Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To wonder how this is legal

12 replies

Bluepansies · 02/08/2017 17:20

I've just seen a TV ad for a company offering loans at 1035% apr. I thought the one I saw the other day that was 79% apr was bad enough but this is insane - surely you'd have to be in a pretty desperate financial situation to go for this in which case this is unbelievably exploitative. The only other reason I can think of for someone to take one out is if they were very inexperienced and/or uneducated when it comes to finances in which case it's equally exploitative.

How is this allowed?

OP posts:
AnnetteCurtains · 02/08/2017 17:22

It shouldn't be
Disgraceful

VisitorFromAlphaStation · 02/08/2017 17:24

I wonder this too. I spotted an article from 2012 where the offered interest rate was 23707 apr, and another article from 2010 an interest rate of 75862 apr was offered, according to that article.

Floggingmolly · 02/08/2017 17:26

They're aimed at people who can't actually access credit elsewhere.

MaidOfStars · 02/08/2017 17:26

surely you'd have to be in a pretty desperate financial situation to go for this
Yep.

in which case this is unbelievably exploitative
I don't think these loans are designed to be held for a year. Most people might reason that, in a tight spot, paying a fiver a week to borrow a hundred for a month is a pretty decent deal. That works out at !200% APR.

I'm not necessarily defending these types of loans, and I think there are many defaulters (quite simply because a fiver a week for a hundred borrowed over a month doesn't seem like a bad term to default on) but I think the phrase "payday" loans should be borne in mind.

c3pu · 02/08/2017 17:29

YANBU, there should be a cap on the amount of interest that can be charged.

Inevitably it is the most vulnerable who will be taking out these kind of loans... It amounts to little more than a tax on being poor. Sickening.

SerfTerf · 02/08/2017 17:31

That's eyewatering.

What was the company name?

Bluepansies · 02/08/2017 17:34

I can't remember the name of it but it featured a man folded up in a cardboard box. The 79% one was Amigo loans I think, they offer loans to people with bad credit as long as they have a guarantor. I think they're up to 5 or 10 grand so definitely designed to be held for more than a year! Awful.

OP posts:
DonaldStott · 02/08/2017 17:38

It's an absolute disgrace and I wish it would be banned.

MaidOfStars · 02/08/2017 17:40

Anyone have any thoughts about microfinance in third world countries?

FayKnights · 02/08/2017 17:57

I've wondered that, it's smacks of legalised loan sharking, yet if have good credit you are offered 0% credit for anything up to 40 months. It's a crazy system.

KanielOutis · 02/08/2017 18:01

They are high risk, short term loans for people who have ruined their credit ratings with conventional credit. They work in £ not %, but are obliged to advertise the %. Say costs £5 to borrow £20.

SerfTerf · 02/08/2017 18:45

@KanielOutis

You're not making much sense.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread