Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Devi Rakshit v. Bank of America, N.A.

Date: 10-04-2023

Case Number: 1:22-cv-00168

Judge: Pamela K. Chen

Court: United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Manhattan County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:





Click Here For The Best Brooklyn Consumer Credit Lawyer Directory







Defendant's Attorney: Scott Howard Mandel, Stevan H LaBonte, and Shan P. Massand

Description:
Brooklyn, New York consumer credit lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a Truth in Lending Act violation theory under 15 U.S.C. 1601, which provides:



(a) Informed use of credit



The Congress finds that economic stabilization would be enhanced and the competition among the various financial institutions and other firms engaged in the extension of consumer credit would be strengthened by the informed use of credit. The informed use of credit results from an awareness of the cost thereof by consumers. It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of credit terms so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit, and to protect the consumer against inaccurate and unfair credit billing and credit card practices.

(b) Terms of personal property leases



The Congress also finds that there has been a recent trend toward leasing automobiles and other durable goods for consumer use as an alternative to installment credit sales and that these leases have been offered without adequate cost disclosures. It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of the terms of leases of personal property for personal, family, or household purposes so as to enable the lessee to compare more readily the various lease terms available to him, limit balloon payments in consumer leasing, enable comparison of lease terms with credit terms where appropriate, and to assure meaningful and accurate disclosures of lease terms in advertisements.



"The Truth in Lending Act (TILA) is a federal law that requires lenders to provide borrowers with clear and accurate information about the terms of their loans. This information helps borrowers to understand the true cost of their loans and to make informed decisions about whether to borrow money.



TILA covers a wide range of loans, including mortgages, credit cards, and personal loans. Lenders are required to provide borrowers with disclosures about the following information:



The amount of the loan

The interest rate

The annual percentage rate (APR)

The monthly payments

The total cost of the loan, including interest and fees

The right to rescind the loan



Borrowers have the right to rescind a loan within three days of receiving the TILA disclosures. This means that they can cancel the loan without penalty and get all of their money back.



TILA is enforced by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Borrowers who believe that a lender has violated TILA can file a complaint with the CFPB.



Here are some examples of how TILA protects borrowers:



TILA requires lenders to disclose the APR, which is the true cost of a loan expressed as an annual percentage rate. This allows borrowers to compare loans from different lenders and to choose the loan with the lowest APR.

TILA requires lenders to disclose the right to rescind a loan. This gives borrowers a chance to back out of a loan if they have second thoughts.

TILA prohibits lenders from using deceptive or unfair practices. For example, lenders cannot advertise a loan with a low interest rate without disclosing the fees and other costs associated with the loan.



TILA is an important law that protects borrowers from predatory lending practices. Borrowers should be familiar with their rights under TILA before they take out any loan."



Google Bard





Outcome:
10/04/2023 Civil Case Terminated. See 29 Stipulation of Dismissal. (KW) (Entered: 10/04/2023)
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of Devi Rakshit v. Bank of America, N.A.?

The outcome was: 10/04/2023 Civil Case Terminated. See 29 Stipulation of Dismissal. (KW) (Entered: 10/04/2023)

Which court heard Devi Rakshit v. Bank of America, N.A.?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Manhattan County), NY. The presiding judge was Pamela K. Chen.

Who were the attorneys in Devi Rakshit v. Bank of America, N.A.?

Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here For The Best Brooklyn Consumer Credit Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Scott Howard Mandel, Stevan H LaBonte, and Shan P. Massand.

When was Devi Rakshit v. Bank of America, N.A. decided?

This case was decided on October 4, 2023.