Live data from Hacker News

Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

npr.org

41–50 of 71 posts

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#41
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you really? Do payday loan customers typically comparison shop?

To further reinforce this point, find me a payday lender that up-front lists their Annual Percentage Rate. They really don't which makes comparisons impossible or very hard work.

Sure, but everyone who needs their car repaired today so they don’t get fired tomorrow definitely takes the time to survey all of their local payday lenders, then sits down with a calculator and carefully works out how much each one will ultimately cost them before choosing the cheapest one.

(Hopefully obvious sarcasm is obvious, but one can never tell.)

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think about the idea that if someone is charging 20% on a loan and making easy money, you can offer the same service for 15% and take their business?* That is a race to the bottom, but it seems like it would be good for the customer. * This is essentially what credit unions do with signature loans.

This assumes people are A) rational and B) intelligent enough to shop around. Neither is true. It's quite likely that the company making 20% has a much higher marketing budget than the 15% one. People can't choose the cheaper option if they don't know about it.

Also many who end up taking these loans don't have reliable access to transportation, making shopping around logistically difficult.

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#43
post #3

I'm generally not a fan of regulation. But lately, I've been changing my opinion on that. I don't see how we can all play in the economy game without having a set of unambiguous rules and referees to enforce them. Regulations do add overhead, sure, but how else can we prevent companies from acting in ways that are detrimental to society? Capital finds the shortest path to profits, and without rules, it becomes a quic…

The overhead of regulation is not my concern. My concern is the detrimental effect on society that comes from trying to manage companies doing things that "have a detrimental effect on society". To me, payday loans are a symptom, not a cause. An inability to manage money is not going to go away if payday loans are stopped. An inability to manage money may in some cases be improved with education and mentoring which would reduce the demand for payday loans proportionately. So if we're a compassionate society interested in helping people, then we would be better off helping them directly to reduce the occurrence of the cause.

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#44
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think about the idea that if someone is charging 20% on a loan and making easy money, you can offer the same service for 15% and take their business?* That is a race to the bottom, but it seems like it would be good for the customer. * This is essentially what credit unions do with signature loans.

Can you really? Do payday loan customers typically comparison shop?

> Do payday loan customers typically comparison shop?

I'd say that if they were savvy enough to comparison shop, they wouldn't be payday loan customers.

Look at the person in the article, Angela. She started out @ $300 for approximately $75.00 interest (25%). But now she owes who-knows-how-much with a yearly interest rate of 300%! Yet she still thinks she could pay it back!

She did this because she doesn't trust herself with credit cards; the truth should be she shouldn't trust herself to borrow and pay back loans without incurring further debt and higher interest rates.

Had she actually comparison-shopped, she would've found that a credit card - if she could get one - would likely have had a lower interest rate over the same time period, and couldn't rise anywhere near what the yearly rate she has now with the payday loan company.

This is definitely predatory lending; these companies are lending to people who don't seem to have an understanding of certain basic financial concepts, or if they do, they don't have any clue how it will impact them.

It would be a different case if the borrowers all knew that "yes, this is a crap loan with bad interest, but I don't have a choice, and I know I have to pay it back fast or I'm hosed". Some of them do. But I would wager that the vast majority don't, for a variety of reasons, not all of them due to ignorance (I imagine for some there might be some cultural and/or language barriers as well).

These companies are taking extreme advantage of this, to their profit and to their customers detriment.

The really astounding thing are their customers, like Angela, who seem to think all of this happening is a good thing. I just really don't understand this kind of mindset, of borrowing money at any and all costs with little to gain in the end (it isn't like all of these people are borrowing money to make an investment in some manner, to make a larger gain and pay back the loan with extra in their pocket - maybe some are, but I doubt they are in the majority).

If you need an unsecured loan for something you can't afford to pay cash for today, you likely won't be able to afford to pay off the loan for it tomorrow. If you can - then you must. You don't just keep taking out more loans to keep covering the old loans (which is how a lot of these lenders work; the borrower finds they are unable to pay back the loan plus interest when the note comes due, so the lender extends the loan and ups the rate a bit - rinse and repeat until they default).

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think the rates are obscene?

Is there really any debate on whether or not 400% is obscene?

If you were asked to lend someone you knew was unqualified for a traditional bank loan $200 for a week, and you had to fill out paperwork, create a record, etc., how much would you want them to give back? If they gave you $205 ($5 for your trouble) you’d be roughly charging 130% APR and you wouldn’t cover your costs, let alone the risk. You can extrapolate 400% from this example.

Understanding how short duration, risk and operational overhead affects the rate is key to effective regulation in this industry.

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#48
post #3

I'm generally not a fan of regulation. But lately, I've been changing my opinion on that. I don't see how we can all play in the economy game without having a set of unambiguous rules and referees to enforce them. Regulations do add overhead, sure, but how else can we prevent companies from acting in ways that are detrimental to society? Capital finds the shortest path to profits, and without rules, it becomes a quic…

I heard an interesting quote lately about how federal aviation regulations were "written in blood". That nobody really wanted the regulations but time after time common sense and commercial interests failed to provide a safe operating environment. I've been thinking about that a lot: while there are certainly some over-regulated industries, when you dig into the "why" on any particular rule you usually find some horr…

Just because an unlikely horror story occurs once in a while doesn't mean we need a regulatory response each time.

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think the rates are obscene?

Is there really any debate on whether or not 400% is obscene?

If you think you could do it for less, why don't you? 200% returns would be yours for the taking!

Re: Move to Pull Consumer Protection Rule Heightens Debate over Payday Lending

#50
post #12

Adding regulation without forbidding payday loans sounds to me like the worst thing you can do. In emergency situations, it can be perfectly rational to take out such a loan, despite high interests and fees. On the other hand, if you take a payday loan for an unneeded expenditure, you will have even less money in the long term. So either you get rid of the regulation, in order to lower the fees. Or you forbid payday…

73 dollars in interest/fees for a 30 day, 300 dollar loan doesn't sound like much, but it works out to approx. a 296% APR. This isn't about fees, it's about usurious behaviour.
Post reply on HN