The New CFPB Rule is a Testament to the Power of Community Organizing

Seniors were the largest age group of payday loan borrowers in California last year but a new CFPB rule will better protect borrowers.

Dear CRC Supporter:

Yesterday, the CFPB released a new rule that will protect working families from predatory loans and the financial heartaches they create.

This rule is a victory and is a testament to the power of community organizing by CRC, our members and our allies. Borrowers will benefit from new safeguards requiring lenders to better assess their ability to repay a loan and from restrictions preventing lenders from making multiple, unsuccessful attempts to debit their bank accounts, a practice that results in costly overdrafts and closed bank accounts.

As the CFPB began its work to write this rule, CRC members and their clients courageously stepped up to share their experiences. Working with our partners, we organized listening sessions with the CFPB and with our Congressional representatives where Californians talked about how they got caught in the payday loan debt trap- a cycle of costly rollovers that are profitable for the industry, but that extract precious income and assets away from working families.

California Consumer Leadership Academy

In 2015, CRC partnered with CRL-California and California LULAC to organize the first ever California Consumer Leadership Academy.  Eight courageous women participated in this day-long training, shared their experiences, and crafted strategies on how to stop predatory lending practices in our communities.

At the CFPB’s field hearing where it announced its draft proposal of the rule, I shared the story of a Santa Cruz borrower who had worked with a CRC member after getting a payday loan and then being illegally harassed for repayment of it. We applauded the CFPB’s initial proposal, while also highlighting where we thought the safeguards could be stronger.

Once the public comment period opened, we activated consumers, CRC members and allies, and engaged with local, state, and federal elected officials to ensure the rules were as strong as possible. Consumers shared their stories in the media and we helped them to file CFPB complaints. Local mayors voiced their support. As a result of CRC and our member’s organizing efforts, the LA County Board of Supervisors passed a unanimous motion in support of strong rules. California state legislators, as well as our two senators and more than half of our congressional delegation (led by Representative Maxine Waters) weighed in with their support.

Over 100 California nonprofits also weighed in with the CFPB and our message was loud and clear: California families need a strong CFPB rule that protects their income and assets from predatory lenders.

We applaud the CFPB for its thoughtful approach to this rule and we want to extend our gratitude to our members and allies who worked tirelessly to organize and to protect our communities from predatory lending. We’re also grateful to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation for their support of this work.

We anticipate the industry will attempt to get this rule overturned- either through the courts or the Congressional Review Act, but rest assured we will continue our advocacy in support of this rule and the other work the CFPB is doing to stand up for Main Street.

My statement on the rules is now available on CRC’s website and you can read a CFPB fact sheet about the rules here.

Thank you for your support.

Paulina Gonzalez

Executive Director

California Reinvestment Coalition Recommendations on Updating the Community Reinvestment Act

Community reinvestment act 2

Fact Sheet: Community Reinvestment Act Recommendations

To truly meet community needs, CRC members believe the CRA should be improved and strengthened. In a recent survey, 100% of members said that the level of CRA activity in their community needed improvement and that there was considerable room for banks to do more.

CRC recommends that CRA be reformed so that:

1. CRA implementation encourages, not discourages, reinvestment in rural areas. California is home to numerous rural reinvestment deserts, where a lack of lending and investment prevents communities from thriving economically. And yet, many of these areas already have bank branches and are included in bank CRA assessment areas. Regulators subject bank CRA activity in these areas to a lower level of scrutiny, as banks are able to denote these areas as subject to only “limited scope” review. For example, Bakersfield, California, has numerous bank branches, and those banks have CRA obligations in the city. However, these same banks are examined for their CRA activity far more closely in other, more urban areas of the state. This creates fierce competition, for example, for housing tax credit deals in urban areas, while rural projects struggle to find financing. Instead, regulators should ensure that the banks with the largest deposits in a given MSA are subject to a full scope review in that MSA.

2. Regulators should encourage banks to develop transparent, multi-year CRA Plans that reflect significant public input and that include measurable goals, such as tying reinvestment activity to a percentage of bank deposits. Banks are supposed to help meet community credit needs. And in many bank merger applications, banks must demonstrate that the merger will provide a community benefit. The public input process is critical to this assessment.

However, community input has been diluted, and is not sufficiently sought and considered under current CRA implementation, as an example, very few mergers will even have public hearings. Mergers most often lead to diminished resources for communities as 1 + 1 rarely equals 2 in terms of reinvestment. That is why a comprehensive review of mergers is so important, complete with strong community input and mitigation of any harm the merger may cause in the form of decreased reinvestment or reduced access to banking services or branches.

Regulators should encourage CRA plans, particularly in the context of mergers that must show a clear public benefit to the community. Strong and meaningful CRA plans reflect community input about community credit needs, motivate banks by setting strong goals for lending, investment and services, and allow communities to work in partnership with banks to ensure that they are treated equitably and fairly by financial institutions. CRA plans are a best practice that have resulted in significant gains for communities in the past few years. Strong CRA plans can help demonstrate that a merger will have a public benefit.

3. Banks should be downgraded for causing, enabling, or financing harm in communities, taking into account discrimination, and equity stripping conduct and transactions that lead to displacement. The CRA calls for an assessment of how well or poorly a bank is meeting community credit needs. This analysis must include an assessment of fair housing and related factors. Regulators should conduct a comprehensive review of a bank’s community impact. Wells Fargo is but the most recent example to demonstrate that simply investing in the community is insufficient- banks must also not cause harm or break the law.

For a regulator to give a bank a passing CRA grade while the bank engages in discriminatory lending would be to endorse discrimination. Further, a high CRA rating for a discriminatory bank could result in consumers being directed to a bank with an inflated CRA rating, only for the bank to potentially overcharge the consumer or deny that person a loan. In this way, regulators would abuse the public’s trust in its ratings.

Bank regulators should consider expensive overdraft programs and excessive reliance on fee revenue generated at the expense of the most economically vulnerable consumers as a basis for downgrading a bank in a CRA service test evaluation. Similarly, banks should be downgraded for financing high cost, predatory lenders, and for contributing to gentrification and displacement. Banks should also suffer CRA rating downgrades as a result of any involvement in the REO to Rental craze, which results in first time homebuyers being outbid by cash investors, tenants being displaced by Wall Street landlords, and neighborhoods losing long term residents as well as racial and income diversity.

4. Encourages banks to open and maintain branches in LMI and rural areas. Bank branches remain a critical part of how banks serve communities, and inequitable distribution of branches must be considered as part of the CRA service test. Critically, regulators cannot allow the industry’s preference for technology to result in fewer branches and shrinking CRA assessment areas, footprints, and obligations in LMI communities. Additionally, many LMI neighborhoods and communities of color not only lack access to bank branches, but also to a wide range of banking products and services, including ATMs.  Regulators should analyze whether banks are meeting the banking needs of all communities in their assessment areas.

Regulators should also consider how banks can better reduce the number of unbanked or underbanked consumers within their assessment areas. Moreover, banks should quantify the extent to which LMI bank customers are able to keep their accounts open and in good standing over time, or if their customers are pushed out of the bank by overdraft fees or other barriers. Low cost bank accounts should be offered and accessible to LMI consumers, including through bank acceptance of municipal identification cards and other accessible forms of ID.

5. Assessment areas should include areas where banks have branches, or where a significant number of their customers and depositors live. Regulation has lagged behind market innovation. Requiring reinvestment only around retail branches makes much less sense today, when internet, credit card, and fintech banks operate nationally but reinvest only in Salt Lake City or another headquarters location.

Assessment areas should be expanded to include areas where a substantial portion of a bank’s depositors and borrowers reside. At the same time, banks should not be allowed to receive additional CRA credit for lending or investing outside of the bank’s CRA assessment area, beyond the accommodation made to banks by regulators during the last CRA Questions and Answers review. This will only lead to a dilution of investment in LMI neighborhoods that are most in need of reinvestment. The primary purpose of the CRA is to serve communities where the bank is doing business, not to encourage reinvestment where it is easiest to do. Banks should not be able to circumvent obligations to serve the communities in their assessment areas. The focus of bank CRA should remain on LMI individuals and communities.

6. CRA examinations should consider and reflect new small business lending data that the CFPB will be overseeing. Small businesses are the lifeblood of our economy, prime job creators, and bulwarks of the community. Yet small business owners benefit from fewer protections than homeowners. HMDA data has been collected for years, and used to inform CRA examinations, without problem or incident. Small business owners should also benefit from a comprehensive and unified lending data collection system.

CRC members strongly support Congress’ charge in Dodd-Frank that §1071 small business lending data be collected in order to facilitate enforcement of fair lending laws and enable communities, governmental entities, and creditors to identify business and community development needs and opportunities of women-owned, minority-owned, and small businesses. Such data collection and dissemination will surely make affordable credit more accessible to all small businesses, and will inform CRA examinations.

A recent CRC survey of our CDFI, community lender and technical assistance provider member organizations revealed that small business clients still face discrimination; are pushed by banks towards higher priced credit cards; are frequently targeted for nonbank credit products (like Merchant Cash Advances), and are in need of greater access to affordable, safe, and transparent credit.

7. Banks serve all segments of the community, including the immigrant community. Banks can and should serve the immigrant community by directly providing loans and investments to immigrants, and by supporting community lenders and other organizations that serve the immigrant community. Immigrant community members have significant unmet credit needs, whether it is a safe place to save money, a loan to buy a house, purchase a car, start a businesses, or pursue a citizenship application.

Banks should ensure that employees represent the diversity of their service areas, and make translation, interpretation and related language access services available to all potential clients. Banks should make loans and investments accessible to all community members, and invest and support community lenders and other organizations that serve the immigrant community.

8. The bank examination process can be improved so that years do not go by after an examination before the pubic rating is released. The regulators should hire additional examiners and provide enhanced training to ensure that there is consistency in the examination process across agencies and examiners. CRC believes that a primary reason behind the delay in the public release of CRA ratings is the propensity of banks to challenge and appeal initial CRA ratings by regulators. This process should be reformed to limit the circumstances in which a bank can challenge a rating, and the public should be given an opportunity to comment on the appeal when a bank invokes this otherwise opaque process. It is of critical importance that regulators set high standards of review.

To make CRA meaningful, regulators have to end the long history of CRA grade inflation so that poor CRA performance will be reflected in CRA ratings. Streamlining the process while lowering the examination bar will only lead to less investment, more harm to communities, and potentially, to greater risk in the US financial system. We saw this happen in the years leading up the financial crisis, when regulatory agencies competed against each other to attract banks to their charters, fueling a regulatory race to the bottom, and leading ultimately to the failure of several savings and loans and the end of the Office of Thrift Supervision.

100 Organizations Take Stand Against Predatory Lending in California

Is it Time to Stop Predatory Lending in California

It’s hard to believe, but in California, if you are getting a consumer loan for $2,500 or more, then there are NO LIMITS to the interest rate a lender can charge you!

High cost installment lenders are taking full advantage of this loophole and of California borrowers. In 2015, over 50% of consumer loans in the $2,500 to $4,999 range carried interest rates of more than 100% APR!

To address this problem, Assemblymember Ash Kalra introduced legislation, Assembly Bill 1109, which would cap the interest rates on these loans.  As a city council member in San Jose, Kalra had championed reforms to the payday lending market to better protect borrowers.

In a very short time, 100 organizations from around the state (listed below) submitted letters in support of AB 1109.

While Assemblymember Kalra recently decided to make AB 1109 into a two year bill, right now he is working with the chair of the Assembly Banking Committee, Matthew Dababneh, on a different bill, AB 784, that also represents a step forward in curbing predatory lending in California.

AB 784 would make a pilot program (Pilot Program for Increased Access to Responsible Small Dollar Loans) permanent. The program has for lenders who want to provide loans in the range of at least $300 but less than $2,500. However, in making the pilot permanent, the bill would now allow loans to be made under the pilot program from $300 up to $5,000. The pilot program limits interest rates, requires some level of underwriting, and offers additional consumer protections. While the rates under the pilot program exceed 36%, in recent years the pilot lenders have demonstrated the feasibility of lending at rates far below 100%.

CRC will be monitoring the progress of AB 784 closely. We are heartened to see 99 other organizations throughout California are in strong support of addressing predatory lending as indicated through their support of AB 1109. If you’re interested in learning more or getting involved, please contact Liana Molina, director of community engagement: LIANA AT calreinvest.org or (415) 864-3980.

The following 100 organizations support AB 1109:

9to5 California
9to5, National Association Of Working Women
Act For Women And Girls
Alliance Of Californians For Community Empowerment
American Association Of University Women – California
American Civil Liberties Union Of Northern California
Asian Law Alliance
Asian Pacific Planning & Policy Council
Black Women For Wellness
Board Of Missions And Social Justice Of Arlington Community Church
California Asset Building Coalition
California Association For Micro Enterprise Opportunity
California Capital Financial Development Corporation
California Child Care Resource And Referral Network
California Community Economic Development Association
California Domestic Workers Coalition
California Employment Lawyers Association
California Hunger Action Coalition
California Latinas For Reproductive Justice
California League Of United Latin American Citizens
California Partnership
California Reinvestment Coalition
California Women’s Law Center
California Work And Family Coalition
Career Ladders Project
Center For Popular Democracy
Center For Responsible Lending
Child Care Law Center
Clergy And Laity United For Economic Justice
Coalition For Humane Immigrant Rights
Community Housing Council Of Fresno
Community Housing Works
Community Legal Services Of East Palo Alto
Consumer Action
Consumer Attorneys Of California
Consumer Federation Of California
Consumers For Auto Reliability & Safety
Consumers Union
Courage Campaign
Dolores Huerta Foundation
Dreams For Change
Earn
East Bay Community Law Center
East La Community Corporation
Equal Rights Advocates
Faith In The Valley
Haven Neighborhood Services
Hunger Action Los Angeles
Jubilee East Bay
Koreatown Youth + Community Center
Legal Aid At Work
Little Tokyo Service Center
Metropolitan Area Advisory Committee
Mexican American Opportunity Foundation
Mission Economic Development Agency
Montebello Housing Development Corporation
Mujeres Unidas Y Activas
Multicultural Real Estate Alliance
Multicultural Real Estate Alliance For Urban Change
Mutual Housing California
My Path
National Baptist Convention Usa Housing And Economic Development Commission
National Council Of Jewish Women
National Council Of La Raza
Neighborhood Housing Services Of Los Angeles County
New Capital
New Economics For Women
Newman Hall-holy Spirit Parish
Northern California Community Loan Fund
Nuestra Casa
Pacoima Development Federal Credit Union
Parent Voices
Peoples’ Self Help Housing
Public Counsel
Public Law Center
Raising California Together
Religious Action Center Of Reform Judaism
Riverside Legal Aid
San Fernando Valley Young Democrats
San Mateo County Central Labor Council
San Mateo County Union Community Alliance
Services, Immigrant Rights And Education Network
St. Columba Catholic Church, Oakland
St. John’s Episcopal Church In Oakland
Sunnyvale Community Services
The Greenlining Institute
The Opportunity Institute
The United Food And Commercial Workers Western States Council
Tradeswomen, Inc.
Valley Economic Development Center
Vermont Slauson Economic Development Center
Voices For Progress
Voices For Progress Education Fund
Watts/century Latino Organization
Western Center On Law & Poverty, Inc.
Women’s Economic Ventures
Women’s Foundation Of California
Yolo Mutual Housing Association
Youth Leadership Institute
Ywca San Francisco & Marin

Watch a Screening of “The Ordinance” with Stop the Debt Trap LA on Feb 22nd

Join Stop the Debt Trap LA on Wednesday, February 22nd from 2 – 4 pm for a screening of “The Ordinance” documentary film, followed by a short campaign briefing and planning meeting. the-ordinance

With billionaires, racists and Wall Street executives running the country, our communities are especially vulnerable.

Come learn more about how we’re organizing locally to shore up protections for consumers and communities against predatory lenders.

“The Ordinance” is a new short film focused on the fight to reform predatory lending in Texas, and the role that local communities, faith leaders and policy makers played in putting out the “not welcome” mat to financial predators in their community.

Much like in California, the Texas legislature is partial to the payday loan industry, and legally allows for abusive triple-digit interest rate lending. In Texas and in California, communities are fighting back and organizing to pass local policies in their cities to stop the growth of these industries and send a strong message to state and federal policy makers that enough is enough!

Come learn more about the local movement against predatory payday and car title lenders, and how you can get involved in our advocacy campaign!

Light refreshments will be provided.

Please RSVP either on CRC’s Facebook page, or by emailing Liana Molina.

If you have any questions or would like more information, contact Liana at liana@calreinvest.org

You can watch the trailer for the movie by clicking here.

New Payday Loan Facts in California

Did you hear that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is finalizing rules for high-cost payday, car title, and installment loans?

If you’re curious to know more about these loans, and the impact they have (mostly negative) on Californians and our state economy, then you’ll want to read CRC’s new fact sheet on payday lending in California.

It includes the latest data from the California Department of Business Oversight, as well as research on the negative drag to California’s economy created by payday loans.

california-payday-loan-brochure

 

 

You can download the fact sheet by clicking here.

If you want to learn more about payday loans in California- and the work the California Reinvestment Coalition is doing to take on predatory lending, click here and visit the CRC website.

Los Angeles County Takes Stand Against Predatory Payday, Car Title, Installment Lending Practices, Urges Strong CFPB Rules

Editor’s note: If your organization would like to support strong consumer protections being included in the new CFPB rules for payday, car title, and high-cost installment loans, please contact Liana Molina (liana AT calreinvest.org) at CRC and she can help.  The deadline to give your feedback is approaching fast- it’s October 7, 2016!

On Thursday, September 8th, the Chair of the LA County Board of Supervisors, Hilda L. Solis, hosted a press conference with LA community leaders where she talked about the financial harms caused by predatory payday, car title, and high-cost installment loans.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

(Photo credits: Supervisor Solis' office, LULAC, Samuel Chu, and CRC)

LA County Motion

At the press conference, Supervisor Solis announced an LA County motion in support of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) implementing strong federal rules to better protect consumers from harmful lending practices by payday, car title, and high cost installment lenders. The motion was approved unanimously the following week, making Los Angeles County the largest county in California (and the US) to pass a motion supporting strong rules by the CFPB to better protect consumers from predatory lending.

Supervisor Solis explained: “This motion is an important way for the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to demonstrate that we believe protecting families and their pocketbooks is good public policy and that we strongly support the CFPB finalizing a rule that will prioritize borrowers over ill-gotten profits.”

Community Leaders

Rabbi Joel Thal Simonds, associate program director at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, opened the event. He explained: “The words of Exodus 22:24 remind us that ‘If you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, do not act toward them as a creditor; exact no interest from them.’ We seek a just and caring society in which those in need are not set on downward spiral of debt and hopelessness. That is why we must stop the abusive practice of payday lending which profits off the hardships of those living paycheck to paycheck. ”

Borrowers Discuss Their Experiences

During the press conference, former payday loan consumers also spoke about their experience with the so-called “payday loan debt trap.”  The “debt trap” refers to the fact that most payday loan borrowers are unable to repay their first loan when it comes due two weeks after they got it. So, they are forced to roll over or renew the loan, often multiple times, and they are paying an average APR in California of 366% when borrowing these loans.

Christina Griffin explained:

“When I had a financial emergency, I thought I could use a payday loan once and be done with it. Instead, I couldn’t pay back the loan two weeks later- and also be able to pay my other expenses. So, I had to keep rolling over my payday loan- which meant more and more fees and less money for other things- like groceries. As a former customer who survived the “debt trap,” I’m urging the CFPB to put a stop to this “debt trap” for future borrowers.”

Rosa Barragán shared her story of getting caught in a long term cycle of payday loan debt when she took out a loan following the passing of her husband.  You can read more of her story in La Opinión’s article about the press conference: Exigen mano dura para las compañías de ‘payday loans’.

rosa-barragan-photo-credit-chair-solis-office

Rosa Barragan speaking

Pit of Despair Art Installation

In addition to the press conference, a visually stunning, life-sized 3D art installation, the “Pit of Despair” was unveiled.  It was created by an artist named Melanie Stimmel and the team at We Talk Chalk, and it is a graphic illustration of how payday lending really works. The interactive art display has traveled around the country to visually demonstrate the “debt trap” that the majority of payday loan borrowers find themselves in when they are unable to make a balloon payment to repay their loan two weeks after they receive it. As a result, most borrowers renew their loans repeatedly (incurring more charges each time), which has been labeled the “payday loan debt trap.”

Putting finishing touch on Pit of Despair- thanks Americans for Financial Reform!

Putting finishing touch on Pit of Despair- thanks to Americans for Financial Reform for sharing it!

The Negative Impact of Payday Loan Stores in Los Angeles
Los Angeles County is home to approximately 800 payday loan storefronts, by far the most of any county in California. Because of the structure and terms of payday, car title, and high-cost installment loans, they worsen the financial position of most borrowers. Research has found that lenders are disproportionately located in communities of color, and are a net drag on the overall economy.

Bill Allen, CEO of the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation, explained the impact  of payday loan fees recently in an LA Daily News OpEd:

“These “alternatives” drain low-income residents’ scant savings. More than $54 million in check-cashing fees and $88 million in payday loan fees each year are paid by county residents. If those consumers had better financial services options, much of that $142 million could go toward building household savings, thus increasing economic stability for their families and communities.”

Gabriella Landeros from the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor explained: “Working families deserve better than the harmful financial products peddled by these lenders, and we join the LA County Board of Supervisors in urging the CFPB to finalize and enforce a strong rule to protect consumers.”

Liana Molina, director of community engagement at the California Reinvestment Coalition, helped organize the event and coordinated with the StopTheDebtTrap team at Americans for Financial Reform to bring the “Pit of Despair” art installation.  She explained:

“The payday loan industry advertises their loans as quick, one-time “fix” for a financial emergencies. In reality, these loans are designed to do the opposite. The majority of borrowers will end up renewing their loans repeatedly and incurring huge fees every time they do so. The CFPB can stop this “debt trap cycle” by implementing a strong rule that would require lenders to underwrite these loans, to determine that borrowers have the ability to repay without having to re-borrow or default on other expenses.”

CRC extends a big thank you to the organizations that made the event possible:

East LA Community Corporation (ELACC),

LULAC – California,

New Economics for Women (NEW),

Mexican American Opportunity Foundation (MAOF),

Montebello Housing Development Corporation (MHDC),

Consumer Action,

Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, AFL-CIO,

Labor Community Services, AFL CIO,

Pacific Asian Consortium in Employment (PACE),

Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council (A3PCON),

Multi-Cultural Real Estate Alliance for Urban Change,

Thai Community Development Center (Thai CDC),

Haven Neighborhood Services,

Korean Churches for Community Development (KCCD),

Koreatown Youth and Community Center (KYCC),

Public Counsel,

Religious Action Center for Reform Judaism, and

VEDC

Additional Background on the Impact of Payday Loans in California 

While fourteen states and the District of Columbia have interest rate caps of about 36% APR or less, California law allows for two-week, $300 payday loans at 459% APR interest.

The California Department of Business Oversight recently released two reports on payday lending, and car title and high cost installment loans.

A few stats are included below:

1) Total Number of payday loans: Approximately 12.3 million payday loans were made in California in 2015 and the aggregate dollar amount of the payday loans was about $4.2 billion.

2) Average number of loans and average APRs: The average number of payday loans per customer was 6.5, paying an average APR of 366% (a 5% increase from 2014).

3) Repeat borrowers and “churning” of loans: Contrary to loans being advertised as a “one time fix for emergencies,” 64% of fees in 2015 ($53.53 million) – came from customers who had seven or more payday loan transactions during the year.

2015 Payday Loan Statistics for California

Editor’s note: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is finalizing new rules for payday, car title, and high-cost installment loans. They want to hear from YOU about your experiences and recommendations for the loans. Please take two minutes to provide your insights here. 

California Payday Lending Statistics

1) Total Number of loans:  Approximately 12.3 million loans were made in California in 2015 and the aggregate dollar amount of the loans was about $4.2 billion.

2) Average number of loans and average APRs: The average number of loans per customer was 6.5, paying an average APR of 366% (average APR increased 5% from 2014).[1]

3) Repeat borrowers and “churning” of loans: Contrary to loans being advertised as a “one time fix for emergencies” the number of Californians who obtained 10 payday loans (462,334) was far greater than the number who only had one loan (323,870). Subsequent transactions by the same borrower accounted for 76% of the total number of loans made in 2015 with 47% of subsequent loans made the same day a previous loan transaction was paid off and another 23% happening within 1-7 days.

CA DBO new report number of transactions

Graph is from CA Dept. of Business Oversight Report on 2015 Payday Lending Statistics

4) Churning profits: 64% of fees in 2015 ($53.53 million) – came from customers who had seven or more transactions during the year.

Fees collected

Graph is from CA Dept. of Business Oversight Report on 2015 Payday Lending Statistics 

5) Repossessions: 16,989 car title loans resulted in the consumer’s car being repossessed in 2015.[2] At the national level, the CFPB has found that 1 in 5 car title loans ultimately results in a repossession.[3]

6) Fees: California payday loan consumers pay over $507 million annually in payday loans and over $239 million in car title loans.  This ranks California in the #2 spot for highest amount of fees paid for car title and payday loans.[4]

7 Economic drain: Payday lending is an estimated $135 million net drain on California’s economy every year and subtracts 1,975 jobs.[5]

Customers age

Graph is from CA Dept. of Business Oversight Report on 2015 Payday Lending Statistics on ages 

The California Reinvestment Coalition builds an inclusive and fair economy that meets the needs of communities of color and low-income communities by ensuring that banks and other corporations invest and conduct business in our communities in a just and equitable manner.

You might also be interested in these payday lending posts:

Editorials Against Payday Lenders (As of July 2016, there’s been more than 150 editorials written from around the country about the financial harm caused by these lenders).

Payday Lender Hall of Shame This industry is known for spectacularly shady practices against its consumers. We’ve compiled some of the worst.

8 Reasons Not to Get An Online Payday Loan Is that really a lender’s website you’re on?  Or is it a broker who will re-sell your sensitive information repeatedly?

Data Sources:

[1] CA Dept. of Business Oversight press release, available at: http://www.dbo.ca.gov/Press/press_releases/2016/2016%20CDDTL%20Annual%20Report%20and%20Industry%20Survey%20Press%20Release%2007-06-16.pdf

[2] CA Dept. of Business Oversight 2015 CFLL annual report, available at: http://www.dbo.ca.gov/Licensees/Finance_Lenders/pdf/2015_CFLL_Aggregated_Annual_Report_FINAL.pdf

[3] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau press release, available at: http://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-finds-one-five-auto-title-loan-borrowers-have-vehicle-seized-failing-repay-debt/

[4] Center for Responsible Lending report, available at: http://responsiblelending.org/sites/default/files/nodes/files/research-publication/crl_statebystate_fee_drain_may2016_0.pdf

[5] Insight Center for Community Economic Development report, available at: http://ww1.insightcced.org/uploads/assets/Net%20Economic%20Impact%20of%20Payday%20Lending.pdf