Quick Cash Loan
- Thread starter Just1709
- Start date
Just log on to lightpaydayloan.com , We offer a wide range of bad credit loans for your needs. Your financial situation is not a problem for us. We have many lenders waiting to approve your bad credit instantly. We can get you the loan you want, even if you have a bankruptcy. We have mortgage loans bad credit auto loan Bad, Bad Credit Personal Loans, Bad Credit, Quick Cash Loan with Poor Credit and much more.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Its almost as if the OP and Pierjons are the same person
Auto loans, now theres a term I haven't seen used in this country!
Auto loans, now theres a term I haven't seen used in this country!
Upvote
0
P
paydayadvisor
highest US bidder, it's all in dollars :/
i would suggest popping along to my site to compare the loans, but we're not operational as of yet!
Wonga do credit check. WagedayAdvance are the only large scale payday lender to genuinely not include a credit check but the no credit check ones do cost more, £29.50 to be exact
I'd post a URL but I think I'd get told off for shameful self advertising
that's them, if this is actually what you're looking for great if not let me know and I can point you in the right direction. PM me if needed
Never borrow more than you can comfortably pay back!
Upvote
0
The minimum lending rate has been less than 1% p.a. for a number of years. Barclaycard Platinum Card is currently quoting 17.9%. Quoted APRs for Payday UK and wonga.com (for example) range from 1700% to 4200% p.a. No doubt forum users will form their own conclusions as to whether these rates are "outrageously high".
Upvote
0
Hopefully intelligent forum users will form conclusions based on like-for-like comparison and opportunity cost, not on a spurious 'compared to base' comparison.
Upvote
0
Nobody would suggest that comparing the rates charged by lenders of last resort to MLR is sensible however the rates charged by credit card companies are generally considered fairly high and are easy to access for comparison. Granted, "payday" loans are high risk and deserve a higher reward. But is 100-200 times higher justifiable? I just ask the question. In the case of Kettley v Scott [1981], the court stated that consideration would be given to the prevailing interest rates at the time, the age and experience of the debtor, the risk involved and the degree of pressure brought upon the debtor. It would be interesting to see the attitude the court would take to a challenge to an APR of, for example, 1700% or 4,000%.
As for APRs, their use was adopted, if my memory serves me correctly, in the 1970s under the Consumer Credit Act to allow for a fair and reasonable comparison of interest rates for all types of borrowing and they take into account the amount lent, the interest rate, the period of the loan and the periodicity of the payments. There are standard methods of calculation which take all these factors into consideration for all types of lending. I do not understand the point made that "APR is only relative to the length of the loan". APRs are the legally acceptable method of comparison of the costs of credit.
My understanding of the term "opportunity cost" is "the cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action", so I am not really certain I understand the context in which it is used here. Do you mean the cost to the borrower of not borrowing the money compared to the cost of borrowing it? Or the cost to the lender of not lending it and using the money in some other way? Sorry if I'm being dim.
As for APRs, their use was adopted, if my memory serves me correctly, in the 1970s under the Consumer Credit Act to allow for a fair and reasonable comparison of interest rates for all types of borrowing and they take into account the amount lent, the interest rate, the period of the loan and the periodicity of the payments. There are standard methods of calculation which take all these factors into consideration for all types of lending. I do not understand the point made that "APR is only relative to the length of the loan". APRs are the legally acceptable method of comparison of the costs of credit.
My understanding of the term "opportunity cost" is "the cost of an alternative that must be forgone in order to pursue a certain action", so I am not really certain I understand the context in which it is used here. Do you mean the cost to the borrower of not borrowing the money compared to the cost of borrowing it? Or the cost to the lender of not lending it and using the money in some other way? Sorry if I'm being dim.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
My principle point is that payday loans are typically taken out to cover a distress situation of (hopefully) a short term nature, so a direct comparison might well be approaching your bank for an overdraft - for this they would charge a fee (minimum £150) and might well add aditional costs. If the need for cash is, say £700 for a week then the cost of that overdraft will far exceed the cost of a payday loan, though on APR comparison the APR will be less. Alternatively it might mean missing credit card payments which will incur greater penalty charges.
if the need is repeated monthly then overdraft will almost certainly be cheaper.
There is, of course a very real chance that the bank will decline to help - in which case you can add the real cost of bounced cheques and additional charges to the opportunity cost (albeit not a very positive alternative) of the loss of goodwill and credibility of bounced payments and unpaid bills.
I have only a passing knowledge of this sector but I am aware that the the cost of running such an operation is disproportionately high (you can imagine the relative costs of distance-lending £700 for 7 days) which mean that rates have to be high to be commercially viable.
Which leaves the real question of whether the sector should exist?
Just a final point, but I would say that ANY price comparison is only ever valid once core needs are established.
if the need is repeated monthly then overdraft will almost certainly be cheaper.
There is, of course a very real chance that the bank will decline to help - in which case you can add the real cost of bounced cheques and additional charges to the opportunity cost (albeit not a very positive alternative) of the loss of goodwill and credibility of bounced payments and unpaid bills.
I have only a passing knowledge of this sector but I am aware that the the cost of running such an operation is disproportionately high (you can imagine the relative costs of distance-lending £700 for 7 days) which mean that rates have to be high to be commercially viable.
Which leaves the real question of whether the sector should exist?
Just a final point, but I would say that ANY price comparison is only ever valid once core needs are established.
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote
0
As I say above ". . . "payday" loans are high risk and deserve a higher reward." The issue in question is whether an APR of 1700-4000% p.a. is justifiable, compared to the relatively expensive option of a credit card. Is the rate of default on payday loans really 100-200 times greater than on credit card debt? Judging by the number of consumer IVAs and bankruptcies, I doubt it.
The Moneylenders Act 1900 was the result, at least in part, of concern about lenders who charged 3,000% p.a. interest and while the legislation, which has evolved from there, has never sought to impose specific limits (each case on its own merits etc.) it is clear to me that the courts will look - and probably fairly soon - very carefully at loan agreements where the APR is in the rarefied atmosphere of four figures. It's about risk/reward and fairness.
The Moneylenders Act 1900 was the result, at least in part, of concern about lenders who charged 3,000% p.a. interest and while the legislation, which has evolved from there, has never sought to impose specific limits (each case on its own merits etc.) it is clear to me that the courts will look - and probably fairly soon - very carefully at loan agreements where the APR is in the rarefied atmosphere of four figures. It's about risk/reward and fairness.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
P
paydayadvisor
Just to see if there has been a breakdown in understanding, let me ask you a question.
If you had a £100 debt on your credit card and paid it off a month or so after, how much would you expect to pay back?
Also, a £100 payday loan, how much would you expect to pay to repay that in full?
Upvote
0
P
paydayadvisor
You're comparing payday loans and credit cards. These products have no relevance to each other.
The prices are only relative to the length of time they are taken over as stated previously
Upvote
0
They are both readily available sources of consumer credit so of course they are relevant to each other and can be compared. Quite obviously (by definition) the amount of interest paid is a function of the duration of the loan and there is a statutory form of comparison of the cost - the APR - which takes into account all the variables. Although if I want to "borrow" £200 for a month from my credit card company, it doesn't cost me a penny!
There have been concerns about very high rates of interest for hundreds of years, hence the need for legislation to protect borrowers (and lenders). The proof of the pudding is in the eating however. Sooner or later the court will be asked to adjudicate.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
P
paydayadvisor
I think charging £50 on a £200 loan is very good when you consider the target market.
The typical customer for a payday loan wont be able to get a credit card etc.
If the lenders are strangled down to lower interest rates by the government, it will kill them.
Remember that not everyone pays back, and there is a lot of costs from the lender for staff/overhead etc.
The outrage is all about the APR which is IRRELEVANT on a short period loan.
I dont think short term lenders should have to show APR as it is a misleading figure for the consumer. Example rates would be better suited
The typical customer for a payday loan wont be able to get a credit card etc.
If the lenders are strangled down to lower interest rates by the government, it will kill them.
Remember that not everyone pays back, and there is a lot of costs from the lender for staff/overhead etc.
The outrage is all about the APR which is IRRELEVANT on a short period loan.
I dont think short term lenders should have to show APR as it is a misleading figure for the consumer. Example rates would be better suited
Upvote
0
I am not denying that payday lenders should charge a premium. I just question whether £50 on a £200 loan is justifiable, given the duration of the loan and the comparative risk. Is the payday borrower really 100-200 times more of a risk than a credit card borrower?
I reiterate my point about APRs (and please don't SHOUT). They are the legal and proper way of comparing interest rates. The fact you don't like them doesn't mean they're not relevant - they just go to highlight how expensive payday loans are. Something can of course be expensive and good value for money; the question is whether payday loans are good VFM.
Upvote
0
If at all possible, avoid those loans! You will be paying and APR in excess of 2000%. Try get a credit card or something. You can get credit cards even with a poor credit history, although the APR is usually around the 40% mark, substantially lower than pay day loans. You should be able to withdraw cash on the card
Upvote
0
M
MASSEY
You still have to wait for the pin and card in the post. Not exactly a QUICK LOAN.
Upvote
0
Good point! I guess what I was trying to say is that Payday Loans are ridiculously expensive and should be avoided if at all possible.
Could a loan from friend/family/employer not be a possibility if its only very short term (you could then still apply for the credit card
)
Upvote
0
Similar threads
- Locked
Latest Articles
-
AI can do the typing. It can't sign the accounts.Back in January, a UKBF member called @Byzantium put up a complaint that'll sound familiar to a...- Lord Moore
- Updated:
- 6 min read
-
90,000 jobs are heading your way. Your rates bill might get there firstIf you run a business in Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds or Bristol, you were probably told some...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 8 min read
-
How to Price a New Product or Service: We Asked UKBFOn 5 August, @Data Swami posted in the General Business Forum with a question that ought to have...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 7 min read
-
70 years of director bans in six months: Companies House has stopped asking nicelyCompanies House published a release on August 6th 2026 that every company director should read...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
- 7 min read
-
MTD for Income Tax: your first quarterly update is due 7 August.If you are a sole trader or landlord and your gross income from self-employment and property was...- maka
- Updated:
- 4 min read