Trouble with a Payday Loan Provider

immoral_angeluk

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/MoneyTaxAndBenefits/BenefitsTaxCreditsAndOtherSupport/On_a_low_income/DG_10018856

Who is eligible?

You can apply for a Crisis Loan if all the following apply:

• you're aged 16 or over
• you don't have enough money to meet your (or your family's) immediate short term needs in an emergency or as the result of a disaster
• without the loan there will be serious damage or risk to your (or your family's) health or safety

or if you're aged 16 or over and you've:

• been getting a Community Care Grant but you're moving out of institutional or residential accommodation and don't have enough money to pay advance rent to a non-local authority landlord

michael1983l

Apples2 wrote: »

I will be the first to admit I don't know much about Crisis Loans other than they are Interest Free loans.

I would LIKE to think though, that there is a strict criteria for being accepted for them.
I would like to think you will not get one because your fridge has died or your car as failed.

I would like to think they are for genuine emergencies e.g having no food, no heating in winter with kids/elderly.

I would like to think there is a panel of people who examine each and every case on an individual basis (can I assume the rest of us are funding these Crisis Loans??)


That's the emergancies dealt with, now are you implying you want these Crisis Loans loans offered to people who want a new TV or whatever other reason people like the OP took one out??


Isn't buying food from Tesco with a Debit Card knowing there is no money in the account the same as taking a loan with no money to repay.

Technically different of course, but the reality is the same.

Apples, the group that I would class as dependant on these loans (which is where the real problems lie) should not be getting loans for TVs cars, ect ect. It is designed to bridge a gap for essentials between paydays. Obviously this is not used by people for this, they do use it for Pub and other nice things they really shouldn't.

However if these sharks were made illigal and the only form was a crisis loan then only those that REALLY REALLY need extra money would be granted credit. Those that want to blow it on any old crap will not.

I appreciate that people should be given choices, however I also think that lenders, borrowers and the government should all be making sure we are not borrowing more than we can afford as the defaulting of loans affects us all in interest rates not just the original borrower.

Also it would reduce the risk of poverty brought on by spiralling debts.

I think you can only genuinly understand how soul destroying these companies are if you have been in the unfortunate position of relying on payday loans to get from payday to payday. It is a never ending cycle.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

michael1983l wrote: »

Nanny state? wow where do I start on this one, firstly Tescos are not lending you money so it is totally irrelevant. Your bank is and they will make a decision wether to authorise your transaction based on your account conduct.

As for Nanny state, this is nothing to do with state. This is to do with ethical banking. If you lend money to somebody with no income, you know from the start that they can't pay you back. To know this, knowing you will impose fines as per your terms and conditions in my eyes is legal robbery.

they lent to someone with income though. and the OP borrowed knowing the rates of interest and the handling fee and agreed to the T&Cs that if they could not pay back the loan they could either roll it over or face higher interest charges on the loan amount.

The point is not whether these loan companies are ethical - that is not what the OP is after. He entered into a contract with a payday loan company whose sole idea is to give you a helping hand till your next PAYDAY. They are short term loans.


In this instance the Op knew this but they decided they had either spent all their money and didnt want to pay it back when due and is now crying into their milk because they face higher charges.

michael1983l

Jeff_Bridges_hair wrote: »

they lent to someone with income though. and the OP borrowed knowing the rates of interest and the handling fee and agreed to the T&Cs that if they could not pay back the loan they could either roll it over or face higher interest charges on the loan amount.

The point is not whether these loan companies are ethical - that is not what the OP is after. He entered into a contract with a payday loan company whose sole idea is to give you a helping hand till your next PAYDAY. They are short term loans.


In this instance the Op knew this but they decided they had either spent all their money and didnt want to pay it back when due and is now crying into their milk because they face higher charges.

Sorry that was just poor choice of words from myself. I was actually referring to their disposable income after essentials are paid. I know they lend money to people who have no disposable income because once upon a time that was me. In fact my books balanced £200 short yet they still eventually gave me a payday loan of £800 after months of it snowballing.

Apples2

michael1983l wrote: »

However if these sharks were made illigal and the only form was a crisis loan then only those that REALLY REALLY need extra money would be granted credit. Those that want to blow it on any old crap will not.

I appreciate what you are saying but these customers will STILL want to spend money on crap. Taking away the source, does NOT take away the demand.

With all the regulated lenders now banned, the only other avenue to obtain cash loans is via Fat Harry and his henchmen.

The OP will not be concerned about default, he would be concerned about his kneecaps and safety of his family.

michael1983l

Apples2 wrote: »

I appreciate what you are saying but these customers will STILL want to spend money on crap. Taking away the source, does NOT take away the demand.

With all the regulated lenders now banned, the only other avenue to obtain cash loans is via Fat Harry and his henchmen.

The OP will not be concerned about default, he would be concerned about his kneecaps and safety of his family.

Only a very few number would opt for that option, people who use payday loan companies do because it is easy and on TV. What happens when these same people cant get more credit from payday loan companies, they go to fat harry anyway, your just delaying the inevitable really at the same time as getting lots of people into trouble who wouldn't have thought twice had their not been an advert on the telly every 2 mins for easy access to cash.

Jeff_Bridges_hair

michael1983l wrote: »

Sorry that was just poor choice of words from myself. I was actually referring to their disposable income after essentials are paid. I know they lend money to people who have no disposable income because once upon a time that was me. In fact my books balanced £200 short yet they still eventually gave me a payday loan of £800 after months of it snowballing.

Well again this comes down to the consumers choice to use them doesnt it. We are all adults able to make choices in our lives - if you need a small loan so badly ask family friends or if your unemployed the dole before you should even think of going to these companies.


If not - Pawn something.

Then and only then should you think about using one of these companies - there are lots of them so they must be making some money out of it and there must be thousands who have used them have found the service they have provided excellent.. It seems people only complain when they find out they have to pay up because they cant afford the repayments.

michael1983l

Jeff_Bridges_hair wrote: »

Well again this comes down to the consumers choice to use them doesnt it. We are all adults able to make choices in our lives - if you need a small loan so badly ask family friends or if your unemployed the dole before you should even think of going to these companies.


If not - Pawn something.

Then and only then should you think about using one of these companies - there are lots of them so they must be making some money out of it and there must be thousands who have used them have found the service they have provided excellent.. It seems people only complain when they find out they have to pay up because they cant afford the repayments.

Obviously there should be a choice in credit, I am not disputing that. What I am disputing is the tactics used, the target audience and the lack of common sense used by these companies. If they did not lend to people who were at a very high risk of not being able to afford the repayment then I would not have a problem with them. It is the lenders responsibility to do the necessary checks to prove that the loan is affordable to the consumer. These companies do not do this obviously.

LadBroke

Unfortunately this has turned into a general discussion about "Payday Loans". Just to make it clear: I have only used the tooth crown as an example for a sudden financial burden that could come up - before someone on here gets too cynical about it: People have no choice whether they want one or not - and normally there is not time to lose if you want your gems to stay as healthy as possible !

Back to my real question and that is about the legal aspect of them charging me for a missed payment and now even charging interest on that: If I have already indicated to them that I can only afford to pay back so much, are they still entitled to charge. Especially if you go back to the top of this thread and read how they provide different information on four occasions ? Even I were in a position to pay back now - the amount due to be paid back has been increased significantly because I have been given different information four times ?

Jeff_Bridges_hair

LadBroke wrote: »

Unfortunately this has turned into a general discussion about "Payday Loans". Just to make it clear: I have only used the tooth crown as an example for a sudden financial burden that could come up - before someone on here gets too cynical about it: People have no choice whether they want one or not - and normally there is not time to lose if you want your gems to stay as healthy as possible !

Back to my real question and that is about the legal aspect of them charging me for a missed payment and now even charging interest on that: If I have already indicated to them that I can only afford to pay back so much, are they still entitled to charge. Especially if you go back to the top of this thread and read how they provide different information on four occasions ? Even I were in a position to pay back now - the amount due to be paid back has been increased significantly because I have been given different information four times ?

Yes they have every right to charge you for a late payment and interest on top of that - Its in your T&Cs when you apply for a loan from them.

What you should have done is used the roll over feature where they would have taken £25 then your loan would roll over to the next month with no interest added until you could then afford to pay it all back.