Payday Loan thing?

[namealot]

Society is measured by how it treats its weakest members ( Its ok to exploit them they don’t have to borrow it etc ) If you stand by that then its ok for nominet etc to bring out a new cctld by the same route you don’t have to reg them? Exploitation be it through necessity, ignorance, cohesion whatever leaves for some a bad taste for others it part of consumer society.

Yes there is plenty on the net about the high interest but some might see many who borrow do not have the access to the net or able to afford news papers or ability to read and understand the paperwork given them...

 

[GreyWing]

Society is measured by how it treats its weakest members ( its ok to exploit then they don’t have to borrow it etc ) If you stand by that ethos’s by that its then ok for nominet etc to bring out a new cctld by the same rout you don’t have to reg them? Some might see it hypocritical or good old capitalist self preservation

I don't follow any of that logic I'm afraid. First of all "society is measured by how it treats its weak". I don't understand where that has come from, other than Ghandi repeating it. It's not a measure I subscribe to. I think on some occasions you can use the society tag and on others, Maggie Thatcher was right, there is no such thing.

Yes it is ok for Nominet to bring out CC'tld's, a group of us are arguing that it's not the best way to move forward. Not that Nominet shouldn't have the right to choose. So I don't think there is anything hypocritical from people against .uk. If anything, what they are arguing is the very fact that users don't have a choice to purchase the .uk version... not that they do. Although it has been noted that the Guardian have jumped ship, Edwin pointed out that they were one who were set to lose out with .uk So maybe voting with feet is already taking place?

So hypocritical? I don't see where that is coming from unfortunately.

 

[GreyWing]

Exploitation be it through necessity, ignorance, cohesion whatever leaves for some a bad taste for others it part of consumer society.ci

Yes there is plenty on the net about the high interest but some might see many who borrow do not have the access to the net or able to afford news papers or ability to read and understand the paperwork given them...

Sorry is changed a little since I quoted your original, but if I could ask you this then. How do you intend to change things? What is your ideal solution?

 

[namealot]

I don't follow any of that logic I'm afraid. First of all "society is measured by how it treats its weak". I don't understand where that has come from, other than Ghandi repeating it. It's not a measure I subscribe to. I think on some occasions you can use the society tag and on others, Maggie Thatcher was right, there is no such thing.

Yes it is ok for Nominet to bring out CC'tld's, a group of us are arguing that it's not the best way to move forward. Not that Nominet shouldn't have the right to choose. So I don't think there is anything hypocritical from people against .uk. If anything, what they are arguing is the very fact that users don't have a choice to purchase the .uk version... not that they do. Although it has been noted that the Guardian have jumped ship, Edwin pointed out that they were one who were set to lose out with .uk So maybe voting with feet is already taking place?

So hypocritical? I don't see where that is coming from unfortunately.

Appols was editing post before you replied ?
Most would see it atributed to Matthew 25:41-46 NT

Does an open free market drive rates down make lenders more competitive or allow some to exploit it nanny state or jungle law tricky to decide which is best and easy to be judgmental when its not something most casting it will ever need ?

I don’t see anything wrong with lenders that’s there choice neither though do I see anything wrong with tougher criteria for lenders or capping interest?

 

[julian]

I'm sorry to say in my experience reckless borrowing is rife.. a sad reflection of what society has become.

I know plenty of people who want the latest phone, the latest TV, Holidays, the latest car, SKY, louis vuitton clothes the list goes on..

- they cannot afford it and instead of saving for it like I had to (or can I dare say 'go without it - and make do with what you've got')

they take a loan, or smash the credit card.

These above aren't essential things to live and yet I'm supposed to fee sorry for the 5k wonga loan they can't pay back?

 

[GreyWing]

Graeme, I'm just calling it the way I see it. I'm neither a dogmatic nor ideological person, in fact the older I get the more pragmatic I become.

If the domain you refer to is sportswear, I paid £xx,xxx for the domain from a chap called Rick Williams in 2010 and I sold it for a 60% loss so I'm not doing very well at this game.

The point was making with that sportswear.co.uk isn't related to you, it's to us all. Not the name or not even that actual deal. But more how someone who doesn't know the industry could spin it if they wanted. They could go to Government and say, look at this guy selling it for £xx,xxx and we sold it for £6. They wouldn't tell the minister you sold it for a loss. My point being that, the APR figure with payday loans also very misleading. To people outside the industry who don't see the costs involved it is being spun the same.

I genuinely think the industry needs competition, not regulation. The barriers to entry aren't that high to be honest. Compared to starting a bank, which you need hundreds of millions to back you (so they have a monopoly and do to some point need to be regulated as there aren't that many these days), starting a payday loan company is relatively simple. £600 CCL and off they go, if there is as much fat on the bone as people think... competitors should be in there driving down the costs.

Mate I respect your views, you know I'm one those people who welcomes debate. I really don't mind anyone's views or stand point, I honestly don't and if they are your views then fair enough. I don't think we are going to change each others mind though.

Certainly not going to fall out over it,

 

[namealot]

I'm sorry to say in my experience reckless borrowing is rife.. a sad reflection of what society has become.

I know plenty of people who want the latest phone, the latest TV, Holidays, the latest car, SKY, louis vuitton clothes the list goes on..

- they cannot afford it and instead of saving for it like I had to (or can I dare say 'go without it - and make do with what you've got')

they take a loan, or smash the credit card.

These above aren't essential things to live and yet I'm supposed to fee sorry for the 5k wonga loan they can't pay back?

Item is immaterial it’s reckless lending…?..

 

[GreyWing]

Item is immaterial it’s reckless lending…?..

How would you fix it though?

 

[namealot]

How would you fix it though?

Is there an answer? loaded either way

Does it depend on if you believe the current system is fine or not? Do you regulate the dealer or control the junky? I lean towards regulating the dealer control the % slow down the incentive to deal that slows down chances of new addicts then help the existing become weaned off.

 

[GreyWing]

Is there an answer? loaded either way

Does it depend on if you believe the current system is fine or not? Do you regulate the dealer or control the junky? I lean towards regulating the dealer control the % slow down the incentive to deal that slows down chances of new addicts then help the existing become weaned off.

But they are already addicted before they get to this dealer (the payday loan dealers to use the analergy), most payday loans are used to pay off other debts.

They did the old regulation of % in certain states of the US. Lenders just got up and left, it had the effect of banning legally obtained loans for poor people. People were forced on to unregulated loan sharks. Ironically, some of them were actually dealing drugs and loan sharking on the side. Going through bankruptcy, didn't seem to stop them wanting their money back either.

Nope I don't think there is an answer, well other than competition to drive down prices. Or as Julian says, people stop overspending is the best answer, but that needs to be done before people even get to payday loans.

 

[namealot]

But they are already addicted before they get to this dealer (the payday loan dealers to use the analergy), most payday loans are used to pay off other debts.

They did the old regulation of % in certain states of the US. Lenders just got up and left, it had the effect of banning legally obtained loans for poor people. People were forced on to unregulated loan sharks. Ironically, some of them were actually dealing drugs and loan sharking on the side. Going through bankruptcy, didn't seem to stop them wanting their money back either.

Nope I don't think there is an answer, well other than competition to drive down prices. Or as Julian says, people stop overspending is the best answer, but that needs to be done before people even get to payday loans.

But there are already door stop lenders who many will go to either before or after but strangely although they may give you a slap take everything worth anything from your home there likely leave you somewhere to live? They want too be able to find you and have little chance of them taking your home, following you every where you move ? Most of them there interest would actually likely be lower often you borrow x pay back xx by x a more simplistic method and whilst its true some may be borrowers already many are not because they cant meet the criteria set for more traditional lending ?

 

[julian]

Reckless Borrowing - not lending?

borrowing money is not compulsory - take responsibility for one's action.

(swindling old ladies on the doorstep for a loan is different)

Item is immaterial it’s reckless lending…?..

 

[Blossom]

I'm sorry to say in my experience reckless borrowing is rife.. a sad reflection of what society has become.

I know plenty of people who want the latest phone, the latest TV, Holidays, the latest car, SKY, louis vuitton clothes the list goes on..

- they cannot afford it and instead of saving for it like I had to (or can I dare say 'go without it - and make do with what you've got')

they take a loan, or smash the credit card.

These above aren't essential things to live and yet I'm supposed to fee sorry for the 5k wonga loan they can't pay back?

Very true. For these people (i.e. not the people who are in exceptional circumstances or completely swindled by those doorstep sellers and/or misleading advertising) I have no pity at all. Don't buy something that you can't afford, it's simple.

You see forum posts all the time on MSE along the lines of 'I have no money, I can't afford to eat or pay off my loans' and it turns out they have an iPhone that they just don't want to sell (that they couldn't afford in the first place). I don't think it's even possible to help these people.

I'm pretty materialistic, but I don't make any big purchases unless I'm 100% sure that I can afford it, the essentials for the month, and still have a fair amount left over. Usually means saving and planning ahead, but it's worth it for the security.

 

[DaveP]

Reckless Borrowing - not lending?

borrowing money is not compulsory - take responsibility for one's action.

(swindling old ladies on the doorstep for a loan is different)

Julian is right.

A payday loan is meant for those who are in full-time employment. Payday loans do not appear on ones credit history/report unless they default on it. Therefore lenders do not know and are not responsible to know what other payday loans borrowers have, it is the borrowers responsibility, which means if someone falls into a trap with these payday loans it is entirely their responsibility.

I've personally fallen into a trap with these when I didn't have too. I know others who have too and all I can say is we were all reckless for doing so, it was our fault not the lenders.

 

[GreyWing]

Massive amount of respect for saying that Dave.

 

[DaveP]

Massive amount of respect for saying that Dave.

Thanks mate. I'd rather not say why or how it happened to me but it is incredibly easy to fall into the trap thus perhaps the confusion as to why some feel it is reckless lending when it isn't. I've said too much now I don't want to tarnish my reputation here.

 

[julian]

I agree. If you were a hard working person suddenly made redundant through no fault of your own - you have a family to support, a mortgage to pay, I can completely see how you might take a loan in this economic climate.

I don't know what the answer is..

people that aren't on the dole sometimes have nowhere to turn to other than these types of lenders and it's these people that society should be looking out for.

 

[DaveP]

Dave, thanks for sharing this.

Two things, firstly, you say you didn't have to so what made you do it and what would you have done if you didn't have the option of a payday lender?

Let's just say compulsive behaviour..

Secondly, what if you did have to borrow the money, what if your child's shoes had worn through so badly they'd split and was making holes in their socks. What if even though you knew you couldn't afford it your choice was to take the loan or let your child down.

Luckily for me I have no dependents, I'm single and I'm still only 25 so have plenty of time to turn things around.

But what I will say is this is why it's so important for everyone to be responsible and to save money. In the past I've known people who could easily walk to work but instead choose to perhaps drive or get public transport then have the cheek to complain about fuel or public transport prices burning a hole in their pocket every month, whereas if they just walked or cycled they could probably save £60 a month or more on this alone. :S

The sad reality is we live in a society where materialistic possessions, luxuries and ease of living are a must have for most people, some of whom can't really afford it.

This also answers your question in regards to what if somebody was suddenly made redundant. Well as long as they were sensible and saved money for a rainy day rather splash it all out on luxuries they would be better off, right?

 

[namealot]

A payday lender that makes a point of its selectivity on loans and ability to payback has nonetheless seen write-offs rise to 41% of revenue? That’s not responsible lending?

If someone does need to feed cloth themselves, dependants through no fault of there own an unexpected death, redundancy, employer gone bust and has no alternative a APR 4214%

I’m all for profit but don’t believe all that use these services are doing so just to buy the latest fade items or go on holiday? oh I know they don’t have to borrow but if they do the rates justified ? cap it at 100 - 200% that’s still mega profit ? A rate of 4214% APR would make an honest person think f it steal it as the chance of being caught and if they are the penalties and % payback are lower?

 

[retired_member32]

payday lenders are terrible, everything should be transparent which it clearly isn't...there accounting is unbelievable, and the majority of the searches on peoples incomes are non existent, if the person/s taking out the loans are found to be in arrears, default notices recorded or to be in the slightest risk the loan should be void, giving loans to the sub-prime market is a recipe for disaster....and everybody will pay for