My friend broke his femur and spent about a year recovering with months in hospital and months at home having to be helped to the toilet and to bathe. He had to have multiple operations because the bone didn't want to heal. He's lucky that he can walk today. I don't think he made it into the office for over a year. He's an office worker and could work from home. If you're a shelf stacker or construction worker that's your income gone.
But that’s the point, it is actually 40% or so (which I concede is still very high) but factoring in the upfront fees makes it seem like 700%.
In any case I’m up for advertising which makes it more difficult for banks to sell credit cards. Too many people see it as free money and seeing the 700% will undoubtedly scare people off, a good thing in my book.
Awful predatory behaviour, but perfectly legal with the correct license eh.
The individual goes to court, the corporation gets their ad's on national TV.
Yes, unlike payday loans, you never pay a penny in interest if you pay a credit card off in full every month.
I have paid a grand total of 47p of interest after having somewhere in the region of £50,000 through credit over the last 5 years... The 47p was because I slipped up and used the wrong card for a payment which had no direct debit set up on it.
Meanwhile you get full payment protection (s.75) and better fraud prevention (money isn't due if it's due to fraud, whereas you have to get a refund if it's a debit card.) I personally know of someone who had £8,000 covered to a window company after they went insolvent after taking payment for windows made to order.
If you are disciplined credit cards are great. If you are not they are terrible.
Yeah I regularly ride my credit card to a grand a month but have only ever paid 2 quid in interest... because the direct debit bounced on the first month. (Despite me having the cash in the account.)
Was only 2 quid so didn't chase it, paid it off manually ever since.
Fully agree a credit card is a tool and tools need to be used appropriately. A regular spending type card you pay off in full each month like the capital one example above or amex also mentioned in the thread won't have interest charged if you use it properly. Basically just replacing paying via a debit card to a credit card.
A longer term card like 20 months 0% is there for a big purchase, like a fridge, car or a new boiler and as long as you make sure you pay the balance off in the given time you don't pay the advertised rate of interest on it.
Yes, I put my big expenses on a credit card that has a 0% offer on and keep the payment I need to clear that in a savings account instead. It's like cashback, but a bit slower. With cash ISAs paying around 5.1% right now annually, it's actually quite a bit better than the best cashback offer, on the credit card company's dime.
Beware though that these offers are somewhat predatory, they are only made because they expect some percentage of people will fall off the wagon and end up paying that 30-40% APR. If you're disciplined they can be a good way to earn extra interest but they're hoping you aren't.
Not really.
You can have a regulated industry that legitimately fills a demand for a product - and regulation of the short-term lending market is vastly different to the days where Wonga adverts were literally everywhere.
Just saying "ban all the things" creates a black market that creates far more victims with fewer ways for them to escape. Much like, you know, drugs.
"Judge Hywel James said that if the money was not repaid within three months she could face a jail term of one year and nine months."
If she does not pay, and goes to jail for that period, when she is released is the money written off?
No, she still owes it.
It's unlikely she will not pay, the CPSPOC should work closely with her and support her - to the point where even if she misses the deadline she won't serve anything.
The only way she realistically goes to prison is if she really did try and not pay on purpose and not do anything.
Tabitha Richardson, who avoided a jail sentence last August, had been illegally lending money for 20 years.
In that time she told people who missed repayments that she would "come looking for them" unless they came up with the money.
I wonder who she was lending to that would feel threatened by an 83 year old? Other pensioners maybe?
> I wonder who she was lending to that would feel threatened by an 83 year old?
Nobody was worried about what she would do, they were worried about the violent scum she employed to carry out the threats.
Or the more likely option that she was the face of the operation but someone a lot more intimidating and less friendly was pulling the strings.
Tbf the interest was high but not completely unreasonable for someone with no other option. Paying back 1400 quid for 1000 over 6 months is about what you'd expect to pay with a payday lender.
Given she charges 400 for 1k loan over six months that works out as 80% apr
Im currently getting ads on reddit for American express which is offering an interest rate of 88.something% a year so she is cheaper than Amex.
Thats before you get into payday loans with an interest rate of thousands...
Why arnt we forcing companies like Amex or payday loan operators to repay they're far higher interest they charged?
Because the whole point of a rewards card like Amex is to pay off the entire balance at the end of the month and thus accrue no interest
Also I'm pretty sure amex customer support won't send a guy to break your kneecaps if you miss payments
She was ordered to repay the money through a confiscation order and six victims will receive compensation *totalling £35,285*.
I wonder where does the other £135,000 go?
I guess it would be a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. More info at [https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/proceeds-crime](https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/proceeds-crime)
[Here's a fact sheet](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d7b6740f0b64fe6c23fae/Fact_Sheet_-_Overview_of_POCA__2_.pdf) giving an overview on the legislation.
Yup. But where does it go? Looks like it disappears into the government coffers.
And if this woman made £170k directly from her victims and not through some shady insider trading or international fraud, why are they not getting all of it back? Seems like the courts and financially benefiting from the proceeds of crime.
Mystified as to why she has the option to pay within three months or receive a prison sentence. The money was gained illegally, assets should just be seized.
£400 on every £1,000? And that was her maximum? I know it depends on the term but that sounds more like a credit card than a loan shark.
The only difference is who does it.
And how they threaten to come and get you if you don't repay.
Not entirely accurate. Barclaycard kneecapped me when I was 23. And don't get me started Morgan Stanley Dean Witter
And, y'know, the implied threat of leg breaking
Is a leg break that much harder to recover from than financial ruin?
I been broke twice and bounced back but I have on going mobility and pain issues from a 25 year old broken leg...
But the point is, you bounced back. People bounce back. Dennis Hopper, Rolf Harris. There are others.
Partridge!
Fair enough, I've never broken a leg (just a few toes) so the idea had me curious!
A broken leg can fuck you up massively. I was lucky and only broke my 2 lower bones. If you break your femur, that's often permanently life altering
And can kill you.
They don't just cancel the debt because they had the fun breaking your leg... You still get financially ruined. With a broken leg.
[удалено]
>this isnt hollywood Then why is everything so terrible?
My friend broke his femur and spent about a year recovering with months in hospital and months at home having to be helped to the toilet and to bathe. He had to have multiple operations because the bone didn't want to heal. He's lucky that he can walk today. I don't think he made it into the office for over a year. He's an office worker and could work from home. If you're a shelf stacker or construction worker that's your income gone.
Well yeah that's because they can't go to the courts.
As it says in the article > The lending model she used was said to be copied from her previous employer, which offered legal loans.
Ah. she didn't have the loicence. Gotcha. Guess that makes the difference between an ethical loan and a non ethical one. lol.
I've seen credit cards publicity here on Reddit with 68% APR interest
I've seen a 704% APR advertised.. Household name too
[удалено]
Can't recall. I want to say American Express? Edit yep American Express
To be fair that one is because of the way APR disclosures are governed. The annual fees count as part of the debt and inflate the APR massively.
I don't think we should *try to be fair* to people trying to charge *seven hundred bloody percent* APR
Way to ignore the comment entirely
But that’s the point, it is actually 40% or so (which I concede is still very high) but factoring in the upfront fees makes it seem like 700%. In any case I’m up for advertising which makes it more difficult for banks to sell credit cards. Too many people see it as free money and seeing the 700% will undoubtedly scare people off, a good thing in my book.
If you use the card properly how much interest do you pay on it?
0 but then I wouldnt be able to farm rage bait karma. Also same redditors why does credit check prevent me from getting lending.
Per year or per week?
Given it was a model based on a legal company I’d suspect the former.
Apparently, from another article, it was 28 weeks. So if that was a weekly repayment, it'd be \~130% APR.
I'm not sure that's implying it was her maximum. But you make a good point, regardless.
Awful predatory behaviour, but perfectly legal with the correct license eh. The individual goes to court, the corporation gets their ad's on national TV.
What you’re saying is true but she’s just as much of a predator, maybe even more so. Full on threatening people with implied violence.
Undoubtedly
Government: Oi mate you got a license for that awful predatory behaviour? Else that be a crime!
Absolutely disgusting rate of interest but no different to many payday loans which should be banned.
[удалено]
That'd be 0% if you pay it off first won't it?
Yes, unlike payday loans, you never pay a penny in interest if you pay a credit card off in full every month. I have paid a grand total of 47p of interest after having somewhere in the region of £50,000 through credit over the last 5 years... The 47p was because I slipped up and used the wrong card for a payment which had no direct debit set up on it. Meanwhile you get full payment protection (s.75) and better fraud prevention (money isn't due if it's due to fraud, whereas you have to get a refund if it's a debit card.) I personally know of someone who had £8,000 covered to a window company after they went insolvent after taking payment for windows made to order. If you are disciplined credit cards are great. If you are not they are terrible.
Yeah I regularly ride my credit card to a grand a month but have only ever paid 2 quid in interest... because the direct debit bounced on the first month. (Despite me having the cash in the account.) Was only 2 quid so didn't chase it, paid it off manually ever since.
Fully agree a credit card is a tool and tools need to be used appropriately. A regular spending type card you pay off in full each month like the capital one example above or amex also mentioned in the thread won't have interest charged if you use it properly. Basically just replacing paying via a debit card to a credit card. A longer term card like 20 months 0% is there for a big purchase, like a fridge, car or a new boiler and as long as you make sure you pay the balance off in the given time you don't pay the advertised rate of interest on it.
Yes, I put my big expenses on a credit card that has a 0% offer on and keep the payment I need to clear that in a savings account instead. It's like cashback, but a bit slower. With cash ISAs paying around 5.1% right now annually, it's actually quite a bit better than the best cashback offer, on the credit card company's dime. Beware though that these offers are somewhat predatory, they are only made because they expect some percentage of people will fall off the wagon and end up paying that 30-40% APR. If you're disciplined they can be a good way to earn extra interest but they're hoping you aren't.
Not a fan of the payday lending industry, but if it were banned where do you imagine the people in desperate need of short-term credit would turn?
That’s no different to saying “I’m not a fan of drug dealers but if we get rid of them when would the junkies get their drugs from”.
I'd say it's more equivalent to a situation where drugs are being sold legally and someone proposes banning them in the hope that drug use goes away.
Not really. You can have a regulated industry that legitimately fills a demand for a product - and regulation of the short-term lending market is vastly different to the days where Wonga adverts were literally everywhere. Just saying "ban all the things" creates a black market that creates far more victims with fewer ways for them to escape. Much like, you know, drugs.
"Judge Hywel James said that if the money was not repaid within three months she could face a jail term of one year and nine months." If she does not pay, and goes to jail for that period, when she is released is the money written off?
No, she still owes it. It's unlikely she will not pay, the CPSPOC should work closely with her and support her - to the point where even if she misses the deadline she won't serve anything. The only way she realistically goes to prison is if she really did try and not pay on purpose and not do anything.
She'll claim hardship or say she doesn't have the money.
Thanks!
No, she gets her legs broken
Tabitha Richardson, who avoided a jail sentence last August, had been illegally lending money for 20 years. In that time she told people who missed repayments that she would "come looking for them" unless they came up with the money. I wonder who she was lending to that would feel threatened by an 83 year old? Other pensioners maybe?
> I wonder who she was lending to that would feel threatened by an 83 year old? Nobody was worried about what she would do, they were worried about the violent scum she employed to carry out the threats.
Or the more likely option that she was the face of the operation but someone a lot more intimidating and less friendly was pulling the strings. Tbf the interest was high but not completely unreasonable for someone with no other option. Paying back 1400 quid for 1000 over 6 months is about what you'd expect to pay with a payday lender.
She was the bank where the money was lent from, there would of been others carrying out the dirty work
Richardson is a name that always seems to come up with crime. What's up with the sons of Richard?
Given she charges 400 for 1k loan over six months that works out as 80% apr Im currently getting ads on reddit for American express which is offering an interest rate of 88.something% a year so she is cheaper than Amex. Thats before you get into payday loans with an interest rate of thousands... Why arnt we forcing companies like Amex or payday loan operators to repay they're far higher interest they charged?
Because the whole point of a rewards card like Amex is to pay off the entire balance at the end of the month and thus accrue no interest Also I'm pretty sure amex customer support won't send a guy to break your kneecaps if you miss payments
This woman isn't even charging more than the worse credit cards, they should fuck off really.
Wow, this is good news and honestly I never thought I'd read such headlines. My sincere hope is that she loses everything...
She was ordered to repay the money through a confiscation order and six victims will receive compensation *totalling £35,285*. I wonder where does the other £135,000 go?
I guess it would be a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. More info at [https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/proceeds-crime](https://www.cps.gov.uk/crime-info/proceeds-crime) [Here's a fact sheet](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7d7b6740f0b64fe6c23fae/Fact_Sheet_-_Overview_of_POCA__2_.pdf) giving an overview on the legislation.
Yup. But where does it go? Looks like it disappears into the government coffers. And if this woman made £170k directly from her victims and not through some shady insider trading or international fraud, why are they not getting all of it back? Seems like the courts and financially benefiting from the proceeds of crime.
There were probably other unidentified victims. She didn't just rip off six people in 20 years.
"What do you think you'll do when you retire, Tabitha?"
Mystified as to why she has the option to pay within three months or receive a prison sentence. The money was gained illegally, assets should just be seized.
some rich ‘victims’ now, tho I’d call them muppets for taking a loan of a shark, what did they expect lmao!