan (with all the usual snakey things like pre-payment penalty, YSP, etc... but none of those make it an extended right to rescind.) We have TWO Hud1's- the one we signed at closing, which sort of match the TILA, then we have the one they sent after closing which is HUGELY different on the amounts, but again, it should all be plain on the TILA, right?

Let me know if you think this is going to have any chance in front of the judge, and my gratitude will be ETERNAL. I need reassurance.

[Nathan Fransen Esq.]

TB,
I may be missing the jist of your question, but here is some general info. Mortgage BROKERS often prepare TIL disclosures (among other disclosures), but this is not the one relevant for purposes of material disclosure violations. The disclosure provided by the lender at the time of signing is typically the one to review and compare it to the final closing statement. Based on your post, i am not clear on what conclusion a judge could, or would come to.

[Social Apocalypse]

You rock Nathan;
Sorry for not clarifying. The data a I gave IS from our CLOSING TILA Disclosure. It sort of matches the hud1 we signed at closing, and varies greatly from the hud1 we received AFTER we closed from the Title Company. Does this help? It was NOT an estimate. It was THE document.

Thanks again, truly.

[Social Apocalypse]

Additionally: I feel my biggest challenge is NOT whether or not I have a valid rescission, I am 99% sure that I do. My challenge is Yamamoto... (which I know you know all about). It is my burden (Since we are going to file Ch 13) to figure out how in the world I will tender the rescission. My attorney won't even LOOK at until I can come up with the answer to that.
My plan is to find someone who would be unhappy if we foreclosed... I am thinking that the PMI provider MIGHT have an incentive to offer a committment to lend on our mortgage at a 40% LTV... But I have to call them and ask about that. I know that they already DO conventional mortgages... so I don't think it's that far-fetched of an idea. I hope I am write.

[Nathan Fransen Esq.]

TB,
make sure you have your attorney review what specifically changed on the revised closing statement. For example, if the changes were to fees or costs that are not part of what is considered a "material disclosure" (i.e. insurance, taxes, title fees), then they may not matter.

Yamamoto is a difficult burden. Good luck with your search. I know loans are tough to come by these days...

[Social Apocalypse]

Thanks NF;

I really didn't intend to overcomplicate the question, and I can appreciate the need to establish WHY the numbers changed on the hud1's. Of course, we did do that early on, and they changed do to new broker fee amounts, an erroneous carry-over on our concurrent second mortgage, indicating we paid our closing costs TWICE on that loan, and a fee misplaced in the list of debts that were paid from loan proceeds, etc. There were many more like this... NOT acceptable reasons for the TILA Disclosure to be OFF, but I digress...

I was trying to sort of keep it simple...
The numbers on the TILA disclosure are interralated. If ONE of them is way off, then all of them will be way off. You cannot have your payment amount be way overstated and amortize that over 30 years and have that number equal the correct total of payments if the amount financed is correct and the APR is correct.

if the numbers are within ACCEPTABLE MARGINS according to Regulation Z, then they will co-relate seamlessly.

Simply doing the very SIMPLE math on MY numbers I presented shows that my APR is off by MORE than one eighth of one percent, that my amount financed is wrong, and that if you add this all up, the total of payments does not equal what they say.

For example, if you take the payment amount, (which is the ONLY number on the TILA that is factual, that IS my payment amount...) then if you amortize that over 30 years at the shown APR, you do NOT come up with the loan amount which was $344,000.

Am I wrong?

[Nathan Fransen Esq.]

TB,
Do you have an adjustable or fixed rate?

[Social Apocalypse]

Hi N;

The first is a 30 yr fixed at 7.75% with a "surprise" 3 yr prepayment penalty at closing.
The second is a 15-year plus "surprise" balloon payment at 8.99%

We applied for, were approved for, and recieved a GFE for a SINGLE 30 yr fixed at a lower interest rate with NONE of the above surprises... which was the ONLY GFE we ever recieved. There was ONE number that remained consistent, (Which is part of the reason I didn't catch the garbage in my TILA as I should have) the payment amount never changed ONE PENNY from one to the next...

They are TERRIBLE loans, and the HUD1's should be used in law school to show students how BAD these brokers can be...

[Social Apocalypse]

Additionally, just to be clear, the violations contained in our transactions could be summarized by a RESPA violation orgy... but it's been three years. I actually don't really see a real problem with what the lender did... It is the BROKER that scored on these deals, both against US and against the LENDER! For example, we received the PRE-disclosures for the loans we closed on in the mail AFTER we closed!! (I have the postmarked envelope and everything... that's how "surprised" we were.)

I am sure the LENDER will be JUST as hosed and angry as we will if we are successful, but it's been too long to bring suit on RESPA, I think, although I am not sure about that. I opted to do a rescission because it seemed the most expedient. I will have to let the lender pursue whatever restitution they seek against the broker and I am sure they will, if we are successful. I am not sure we will be though, because there are simply too many people who need help, and I cannot get legal help from one of the very FEW attorneys who actually understand this particular stuff well enough to actually GO TO COURT. Nobody wants to go to court. I need someone with some TEETH... harder to find.

On a brigher note, IF I can get my representation lined up, I think I may have found TENDER to satisfy Yamamoto, which will likely be my biggest hurdle. I am praying like a nun these days.

Thanks again for your help.