Two or three payments of $98 or so, I was led to believe that any payments after those payments would go towards my principle.
Little did I realize that finance charges would still acrue when making payments as high as $127, $121, now $116 would not be carried for the $700, original loan.instead I learn that only $35 from all the hundreds plus payments went toward clearing up my $700 loan. I was under the impression that the prior three fees took care of the finance charges.
Now I see that there is a $65.38 RENEWAL FEE, $11.90 for interest accrued, a monthly FEE RATE of 10.99%, a MONTHLY RATE OF INTEREST of 2.00% and The APR for the original Title Pledge Agreement is 158.04 %.
The manager said all of this was stated in the contract. However, in reading the contract, I did not understand the jargon, otherwise I would have declined the loan. If he had said that more finance charges would be taken from future payments, (I thought the three upfront before principle payments took care of the finance charges), and said only $35 from the hundred plus payments, is all that goes towards the initial loan, do you think I would have agreed. NO!
I was late on a payment, and I counted 18 calls, plus 3 home visits because of it. My point is that there are unethical practices in charges, because after 5 months of getting a $700 loan, I still owe them $672.21 to satisfy my obligation.in 5 months of payments, that means I have only put $27.79 toward my truck.
Is there anything we can do, to stop these loan sharks from taking advantage of those in dire need. I am now in trouble with my rent money because I was made to believe that two payments were necessary by the manager.
0 comments