U.S. Code » Title 15 » Chapter CHAPTER 41— CONSUMER CREDIT PROTECTION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— CONSUMER CREDIT COST DISCLOSURE › Part Part B— Credit Transactions

15 U.S.C. § 1649

Certain limitations on liability

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Limitations on liabilityFor any closed end consumer credit transaction that is secured by real property or a dwelling, that is subject to this subchapter, and that is consummated before September 30, 1995, a creditor or any assignee of a creditor shall have no civil, administrative, or criminal liability under this subchapter for, and a consumer shall have no extended rescission rights under section 1635(f) of this title with respect to—(1) the creditor’s treatment, for disclosure purposes, of—(A) taxes described in section 1605(d)(3) of this title;(B) fees described in section 1605(e)(2) and (5) of this title;(C) fees and amounts referred to in the 3rd sentence of section 1605(a) of this title; or(D) borrower-paid mortgage broker fees referred to in section 1605(a)(6) of this title;(2) the form of written notice used by the creditor to inform the obligor of the rights of the obligor under section 1635 of this title if the creditor provided the obligor with a properly dated form of written notice published and adopted by the Bureau or a comparable written notice, and otherwise complied with all the requirements of this section regarding notice; or(3) any disclosure relating to the finance charge imposed with respect to the transaction if the amount or percentage actually disclosed—(A) may be treated as accurate for purposes of this subchapter if the amount disclosed as the finance charge does not vary from the actual finance charge by more than $200;(B) may, under section 1605(f)(2) of this title, be treated as accurate for purposes of section 1635 of this title; or(C) is greater than the amount or percentage required to be disclosed under this subchapter.(b) ExceptionsSubsection (a) shall not apply to—(1) any individual action or counterclaim brought under this subchapter which was filed before June 1, 1995;(2) any class action brought under this subchapter for which a final order certifying a class was entered before January 1, 1995;(3) the named individual plaintiffs in any class action brought under this subchapter which was filed before June 1, 1995; or(4) any consumer credit transaction with respect to which a timely notice of rescission was sent to the creditor before June 1, 1995.(Pub. L. 90–321, title I, § 139, as added Pub. L. 104–29, § 4(a), Sept. 30, 1995, 109 Stat. 273; amended Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title II, § 2107(a), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–402; Pub. L. 111–203, title X, § 1100A(2), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2107.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2010—Subsec. (a)(2). Pub. L. 111–203 substituted “Bureau” for “Board”.

1996—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104–208 substituted “For any closed end consumer credit transaction that is secured by real property or a dwelling, that is subject to this subchapter, and” for “For any consumer credit transaction subject to this subchapter”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title II, § 2107(b), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–402, provided that: “The amendment made by subsection (a) [amending this section] shall be effective as of September 30, 1995.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1996–2002 · leading case: Martinez v. Weyerhaeuser Mortg. Co., 959 F. Supp. 1511 (S.D. Fla. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Martinez v. Weyerhaeuser Mortg. Co., 959 F. Supp. 1511 (S.D. Fla. 1996). · cites it 6× “15 U.S.C. § 1649 (a)(1)(B). The Court has found the TILA Amendments both retroactive with respect to 15 U.”
Inge v. Rock Fin. Corp., 281 F.3d 613 (6th Cir. 2002). · cites it 5× “In granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs TILA class claim for failure to allege a disclosure variance greater than $200, the Barry court relied upon a 1995 amendment to the TILA, codified as 15 U.S.C. § 1649 (a). Section 1649(a) provides, in relevant part:…”
Moore v. Flagstar Bank, 6 F. Supp. 2d 496 (E.D. Va. 1997). · cites it 3× “15 U.S.C.A. § 1649 (a) (West 1998). Likewise, the plain language of this provision demonstrates Congress’ intention that it should apply retroactively to transactions consummated before September 30,.”
Young v. 1st Am. Fin. Servs., 992 F. Supp. 440 (D.D.C. 1998). · cites it 3× “They cannot do so here, because 15 U.S.C. § 1649 (a)(3)(C) provides that “a consumer shall have no extended rescission rights under section 1635(f) of this title with respect to .”
Connie Edwards v. Your Credit, Inc., 148 F.3d 427 (5th Cir. 1998). “See 15 U.S.C. § 1649 . Section 226.18(d)(2) of Regulation Z, issued pursuant to § 1649, provides that a fi.”
Weil v. Long Island Sav. Bank, FSB, 77 F. Supp. 2d 313 (E.D.N.Y 1999). · cites it 3× “TILA Claims These defendants argue that the TILA claims fail because: (1) they were made after the expiration of the one-year statute of limitations; (2) 15 U.S.C. § 1649 precludes the claims as discussed below; and (3) plaintiffs do not allege any specific violation of the…”
Barry v. Mortg. Servicing Acquisition Corp., 941 F. Supp. 278 (D.R.I. 1996). · cites it 4× “This provision, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1649 (a), provides in pertinent part that: For any consumer credit transaction subject to this subchapter that is consummat *283 ed before September 30, 1995, a creditor or any assignee of a creditor shall have no civil, administrative, or…”
Santoro v. CTC Foreclosure Serv. Corp., 12 F. App'x 476 (9th Cir. 2001). “15 U.S.C. § 1649 (a)(1)(D). The Santo-ros loan was a closed-end consumer credit transaction secured by real property.”
Rogers v. Assurance Mortg. Corp. (D.N.H. 1997). · cites it 4× “3009 - (codified at 15 U.S.C. § 1649 (Supp. 1997)). 7 With the addition of these amendments.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.