Amigo Loans Irresponsible lending complaints thread

onwards&upwards

boo_star wrote: »

Do Halifax, or RBS, or any other prime lender?

Why do you think different rules apply to subprime lenders vs prime ones?

Because they charge nearly 50% interest and prey on the vulnerable and desperate.

boo_star

onwards&upwards wrote: »

Because they charge nearly 50% interest and prey on the vulnerable and desperate.

Their interest rate is irrelevant and they charge an interest rate proportional to the risk involved with lending to those customers.

Duke203

robboa wrote: »

Hi all

Now you can complain against this horible company to the ombudsman and with over 83 percent of cases siding with the creditor - i thought i'd start this thread for success stories.

Are you able to furnish us with the source of your 83% please?


A quick look through your posting history provides a brief insight into the cause of companies giving out high interest loans, and the answer might surprise you, as it's you.


You have stated you have a number of satisfied defaults, and if I was in the business of lending money and expecting it to be paid back on time, and with defualts in your file, I'd probably lend to you at 100-150% maybe, so count yourself lucky Amigo were foolish enough to send the money over to you at such a low 50% rate.


Why are you complaining to the FOS about them BTW?

Willing2Learn

boo_star wrote: »

...they have a business model that requires they charge more because their customers stand a greater chance of defaulting vs Mr and Mrs "Bucket" from middle England.

I'd rather these companies didn't exist at all, but I do understand that people from all walks of life have a need to borrow money from time to time and they're simply satisfying the demand from one part of the market.

I have not got a problem with Amigo existing. Nor do I have a problem with the rates they charge. The problem I have is that they're targeting individuals who would be classified as vulnerable, without first having in place a policy to protect their vulnerable customers from harm or detriment.

FCA paper on Consumer Vulnerability

Definition of Vulnerable
The FCA – A vulnerable consumer is someone who, due to their personal circumstances, is especially susceptible to detriment, particularly when a firm is not acting with appropriate levels of care.

Please read page 19 in full to get a more complete definition of vulnerability.

YorkshireBoy

Willing2Learn wrote: »

I have not got a problem with Amigo existing. Nor do I have a problem with the rates they charge. The problem I have is that they're targeting individuals who would be classified as vulnerable, without first having in place a policy to protect their vulnerable customers from harm or detriment.

FCA paper on Consumer Vulnerability



Please read page 19 in full to get a more complete definition of vulnerability.

Then the guarantors are as guilty, if not more so, as the lender, because they know far more about their vulnerability than the lender can ascertain.

Willing2Learn

YorkshireBoy wrote: »

Then the guarantors are as guilty, if not more so, as the lender, because they know far more about their vulnerability than the lender can ascertain.

I think that is something we can all agree on. That the decision making processes of the guarantor is flawed (and that is being generous to them)

boo_star

Willing2Learn wrote: »

I have not got a problem with Amigo existing. Nor do I have a problem with the rates they charge. The problem I have is that they're targeting individuals who would be classified as vulnerable, without first having in place a policy to protect their vulnerable customers from harm or detriment.

FCA paper on Consumer Vulnerability



Please read page 19 in full to get a more complete definition of vulnerability.

There's absolutely no evidence that they're targeting vulnerable people.

Willing2Learn

Whether someone is vulnerable or not is definitely a subjective opinion. After all, how can you say with certainty that an individual is "especially susceptible to detriment". Plus it could all depend on whose definition of vulnerable you go with...

boo_star

Willing2Learn wrote: »

Whether someone is vulnerable or not is definitely a subjective opinion. After all, how can you say with certainty that an individual is "especially susceptible to detriment". Plus it could all depend on whose definition of vulnerable you go with...

They're not vulnerable.

It's that easy.

Willing2Learn

:shocked: :shocked:

I believe your subjectivity leaves us at deadlock.