In Olsen v. Porter, 213 Mich. App. 25, 30-31; 539 N.W.2d 523 (1995), the lender brought a reformation action to eliminate the usurious interest rate from the contract. The Court held that the statutory penalty was not triggered because the lender was not seeking to "enforce" the contract, but to reform it. The panel noted that "plaintiffs were neither attempting to make effective the usurious interest rate nor attempting to compel defendant to abide by the terms of the usurious contract." Id. at 31. The panel also noted in dicta that, if the lender brought an action to enforce payment under the contract, the borrower could raise the issue of the applicability of the penalty. Id. at 31 n 2.