Comments about ‘Payday lenders fighting plan to cap interest at 100%’

Why is the government getting into this business? Yes, they are bad terms, but if someone wants to pay that amount, so what?

Government - keep your hands off! Let the free market work!

These guys are predators and need to be driven off the landscape. The totally unmitigated free market leads to this kind of abuse and is entirely counter to the good of the people. The entrenched ideology of an entirely free market regulating itself is nothing short of wishful thinking, and is a myth.

Free market is one thing, this is another. These types of businesses take advantage of people when they are in desperate situations. They are scam artists and criminals just like a loan shark. Why do you think so many other states have banned them?

Control!

I agree that these businesses are risky, but they do have their place as a VERY LAST RESORT if you know what you are doing and shop for the best of the worst. I have to admit that I have used these plaaces, but borrowed only what I NEEDED and KNOW I can pay them back on time by simply letting them send my pre dated check through my bank when I agreed to let them do it. By disaplining myself I have had no trouble and have even raised my credit score by doing so. The trick is to borrow only what is needed and them remember that that is money you have already spent from other sorces that is coming to you later because you needed it now.

In Australia the limit is 48% p.a.

That's still too much in my book.

Should be more like 24%.

All loans have their costs added to the principal or paid up front. Lenders don't have to cover them from the interest. There are other ways.

Islamic pasyday lenders charge an agreed fee for the loan. No interest is charged.

The toruble with short term lenders is that they treat the borrower as if they are a captive market - which is pretty much true.

The trouble with short-term borrowers is that they are vulnerable and will accept almost any terms because they have to.

A cap is a good thing. 48% is workable, so is 25%

Way to go Laura! We need control.Our kids live on it week to week.

The only thing that makes this business legal is that they bought a license to practice loan sharking. With this license they now use law enforcement to be their enforcers to collect debts. This cap of 100% is not low enough. They are predators of the poor and marginal income workers and many military personnel. What is most disturbing is payday lenders sell these loans to local banks who then become the predators with the greater ability to clog our small claims courts. Perhaps some legislation to keep lending institutions from using small claims courts to act as collection agencies on their loans. Better yet, legislation to ban them from the state. It would also free up law enforcement and keep them from being the enforcers for loan sharks. These business are not a part of the free market system, they are predators with no purpose. They are in business to steal and rob from the poor. Even our esteemed County AG, Shurtleff is on their payroll and openly considers them as reputable. Shurtleff has been a clog in the artery in tring to eliminate this scourge of loan sharking.

Make it illegal for these (ahem) businesses to loan money to anyone under 30 years old. If people aren't responsible enough to stay away from them by that age they deserve what they get. I'm betting the "lenders" would fight that, too.

Desperate people do desperate things, which many times are fool hardy. These types of lending institutions wreck tremendous personal damage. My son was involved with two a couple of years ago. They have been disastrous for him. These charlatins should be outlawed.

Here's the real problem:

"Such power comes as the industry gave at least $91,000 to state candidates and parties last year including giving directly to about one of every four legislators who stood for election."

The industry has bought out your legislature. This is where the controls should be. Cut off the head of the legislative snake and problem solved.

Too many people drinking the legislative Kool Aid.

These are indeed 'predatory lenders' in the worst sense of the word. The prey on desperate, financially ignorant people and trap them into a 'lending' cycle they can't get out of. Many of their 'customers' sign over their entire paychecks to these animals, and then 'borrow' what they need to survive on. If there was any justice in this country they would not be allowed to operate at all. These businesses are nothing more then 'dressed up' versions of the 'loan sharks' that used to operate in poor neighborhoods, and broke the legs of 'customers' who failed to meet their 'payments'. OUTLAW THEM!

I don't hear of anyone being dragged in off the street and made to apply for a loan. This is just one more effort to protect people from the consequences of their own actions. It's a tax PAYING business.

How many of you would loan 100 dollars to a complete stranger and only want 3.95 for taking responsiblity for taking care of their collateral and doing the paper work for the state and city. I'm not in the business but am just being the "devils advocat".

Even though we advocate "free market" principles, in Utah, we also have no trouble banning practices which have shown to be generally very bad for people. That's why we wisely have banned, gambling, drug use, prostitution, Ponsi schemes , etc. I've seen how these bottom feeding loan sharks take advantage of those in need, I think they should be banned out right. Remember this:

"The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is slave to the lender." (Proverbs 22:7)

Congratulations, Laura Black. But please be tougher, work to ban them from the State. Those loan sharks are preying on the misery of troubled people. At the same time, though, provide to these troubled people more financial education and help so they can better handle their challenges.

I find it very hard to believe that payday lenders can't make it on 100% interest. I think that they should leave the state. We don't need this type of business here.

I trust that the limit of 100% will also be applied to bank fees that often exceed 1,000%.

No one is holding a gun to the heads of the people taking the loans, forcing them to do so. Sure, the government should protect people from being deceived, by requiring full disclosure of the contract terms, but if the terms are accurately described in the contract (and I have not heard anyone claiming otherwise) then no deception is taking place. If a business offers a loan at an interest rate of 10,000% and there are people out there who voluntarily agree to those terms, then what right does the government have to say that the deal should not be allowed? If a person finds that rate to be too high, then he or she can pursue other options or try to negotiate a lower rate with the business offering the loan.

If the government artifically limits the loan rates that can be offered, then the businesses will refuse to make loans to people with very bad credit. That will result in a person with only bad loan options suddenly finding that he or she now has no loan options. So in the end, limiting rates doesn't help those whom the program is supposed to help.

Why are we not banning McDonalds or Burger King for tempting the obese. Why don't we put speed controls on cars to cap the speed at 65 for those who have a lead foot. How about banning Credit Cards or Land Speculators for the mess we currently experience. Why don't we just let Government rule everything we do. that would mean higher taxes, more regulations, fewer choices. These businesses provide better rates than your bank when you bounce a check by mis balancing your bank account by $1.00. Or when you are late on either a car payment or a home loan. Maybe we should all file for bk life is too tough.