Forum & Social Team

Femail Today 'It was instantaneous! Instead, I want to fight the underlying problem, by addressing education and social programs. That's predatory lending, pure and simple. I understand the demand, but I dont understand their legality. I Accept Read more. Reclaiming money back from various payday loan companies 17th Jul 15 at 9:

Responsible Lending

Want to add to the discussion?

 · The issue of payday loan debt became particularly sensitive in Bolton earlier this month when a coroner heard how town resident Antony Breeze, 36, died after dousing himself in petrol and setting onlinecamadult.gq Bolton decide to scrap payday loan kit sponsorship deal after public outrage. Bolton Wanderers scrap QuickQuid kit sponsorship deal Former captain makes joke on Instagram after onlinecamadult.gq /Bolton-Wanderers-scrap-QuickQuid-kit. About loans and responsible lending. At Wizzcash, when we review a payday loan application, we treat it responsibly. Our aim is to always: Treat our customers fairly. Be transparent. Only lend to people we feel will be able to onlinecamadult.gq://onlinecamadult.gq

Forum Help

More top stories

This is exactly it, these loans are absolute traps if not used properly, people use them to get to the next paycheck, then they get their next paycheck and have to pay it back, needing another loan and this pattern continues until they've paid an absolutely ridiculous amount just to survive another week or two.

There are studies which demonstrate clearly that people in very difficult financial situations can make very poor decisions:. And when that feeling is constant, as it is for people mired in poverty, it captures and compromises the mind. Easy to judge people as "idiots" when you've never had to deal with their problems.

I'm surprised that payday and title loans are still legal. The fact that these companies can charge basically whatever they want in interest is ridiculous. Its just a scam that targets desperate people.

Because if you make bad choices illegal you just push them underground. Same as has historically happened with gambling, cigarettes and drugs. Loan sharks have historically existed for that reason and many times it's been controlled by the mob. That's still where people go when they don't have access to payday loans.

And yet not a single person uses them that way. They say that because what they're really meant to do - fleece poor, uneducated people out of what little money they have and lock them into an unending payment plan - doesn't really make for good advertising. Payday loans are a scam and simply need to be put to an end.

The problem is that if Shandice needs a payday loan this month, unless it's because of a dire one-off emergency, then she'll be in the same situation next month, but with the added expense of the last loan's interest, so this month she needs a slightly bigger loan, and dooooown she slides.

I think there's a lot of denial in many payday loan users; they should be looking at asking the numerous advice lines how they can cut back to end up in the black at the end of the month, but instead try to sustain a lifestyle that's beyond their wage. I think the point being made is that this is borderline criminal. Let's say we were to make it illegal though, and the but the market still decides that these sorts of desperate, generally un-creditworthy are at those sorts of rates.

If that's the case, there will cease to be legal lending options for them, and the only people they will be able to turn to are actual criminals. Unfortunately we need somebody providing this sort of service. Also, these people who are high risk enough to have to go out and get these loans wouldn't have a place to go. Just look at the risk aspect. It looks a little like this:. That's just if you're running a charity.

What about taking into consideration the opportunity cost of that money? That's not even including overhead like rent, electricity, salary, etc. It's very likely that it's less. Your edit hit the nail on the head. Its all the fucking overhead. My research is on title lenders, but I think there's some similarity. These stores see less than 3 customers Each store needs staff, rent, utilities, compliance expenses, etc. Most title lenders began moving online after rate caps, because it was now incredibly difficult to be in black.

The last few 10ks I saw of major payday lenders showed a pretty universal desire to move away from payday loans in the US, and focus on pawnbrokering in the US and Latin America. The companies are feeling the heat, and getting ready to bail. My fear is this will leave room for private and mom and pop shops to take over the payday lending space, and that will leave a fucked low income consumer even more fucked. The public companies are VERY aware of public perception, and try to not stick to it.

The private ones are a different story. There's a particular title lending "entity" out there with about stores. This is 3 times bigger than the official largest title lender, TMX. This entity is compromised of dozens and dozens of shell firms in most states. Since they don't face the public the main corps official answering machine has no way to speak with a live person, and just says "Hello, you have reached the business office.

When word gets out a particular store is scamming, you repaint it, changes the name, and dissolve the shell corp it was under. Boom, problem solved, you can get right back to scamming. And by scamming, I mean illegal practices, not the typical payday practices seem by the general public as usary.

I mean changing principal amounts on loan docs, foraging signatures and the like. Next time you see 4 or 5 alt fin serv locations on the same corner, consider that they are most likely all operated by the same company. Too much pressure on the public firms and that's the only option the low income will have. You also have to be aware this entity helped write the laws to make this sort of lending profitable again.

It was not so up until the mid 90s. Mg original statement is not as close to true as I would have liked. You don't have to make the entire practice illegal to bring the interest rates to a reasonable number.

If someone is in a position where their only hope is a payday loan to survive they don't need a loan they need financial advice and welfare. You've got no one when you're an adult to just "get money off" - we're talking about kids starving, getting thrown out, not being able to get to work The loans are built to be 14 day and under loans, so say the guy took out for the maximum 14 days before renewing - he would owe 76 dollars interest plus the That doesn't seem crazy.

They are doing a high risk, low dollar, short term loan. Only the actual profit after business expenses I'm going to assume is pretty low dollar.

This guy I assume has no financial sense and I don't know what can be done - have a cap on max you can renew? Max it can go up to? But I just assuming this person has no idea how money works. Shouldn't but if you never repay the principle but also never breach the contract, what are they supposed to do?

Turn it magically into an interest free loan? We want everything regulated, unless we actually use and benifit from it - than free market, government stay out we don't need to be babied opinion comes out. Thats what happens when you never actually pay off the loan and instead only the interest.

Try not to take out a short term loan if you can't pay it off in the short term. They're called payday loans for a reason. You get an influx of cash for an emergency and then pay it off on your next payday.

There is absolutely no situation where a responsible person can rack up that much debt from a payday loan. Either you have a paycheck coming in and you can benefit from the loan or you don't and you shouldn't get the loan. This is where the trap happens. So what do you do? But here's the beautiful part: I've seen this happen to people Rollovers are capped at 4 per loan, counting the original depends on state, but 4 is the max of any state.

Once your rollovers run out, you must pay the principal or go into default. And once you default, you will not be given another loan. I thought most states have a law that if principle is paid more than times not sure that it reverts to a traditional loan.

So as not to cause a debtors prison. Wtf, hospitals have payment plans. Don't even get a loan. When you get the bill you negotiate with hospital.

Man wouldn't it be easier if we all paid taxes earmarked for health, some of us pay a little and some pay a lot, and all that money is used to cover everyone's hospital bills? Like forgetting how you feel about paying for part of someone else's healthcare, wouldn't it just be logistically easier if we did it this way, and cheaper for everyone in the long run? A healthcare system, run not for profit, but instead to ensure the health of a nation? But how would those business owners survive!?

If they aren't grifting everything they can from the poorest Americans, how will they afford the millions they need to lobby politicians? If they don't lobby to keep ppl desperate and in poverty, they will lose business We don't want to hurt business owners, do we? Having worked for a payday loan company, it's not exactly the most honest business. They understood the due dates and such, but they didn't really grasp how much money they were throwing away. That's the crux of it I think, many people just don't really fathom how much they're wasting on these things.

They get the basics of the dates and all that, but they never actually do the math. I think it's an ethical problem that the payday loan companies are lending under those circumstances, but I don't see how it's justifiable to legislate based on legally competent adults choosing to not do the math. If I'm expected to trust another to the extent that their voice should be equally valued as mine in the selection of our public officials, I have to believe they're capable of making a decision about taking a loan - and vice versa, with regard to their view of me.

I think the whole payday loan "industry" is a pox and a racket, but that's an ethical judgment. I don't see a legal reason to outlaw a legally competent adult from entering into a financial contract, provided the contract's terms are unambiguously stated and that there's no false advertising surrounding the interaction. More accurately, I don't see a justification without also beginning to legislate things which must remain out of our legal codes.

I don't see how it's justifiable to legislate based on legally competent adults choosing to not do the math. I think it could be argued the whole idea behind Miranda rights is just that. Adults choosing to not learn their rights. I'm not saying it's impossible, just incredibly difficult. The game is rigged against them. I feel it's our responsibility to provide quality education, so that people CAN do the math.

It's like the abortion debate years ago: At what point will our representatives exercise some responsibility for the crisis our people are in?

While it's absolutely possible that a prospective borrower at a payday company is under significant stress, getting a payday loan is premeditated. You have to have the need for funds, think of the solution of getting a loan, find a payday loan company, predict that you'll be extended the loan, go through whatever the likely insufficient process it is to be checked out, and then sign a legal document provided for your review.

When arrested, it's a more immediate experience. I don't think that an officer should be required to remind suspects of their Miranda rights every time the officer walks away and returns. The key factor of the recitation is to cut through the immediately disorienting experience to remind the citizen of their rights.

Nor are Miranda rights imposed - an adult can choose to waive the rights, and is trusted to make that decision even given the disorienting experience. Just like how fast food restaurants must prominently display nutritional information and credit card companies must show calculations for how much interest will be charged in different scenarios, it would be perfectly justified and in line with recent regulations to have payday lenders very clearly outline the costs of their services.

It was my understanding that they do so. I don't see why contracts should necessarily be required to state examples of payment if the contract isn't upheld, though. The whole point of the contract is that the borrower is agreeing to pay as stated - if the borrower is concerned that they won't make those payments or that they could pay off the loan in less time , they should have the contract amended accordingly.

Regardless, while that information should certainly be part of the contract, it's not the same as capping interest rates, which is what the article calls for, but which does not address the underlying problem. I really think it should be illegal to prey on people's ignorance They should have to, by law, clearly state the total amount to be repaid after multiple periods including the agreed upon term of the loan, one month, and one year.

It wouldn't prevent all silly situations but would hopefully cause some people to think twice before risking being in very bad situations. I've in the past explained credit cards and compound interest to people who otherwise wouldn't have realised how debt can spiral out of control if not serviced at a sensible rate.

I think that it's immoral to prey on people's ignorance, but as I discussed here , the free public education system, made available to all citizens, does include in the curriculum the skills necessary for basic financial literacy.

It's attitudes and culture which are preventing adults from utilizing those lessons. I don't, however, see a justification to legislate from the perspective that adults otherwise deemed competent are unable to enter into financial contracts. If they possess the necessary skills and understandings to, e. Instead, I want to fight the underlying problem, by addressing education and social programs. Rather than fight the symptom by contradictory ideas of legal competence, I think the solution is to ensure that people have options beyond "forgo necessary medical care" or "accept a loan intended to be paid back within two weeks, knowing that it'll take years," so that the impetus for risky lending to cover necessities dies out.

However, I don't see why contracts should be required to state examples of payment if the contract isn't upheld. The whole point of the contract is that the borrower is agreeing to pay as stated.

If the borrower doesn't want to agree to that contract, they should have another drawn up. The borrower is under no requirement to accept the terms of the first contract they're shown though similarly, the lender is under no requirement to offer a contract to suit the borrower's requested duration of payment.

That's the ethical issue I see here - that these lenders are intentionally providing loans with the expectation that some many? Why the hell would we maintain this when we KNOW it's not true? My wife worked for Child Protective Services There are adults that don't know that their infants can't understand their "orders" and beat them when they disobey them. I don't really see how loaning money at high interest rates to those with poor credit is any different than the predatory home loan tactics that created the housing bubble in If these people had decent credit they'd be able to get a much better deal with a credit union.

A part of me believes that many of these folks probably shouldn't even be qualifying for personal loans. I get where you're coming from in regards to personal responsibility but lenders acting unethically and approving those who can't afford to repay these loans seems like the lynch pin in this whole ordeal. Worked at a rent a center with the same customers. They were renting used furniture and electronics that could be had for an insanely cheaper amount at a yard sale.

No, it would probably not override a lifetime's worth of poor financial skills developed within poverty. In a similar industry, and I see the same thing. Even after walking customers through how the payment schedules work, and that we won't take money out of their account they provided for the fed funds wire, we still have people freaking out as us when their 6 months in default for not taking their payments directly from their bank accts on their behalf. To me, its probably a lot like working in the alcohol industry.

Ideally, most people are responsible, but it ends up being the irresponsible one's who generate most of the profit. I really support intelligently crafted regulation to help these people without hurting the one's who do have enough sense to realize that loans aren't free money, and the lender expects to be repaid.

Salah lifts lid on life at Liverpool 'If you ask the cow when the train is coming she's not going to answer': Pochettino channels his inner Cantona with bizarre analogy ahead of Inter tie Ferrari's flaws shouldn't stop us from applauding Hamilton's greatness Salah and Mane in high spirits as Liverpool put finishing touches on preparations for huge Champions League clash with PSG 'He couldn't play today, no chance': Enzo Calzaghe, father and trainer of world champion Joe, dies at 69 Pulis and Holloway lead tributes to Ralph Ellis, football writer and Daily Mail sports news editor, after he dies at 62 Fellaini brushes away fan filming Manchester United stars boarding train back north after Watford win On red alert!

Neymar and Mbappe lead PSG's star-studded squad at training as they wear Liverpool colours ahead of Champions League showdown 'It will be a tough start': Why the new Champions League kick-off time will have fans rushing to the sofa or the pub… and Tottenham are up first this week Champions League kicks off with world's top stars vying for glory… but how are the 10 big contenders shaping up?

Tottenham stars board plane to Milan as they prepare to make Champions League bow against Inter at San Siro Manchester City all smiles as Guardiola's men prepare for Champions League tie with Lyon Spalletti puts Inter Milan through their paces as they prepare for the arrival of Tottenham in the Champions League 'If we get a good result I don't care if they fight for Messi's shirt': Share this article Share. Share or comment on this article: Bolton Wanderers scrap QuickQuid kit sponsorship deal e-mail.

Golovkin wants third fight Jose Mourinho says he is 'very happy' after Man Utd beats Watford Unai Emery wants Arsenal players to be angry when he subs them out Billy Joe Saunders tricks addict into assaulting a passer by 'We won't play mind games': Juan Mata warns Manchester United team-mates against Juan de Jongh double helps hosts DC United Red Bulls: Wayne Rooney scores his fifth of Who will step up and score the goals Celtic so Dimitri Payet scores incredible Lucas Perez vents fury at Manuel Pellegrini after he was The FCA's plans include limiting the number of times payday lenders are allowed to roll over loans twice, forcing them to put "risk warnings" on their advertising and limiting the number of attempts lenders can make to claw back money if there is insufficient cash in a borrower's bank account to two.

Meanwhile the Government announced plans last month to place a cap on the total cost of a payday loan. The committee said that while limiting the number of rollovers to two times would be a "welcome development", this would still mean that a loan which was meant to be paid off after one month could last for up to three months.

The FCA should also work with the Information Commissioner's Office to put an end to vulnerable people being plagued with calls and text offering expensive loans. If there is evidence of inappropriate targeting, the FCA should move to ban all brokering of payday loans through emails and texts, the report said. But this is what anecdotal evidence suggests is happening. The number of payday ads seen by children soared from three million in to million last year, meaning that in each child typically saw 70 of these ads.

It also called for better sharing of up-to-date information between payday firms, so that they can stop struggling borrowers getting into further trouble by taking outmultiple loans with different lenders. If the payday lenders do not establish better ways to quickly share such information by next July, the FCA should mandate this as a condition of trading in the sector, the committee said. Russell Hamblin-Boone, chief executive of the CFA, said the body recognised concerns about the advertising of short-term loans on children's TV channels over a year ago "and, as a result, there have been no adverts by members on children's channels since then".

CFA members conduct robust affordability assessments and work with the credit reference agencies before lending to anyone. Payday lenders are under fire Image: Getty Images Get daily news updates directly to your inbox Subscribe See our privacy notice More newsletters. Thank you for subscribing We have more newsletters Show me See our privacy notice. Subscribe to our Daily news newsletter Enter email Subscribe. News all Most Read Most Recent.