Right of Rescission. George and Mona Antanuos obtained a mortgage loan secured with rental property from the First National Bank of Arizona. At the closing, First National provided the Antanuoses with a “Notice of Right to Cancel,”

informing them about their TILA three-day rescission period. The following day, according to the Antanuoses, they informed the bank via fax that they wished to exercise their right to rescind. When First National refused to rescind the agreement, the Antanuoses sued the bank. The Antanuoses did not dispute that a consumer’s right to rescind under the TILA applies only to the consumer’s original dwelling and that they used their commercial property as a security interest. Instead, the Antanuoses argued that the bank was prohibited from denying them the rescission right because they relied on the bank’s disclosure, which would have been required under the TILA, to their detriment. Would the court be convinced? Explain. [Antanuos v. First National Bank of Arizona, 508 F.Supp.2d 466 (E.D.Va. 2007)] (See page 579.)