1330% APR - Tackling the Loan Parasites (and Sharks)

I’ve been thinking of yesterday’s post and about what should be done about the likes of “Money Shop” and the rest (Payday UK “only” charge 1330% interest for a 30 day loan – please click on the link to check I am not making this figure up. It is unbelievable. Apparently they have 100,000 UK customers) who make such excessive interest charges.

Firstly, why not legislate against it. Usury use to be illegal for centuries. There also use to be numerous Bank of England regulated credit controls which were abolished by Thatcher?

This is not just “Old Labour” but actually surely it is the role of the state to legislate against such blatant exploitation of vulnerable people? These interest rates are just parasitical. We have after all made other justifiable interventions into the “market” such as the minimum wage and now personal pension accounts.

Of course there must be better education in schools about personal finance and what high interest rates really mean. Maybe also we should think whether the government could open an account for everyone in a community credit union as they did recently for kids?

There is an argument that if you restrict the “official” interest rate you may encourage people to use loan sharks. According to recent research 165,000 Brits already use loan sharks. So that argument is pretty poor. You are more likely to need a loan shark if you have to spend so much of a limited income on “over the counter” interest. Also these mind boggling rates almost make loan sharks respectable. It is interesting that the BBC link above mentions that Tower Hamlets loan sharks are being targeted by special trading standard teams. We have a bit of a history of this sort of thing.

If there is (rightly in my view) a fuss about the “unfair” charges paid to proper banks by (dare I say mostly “middle class”) bank customers and even a legal test case by the Office of Fair Trading, then why can’t the government take action to restrict the interests rate paid by the mostly very poor, “working class”?

Apart from being a point of principal and social justice - can you imagine the Tories supporting such a move? What would their paymasters, such as the pro-unfettered market "Fidelity Fund managers" say!

A decisive move in this direction would let in some clear red water... Gordon?


Display: Sort:

Re: 1330% APR - Tackling the Loan Parasites (#1)

It's beyond repugnant. I think even those who support free trade can recognise that regulating these rediculous credit rates would save more money than a tax cut.

Re: 1330% APR - Tackling the Loan Parasites (#2)

Credit Unions are the answer. They work well in America where about 40 % of the less well off belong to one.
Low interest loans given. And yet not enough is being done in the UK to promote them, although the DWP is trying to push low cost loans through CU's, to keep vulnerable people out of the hands of the loan sharks. But you are right the Govt needs to do more.

Re: 1330% APR - Tackling the Loan Parasites (#3)

As a Conservative I couldn't agree more with this article. There is no viable reason for any organisation to be charging more than 30% interest on an APR basis. Whilst the Payday website says that their 'real' interest rates are low, what they fail to note is that most people driven to them won't be able to pay the balance in the same month...instead they may take years over it, in which case they really are paying 1330% APR. I dread to think what someone would pay after two or three years for an initial loan of £1000.

It is actually something which I think picks up on the social justice agenda highlighted by Iain Duncan Smith and I hope it's an issue where there can be a cross-party consensus.

I would be careful with credit unions, however. One in the north recently collapsed leaving many low-income families who had been saving with it with no money for Christmas. So I like the concept but am unsure on the execution... 

Re: 1330% APR - Tackling the Loan Parasites (#5)

Hi Visiting Tory
 

I would hope for cross party support on this; however the credit industry would go bananas.
 

It appears that the credit union money is safe
 

A statement from the FSA said: "Savers with Streetcred are protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), the UK's statutory compensation fund of last resort for customers of financial services firms.

Re: 1330% APR - (#4)

Rwendland posted a very interesting comment on the original post
...“often called usury laws. e.g. many U.S. states have max interest rate limits that unlicensed entitities can charge, licensed entities can charge more but have their own fairness rules I think. If the U.S. can do something in this area, why can't we?”.

Re: 1330% APR - (#6)

Thanks for copying that across. The U.S. usury system is obviously more complex than it first looks, and perhaps only applies to the initial loan agreement, rather than after late payments - I see a  U.S. Senate attempt in 2005 "To limit the amount of interest that can be charged on any extension of credit to 30 percent", which failed.

Interestingly in the light of recent events, Hilary Clinton voted for this amendment but Obama against! But I have no idea what the U.S. politics was behind this, maybe Obama had a good reason to vote with the Republicans on this one.

Re: 1330% APR - (#7)

RedRooster has also posted this website http://www.debt-on-our-doorstep.com/index.html - I’ve volunteered to help out with a local “anti-shark Team”! 
I am surprised that Obama voted against the amendment?