Addressing Industry Studies

Studies pertaining to the industry continue to surface while validating the industry as a viable option for households in a temporary bind.  While the CRL and other consumer advocate groups will dissect and apply information to fit their views, there are data to support claims in favor of payday lending which negate many of the claims from opposition.  To their credit, the CRL doesn’t discriminate with their attacks in the name of consumer protection, and instead they seem to make it a point to attack every form of credit available.  

Study: Phantom Demand: Short-term due date generates need for repeat payday loans, accounting for 76% of total volume conducted by the Center For Responsible Lending

Link: http://www.responsiblelending.org/payday-lending/research-analysis/phantom-demand-final.pdf

Claim: The CRL makes blanketed and gross accusations claiming: "The borrower needs only a source of income—usually from a job or government benefits such as Social Security—and a checking account to qualify. No credit check is performed, nor greater assessment of ability to repay, such as a review of the borrower’s other obligations.”

Truth: This statement is false for a number of reasons.  Although the industry’s trade association, the Community Financial Services Association of America sets guidelines and best practices, the CRL is assuming that the thousands of different payday lending entities operate using the exact same procedures and underwriting.  Payday lending institutions are also governed by their respective states in which states such as Michigan where (by law) lenders must check a database to see if a potential customer has any loans outstanding prior to approval.  Lenders are therefore assessing ability to pay and are also limited to loaning no more than $600 to an individual every 31 days.

Claim: “The payday lending industry reports that 90 percent or more of loans are repaid. However, after repaying their loan, many borrowers find they cannot meet their other expenses with the remainder of their income. Faced with this shortfall, borrowers take out a new loan soon after they pay back the old one, trying to fill the hole in their family budget that was created by repaying the previous loan.”

Truth: Again, the state in which the company operates determines whether or not a customer has to pay off or is able to pay the balance down with a minimum payment.  In addition, one of the best practices created the trade association insists that all members allow their clients with the inability to pay to enter into an interest free installment agreement.  It is pretty evident that the CRL had already made up its mind about the outcome of their study before it was even initiated and completed.

Claim: “Since payday loans are due on the borrower’s next payday, we would expect to observe a preponderance of very short loan terms (for example, of less than seven days), consistent with the explanation that the borrower ran out of money a few days before their next paycheck because they faced an unexpected financial shortfall.”

Truth: It is likely that this statement was made with no consideration of individual state laws at all.  Missouri, for example, cannot legally issue a loan for terms less than 14 days in addition to Indiana and Alaska.  Every state has specific requirements for the length of the loan contract and therefore should be no surprise that the average loan may be longer than 7 days.

Claim: “As the experiences in 15 states and the District of Columbia show, a 36 percent APR rate cap protects families from short-term balloon payment loans, encouraging installment products where a borrower can repay their debt at a more manageable pace.”

Truth: Yes, a 36 percent APR has been applied in several states and unfortunately, the effect wasn’t the protection of borrowers from short-term balloon payments, but instead it lead to the complete abolition of short-term credit in those states.

 

Study: Payday Holiday: How Households Fare after Payday Credit Bans conducted by staff from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York

Link: http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/staff_reports/sr309.pdf

Findings: The study tested the three primary claims that are frequently made by the CRL.  These claims include: payday loans are usurious, payday loans target a particular demographic, and payday loan customers are repeat borrowers.  By doing the above, they were essentially testing the debt trap hypothesis.  Georgia and North Carolina were in the process of banning payday lending shortly before the study and the household financial problems of those states were compared to those of states in which payday loans were already banned.  Most of the findings from the study contradict the debt trap hypothesis, suggesting that Georgia bounced more checks, complained more about lenders and debt collectors in addition to being more likely to file chapter 7 bankruptcy after the ban.

 

Study: An Analysis of Consumers’ Use of Payday Loans conducted by the George Washington School of Business

Link: George Washington School of Business

Findings: This study seeks to determine whether or not payday loan customers know what they are doing when they use product in addition to whether or not they understand the costs and available alternatives.  This study concluded that most payday loan customers used the product for unexpected and urgent expenses and also considered their options before-hand.  There is also evidence that although some customers use the loans frequently, most customers use them as they were intended, for short-term financing.  In addition, most customers felt that payday lenders provide a useful product/service.

 

Study: Payday Lenders: Heroes or Villains in 2008 conducted by the Graduate School of Business of the University of Chicago

Link: http://www.fdic.gov/bank/analytical/cfr/2007/apr/CFRSS_2007_Morse.pdf

Findings: Natural disasters and positive and negative welfare measures are used to evaluate the strength of lifestyle patterns during distress as well as the permanent consequences to distress. The study finds that communities with payday lenders show greater resiliency when faced with natural disasters.

 

Study: An Experimental Analysis of the Demand for Payday Loans

Link: http://www1.chapman.edu/~bjwilson/papers/PaydayLoans.pdf

Findings: This study was conducted to determine the effect that payday loans have on an individuals’ ability to effectively manage financial setbacks.  The study found that where payday loans exist, a higher percentage of subjects survived financially over a 30 month period.  Subjects had access to payday loans as well as overdrafts and there was nearly a 10% difference in survival rate between subjects who used payday loans versus those with no access to them.