Sally L. Madison v. United Finance Company, Inc., Barbara Pickett v. United Finance Company, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
These consolidated appeals present the issue of whether the disclosure requirements imposed upon a lender by the Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 , et seq., and specifically Regulation Z, § 226.8(b)(5), were violated by the language of the Security Agreement — Chattel Mortgages before this court.
The plaintiff-appellee in each of these consolidated appeals entered into a consumer credit transaction with defendant, United Finance Company. A disclosure statement, promissory note, and security agreement was signed by each plaintiff. Copies of these documents were given to each plaintiff at the time of the signing. Complaints were later filed by both borrowers for money damages pursuant to the Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 , et seq., to recover statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and the cost of the suit. The cases were submitted to the district court in each case upon cross motions for summary judgment.
The district court held that in both instances the defendant had failed to clearly identify the property to which the security interest attached, thus violating Regulation Z, § 226.8(b)(5).