Tom Linafelt of QC Holdings was obviously annoyed with an uninformed editorial in the Kansan newspaper.   Here’s his letter to the editor, which goes on to make the key points that:

• The vast majority of Kansan use payday loans responsibly, and;
• Banning payday loans will force customers into more costly options. 

The Center for Consumer Freedom responds to a recent editorial in Kansas’ Witchita Eagle.

“…The Eagle editorial ignored these critical facts while narrowly focusing an ad hominem critique on the payday industry alone. These lenders earn a mere fraction of what traditional banks make on service fees. In 2003, bounced-check and insufficient-fund fees generated $22 billion in bank revenues, which was equal to 18 percent of banks’ net operating income. The banking industry brought in an additional $57 billion in late fees.

“Vulnerable Kansans” are best served when they have the ability to bridge temporary stress in their budget. Instead of restricting payday lenders, government should focus on making sure consumers have the ability to choose the best borrowing option for their needs.

A payday lender from El Dorado, KS, Mike Strong, engaged is some fairly vigorous debate with anti-payday loan activists.  Mike deserves lots of kudos for walking into the lion’s den and putting up a fight.  There are a lot of Mike Strongs in the industry, but we can always use more.