The Salt Lake County Council’s decision to cap the number of payday lending options is misguided and will hurt the very borrowers council members intend to help (“Payday lenders can’t cash in,” Tribune, May 21).
As former presidential candidate George McGovern recently said in a Wall Street Journal commentary about what happens following a payday lending ban: “The consumer has the same amount of debt but fewer ways to manage it. . . .Why do we think we are helping adult consumers by taking away their options?” A study by economists with the Federal Reserve of New York reinforces his argument. The study found that after a ban on payday lenders in North Carolina and Georgia, residents turned to more expensive and less desirable options, like bounced checks, overdrafts and bankruptcy filings.
Borrowers are best served when they have more choices to pick from, not when politicians eliminate what is for many their best option.
Tim Miller
Center for Consumer Freedom
Washington, D.C.
What “benefits of the bill?”
May 27, 2008 | Uncategorized | Comments (0)
I wasn’t surprised to see this Cashland branch is opposed to House Bill 545 because they stand to lose significant profits. However, just who are they attempting to appeal to with this sign? I hope it’s not regular people that use these payday loan businesses. It would be pretty difficult to find a consumer that would side with the payday loan business if the benefits of the bill were fully explained to them.
Payday Pundit has just one question for the blogger: what exactly are the benefits of this bill? How does banning payday loans help the “regular people who use these payday loan businesses?”
Payday Pundit wishes to be a fly on the wall if ever the elected officials in Ohio are forced to explain the “benefits” of banning payday lending to the hard-working Ohioans who use them.
Yahoo! asks, “When will ohio house bill 545 effect the ability to get a payday loan?”
May 27, 2008 | Uncategorized | Comments (1)
If you want to answer for your specific company, feel free to go to http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080520111333AAkrOUP to post an answer.
Arizona Republic: Facing ban, payday lenders look to voters
May 27, 2008 | Uncategorized | Comments (1)The Arizona Republic details the efforts to gather petition signatures so that voters can decide whether payday lenders can keep their doors open in Arizona.
If payday lending can remain in Arizona, payday operators would lower fees, provide a repayment plan with no additional cost for borrowers behind in payments and ban loan extensions.
At least 153,365 valid signatures are needed to place the initiative on the Nov. 4 ballot.
Felecia Rotellini, superintendent of the state Department of Financial Institutions, said her office receives few complaints regarding payday lenders despite the industry’s large growth since 2000.
Nashua Telegraph: Laws can impact your pocketbook
May 27, 2008 | Uncategorized | Comments (0)Commentary on recent legislation in New Hampshire that, among other things, bans payday lending:
The bad news is if you smoke cigarettes, drink wine, buy property, run a poker tournament or need a short-term loan, you could wind up paying more.
…Lynch will soon sign a law capping the interest rate that can be charged by payday loan agencies or title loan agencies to short-term borrowers. The cap would be 36 percent after Jan. 1.
Payday operators say they can’t survive on the restriction and will close shop in the state. They predict borrowers will end up paying more, if they’re even able to get such quick loans from credit unions or other lenders.
“Legislators do not understand the impact of what they have done.”
May 27, 2008 | industry | Comments (0)So says CFSA’s Tommy Moore in a letter to Ohio’s Zanesville Times Recorder. More from letter:
Let’s be clear: A 28 percent annual rate cap is a ban on payday lending. A 28 percent APR cap allows a fee of less than 8 cents a day, which is not enough to pay salaries and benefits, rent or other overhead costs.
Independent research has shown that without the option of payday lending, consumers bounced more checks, filed for more bankruptcies, did not pay bills and even chose such dangerous options such as forgoing prescription medications.
Center for Consumer Freedom criticizes Salt Lake City council
May 26, 2008 | industry | Comments (0)Article Last Updated: 05/25/2008 11:17:39 PM MDT
“…the only people who complain about payday loans are those who have never needed the product.”
May 25, 2008 | industry | Comments (0)That’s Jabo Covert of Check into Cash in a guest opinion piece in the Tennessean. More from the piece:
Though payday lending has more than its fair share of critics, the simple truth is that the product is extremely popular with customers who use it for short-term, small loans when sudden unexpected expenses arise. Surveys show that payday loan customers nationwide are overwhelmingly satisfied with the service, a fact confirmed by state regulators across the country who report the fewest complaints of any financial business they regulate.
Arizona update: Signature gathering under way for ballot initiative
May 24, 2008 | industry | Comments (0)Arizonans for Financial Reform is leading the charge for sensible reform:
At least 153,365 valid signatures are needed to place the initiative on the Nov. 4 ballot.
If passed, it would give lenders a long-term future in Arizona while consumers would save $2.65 in fees for every $100 borrowed.
Lenders now charge $17.65 per $100 borrowed. Add loan extensions and their additional fees, and borrowers can pay up to a 460 percent annual percentage rate.
Observing Memorial Day
May 23, 2008 | Uncategorized | Comments (0)Payday Pundit wants to take a moment to honor those who currently serve, or have served, in the Armed Forces. Especially those who have given the ultimate sacrifice of their lives.
For ideas on how to observe memorial day, visit http://www.usmemorialday.org/observe.htm. To help those who currently serve, visit http://anysoldier.com/.
CFSA’s Tommy Moore letter in Ohio paper
May 23, 2008 | industry | Comments (1)In the Lancaster Eagle Gazette, Tommy Moore says:
Let’s be clear: A 28-percent annual-rate cap is a ban on payday lending. A 28-percent APR cap allows a fee of less than 8 cents a day, which is not enough to pay salaries and benefits, rent or other overhead costs.
Independent research has shown that without the option of payday lending, consumers bounced more checks, filed for more bankruptcies, did not pay bills and even chose such dangerous options such as foregoing prescription medications.
