short term loans

nevesnanna

Hi, I am just wondering why this government allows all the short term loan companies (mostly from America) to constantly bombard us with adverts in a recession basically encouraging people to get deeper in debt.
What I don't understand is why our own banks in the UK don't do short term loans for their own customers who have banked with them for a long time. Instead they do a "credit check" and say NO! Thus pushing people into the arms of the sharks & short term loan companies.
Surely it would be in the banks best interest to get them back in the good books to look into this. Obviously charging a little extra interest but nowhere near as much as 3-4000%.
It's not exactly rocket science and the way I see it is, if the loan companies can hand out money so easily WITHOUT a credit check why can't the big banks?
I'm not encouraging people to take out loans & get into more debt and I'm sure a few of you will disagree with me but I just had to ask WHY?

Nice_Weather_For_Ducks

nevesnanna wrote: »

What I don't understand is why our own banks in the UK don't do short term loans for their own customers who have banked with them for a long time.

They do, its called an overdraft.

And they have to be a bit more selective who they will grant them to as A: they want to be repaid, and B: they charge 10-25% APR not 1000-5000% APR.

Payday loans are taken out by people who cant afford them, and are highly likely to have trouble paying them back.

Apples2

nevesnanna wrote: »

the way I see it is, if the loan companies can hand out money so easily WITHOUT a credit check why can't the big banks?
I'm not encouraging people to take out loans & get into more debt and I'm sure a few of you will disagree with me but I just had to ask WHY?

Because too many people take the money and run away never to repay a penny.

We have Credit Reference Agencies who monitor how people manage their obligations, those who don't get a black mark so have a bad credit file. This way the banks already know this guy is likely to do a moonlight flit so they know not to lend to him.

Any of this sound familiar to you?

[Deleted User]

Very few, if any, of the high street banks have any appetite to play in the high risk end of the market.

Reputationally, it would destroy them, because of the rates they would have to charge.

DCFC79

People aren't encouraged to get deeper into debt, its all down to the lifestyle people lead eg keeping up with the jones's. Its the must this/that mentality. If people spend within they're means they shouldn't be encouraged to get into debt.

27col

DCFC79 wrote: »

People aren't encouraged to get deeper into debt, its all down to the lifestyle people lead eg keeping up with the jones's. Its the must this/that mentality. If people spend within they're means they shouldn't be encouraged to get into debt.

No apostrophe needed. It's their means.
But I agree with the sentiment.

DCFC79

Nice_Weather_For_Ducks wrote: »

Payday loans are taken out by people who cant afford them, and are highly likely to have trouble paying them back.

Or they think they can pay the loan back at the end of the month but they just so happen to pay for something else or spend money on a night out and the loan doesn't get paid.

DCFC79

27col wrote: »

No apostrophe needed. It's their means.
But I agree with the sentiment.

I knew that was the wrong 1 to use and that it would be picked up on.

Top marks to you.

telboyo

DCFC79 wrote: »

I knew that was the wrong 1 to use and that it would be picked up on.

Top marks to you.

Also your signature should read "their" instead of "they're" in both instances.
Sorry to be a pedant.

DCFC79

telboyo wrote: »

Also your signature should read "their" instead of "they're" in both instances.
Sorry to be a pedant.

Thanks, really should learn the difference.

iolanthe07

DCFC79 wrote: »

Thanks, really should learn the difference.

This might help: They're (they are) going to drive their car (belongs to them) which is parked over there (position).