Lausier v. Goodwin
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On October 3, 1978, debtors borrowed $18,939.28 from Madawaska Federal Credit Union [credit union], contemporaneously executing a promissory note, a first real estate mortgage covering a lot of land [Crestwood Avenue lot], 1 and a security agreement granting a purchase-money security interest in a 1978 Young American mobile home in favor of the credit union. The debtors insist that the mortgaging of the Crestwood Avenue lot upon which the mobile home was later situated constituted a consumer credit transaction within the meaning of Title 9-A, Maine Revised Statutes Annotated, section § 7-117(1) 2 in that *478 a security interest was acquired on real property which both parties expected would be used as the residence of the debtors. Consequently, the debtors claim an outstanding right to rescind the real estate mortgage, 3 inasmuch as no notice of their right of rescission was provided. 4 The credit union denies that notice of the right of rescission was required, for the reason that it acquired “a first lien against a dwelling to finance the acquisition of that dwelling.” 5
The term “dwelling” is not defined by the Maine Consumer Credit Code. The Federal Truth in Lending Act defines “dwelling” as “a residential-type structure which is real property . . . , 6 At the time of the execution of the real estate mortgage, the mobile home was not on the Crestwood Avenue lot. The debtors would have the court determine that the mortgage deed did not create a lien in a “dwelling” as the land was vacant and unimproved at the time, and that, assuming arguendo that the vacant Crestwood Avenue lot was a dwelling within the meaning of the exception, the lien granted the credit union was not given as consideration for the financing of the acquisition of that “dwelling.”
There is no case law of which the court is aware interpreting section 7-117 of the Maine Consumer Credit Code. The credit union did not finance the acquisition of the Crestwood Avenue lot. Instead, the credit union financed acquisition of the mobile home, which constituted personal property, albeit acquiring a lien on the real property as additional security therefor. Under these circumstances notice of the right of rescission was required.
Upon entry of the order for chapter 7 relief on March 6, 1980, the debtors’ right of rescission became property of the estate within the meaning of Bankruptcy Code § 541(a)(1). 7 It is the duty of the trustee in bankruptcy to collect and reduce to money all property of the estate. 8 On March 6, 1980, the debtors’ right of rescission became exercisable exclusively by the trustee in bankruptcy. The trustee in bankruptcy was made a party defendant in these adversary proceedings to determine the validity of the credit union lien, but failed to appear, answer, or otherwise respond and was in due course defaulted. The court has authorized sale of the subject real estate on request of the debtors and the credit union. Sale effectively cuts off any right of rescis *479 sion under both the Maine Consumer Credit Code 9 and the Truth in Lending Act. 10 The trustee in bankruptcy having failed to make timely exercise of the debtors’ right of rescission or to oppose the authorization to sell, the real estate mortgage remains in all respects valid and enforceable.
The challenge to the formal sufficiency of the filed financing statement unnecessarily confuses the issue. The rights of the secured party vis-a-vis the debtor are not dependent on proof of perfection. The security interest of the credit union became enforceable against the debtors immediately upon their written grant of a purchase-money security interest in the mobile home on October 3, 1978. 11 Since the rights of the debtors and the credit union inter se are unaffected thereby and since the rights of third parties are not involved [the trustee in bankruptcy having defaulted], the court need not reach the issue of perfection.
The security interest in the mobile home and the lien on the Crestwood Avenue lot are valid and enforceable. On the basis of the stipulation filed by the parties, the security interest and mortgage secure an outstanding indebtedness as at August 4, 1980 in the amount of $19,533.64, inclusive of principal and interest, with per diem interest since August 4, 1980 at $6.00 until payment is made. In the event that the sale produces net proceeds in excess of the amount herein determined due the credit union, the debtors may initiate proceedings to recover the escrowed balance as exempt property. Enter order.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
7 B.R. 476 (Lausier v. Goodwin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.