Payday lender CashCall Inc. will repay $1,300 per customer on average

PHILADELPHIA — The U.S. government states sufficient facts to convict two men of using  indian tribes as fronts for dozens of illegal payday lending businesses that brought in more than $680 million in five years, a Pennsylvania federal judge ruled Dec. 29 after finding that neither tribal law nor sovereign immunity can shield the men from claims that they operated a racketeering conspiracy using a “rent-a-tribe” scheme (United States of America v. Charles M. Hallinan, et al., No. 2:16-cr-130, E.D. Pa.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179625).

CashCall Settles District Of Columbia Usury Suit For $2.9 Million

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Payday lender CashCall Inc. will repay customers more than $1.8 million — about $1,300 per customer on average — and forgive another $1 million in loan debt to settle claims by the District of Columbia that the company charged illegally high interest rates, according to a consent order filed Jan. 11 in the District of Columbia Superior Court, which previously rejected CashCall’s attempts to shield itself from lending laws through tribal sovereign immunity (District of Columbia v. CashCall Inc., et al., No. 2015 CA 006904 B, D.C. Super.). Tribal Courts


$23M in Fines and Refunds Paid Payday Loan Borrowers

FTC Action: Payday Debt Relief Operation Banned from Debt Relief Business

The owners of a debt relief operation that targeted consumers with outstanding payday loans will be banned from the debt relief business under settlements with the Federal Trade Commission.

In February 2015, the FTC filed a complaint alleging that Jared Irby, Richard Hughes, Coastal Acquisitions LLC, and PSC Administrative LLC, who typically did business as “Payday Support Center” or “Infinity Client Solutions,” falsely promised to resolve consumers’ payday loans through their hardship program. Once enrolled, consumers stopped making payments to their lenders, but the defendants failed to provide the promised debt relief, and consumers ended up in deeper financial trouble, having paid hundreds of dollars for no reduction or settlement of their loans according to the agency.

[Be sure to signup for my free Newsletter for updates on refunds being paid by payday loan lenders and collection companies as the FED’s Post them.] Under two stipulated final orders announced today, the defendants are banned from all debt relief-related activities, and they are prohibited from making misrepresentations about financial and other products and services, and from making unsubstantiated claims about any products or services. The orders also bar the defendants from profiting from consumers’ personal information and failing to dispose of it properly.

How to get out of your payday loans
Payday Loan Help

Each order imposes a judgment of more than $23.7 million that will be partially suspended when Irby and the corporate defendants pay $149,537, and Hughes pays $8,037.26. In each case, the full judgment will become due immediately if the defendants are found to have misrepresented their financial condition.

The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the stipulated final orders against Irby, Coastal Acquisitions and PSC Administrative, and against Hughes, was 3-0. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama entered the orders on September 7, 2016.

NOTE: Stipulated final orders have the force of law when approved and signed by the District Court judge.

Here’s a link to the original FTC order.

Here’s a link to the original FTC Complaint.



Another Scummy Payday Loan Scam

A Marshfield man came into the Marshfield Police Department at 3:16 p.m. to report a possible fraud. The man had applied to several payday loan online loan businesses but had been denied by all of them until he was contacted via email by an alleged loan company calling itself “Speedy Cash.”

The man said the email already had his information, and when he called he spoke with a male with a strong accent. The man said he would be approved for a loan of $5,000 even though he only needed $500.

He was then instructed to obtain $500 worth of gift cards to begin the loan process. He did so and sent a picture of the gift cards’ pin numbers. The man did not receive any payment to his bank account, and the so-called “Speedy Cash” representative now needed $200 more.

Police informed the man that this so-called “Speedy Cash” lender was indeed a fraudulent business. The man then called “Speedy Cash,” and when he explained he was at the police department, the representative dropped the accent, cursed at him, and hung up the phone.

The man was advised to contact his bank as he gave out his account number as well as his Social Security number and was instructed on identity theft protection.

Note: There is indeed a legitamate lender called “Speedy Cash.” They have a good reputation and are active members of The CFSA.

Consumers who simply must get their hands on quick cash MUST be careful. Payday loan scammers are everywhere…


TitleMax Forced to Abandon its Title Loan Product

The Nevada Financial Institutions Division (NFID) issued an order requiring TitleMax to “immediately cease and desist offering its “Grace Period Payments Deferment Agreement (GPPDA)” title loan option and return all principal and interest collected under every GPPDA entered into after December 18, 2014. ”

The order directs  TitleMax to pay an administrative fine of $307,000 for breaking Nevada car title loan laws.

The Nevada complaint focused on TitleMax of Nevada, Inc. TitleMax offered an agreement entitled Grace Period Payments Deferment Agreement and cited a violation of NRS 604A.445 which allows for only two types of title loans: a 30-day loan, extendable for up to six additional 30 day periods and a 210-day loan that may not be extended.

18 Ways to Kiss Your Payday Loan Lender Goodbye
Payday Loan Help

A judge upheld a previous ruling that “by entering into the GPPDA, TitleMax unlawfully extends the term of the loan beyond the initial 210-day term. Under the GPPDA, the customer receives an additional 210 days to pay off their title loan with the first seven payments going toward interest only and the second seven installments going toward principal only. While the interest rate remains the same as the initial loan agreement, the customer’s payments are no longer fully and ratably amortized as required by law. A customer who makes payments according to the GPPDA, will ultimately pay more money in interest than he or she would have paid under their initial loan agreement.”

Customers that have a GPPDA title loan agreement with TitleMax should reach out to their TitleMax branch with questions.

For strategies to get out of paying your payday loans and title loans, get my new book: “How to Kiss Your Payday Loan Lender Goodbye” available on Amazon.

Here’s a link to the TitleMax car title loan “Findings of Fact, Conlusions of Law, and the Order.


Vermont Payday Loan Laws and Refunds

Billing Tree, Inc., an Arizona company that processes electronic payments, will pay $178,000 to settle claims that the company violated Vermont consumer protection laws.

Vermont Payday Loan Laws and Refunds

Here’s a link to the Vermont Payday Loan Settlement: Vermont

Verify Vermont payday loan lenders having a license here: Vermont Payday Loan Licensees

To file a Vermont payday loan complaint: Vermont PDL Complaint

The Attorney General for the State of Vermont successfully secured refunds for approximately 4000 Vermont bank account holders from billing Tree.

“Vermont continues its strong prosecution against those engaged in predatory lending activities,” said Attorney General William H. Sorrell. “This is the fourth and largest settlement against a payment processor of high-interest, unlicensed internet loans and a further warning to the illegal lending industry.”

Vermont payday loan lasw 18 Ways to Kiss Your Payday Loan Lender Goodbye
Payday Loan Help

From 2012-2014, Billing Tree processed debits from nearly 4000 consumer bank accounts in Vermont on behalf of at least 43 online payday loan lenders. The annual interest rates (APR) often exceeded 100-300%.  Vermont law prohibits annual interest above 24%. None of the 43 lenders had a license to make loans in Vermont.

As of May 2014, Billing Tree ceased processing payments in Vermont involving any online consumer loans.

Under the terms of the settlement, Billing Tree will issue credits totaling $153,282 to the Vermont bank accounts, and will pay $25,000 in civil penalties and costs to the State. The credits represent partial compensation for payment of interest over Vermont’s legal limit.

Consumers who have borrowed from any lender not listed as licensed with the Vermont Department of Financial Regulation can file a complaint with the Attorney General’s Consumer Assistance Program, or mail a complaint to “Consumer Assistance Program,” 146 University Place, Burlington, VT 05405.