Lansing Journal article shortchanges payday loan facts

Wednesday, June 2nd, 2010 By

A woman peering through a magnifying glass, happy to have discovered something. Perhaps if the Lansing State Journal had used a magnifying glass when writing their recent payday loan scare piece, they'd see that they are missing lots of evidence.

It doesn't take much detective work to discover the payday loan truth. (Photo: ThinkStock)

In the financial news industry, the media will periodically run an anti-payday loan story in which the same talking points are used. In the case of a recent Lansing State Journal article entitled “Going with payday loans might not be worth fees,” those talking points include 391 percent annual interest and varying levels of state regulation. As we’ll see, these are instances of politically convenient bullet points that fail to address the full reality of taking out a payday loan.

A payday loan in Michigan is not an annual loan

For consumer convenience, the Truth in Lending Act (a federal law) requires that all consumer loans – including payday loans – clearly advertise the annual percentage rate (APR) charged. For an annual loan, this is useful. However, while a payday loan is a consumer loan, it is not an annual loan. In Michigan, the average fee (interest) charged per $100 on a two-week payday loan is about $15. That’s 15 percent, or $15 dollars above the principal loan amount. The Journal reporter admits that the payday loan in Michigan ranges in term from as little as seven days to as many as 31 depending upon the lender, although two weeks is standard. Does that sound like an annual loan to you? If it were, you’d be paying 391 APR in interest. For a two-week payday loan, $15 is 15 percent interest paid.

Some lenders charge more than others

The Lansing State Journal is right to advise consumers to “be careful.” Researching the best lender rates ahead of time makes sense and is advised by any pro-payday loan group worth its salt, including the Community Financial Services Association. While some lenders charge $15 per $100 loaned, others may charge more. It varies by lender, and regulations vary by state.

However, the example the Journal uses is suspect because of its lack of context. A payday loan customer named William Lee claims he had to pay back $400 for a $250 payday loan. There is no mention of whether Mr. Lee defaulted on his loan, perhaps because he borrowed more than he could afford to repay. There is also no mention of any other loan terms. As the Michigan Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation allows a maximum of $35.50 (plus a 45-cent database verification fee) charged on a $250 transaction, it seems likely that Mr. Lee either defaulted or the lender he used was operating under the radar. It’s impossible to say for certain based on the article, which makes the Lansing State Journal’s piece nothing more than an unsupported scare piece straight from the Center for Responsible Lending’s playbook.

Do your research, and don’t choose based on emotion

A payday loan can be a useful tool in the right situation. If a consumer shops for the best rate and avoids borrowing more than they can afford to repay on their next payday, there should be no trouble. Impulsive action can lead to financial ruin, whether a consumer is looking for a payday loan, a mortgage, an auto loan or a host of other things. Research lenders online, make sure you understand fees charged before you apply and let the numbers do the talking. The annual APR scare tactic the Lansing State Journal and Center for Responsible Lending use is just that.

Sources:

Lansing State Journal

Truth in Lending Act

Related Video:

Previous Article

« Company stock tanks as BP criminal investigation begins

The outlook for BP worsens as a BP criminal investigation has begun and BP stock has plummeted since the oil rig explosion. READ MORE... Oil spill in water
Next Article

New AT&T data plan | Lower prices and lower limits »

The new data plans AT&T will put into effect on Monday reduce prices, but limit usage. What is the new pricing, and how will it affect users? AT&T vs. Verizon service coverage

Leave a Reply

Other recent posts by Steve Tarlow

Cash Store cannot bar class action suits, says Wisconsin court

A Wisconsin court ruled that contract language in the Cash Store's personal loans contracts cannot stop customers from joining class actions…
One of Cottonwood Financial LTD's The Cash Store locations. A Wisconsin appeals court has said personal loans contracts cannot prevent customers from their right to file or join class action lawsuits.

Payday loans in Colorado and the threat of HB 1351

Colorado passed HB 10-1351 (aka HB 1351) by a narrow margin. Numerous consumer groups expect the state to lose 1,600 jobs or more. READ ON...
The Colorado legislature building, where payday loans HB 1351 placed unreasonable restriction upon payday lending in the state.

Richard Eskow cannot prove anti-payday loans claims (Pt. 2)

World Bank consultant Richard Eskow uses the Huffington Post as his anti-payday loans platform, but misses the cracks in his own platform…
Atlas is doing more than shrugging beneath the weight of the world. Apparently, trying to present a convincing amount of proof against payday loans is a similarly weighty matter for Richard Eskow.