Accessibility and Access Keys [0]

Skip to Content [1]

Stop Spam Here!

Pragmatic Solutions to Payday Lending: Regulating Fringe Lending and “Alternative Banking"

Full text is available here [pdf file: 0.44mb]

Executive Summary

This report is a follow-up to PIAC’s November 2002 Report: “Fringe Lending and “Alternative” Banking: The Consumer Experience” (“Report 1”). From that report, a much clearer picture emerged of the “alternative financial sector” (AFS). The November 2002 report analyzed survey findings of users of the AFS and made several recommendations for consideration by policy makers. This report builds on those recommendations and undertakes an in-depth consideration of possible regulation of a major aspect of the AFS, the payday loan industry, from a consumer perspective. This report outlines several possible options for regulation of the payday loans industry and highlights the advantages and shortcomings of each possible approach. The report is timely, as provincial and federal regulators are presently meeting to determine the scope and method of regulating the AFS in general and the payday loans industry in particular.

Report 1 concluded that the best course of action to deal with problems in payday lending was fairly complete and specific regulation of the payday loan industry. Also discussed was the possible amendment of s. 347 of the Criminal Code (the criminal interest offence and related interest rate cap of 60% effective annual rate of interest) and the resultant need for effective regulation. In light of the possible amendment of s. 347 to permit small, short-term loans, more partial regulatory schemes such as simple licensing, (with or without industry self-regulation or codes of conduct), was rejected as likely to be inadequate to the task of protecting consumers.

This report continues these conclusions, expands upon the regulatory options and justifies extensive regulation. It also suggests which regulatory policies would be most likely to curb industry excesses while encouraging responsible provision of credit to users of payday loan services.

The Report concludes with a plea to mainstream financial institutions to enter the payday loan market once the necessary changes are made to the Criminal Code usury provision, however, it cautions that such an entry by federally-regulated financial institutions must be in accordance with the relevant provincial regulatory scheme.

The regulatory recommendations include:

Licensing of Operators

Extensive Regulator Powers, including

Cost of Credit Disclosure, including

Annual Percentage Rate (APR) statement

Interest Rate Cap, including borrowing limits

Limits on Specific Charges and Fees, including

No Rollovers, Extensions, Back-to-Back Loans

Advertising Rules, including

Education and Awareness Campaigns for Consumers, including

Other Borrower Rights

Collection and Litigation Limits, including

Lender Database (Positive Credit Reports)

“Executive Summary (français) [pdf file: 0.06mb]