23 sep Illinois Credit Agreements Act
It is also important to note that the law applies to alleged agreements of a lender in order to delay or prevent the collection of a credit agreement. The law therefore does not only apply to initial negotiations on new loans. It applies to credit modification negotiations and negotiations on forbearance agreements. These agreements must comply with the requirements of the law. Several court decisions in Illinois have strictly enforced the Credit Agreements Act by refusing to impose so-called credit granting agreements unless they conscientiously meet the requirements of the law. It is essential, for example, that the lender signs the contract, since both parties must sign a credit agreement for it to be valid. Recently, the Illinois Second District Court of Appeals continued this process and ruled against a borrower with whom the lender entered into an agreement but who did not sign that agreement by the borrower. (It is not known why the borrower did not sign the document he asked the court to execute, but he does not appear to have done so.) Avanti v. BMO Harris Bank, N.A., 2014 W.L. 7273795 (Ill.App.2d Dist.).
The law prohibits claims based on omissions arising from a credit agreement. In VR Holdings, Inc. v. LaSalle Business Credit, Inc., 2002 WL 356515 at *3-*4 (N.D. Ill. March 6, 2002), a federal district court in Illinois ruled that the law prohibited claims not only on the basis of oral amendments to credit agreements, but also on omissions from credit agreements. Decisions taken in 1995 and 1996 by the state and federal courts of Illinois established that, where a part of a contract is a commercial contract, the Illinois Credit Agreements Act, 815 ILCS 160/1 et seq., excludes all claims, counter-claims and objections of the debtor against the lender on the basis of its agreement or due to a modification or modification of the credit agreement. It is not both written and signed. Klem v. First National Bank of Chicago, 275 Fig. App.3d 64 (1995); First National Bank in Staunton v. McBride Chevrolet, Inc., 267 Fig.
App.3d 367 (1994); McAloon v. Northwest Bancorp, Inc., 274 Fig. App.3d 758 (1995); Whirlpool Financial Corp. vs. Sevaux, 96 F.3d 216 (7th Cir. 1996). These cases have allowed commercial lenders to reduce their risk of lender liability by introducing into their credit agreements legal choice and election provisions providing for the application of Illinois law and the resolution of disputes by Illinois courts. See z.B » The Best Defense Against Lender Liability Claims » (The Secured Lender, May/June 1998). The law has no exception for «full power.» In Machinery Transports of Illinois v.
. . .