Oh look... A US loan shark advertising on a Canadian site. Here's an idea for you there Mate... Seeing how your bloody Gov't is 14 Trillion Dollars in debt right now, why don't you go an offer those clowns a nice and affordable loan to cover their needs. I'm sure they'd be quite appreciative. Just think of the revenue you could suck in after they pay you back in a couple of weeks.

O.C.

Payday loans are fast and easy ways of getting cash for many people. That is why customers love them. Everyone who wants to use them will have the loans accessible to them in a few states, such as Idaho, where there are not a lot of limitations. In some states, the limitations are overwhelming due to how detailed they are. It is great to know you always have the option without government disturbance. Find out more at: Paydayloans

Pretty interesting thread about payday loan. In Texas, there are almost twice the number of personal loan companies available than there were in 2006. All of the companies have to be licensed with the states now though, which means they will be better-regulated. Payday loans could be very helpful whenever you have an emergency and have to pay a bill. To learn more, go to: Payday Loan

There is much confusion and misunderstanding regarding the Payday Loan Industry. I will try to provide some background and information on this Industry as I understand it. Hopefully, at the conclusion of my blog, you will have a much clearer view of the Industry where it stands now and possibly where it is headed.

The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Hon. Vic Toews, introduced Bill C-26, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (criminal interest rate), in the House of Commons on October 6, 2006. Bill C-26 amends section 347 of the CRIMINAL CODE OF CANADA, which criminalizes the charging of usurious interest rates.

The expanding presence of payday loan companies suggests that some Canadians are willing to pay rates of interest in excess of those permitted under the CRIMINAL CODE for their payday loans. Bill C-26 is designed to exempt payday loans from criminal sanctions in order to facilitate provincial regulation of the industry. Thus, the exemption applies to payday loan companies licenced by any province that have legislative measures in place designed to protect consumers and limit the overall cost of the loan.

A payday loan is a short-term loan for a relaively small sum of money provided by a non-traditional lender. Statistics from the Canadian payday loan industry suggest that the average payday loan is valued at $280 and is extended for a period of ten days (usually payday). In order to qualify for a payday loan, the borrower generally must have identification, a personal chequing account, and a pay stub or alternative proof of a regular income. Payday lenders typically extend credit based on a percentage of the borrower's net pay until his/her next payday (generally within two weeks or less). The borrower provides the payday lender with a post-dated cheque, or authorizes a direct withdrawal, for the value of the loan plus any interest or fees charged.

In Canada, section 347 of the CRIMINAL CODE makes it a criminal offence to charge more than 60% interest per annum. If the rate of interest on payday transactions is calculated according to the definitions and methods specified in the CRIMINAL CODE, some payday loan companies appear to be charging interest in excess of 1,200% per annum.

Shared federal-provincial jurisdiction over payday lenders has meant that they have been left essentially unregulated.

NOTE: Financial institutions are regulated either federally or

provincially/territorially depending upon which level of government
incorporated them. The federal government has jurisdiction over
interest rates, but the day-to-day regulation and licencing of

payday lenders most likely falls under provincial jurisdiction, as

part of their power over property and civil rights. Territorial

governments have the power to regulate payday lenders by virtue
of powers delegated by the federal government.

Provinces are unable to regulate the price of a loan, since any attempt to do so would conflict with section 347, and could therefore be challenged as ULTRA VIRES (meaning outside their authority) of the province. Moreover, section 347 has not been used in a criminal context to curtail the activities of payday lenders. The consent of a provincial Attorney General is required to prosecute an offense under 347. Provincial governments have yet to prosecute a payday lender; they may fear that the lack of a payday loan company alternative would result in consumers using illegal altermatives such as loan sharks.

If the payday loan industry is not regulated, its future may ultimately be determined by a number of class-action lawsuits currently proceeding through Canadian courts. These lawsuits claim that consumers were charged fees in excess of the "rate allowable under the CRIMINAL CODE rate", and seek to recover hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of interest. Should these class-action lawsuits succeed, they could potenially bankrupt the payday loan industry.

Faced with jurisdictional challenges, federal and provincial/territorial governments have been negotiating a regulatory regime that would oversee payday lenders. Bill C-26 opts for provincial regulation of the market rather than an outright ban on payday loans.

The recent growth of the payday loan industry has focused attention on the industry and its practice of charging relatively high rates of interest. Critics have called for the prosecution of payday lenders under the existing CRIMINAL CODE provisions, even if such action reduces the profitability of the industry or results in its abolition.

Proponents of the industry point to the growth of payday loan companies as evidence that the industry is fulfilling an otherwise unmet need for short-term credit and/or convenience. Proponents have argued that instead of an outright ban on payday loans, the federal government should allow provinces to regulate the industry in the interests of restricting some of the more abusive industry practices, such as insufficient disclosure of contractual terms, aggresive and unfair debt collection practices, and the "rolling over" of loans. The payday loan industry itself has proposed self-regulation as a means of addressing some of the concerns associated with lending practices.

Since the introduction of Bill C-26, some commentators have suggested that the federal government has merely transferred the problem of payday loans to the provinces, which may or may not adequately regulate them. Transferring responsibility to the provinces may also lead to a patchwork of different laws and regulations, and a lack of uniformity in enforcement.

And finally, many stakeholders have urged the provinces to include the following minimum requirements in adopting consumer protection measures regarding the payday loan industry:

1. limitations on rollovers and back-to-back loans.

2. mandatory participation by payday lenders in an independent

complaint resolution mechanism.

3. mechanisms ensuring full and accurate disclosure of contract terms.

4. acceptable debt collection practices.

5. a right for the borrower to rescind the loan and obtain full

reimbursement no later than the end of the day following the making
of the loan.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Educating one Consumer at a time

There is much confusion and misunderstanding regarding the Payday Loan Industry. I will try to provide some background and information on this Industry as I understand it. Hopefully, at the conclusion of my blog, you will have a much clearer view of the Industry where it stands now and possibly where it is headed.

The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, the Hon. Vic Toews, introduced Bill C-26, An Act to Amend the Criminal Code (criminal interest rate), in the House of Commons on October 6, 2006. Bill C-26 amends section 347 of the CRIMINAL CODE OF CANADA, which criminalizes the charging of usurious interest rates.

The expanding presence of payday loan companies suggests that some Canadians are willing to pay rates of interest in excess of those permitted under the CRIMINAL CODE for their payday loans. Bill C-26 is designed to exempt payday loans from criminal sanctions in order to facilitate provincial regulation of the industry. Thus, the exemption applies to payday loan companies licenced by any province that have legislative measures in place designed to protect consumers and limit the overall cost of the loan.

A payday loan is a short-term loan for a relaively small sum of money provided by a non-traditional lender. Statistics from the Canadian payday loan industry suggest that the average payday loan is valued at $280 and is extended for a period of ten days (usually payday). In order to qualify for a payday loan, the borrower generally must have identification, a personal chequing account, and a pay stub or alternative proof of a regular income. Payday lenders typically extend credit based on a percentage of the borrower's net pay until his/her next payday (generally within two weeks or less). The borrower provides the payday lender with a post-dated cheque, or authorizes a direct withdrawal, for the value of the loan plus any interest or fees charged.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Educating one Consumer at a time

bump

Hi,

I have 2 payday loans on my credit report from 2006 and I'm trying to get them removed. With Money Mart, Cash Store, Cash Money etc...all being sued and settling do you think I can use leverage.

Both of the companies listed on my report are currently in a class action lawsuit that hasn't been completed yet. They are both placed on my report by the collection agencies and not the original creditors.

Since no company has been able to provide a defense against Section 347 of the criminal code states they can't charge more than 60% per annum "illegal interest" should I fire off a letter to the collection agencies asking them to remove items on my credit report that are "illegal" and threaten to sue them in small claims court if they say no?

Does anyone have any advice on how I can get these removed?