English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

TRUTH-IN-LENDING MANUAL]; D. DOBBS, REMEDIES (1973) [hereinafter cited as D. DOBBS]; Burstein, There's Truth in Lending, But Is There Right in Rescission?, 2 REAL ESTATE REV. 83 (Summer 1972) [hereinafter cited as Burstein]. 1. Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601-81 (1970). The Act was implemented by Federal Reserve Board Regulation Z, 12 C.F.R. § 226 (1974). See generally Garwood, Truth in Lending-A Regulator's View, 29 Bus. LAWYER 193 (1973); Kintner, Henneberger & Neill, A Primer on Truth in Lending, 13 ST. Louis U.L.J. 501 (1969); Tanner, Truth in Lending and Regulation Z-A Primer, 6 GA. ST. B.J. 19 (1969); Note, Truth in Lending: The Impossible Dream, 22 CASE W. RES. L. REV. 89 (1970); Comment, Private Remedies Under the Truth-in-Lending Act: The Relationship Between Rescission and Civil Liability, 57 IowA L. REv. 199 (1971). 2. 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (1970). The Act requires disclosure in clear and conspicuous language so that the consumer can make an informed choice between alternative credit terms. See id. § 1631; Bissette v. Colonial Mortgage Corp., 340 F. Supp. 1191, 1193 (D.D.C. 1972); Ratner v. Chemical Bank N.Y. Trust Co., 329 F. Supp. 270, 276 (S.D.N.Y. 1971); 114 CONG. Rac. 1615 (1968) (remarks of Representative Helstoki). 3. The consumer is "the party to whom credit is offered or extended. . . ." 15 U.S.C. § 1602(h) (1970). Section 1635, however, uses the word "obligoer" to describe the person contracting the debt. Id. § 1635. 4. The Act provides several means of enforcement, some of which are designed to penalize the non-disclosing creditor and others of which afford relief to the consumer. A civil penalty, for example, is authorized by the following language: (a) [A]ny creditor who fails to comply with any requirement imposed under this chapter . . . with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of(1) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of the failure; (2) (A) in the case of an individual action twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction, except that the liability under this subparagraph shall not be less than $100 nor greater than $1000 . . . . Pub. L. No. 89-320, § 408 (Oct. 28, 1974), amending 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (1970). Earlier decisions characterized this civil liability as being remedial in nature and required the consumer to elect between pursuing this remedy or rescinding the contract. In Bostwick v. Cohen, 319 F. Supp. 875 (N.D. Ohio 1970), for example, the court stated that "the civil liability section is remedial rather than punitive in nature ...."

Truth-in-Lending: Judicial Modification of the Right of Rescission