Dist. Ct. did not err in finding that defendants violated Truth in Lending Act (TILA) by failing to supply correct number of copies of notice of right to cancel mortgage prior to plaintiffs closing on mortgage to purchase home. However, Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing plaintiffs’ action seeking to rescind mortgage under TILA by proposing to repay balance of loan via interest-free installments over time frame of original mortgage loan, since Dist. Ct. had discretion to require plaintiffs to make full repayment of loan as condition to enforcing plaintiffs’ rescission rights under TILA and then dismissing their rescission claim when plaintiffs failed to repay loan within 90-day period. Ct. rejected plaintiffs’ claim that, in spite of their inability to satisfy instant tender requirement, they had unconditional right to rescission based on defendants' violation of TILA, and that they were entitled to both reduction of all interest and fees associated with loan and had right to make installment payments over life of loan as part of their rescission rights.