Payday Loan rap!

Former_MSE_Andrea

Hi everyone, have you seen the Payday Loan rap on youtube?

Here's Martin's tweet about it:

Payday Loan rap

What do you think?

sillygoose

Well I LOVE it... catchy!

ConsumerWizkid

That's right, the CoE is reaching out to kids in a hip and fun new way. That'll learn the billion pound pdl industry fersures!

100ml

The thing is, listening to the lyrics of that 'rap', he says Dave was really struggling financially and had no money so he took out a Payday Loan which, it would seem, he shouldn't have done and couldn't pay back.

Playing Devils Advocate, perhaps Dave shouldn't have taken out a payday loan in the first place if he couldn't afford to pay it back?

I think sometimes people are a bit quick to pass blame to the companies rather than accept responsibility for themselves

The same in the second verse, the woman couldn't get any money from anywhere including her banks but she was given money from a payday loan, why are they made out to be the bad guys again when from what their saying they are the only ones who would help her out? What would have been the scenario if they hadn't helped her out? It's not unreasonable to expect to be paid back on time when you lend someone money, the rates are pretty clear?

Not condoning payday loans here, which I know you'll all say, I am just giving my opinion, often people borrow when they shouldn't and then look to pass the blame after.

BillJones

100ml wrote: »

The same in the second verse, the woman couldn't get any money from anywhere including her banks but she was given money from a payday loan, why are they made out to be the bad guys again when from what their saying they are the only ones who would help her out?

Yes, this is exactly right. The customer approached the company, requested a loan, accepted the terms, and then it's seemingly the firm who are in the wrong. It's especially strange when they are blamed when the person does not pay back what they owe.

In this situation the loan company has helped them out when they asked, and has been stung by not getting back what they lent, yet for some reason it is the customer who is portrayed as having been wronged.

Sinhanada

BillJones wrote: »

Yes, this is exactly right. The customer approached the company, requested a loan, accepted the terms, and then it's seemingly the firm who are in the wrong. It's especially strange when they are blamed when the person does not pay back what they owe.

In this situation the loan company has helped them out when they asked, and has been stung by not getting back what they lent, yet for some reason it is the customer who is portrayed as having been wronged.

Sorry Bill, but disagree completely. Just because they advertise their rates etc does not make them fair and equitable. Yes they provide a purpose but - and this is the big one, the ease of which you get sucked in and start to borrow more and more to be able to survive is the big problem and the CoE is doing fantastic work to try and stem this. The rollover of the loans, the charges and the aggressive tactics they use to try and get more business is absurd. The ability to take out these loans without any proper affordability checks, the negative impact on your credit ratings from taking these out - all of these are not explained and is unfair business practice.

100ml

My point of view on this is that nobody is holding guns to peoples heads here, people are accountable for their own actions yet choose to join the bandwagon and pass the blame.

Agreed stricter affordability checks should be in place, which I think since the introduction of the FCA they are, but ultimately this constant push to drive lenders away is going to result in a lot of people not being able to get credit anywhere.

I don't care what the CoE say, you could put a credit union on every street and the majority of people would still not use them. It's an old fashioned way of borrowing, it's not convenient and I personally think taking out small loans is quite a private thing that you wouldn't want other people knowing about.

If the same amount of effort was put into cleaning up the payday loan sector and ridding the bad eggs as it is put into vilifying them and trying to get rid of them, the whole system would be in a better place.

Let's not forget the majority of people that use them seem to have a positive experience, but that is never mentioned.

BillJones

Sinhanada wrote: »

Sorry Bill, but disagree completely. Just because they advertise their rates etc does not make them fair and equitable.

Well, fair and equitable is a concept that each individual has to decide for themselves. Given the customer knew the terms, and agreed to them, they clearly though that they were fine.

If they look at the terms, think "that's terrible", then the right response is not to use them.

I can fully understand someone thinking that payday loans are terrible value, and should be avoided (I think this myself). What I cannot understand is someone entering into a contract with them, and then complaining when they are expected to stick to the deal.

and the CoE is doing fantastic work to try and stem this

No they aren't, they are doing a rubbish job. They claimed that they were going to outcompete them. They should have done so by now, but haven't. They should be ashamed.

Monkeyballs

This is always going to split opinions.

The first thing these places should do is ask for proof of income from employment.

No job, no loan because while people preach about benefits not being enough to live on then how can someone be expected to repay several hundred £'s at the end of the month? Kids in primary school could do this level of maths... Sure, they may be some exceptions but no 'pay' means no 'payday' loan.

As for those in employment with an income, circumstances change and the amendments to which PDL's need to adhere to should go a long way to helping those who struggle - after all, if you lose your job then you'll likely be going onto benefits and therefore the scenario above applies...

MB

Sinhanada

I agree that there needs to be credit available and driving them away is likely to push people further into poverty, but allowing people on benefits to apply (Which still happens regardless of FCA involvement) and then the subsequent charges for late payments etc is abhorrent.

Yes, we all know the costs and we shouldn't take them out, but it is such an easy spiral to get into, and let's face it, the people needing them (Ok I'm being stereotypical here) are generally not the ones with sound financial sense. I'll add myself into this category and explain:

I took out my first PDL in 2008, I rolled it over - and kept doing this until 2009 when I realised that four loans with different companies was too much. I tried to negotiate with them but they all ignored me so I turned to the CCCS - they helped and each one worked with them. With the exception of one with the irritating cartoons on TV. They igonred all pleas, letters - accepted token payments of course until the loan had gone from £645 to over £1500. Is this responsible?

Yes I read the terms, I was prepared to accept the consequences of a ruined credit file and have now managed to pay all of this off. I should have known better - I certainly do now, but from personal experience can tell you how badly they behave towards customers.

Sinhanada

Agree perfectly MB - yes it's always going to be a contentious issue but the checks need to be in place. Payslips from your employers - even a call to HR \ Payroll to make sure they still work there. Harsh? Maybe. Embarrassing. Definitely but will certainly help to slow the tide of people being sucked into this spiral, and stop so many people falling into massive debt due to it