Is one type of best payday lender better than the other? There are storefront and online direct lenders who service fast cash loans to those who qualify. How the loans are processed differ in that one is done face to face, while the other performs all operations over the Internet. A storefront service will need to obtain a post-dated check to be deposited on the payoff due date, while an online lender uses electronic fund transfers.
I read an article today which grouped all lenders together as the reporter slammed payday lenders for improper practices. There was no legal recourse to the practices, but it was being deemed as predatory practices. As I have previously stated over and over, the payday loan industry gets tarnished by a few businesses with poor practices. They also get criticized for things other companies do willingly or unintentionally.
This particular article came from the UK and was claiming that payday loan lenders were lending money to intoxicated applicants. A person’s ability to make choices while inebriated is not always the most informed decisions, but where is the line? How can you broadcast direct lenders for taking advantage of these impaired folks when there is no description of the how, where and why? Businesses have the right to deny service to any customer. The question here lies in whether or not the lender knew of the applicant’s condition and/or whether or not the state was affecting their financial decisions.
How does an online payday lender know the condition of an applicant?
Online lenders offer convenient money services to those people not wanting to go to drive to a storefront. There are numerous reasons why someone would choose to apply online. Whether the applicant is in their pajamas, resting in bed, at the office or intoxicated make no difference. If a person has the ability to fill out the form and process all information through customer relations, why does it matter? At a storefront of course, the customer service may or may not notice what condition a customer is in. If there is communication breakdown by either lender, it would make sense for a service representative to ask the customer to come back or call back at a later date.
It’s horrible to think of someone making poor decisions while in a condition of not thinking clearly, but is it the best payday lender online or storefront worker who is at fault? I’m sure anyone could use some specific reason to justify the blame, but in this general article, there was no such point made.
So once again, the payday loan industry took a hit for something which is clearly not a defined problem in short-term loan lending. With all of the predatory lending articles, has there been one about all those who attack the direct lender? Can you blanket one problem across the spectrum and make it sound like it is a regular practice by all those involved? This is only one example of a bad apple spoiling the bunch. As the Internet has increased the reach to potential customer, it also magnifies the reach of stories like this one which took place in another county. A direct payday lender cannot be responsible for every problem occurring throughout the world.
