Court Opinion

ID: 9703480
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 23:58:14.191277+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:21:49.693584
License: Public Domain

*182SPAETH, Judge,
concurring:
I agree both with the result reached and the analysis employed by the majority except that I should reserve judgment on the question of whether Act No. 6 applies to the mortgage transaction in this case. It may well be that Act No. 6 should apply, see 41 P.S. § 101 (residential mortgage lender defined broadly); see also 1978 Amendments (supports argument that previous version of Act applied to this type of transaction), but I see no need to decide the issue where, as here, neither party has disputed the applicability of the Act, so that we can treat the issue as stipulated. I should therefore assume that the Act applies and hold only that no notice was required prior to the filing of the confession of judgment and that for that reason the lower court’s order striking appellant’s judgment must be reversed.