Marseille business – Mact Asso http://mact-asso.org/ Wed, 10 Aug 2022 20:23:02 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://mact-asso.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/default-150x150.png Marseille business – Mact Asso http://mact-asso.org/ 32 32 Should you ever get a payday loan? https://mact-asso.org/should-you-ever-get-a-payday-loan/ Wed, 10 Aug 2022 20:23:02 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/should-you-ever-get-a-payday-loan/ When you’re low on cash between paychecks or have an unexpected financial emergency, a payday loan can be a tempting option to help you make ends meet or access cash quickly. However, these short-term loans, which are usually due on the day of your next payday, are extremely risky. They come with very high interest […]]]>

When you’re low on cash between paychecks or have an unexpected financial emergency, a payday loan can be a tempting option to help you make ends meet or access cash quickly. However, these short-term loans, which are usually due on the day of your next payday, are extremely risky. They come with very high interest rates and other charges. The payday loan interest rates in the United States ranges from 154% to 664%.

Equally troubling, payday loans are often marketed to those who can least afford them, i.e. people who earn less than $40,000 a year. Although this type of loan is marketed as a short-term loan, payday loans can create a cycle of debt that is difficult to break free from.

What is a personal loan?

A payday loan is usually a short-term loan, lasting two to four weeks, that does not require collateral to be obtained. These loans are generally supposed to be repaid in one installment with your next paycheck when you receive Social Security income or a pension payment.

In most cases, payday loans are granted for relatively small amounts, often $500 or less, with the average borrower getting a payday loan of around $375. In some cases, payday loans can be made for larger amounts.

To obtain a payday loan, borrowers are asked to write a personal check for the amount of debt plus finance charges. If the loan is not repaid on time, the lender will deposit the check to recover their funds. Some lenders may request authorization to electronically deduct the funds from your bank account instead of requiring you to provide a personal check.

Payday loans generally do not involve credit checks, and your ability to repay debt while continuing to pay your daily expenses is generally not considered part of the application process.

Who usually takes out a personal loan?

Payday loans are most often sought out by those with ongoing cash flow issues, as opposed to borrowers who find themselves facing a financial emergency. A payday loan study found that 69 percent of borrowers first used a payday loan to cover recurring expenses such as utility bills, rent, mortgages, student loan payments or credit card bills. Only 16% of borrowers use payday loans for unexpected expenses.

These loans are also widely used by people living in neighborhoods and communities that are underserved by traditional banks or who do not have a bank account with a major financial institution. Payday lenders operate stores in 32 states, although a handful of states recently passed reforms requiring payday lenders to switch from a model in which borrowers must repay the loan in full with their next paycheck. pays to a fairer and less risky installment repayment structure.

What are the risks of personal loans?

Due to the many risks associated with payday loans, they are often viewed as predatory.

For starters, payday loans often come with astronomical interest rates. Those who take out such loans have to pay between $10 and $30 for every $100 borrowed. A typical payday loan with a two-week repayment term and a fee of $15 per $100 equates to an APR of almost 400%.

Many payday lenders also offer rollovers or renewals, which allow you to simply pay the cost of borrowing the money on the loan’s due date and extend the balance owing for a longer period. It can be a slippery slope that has borrowers quickly getting in over their heads with fees and interest piling up. According to recent data from Pew Charitable Trusts, the average borrower finds themselves in debt for five months to fully pay off what was supposed to be a one-time payday loan. In the process, borrowers pay hundreds of dollars more in fees than originally advertised for the loan.

Are payday loans really worth it?

With their high interest rates and fees, a payday loan is rarely a good idea. The fees alone cost Americans $4 billion a year. Because the costs associated with these loans are so high, borrowers often struggle to repay them and take on more debt, so it’s a good idea to carefully consider your options before taking out a payday loan.

However, if you are in dire need or need cash quickly and are confident you can repay the loan with your next paycheck, a payday loan may be a good idea. These loans may also be worth considering if you have no other financial options or if you have no credit and would not qualify for a traditional loan.

Alternatives to payday loans

Before taking on the significant financial risks associated with a payday loan, consider other alternatives that may be less expensive. Some of the options to consider include:

  • Borrowing money from family or friends: Payday loans should be a last resort. If you have family or friends willing to help you, it may be better to borrow money from your relatives than from a predatory lender.
  • Home Equity Loan: Tapping into the equity in your home will give you a much more competitive interest rate than a payday loan. Home equity loans are a popular way to access cash to consolidate debt or pay for other large or unexpected expenses. However, to access the equity in your home, you will need to meet certain requirements, including having a good credit rating, a stable income, and a debt-to-equity ratio of 43% or less.
  • Payday advance : Some employers may offer the possibility of taking a salary advance. This implies that the employer grants you a short-term loan which you will repay on your future salaries. Typically, the employer sets guidelines for how and when the money is to be repaid.
  • Personal loan: For those with good credit, a personal loan can be a safer and more cost-effective borrowing option. Plus, if you need money fast, some online lenders can provide personal loan funds in as little as a day or two.
  • Sell ​​unwanted items: There are various online platforms that allow you to turn all kinds of unwanted items into cash quickly. Some of the better known options include eBay, Facebook Marketplace, Craigslist and OfferUp. If it’s unwanted or used clothes that you want to convert into cash, there are also online resale platforms that specialize in this niche, including ThredUp, Poshmark, and TheRealReal. Many of these marketplaces deposit proceeds from sales directly into your bank account, while others, like OfferUp, allow you to sell locally and receive money directly from buyers.
  • Lateral stampede: Thanks to the proliferation of apps and websites like Thumbtack, TaskRabbit, Rover, Uber, and Lyft, it’s possible to do a few odd jobs in your spare time to quickly build up a side stream of income. TaskRabbit, for example, allows tasks to do everything from assembling furniture for extra cash to home delivery, gardening, and mounting TVs. Rover is a pet sitting and walking network where animal lovers can offer services.

At the end of the line

With high interest rates and tight repayment terms, payday loans are rarely the best choice when you need cash. Often, these types of loans trap borrowers in an inescapable cycle of debt.

Before resorting to a personal loan, consider the many alternatives. Borrowing money from family or friends, opening a home loan, or taking out a personal loan are far less risky options. And if you’re not in a rush for the money, there are even more options, including selling items you no longer want or taking on a side job to earn the extra cash you need.

]]>
Companies that take money directly from your salary https://mact-asso.org/companies-that-take-money-directly-from-your-salary/ Sat, 06 Aug 2022 07:00:07 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/companies-that-take-money-directly-from-your-salary/ At any given time, millions of workers are behind on at least one invoice. But it’s the rare employer who is slow to cut wages or rebound them completely. This is an opportunity for loan companies like Kasable and OneBlinc and for retailers doing business on sites like payrolljewelry.com and purchasingpower.com: Put yourself ahead of […]]]>

At any given time, millions of workers are behind on at least one invoice. But it’s the rare employer who is slow to cut wages or rebound them completely.

This is an opportunity for loan companies like Kasable and OneBlinc and for retailers doing business on sites like payrolljewelry.com and purchasingpower.com: Put yourself ahead of the reimbursement line by tapping directly into these trusted paychecks. Let other billers wait to see if customers reject a payment from their bank account or don’t bother to make one at all.

This clever maneuver is possible thanks to payroll mechanisms that use terms such as “attribution” and “split deposits”. As long as your employer allows it — and some big notables, like the federal government, do — employees can set it up on their own.

Customers who agree to this often lack a good credit history or history. Without a better option, they put their paychecks on the line, and with part of their paycheck each pay period, they pay for goods or pay off a debt in a few years. Some retailers include the cost of their payment plans in their prices and technically not charging interestwhile lenders charge up to an annual percentage rate of 35.99.

Paycheck payment mechanisms are not new. Since 1889, members of the U.S. military have been able to pay bills and transfer money through what’s called an allotment system. According a 1978 report by the Government Accountability Officethe federal government also began allowing civilian federal employees to use the system in the 1960s.

For the military, that made sense. Long before push-button online payments and near-free phone calls, paying a bill while serving overseas was complicated. And, although the GAO report is unclear on the matter, at one point federal employees must have asked after this convenience.

What’s new — and fascinating — about how the paycheck payment process works today is that companies encourage or require customers to use it when setting up their accounts.. Second, they explicitly hide their processes in the language of financial empowerment and societal betterment.

“You can be yourself and own your life with a better way to buy,” sounds the chorus to purchasing power.

One of the ways Kashable finds customers is by persuading HR to offer its services as social advantages.

Kashable’s assignment is “to improve the financial well-being of working Americans,” according to the company’s website. “We provide socially responsible funding to employees as a voluntary employer-sponsored benefit,” he adds.

OneBlinc echoes this theme. He says he offers “socially responsible credit” and that his credit is “for people who work hard and need help to make ends meet.” This form of inclusion “is the best way to reduce social inequalities” and constitutes “a real alternative to the vicious circle of predatory lending”, protecting borrowers from “abusive bank charges”.

Read between these lines and you will have an idea of ​​who the desired customer is and is not. There are tens of millions of people who put all their spending on a single debit card for budgeting purposes, or on a single credit card to accumulate loyalty points. They are not the main targets here.

But many millions more default each month and pay fees to their bank when their checking balance can’t cover a charge. Others cannot qualify for credit cards or have lost their banking privileges. They can turn to payday lenders for short-term help, and these lenders can trap them in a cycle of high-interest debt.

To spare people all this is, indeed, a noble cause. Tying the reimbursement to a paycheck is a potentially reliable way to do this.

But, for businesses, the paycheck payment process is secondary. For them, the breakthrough lies in proprietary digital tools that allow them to lend to people, based on their employment status and income, that other companies would ignore. OneBlinc doesn’t even use credit checks, although it does report customer payments to Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion.

“We don’t believe in credit ratings,” Chief Executive Fabio Torelli said in a 2019 press release, a sentiment he reiterated in an interview this week. “It is the ultimate symbol of an outdated model that we are determined to disrupt,” the statement continued.

The bet here is that knowing someone’s employer, seniority and salary, and the still fairly important payroll link, should be enough to be successful as a business.

Kashable does credit checks, but it also follows an employment-centric underwriting model. Einat Steklov, a co-founder, explained the logic to me in an interview this week.

Just because a person is employed does not mean lenders are willing to do business with them at favorable interest rates. Even among working people, she said, two-thirds are supposedly near-prime (with increased credit risk) or subprime (with high credit risk).

So how do you maintain them? A large portion of Kashable’s borrowers are federal employees. They are not laid off often and tend to stay on the job for a while. This should make them less risky to underwrite than their credit ratings suggest.

Ms. Steklov brought up another point: Often people end up with bad credit because they’re behind on their payments, not because they never pay off their debts. This is where the paycheck payment system comes in.

“We were looking for a better mechanism to help them become successful borrowers,” she said of similar award and repayment systems. “Who does it benefit? We believe the customer is the primary beneficiary.

She added that 64% of people who had a credit record when they took out their first Kashable loan saw their score improve afterward.

It could be a very good thing. But several questions still concern Nadine Chabriersenior policy and litigation counsel for the nonprofit Center for Responsible Lending.

First, what happens when a calamity throws borrowers’ budgets into chaos? Of course, these lenders will allow people to turn paycheck payment off and pay another way, but customers should remember that this is possible and then take steps to turn it off regardless. emergency they face. Are they going?

Speaking of budgets, if you’ve never been in a huge financial bind, you may not be familiar with the resulting act of juggling. Ms Chabrier called it “robbing Pierre to pay Paul”.

You can prioritize car payments (repossession means you can’t get to work) and rent or a mortgage (to avoid eviction or foreclosure) over a personal loan. But if that personal loan is the only obligation arising from your paycheck before the money even hits your bank account, then that lender has an advantage as long as the paycheck tie persists.

And then there’s this: If a lender doesn’t check your credit, how do they know if their loan could suddenly make other obligations unaffordable?

OneBlinc’s Mr. Torelli said his subscription included an overview of people’s current account statements, giving him visibility into whether any new loan payments would be reasonable.

Meanwhile, Ms. Chabrier ticked off a list of questions anyone considering paycheck loans or retailers should ask.

“How does the subscription work? ” she says. “What are the fees and how are they disclosed? Do they follow state and federal debt collection rules? Do they investigate credit report inaccuracies? Are there misleading practices in marketing? And what are the interest rates?

HR managers with the authority to provide access to loans like these can serve as gatekeepers and they can also ask the questions.

Is a loan like this really a benefit, Ms. Chabrier wondered aloud, or something that pushes employees into more debt? Then she caught up.

“By definition, it pushes your employees further into debt,” she said, although it’s possible they could use the proceeds of the loan to pay off even higher interest debt and get money. better conditions in the process. “But does that come with any unexpected issues that you, as HR manager, weren’t aware of in the first place? »

]]>
How San Antonio small businesses can apply for a covid relief grant https://mact-asso.org/how-san-antonio-small-businesses-can-apply-for-a-covid-relief-grant/ Fri, 05 Aug 2022 10:00:00 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/how-san-antonio-small-businesses-can-apply-for-a-covid-relief-grant/ The City of San Antonio has opened a new round of grants for small businesses impacted by the coronavirus pandemic and some ongoing construction projects. Apps are expected on Monday August 22. The city has set aside $17 million of its American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for the grants, which will range from $15,000 […]]]>



The City of San Antonio has opened a new round of grants for small businesses impacted by the coronavirus pandemic and some ongoing construction projects.

Apps are expected on Monday August 22.

The city has set aside $17 million of its American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for the grants, which will range from $15,000 to $35,000,

]]>
Buy now, pay later Company agrees to stop illegal lending and refund settlement refunds https://mact-asso.org/buy-now-pay-later-company-agrees-to-stop-illegal-lending-and-refund-settlement-refunds/ Wed, 03 Aug 2022 18:22:41 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/buy-now-pay-later-company-agrees-to-stop-illegal-lending-and-refund-settlement-refunds/ The DFPI reached a settlement with Florida-based point-of-sale lender Four Technologies, Inc., in which the company agreed to stop making loans, pay $2,500 in penalties, obtain a license and to reimburse $13,065 in illegal charges. These refunds represent fees that Four Technologies collected from consumers in connection with transactions concluded by the DFPI as illegal […]]]>

The DFPI reached a settlement with Florida-based point-of-sale lender Four Technologies, Inc., in which the company agreed to stop making loans, pay $2,500 in penalties, obtain a license and to reimburse $13,065 in illegal charges.

These refunds represent fees that Four Technologies collected from consumers in connection with transactions concluded by the DFPI as illegal loans. Under the settlement, Four Technologies will only make future loans to California residents after obtaining a license from the California Finance Act (CFL).

In late 2021, the DFPI reported a shift to Buy Now, Pay Later products, and an increase in consumer use of Buy Now, Pay Later products is coming under scrutiny from regulators. The DFPI continues to lead the way in oversight, clarifying late last year that BNPL products are loans and that companies offering them must comply with California state lending rules.

The DFPI continues to investigate other companies offering Buy Now, Pay Later products. In 2020, the DFPI (formerly Department of Business Oversight) entered into similar agreements with Buy Now, Pay Later, Quadpay, Sezzle, Afterpay US, and Klarna, Inc.

About Us

The DFPI licenses and regulates financial services, including state chartered banks and credit unions, money issuers, stock brokers, investment advisers, non-bank installment lenders, lenders payday, mortgage lenders and managers, escrow companies, franchisors, etc.

]]>
Hundreds of payday loan customers furious at being charged TWICE after glitch https://mact-asso.org/hundreds-of-payday-loan-customers-furious-at-being-charged-twice-after-glitch/ Mon, 25 Jul 2022 14:54:41 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/hundreds-of-payday-loan-customers-furious-at-being-charged-twice-after-glitch/ A POPULAR payday loan company double-charged hundreds of borrowers after a technical error. Customers who had previously taken out a loan from The Money Platform faced additional fees, despite repaying their loan months ago. 1 Customers expressed their anger online after being charged twiceCredit: Getty About 300 payday lender customers are affected and have seen […]]]>

A POPULAR payday loan company double-charged hundreds of borrowers after a technical error.

Customers who had previously taken out a loan from The Money Platform faced additional fees, despite repaying their loan months ago.

1

Customers expressed their anger online after being charged twiceCredit: Getty

About 300 payday lender customers are affected and have seen repayments taken back in error, in some cases totaling hundreds of pounds.

The Money Platform offers loans of up to £1,000 with a representative APR of 839.20%.

Those affected complained of being left out and the lender promised to make repayments and pay compensation.

A spokesperson for The Money Platform said: “We were informed this morning that our payment service provider, Mangopay, has reprocessed, through a technical error, a number of payments originally made in February and March.

Millions are due repayments on expensive credit cards and payday loans - are you?
I had £11,000 debt - but here's how I paid it off in just 18 months

“This was done by mistake and without our knowledge. We believe around 300 customers were affected.

The Money Platform said it was working with its payment service provider, Mangopay, to ensure customers are reimbursed as soon as possible.

The company said: “Mangopay told us they were issuing refunds to customer accounts this afternoon (July 25).”

The Money Platform told The Sun that it plans to compensate affected customers, but has not yet specified how much it will cost or how people will get the money.

A customer affected by the issue said on Trustpilot: “Like others here, I received an unauthorized payment of £362 into my bank account on August 22.

“I don’t have a current loan plan or agreement, so I was shocked to see this amount randomly debited from my debit card.”

Another former customer said: ‘They withdrew £139 from my account on Friday when the loan was paid off months ago.

This isn’t the first time payday lenders have come under scrutiny. Many other companies have had to pay compensation to their customers in the past for technical errors, overcharges and business closures.

How to get your money back

You should be refunded automatically if you were affected by the glitch.

If you have not done so or wish to file a complaint, you will need to write to The Money Platform.

You can do this by completing their online form. Be sure to use evidence to support your complaint. This could be proof that a payment made by the company means you missed a bill and a screenshot of your bank statement would suffice.

Loan providers are required to have a written complaints process that tells customers how to file a complaint.

You should be able to find the information on their website, but if not, ask them to send it to you.

Once you send in your complaint, the company must give you a response within eight weeks.

If you don’t get a response within eight weeks or are unhappy with the response you get, you can complain to the free service. Financial mediation service.

To get in touch, you must fill out a form, which you can find on the FOS website or simply complete online complaint form.

If you prefer to speak with someone, the FOS can help you do this if you call 0800 023 4567.

Don’t run to payday loan companies if you need to borrow

If you are struggling and need extra cash, there are a number of cheaper and less risky ways to borrow.

And remember – only think about borrowing money if you really need it.

Cheap credit cards – first you need to think about the usefulness of the card. If it’s a purchase, you should look for a 0% credit card. If you want to pay off debt, a 0% balance transfer card will be the best solution, although you will have to pay a fee to transfer your money to the card.

Cheap Personal Loans – Personal loans are generally best for larger purchases or if you need to consolidate debt and pay it off. Use a eligibility checker like MoneySavingExpert to find out what loans you could be accepted for, without hurting your credit score.

credit unions – Credit unions are local organizations where members pool their savings to lend to each other. This often allows them to offer products at low prices.

]]>
States agree to shut down jewelry store for predatory practices used on soldiers https://mact-asso.org/states-agree-to-shut-down-jewelry-store-for-predatory-practices-used-on-soldiers/ Thu, 21 Jul 2022 15:30:24 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/states-agree-to-shut-down-jewelry-store-for-predatory-practices-used-on-soldiers/ New York State Attorney General Letitia James attends a briefing on July 13, 2022 in Manhattan, New York. (Luiz C. Ribeiro/TNS) New York, FTC, 17 others WATERTOWN, NY (Tribune News Service) – “Don’t feed the bear” is what soldiers of the 10th Mountain Division were told when they began their missions at Fort Drum. It’s […]]]>

New York State Attorney General Letitia James attends a briefing on July 13, 2022 in Manhattan, New York. (Luiz C. Ribeiro/TNS)

New York, FTC, 17 others

WATERTOWN, NY (Tribune News Service) – “Don’t feed the bear” is what soldiers of the 10th Mountain Division were told when they began their missions at Fort Drum. It’s a warning about a marketing tactic used by a chain of jewelry stores that had branches across the country, including one here in Watertown, that has decimated the financial stability of thousands of soldiers.

During a press conference at the Dulles State Office Building in Watertown on Wednesday, State Attorney General Letitia A. James, her colleagues from the local branch of the Attorney General’s Office, a former financial education teacher from Fort Drum and a local veterans advocate detailed how Harris Jewels defrauded the military with unfair, illegal, and deceptive finance programs presented as credit-enhancing tools.

The company, based in Ronkonkoma, Suffolk County, has been sued by the New York Attorney General and several other states over its practices, and on Wednesday the attorney general announced they had reached an agreement, not yet approved, to recover more than $34.2 million for more than 46,000 soldiers and veterans targeted by Harris’ scheme.

“It all started with an innocent teddy bear,” Ms James said.

Harris staff advertised with teddy bears, dressed in fatigues, outside storefronts in towns near military installations. A Harris location was open from 2014 until April 2021 in the Salmon Run shopping center in Watertown, when it closed all storefronts due to the pandemic. The company continued to operate online until December 2021, when it stopped running its funding program under an agreement with the Attorney General. The attorney general’s investigation into the stores began in 2017, with the first prosecutions filed in 2018.

Harris salespeople lured the military into the store, promising the entire company was dedicated to meeting the needs of men and women in uniform. With Operation Teddybear, service members were told that some, if not all, of the proceeds of their purchase would go to a military-affiliated charity that sends care packages to deployed troops.

“There was never a written contract between Harris and this charity,” Ms James said. “Operation Teddybear was a marketing ploy to get the military through their doors, and once the military was lured with the teddy bears, employees were instructed to inform them of the benefits of their fundraising program. , called the Harris Program.”

In advertisements, literature, and in-store displays, the Harris program was presented as a tool to help soldiers improve their credit rating or make major purchases. They were given a line of credit and an agreement to pay a certain amount of money per month, or by paycheck, which would eventually come back to them.

Service members who enrolled in the program were informed that they could select Harris jewelry as a gift with the program.

In reality, Harris Jewelry advanced soldiers’ lines of credit, with amounts and interest rates based solely on the branch of the military, length of enlistment, and the type of jewelry they chose. The jewelry “gift” was actually a purchase, made on a line of credit issued by Harris. This line of credit was grossly unfair, with interest rates reaching 15%, payments over the agreed amount, and additional costs for added “gift” jewelry. Customers didn’t even receive proper documentation for their agreements.

On top of that, the jewelry the soldiers actually bought was extremely expensive, with some items in stores costing over 10 times more than wholesale prices. The pieces were of poor quality, with mounts that broke easily, often leaving soldiers paying hundreds of dollars for long-broken jewelry.

“Harris Jewelry’s business practices would only be described as sheer deception,” she said. “Fraud. And today they are paying the price.

The New York portion of this case and the investigation of its local impact was handled by the Watertown Regional Attorney General’s Office, led by Assistant Attorney General in Charge Deanna R. Nelson and Assistant Attorney General Julia Toce. The office was assisted by Investigator Chad Shelmindine, under the supervision of Deputy Attorney General Jill Faber of the Regional Affairs Division.

With the backing of the Federal Trade Commission, New York and 17 other states are suing Harris Jewelry over its practices, with the latest development being a final order from the FTC requiring the company to cease its practices. The order will become law when approved by a federal district court judge, which is expected to happen soon.

Under the agreement, Harris Jewelry will have to stop collecting the more than $21 million in unpaid debts they already have on the books for 13,400 troops under the Harris program, and return more than $13 million. to the 46,000 soldiers who completed the payment program. . Harris Jewelry’s website says the company has already begun this process, with a message that the Harris program, also known as CACUSA, is no longer accepting payments, canceling all existing balances, and requesting that the three Credit bureaus remove all negative ratings from Harris Program consumer reports.

In New York, 443 service members will have approximately $750,000 in debt forgiven and 1,692 service members will be reimbursed approximately $480,000 in total.

The company will also be required to fully dissolve all of its business entities and pay $1 million in total to the 18 states in the agreement. New York’s portion of the money, $150,000, will go to Jefferson County, which in turn will donate the money to the Joseph P. Dwyer Veterans’ Peer Support Center, specifically to help educate veterans. fighters and soldiers on financial literacy and to help prevent other companies from taking advantage of soldiers like this again.

Tim Crytser, veteran outreach coordinator at the Peer Support Center, said he was honored to receive the $150,000 investment. He said he has seen many veterans in the area who have faced similar predatory lending practices, and it becomes a major burden for those people.

“Once the debt is there, everything else starts to snowball, their whole life, their car, their family, their house,” he said. “It starts with the bad lousy diamond, and it spirals down, and what they usually say is they never saw it coming. Well, I guarantee you they will see it coming. now.

John Harrington, a former financial readiness counselor at Fort Drum in the late 2000s and early 2010s, said he frequently saw credit programs targeting soldiers and said the problem was far bigger than Harris. Jewelry. Another company that once had a storefront in the Salmon Run mall, SmartBuy, bought cheap laptops from nearby retailers like Walmart and resold them to soldiers in Watertown at a heavily inflated rate. All of Watertown SmartBuy’s loans were funded by unlicensed foreign companies, and the company was eventually dissolved.

“They were one of many different businesses in the area, furniture stores, payday lenders, short-term lenders,” he said. “I think of the military trying to buy cars in this area. They almost have to go to Syracuse to get a fair price on a car because all the dealerships in the area are trying to come after them.

Ms. James said her office and local branches of the Attorney General’s office like Watertown will continue to fight to protect soldiers and not allow such predatory scams to target New Yorkers again, with the help regional offices and people like Ms. Nelson and Ms. Toce.

___

(c) 2022 Watertown Daily Times (Watertown, NY)

Visit Watertown Daily Times at www.watertowndailytimes.com

Distributed by Content Agency Tribune, LLC.

]]>
Borrowell will begin reporting rent payments to Equifax Canada https://mact-asso.org/borrowell-will-begin-reporting-rent-payments-to-equifax-canada/ Tue, 19 Jul 2022 22:56:38 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/borrowell-will-begin-reporting-rent-payments-to-equifax-canada/ A sign for rent outside a house in Toronto on July 12.COLE BURSTON/The Canadian Press Renters across Canada will soon be able to have their monthly rent payments included in their credit history. Fintech company Borrowell Inc. said on Tuesday it will begin reporting rent payment information to Equifax Canada, one of the country’s two […]]]>

A sign for rent outside a house in Toronto on July 12.COLE BURSTON/The Canadian Press

Renters across Canada will soon be able to have their monthly rent payments included in their credit history.

Fintech company Borrowell Inc. said on Tuesday it will begin reporting rent payment information to Equifax Canada, one of the country’s two major credit bureaus, before the end of July. The service, called Borrowell Rent Advantage, will be available to those with a user account with the company for a monthly fee of $5.

“As a tenant, you don’t get credit for making those payments on time because the credit bureaus can’t see them,” said Andrew Graham, chief executive and co-founder of Borrowell, which offers Canadians a free Equifax credit. write checks and match them with loans and credit products for which they may be eligible. “For the first time in Canada, we are enabling tenants to solve this problem by creating a credit history with their rental payments.

The announcement comes at a time when rapidly rising mortgage rates are forcing a growing number of young adults to put plans to buy a home on hold even as they face rising rents as renters.

Canadians who rent their homes often pay more than those who pay a mortgage on a monthly basis, said Julie Kuzmic, senior consumer compliance officer at Equifax Canada. “We want to be able to add this information to their credit report to paint a more accurate picture.”

A history of on-time and full payments generally helps consumers establish a good credit score, which estimates a borrower’s likelihood of repaying creditors. But credit scores have traditionally relied on debt data rather than bill payment. This meant that while landlords could build up a credit history through their mortgage payments, the fact that a tenant paid their rent by the due date generally didn’t matter.

While third-party vendors have provided rent payment data to credit bureaus in the United States for years, Canada is lagging behind.

Some landlords in Canada are submitting rent payment information to credit bureaus, but Borrowell’s new service will be the first to let tenants self-report their rent payments, Kuzmic said.

Reporting rent payments to credit bureaus can help Canadians who don’t own a home improve their credit score, which could eventually allow them to access more competitive mortgage rates when they’re ready to buy. Mr. Graham said.

It is unclear, however, to what extent the Borrowell subscription would also benefit low-income tenants.

Low-to-moderate income households in Canada are more likely to rent and have poorer credit scores or no credit history. A recent survey conducted by Borrowell and answered by 2,873 respondents with below average credit scores of less than 660, found that 68% were renters. By comparison, about 30% of households across the country rent, according to Statistics Canada.

Low-income renters often have to resort to high-cost debt, borrowing from entities such as payday lenders that don’t necessarily report payment data to credit bureaus, said Brenda Spotton Visano, professor of economics and in public policy at York University.

The ability to establish a credit history with rent payments could help low-income tenants in ways that go beyond the ability to access credit products such as credit cards and loans. automobiles and to do so at lower interest rates, said Ms. Kuzmic. For example, a good credit score could help them qualify for a new lease or improve their job prospects, as many landlords and employers require credit checks when considering applicants for rental or housing. employment.

But Borrowell’s $5 monthly fee for its rent statement product is likely to be a financial barrier for low-income households, Professor Spotton Visano said.

Mr Graham, for his part, argues that Borrowell will provide a key service. While banks and other lenders provide information on mortgage payments, it has been more difficult to receive reliable data from the myriad of landlords large and small who collect rental payments.

Borrowell will gather and verify information from tenants who sign up for the new offer and connect the bank account from which they pay the landlord. Tenants must indicate which monthly transaction constitutes their rent payment.

Borrowell currently has over two million users across Canada. Of these, more than two-thirds do not have a mortgage on their credit profile and are likely renters, the company said.

Like all other Borrowell users, those who sign up for Rent Advantage will receive marketing emails about financial products such as loans and credit cards, although they may opt out.

Are you a young Canadian with money on your mind? To set you up for success and avoid costly mistakes, listen to our award-winning Stress Test podcast.

]]>
Hiltzik: Bankers hate a banking regulator that sides with consumers https://mact-asso.org/hiltzik-bankers-hate-a-banking-regulator-that-sides-with-consumers/ Thu, 14 Jul 2022 13:00:50 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/hiltzik-bankers-hate-a-banking-regulator-that-sides-with-consumers/ The US Chamber of Commerce really piled on the grim adjectives when it announced its campaign against financial regulator Rohit Chopra two weeks ago. In just the title and the first two paragraphs of his adthe chamber described Chopra, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, as “out of control”, “ideologically oriented”, “radical”, “extreme” and […]]]>

The US Chamber of Commerce really piled on the grim adjectives when it announced its campaign against financial regulator Rohit Chopra two weeks ago.

In just the title and the first two paragraphs of his adthe chamber described Chopra, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, as “out of control”, “ideologically oriented”, “radical”, “extreme” and “heavyweight”.

Sounds pretty bad.

Recurrences…[are] on par with the course for many mainstream companies.

— Rohit Chopra, CFPB Director

If you are a banker, of course.

If you’re a consumer of financial services, however, you should interpret this broadside as the chamber expressing its irritation with a government regulator that is doing the job it’s paid for – in this case, protecting consumers from industry abuse. financial services.

It is appropriate, indeed, to view the chamber’s attack on Chopra in the context of similar campaigns the business community has waged against Biden appointees and candidates who intended to regulate industries under their jurisdiction. skill.

This includes the crude and hypocritical efforts last year to portray Saule Omarova, a banking law expert at Cornell Law School who had been appointed Comptroller of the Currency, as a closet communist. These efforts ultimately resulted in Omarova being dropped from her name for the position.

Also last year, bedroom and other industry lobbies attacked David Weil, a labor rights expert at Brandeis and a former Department of Labor official.

Weil’s alleged offense was to take “positions on critical issues” such as “whether an employee would be exempt from overtime, finding joint employment relationships, and whether a worker is an employee or an independent contractor.”

Never mind that these were matters that fell squarely within the bailiwick of the agency’s wage and hour division, where Weil had served in the past and was reappointed to head it. The chorus of industry disapproval grew so deafening that Weil retired his name earlier this year.

Then there’s the campaign by Amazon and Meta Platforms (formerly Facebook) against Federal Trade Commission Chairman Lina Khan to force her to recuse herself from FTC proceedings against the companies, largely because it has developed an expertise on how they conduct their business. (She did not do it.)

The business community’s objection to Chopra is based on the pro-consumer direction the agency has taken under him after his inaction on business interests under the Trump administration. In 2017, let us recall, Trump installed his budget director, Mick Mulvaney, as acting director of the CFPB.

Mulvaney bragged at a convention of bankers that his appointment “apparently kept Elizabeth Warren up late at night, which I don’t mind at all.” The bankers laughed appreciatively. (Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts had been instrumental in establishing the CFPB; Chopra, in this case, launched her public career as a staffer in her office.)

Mulvaney quickly suspended a CFPB regulation designed to prevent payday lenders and other profiteers from abusing low-income customers who couldn’t repay loans by charging them fees, among other sordid practices.

He abruptly withdrew a federal lawsuit against four allegedly abusive installment lenders. And he closed an investigation into World Acceptance Corp., a payday lender in his home state of South Carolina, which had been accused of abusive practices, but who had contributed at least $4,500 to his congressional campaigns.

Kathy Kraninger, Mulvaney’s successor, continued her efforts to gut the agency. She sometimes approved settlements with investigative objectives that required them to pay nothing in compensation to consumers.

Chopra is not cut from this fabric. As chairman of the CFPB, he took on credit card late fees and bank overdraft fees, which he aptly calls “junk fees” by which “big financial institutions feast on their customers,” leaving them feeling “cheated,” as he put it in a press conference in January announcing an investigation into these charges.

(As Helaine Olen of the Washington Post observedafter Chopra fired the bank’s bows by noting that they were collecting $15 billion a year in overdraft fees, several decided to lower their fees.)

Chopra also launched a survey of “buy now, pay later” credit companies, which he says could be mislead consumers about their debt and obligations. “Buy now, pay later is the new version of the old layaway plan,” he said in December, “but with modern, faster twists where the consumer gets the product immediately but also gets the debt immediately”.

It has also launched an investigation into payment platforms operated by Google, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, Square and PayPal, seeking to determine whether they could be used to conduct “invasive financial monitoring and … use this data to further behavioral advertising, price discrimination, or sell to third parties.

So many initiatives likely to give financial services companies goosebumps. It is therefore not surprising that the chamber launched its campaign in in conjunction with American Bankers Assn., the Consumer Bankers Association. and the Independent Community Bankers of America.

Reading the House bill against Chopra, it’s hard to avoid the impression that, as Queen Gertrude from Hamlet might saythe body protests too much.

For example, the chamber expresses outrage at Chopra’s observation (in a conference in March at the University of Pennsylvania) that “repeated offenses… [are] compared to the course for many dominant companies. He specifically mentioned the big banks, Big Tech and Big Pharma.

The Chamber qualifies this view as “extreme and inaccurate”.

Is it true? Let’s see.

Start with the banks. According to offense tracker maintained by Good Jobs First.

The total includes a $920 million assessment imposed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission in 2020 for an eight-year program to manipulate the precious metals and US Treasury markets that the CFTC commissioner called “unmatched” in scope.

It was at least the third charge of market manipulation JPMorgan had faced in recent years, including a bid-rigging scheme in the California electricity market in 2010 and 2011 for which the bank paid a fine. of $410 million.

Then there’s Wells Fargo, which has almost made its name synonymous with consumer abuse.

In 2015, while JPMorgan, Barclays, Citigroup, Royal Bank of Scotland and UBS pleaded guilty to federal felony charges linked to manipulation of the foreign exchange market, Kara M. Stein, a member of the Securities and Exchange Commission, objected to the SEC granting them a waiver of serious sanctions because of what she called “the recidivism of these institutions.”

In total, the five banks had received 23 sanction waivers for misconduct in the previous nine years.

Big tech? In 2019, the Federal Trade Commission fined Facebook $5 billion for violating the terms of a privacy practices agreement it entered into with the same agency in 2011.

Big pharmacy? Johnson & Johnson, Merck and Pfizer, three of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies, all have paid multi-billion dollar settlements to resolve allegations of wrongdoing or in personal injury lawsuits.

In 2009, Pfizer paid fines totaling $2.3 billion, including a $1.195 billion fine, which federal prosecutors called “the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the United States for any matter ‘, and pleaded guilty to a federal charge; it was the company fourth such settlement over the previous decade for the illegal promotion of its drugs.

These are all clearly “dominant companies”. Under these circumstances, Chopra’s observation of corporate recidivism was not “extreme and inaccurate”, but charitable.

However, it is really not Chopra’s observation, as precise as it is, that got under the chamber’s skin. This is the prospect of more extensive regulatory actions.

In a letter of June 28the chamber faulted Chopra for asking agency reviewers to monitor “discriminatory” behavior and linking it to the agency’s statutory power to regulate “unfair, deceptive and abusive acts or practices”.

The chamber’s position is that “discrimination” and “unfairness” are two different things and that the law only gives the CFPB jurisdiction over the latter.

This is a curious position, given that “discrimination” surely falls into the category of unfair things, but also because the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which created the CFPB, specifically states that the board has the power to protect consumers from “unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and discrimination”.

The chamber surely knows this because it cites that exact language in its letter, italicizing the “and” for emphasis. Either way, it’s not for us to question the chamber’s decision to have its lawyers torture legislative diction in a seven-page, single-spaced letter to Chopra.

It’s up to us, however, to ask who the audience for the chamber’s campaign against Chopra, which includes a “six-figure digital ad campaign,” is supposed to be.

The digital ad in question is a nearly two-minute video praising U.S. financial firms for working with the CFPB “to try to ensure fair regulations are passed” and grumbling that Chopra “breaks proven standards in policy-making.” Chopra, the ad says, “has an inflated and distorted view of her role and her power.”

Translating this corporate language into English is easy. The chamber’s complaint is that the warm relationship the companies had with Chopra’s Trumpian predecessors has been severed. The “proven standards of policy-making” she cherishes are those that shape policies to benefit banks.

But these were not the standards envisioned by Warren or by the CFPB’s first director, Democrat Richard Cordray, a serious regulator who bedroom and other business lobbies also hated.

The Chamber of Commerce is playing a long game here. He knows he has no prayers to unseat Chopra as long as a Democrat holds the White House. But if the administration and Congress swing to the Republicans, the CFPB will have a big target painted on its back. In this case, consumers should be prepared to hold on to their wallets.

]]>
Federal government risk reduction guidelines may not move the needle in banks https://mact-asso.org/federal-government-risk-reduction-guidelines-may-not-move-the-needle-in-banks/ Sat, 09 Jul 2022 01:32:00 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/federal-government-risk-reduction-guidelines-may-not-move-the-needle-in-banks/ By Jon Hill (July 8, 2022, 9:32 p.m. EDT) – Federal regulators have issued a new call for banks to categorically refrain from outright shunning independent ATM operators and other customer groups in as illicit financial risks, but some financial services lawyers say the guidelines may have limited practical effect. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network […]]]>
By Jon Hill (July 8, 2022, 9:32 p.m. EDT) – Federal regulators have issued a new call for banks to categorically refrain from outright shunning independent ATM operators and other customer groups in as illicit financial risks, but some financial services lawyers say the guidelines may have limited practical effect.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and federal banking agencies teamed up to release a joint statement on Wednesday advising broadly against risk reduction, a practice in which banks restrict or deny service to customers in industries and regions deemed high risk. of financial crime.

Intended as a reminder of existing policy, the statement says banks should remember to use a “risk-based approach” when…

Stay one step ahead

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You need to know what’s going on with customers, competitors, practice areas and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to stay an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data in articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of lawsuits, etc.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, motions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

]]>
CFPB discusses consumer finance data and sets priorities | Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP https://mact-asso.org/cfpb-discusses-consumer-finance-data-and-sets-priorities-sheppard-mullin-richter-hampton-llp/ Fri, 08 Jul 2022 20:42:50 +0000 https://mact-asso.org/cfpb-discusses-consumer-finance-data-and-sets-priorities-sheppard-mullin-richter-hampton-llp/ On June 15, the deputy director of the CFPB, Zixta Martinez, delivered a opening speech at the Consumer Federation of America’s 2022 Consumer Assembly. The Deputy Director focused on four key areas of consumer protection in her address: Payday Loans: The CFPB released a research report in April focusing on payday loans and the state […]]]>

On June 15, the deputy director of the CFPB, Zixta Martinez, delivered a opening speech at the Consumer Federation of America’s 2022 Consumer Assembly. The Deputy Director focused on four key areas of consumer protection in her address:

Payday Loans: The CFPB released a research report in April focusing on payday loans and the state laws allowing payday lenders to operate. Only 16 of the 26 states that allow payday lenders to operate require/allow lenders to offer extended payment plans, according to the deputy director. The CFPB “will continue to assess payday loan and small loan practices” more generally, she said.

Rent-A-Banks: The Deputy Director has identified the evolution of the small dollar loan market as an area of ​​interest for the CFPB. According to the deputy director, small lenders can use their relationships with banks to evade state interest caps and licensing laws by pretending the bank is the lender in “rent-a-bank” programs. “. The CFPB “looks closely” at these devices.

Bank charges : Big banks penalize customers who can least afford it with complicated bank fees and overdraft practices that push families into deeper debt, the deputy director said. While smaller banks, credit unions and startups rely on business models that don’t use “operating penalties,” Martinez noted that it can be difficult for these companies to break into the industry. business and for customers to switch accounts – the CFPB seeks to promote “vigorous competition” in this area.

Medical debt and credit reports: Consumers with unpaid medical bills, in addition to their concerns about hospital and insurance bureaucracy, often worry about the impact of their medical debt on their credit. The CFPB is “looking at everything” to find solutions to the intersectional problem of medical debt and credit reports, the deputy director said, including assessing whether unpaid medical debts should be included in credit reports.

Put into practice : The Deputy Director’s remarks are an important indicator of the CFPB’s enforcement priorities. Of particular note is the suggestion that the Office might consider asserting claims against non-bank parties under “rent-a-bank” schemes. In addition, a change in the content included in credit reports would have significant implications for consumers and lenders.

Credit bureaus and credit report users have received considerable attention from the CFPB in recent months (we have already discussed this trend in previous blog posts here, hereand here). Today the CFPB published a Advisory opinion to ensure that companies that use and share credit reports and background reports have an authorized purpose under the FCRA. The new CFPB advisory notice makes it clear that credit reporting companies and users of credit reports have specific obligations to protect the confidentiality of public data. The Notice also reminds Covered Entities of potential criminal liability for certain misconduct.

]]>