BankAmerica Nat. Trust Co. v. Zayas-Bazan, ZAYAS-BAZA

Decision Date30 July 1997
Docket NumberNo. 95-3610,E,ZAYAS-BAZA,95-3610
Citation698 So.2d 1261
Parties22 Fla. L. Weekly D1861 BANKAMERICA NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY f/k/a Security Pacific National Trust Co., as Trustee, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Hector E.rrol Portuondo, Rosa Portuondo, his wife, Sylvia Wyman, Trustee of the Sylvia Wyman Irrevocable Trust, Banyon Lakes Property Owners Association, Inc., Banyon Lakes Homeowners Association, Inc., Enterprise Leasing Company, and __________________ an unknown person in possession of the subject real property, Appellees/Cross-Appellants.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Steven Ellison of Broad and Cassel, West Palm Beach, for appellant/cross-appellee.

James A. Bonfiglio, Boynton Beach, for appellees/cross-appellants.

STONE, Chief Judge.

Appellant filed a foreclosure action after Appellees failed to make a mortgage payment due in 1993. Appellees answered, asserting violations of the Truth-In-Lending Act (TILA), 15 U.S.C. § 1635. The loan was made in June 1987. Finding several violations of TILA, the trial court entered a judgment of rescission in favor of Appellees.

The final judgment is reversed. The three-year expiration of Appellees' right to rescission was in June of 1990. They cannot revive the right to rescission by claiming it as a defense. The circumstances here are virtually identical to those before the Florida Supreme Court in Beach v. Great Western Bank, 692 So.2d 146 (Fla.1997). Beach held that the right to rescission, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1635, lapses after three years from the date of the underlying transaction, and it cannot be revived via a defense in recoupment for TILA violations beyond that three-year period. Id. As a statutorily created remedy, the limitation contained within it could not be extended, even as a defense.

Additionally, damages for Appellant's failure to respond to Appellees' rescission demand were also not available. Since the statutory limit for rescission had expired, Appellant's refusal to recognize Appellees' rescission demand did not constitute a violation of the statute. Thus, the trial court should not have imposed a statutory penalty upon Appellant.

All other issues raised are moot. We remand for further proceedings.

POLEN and FARMER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 books & journal articles
  • Practical aspects of parenting conflicts: preparing parents for litigation.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 72 No. 1, January 1998
    • January 1, 1998
    ...Dissolution of marriage is one of life's most stressful experiences.(2) The Fifth District Court of Appeal in Kunzweiler v. Kunzweiler, 698 So. 2d 1261, 1254 (Flat 5th DCA 1997), Only the death of a spouse is generally reported to be more stressful for adults than divorce; separation and di......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT