that the required TILA disclosures were not made. Accordingly, the court limits its analysis of Plaintiffs' claim for rescission to the allegation that the required copies of the notice of their right to rescind were not provided. 9 . Courts are split over whether a borrower can recover damages and attorney's fees against an assignee who fails to honor a valid rescission notice. Compare Brodo v. Bankers Trust Co., 847 F.Supp. 353, 359 (E.D.Pa.1994) ("Neither § 1641 nor any other section provides for a statutory penalty or an award of attorney’s fees to a plaintiff should an assignee fail to respond to a valid rescission notice. Rescission is therefore the only remedy [] to which plaintiff is entitled.”) with Fairbanks Capital Corp. v. Jenkins, 225 F.Supp.2d 910, 916-17 (N.D.Ill.2002) (<HOLDING>). This court has not found a Fourth Circuit
holding that plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys fees for time spent litigating the fees issue on appeal under title viis attorneys fee provision holding that attorneys fees are necessaries in a civil suit to recover money or property for the minor holding party not entitled to recover attorneys fees without also recoveringdamages for breach of contract in part because attorney fees are in the nature of costs not damages holding that although attorneys fees are usually not recoverable unless permitted by statute or contract contractual or statutory authorization was not necessary in a malpractice claim to recover attorneys fees and costs as damages holding that plaintiffs are entitled to recover attorneys fees against an assignee who wrongfully refuses to rescind and suggesting that such plaintiffs are also probably entitled to recover statutory damages