Memorandum by Debt on our Doorstep a Network
for Fair Finance
1. DEBT ON
OUR DOORSTEP
1.1 Debt on our Doorstep is a national campaigning
organisation made up of local activists and public organisations.
We aim to end extortionate lending and ensure universal access
to affordable credit and other financial services. To this end
our objectives are to:
Publicise the extent and impact of
extortionate lending on low income groups.
Lobby Parliament, assemblies and
other decision makers to end extortionate lending.
Research and promote models of affordable
credit.
Provide a platform for people on
low incomes to comment on the impact of debt.
1.2 A list of current members of the campaign
is contained in the Appendix to this submission.
1.3 This submission has been prepared following
discussions with the Institute for Financial Services in Hamburg
(IFF) with whom Debt on our Doorstep has developed close links
during the past two years.
1.4 Debt on our Doorstep is currently organising
a series of conferences with IFF and other European partners with
regard to consumer protection in Europe and these are scheduled
to take place in November 2005.
1.5 The EU proposals for Consumer Credit
Harmonisation
1.6 Debt on our Doorstep welcomes the opportunity
to provide this submission to the House of Lords inquiry. We believe
that there are three fundamental issues that need to be considered
in relation to the proposed Consumer Credit Directive as follows:
The need to balance market harmonisation
with measures to prevent overindebtedness (currently absent from
the Directive).
The need to debate openly the likely
impact of the Directive on the operation of interest rate ceilings
in many EU states and to consider whether a market without any
limit on the price of credit is acceptable for consumers.
The need to enshrine the principle
of responsible lending within the Directive, to define this, and
to learn from other EU countries in relation to UK legislation
in this area.
1.7 The Need for Debate
1.8 The first point to note is that the
amended proposal from the Commission bears little relation to
the original proposal (2002), and that the amendments almost all
relate to a weakening of consumer protection.
1.9 As a consequence of the scale of the
changes from the original proposal to the new amendment, Debt
on our Doorstep believes that the "amendment" should
be viewed as an entirely new proposal and that all national Governments
should debate this prior to determining the future direction of
the Directive.
1.10 Instead of consumer protection, the
goal of the Directive as currently written appears to be the opening
of markets for more aggressive lenders who favour the Internet,
standardized products, cross-selling, refinancing and concessions
to lenders who provide small amounts of credit at unreasonably
high prices seems.
1.11 There is considerable concern relating
to the proposal in other European countries that have stronger
regimes for consumer protection in respect of consumer credit
than the UK.
1.12 Indeed, it is disappointing to note
that the UK has one of the weakest consumer protection frameworks
in Europe in this area. This will remain the case despite the
measures announced by the Government in the current Consumer Credit
Bill.
1.13 In particular, Debt on our Doorstep
is concerned that the proposed directive will allow lenders based
in the UK to export socially harmful lending products to the continent,
and bypass the significantly better consumer protection regimes
that have been established in, for example France and Germany.
1.14 In this respect the US experience is
an interesting comparator. For many years individual US states
were able to regulate against predatory lending and control interest
rates through the use of ceilings set by state legislatures. In
recent years, however, these protections have been eroded by court
rulings. Lenders can now base themselves in states without usury
laws and make loans cross border into those states that were previously
protected. Some states have permitted this in order to attract
the finance sector as employers, but it has come at a cost for
many consumers. The resultant growth of (for example) payday lending
in those states that were previously protected, has been particularly
harmful.
1.15 The same can now be foreseen for Europe.
The Directive as currently proposed would allow UK based lenders
(which are not regulated in terms of the costs that they can charge)
to start to lend in European countries that have had long histories
of controls against usury.
1.16 In Germany, France, Holland and Italy
there are controls on the levels of interest that can be charged
through anti-usury legislation. These are now all at threat as
a result of the proposals in the Consumer Credit Directive.
1.17 What Improvements Can be Made?
1.18 Debt on our Doorstep believes that
the directive needs to include the prevention of overindebtedness
as an aim alongside that of consumer protection. There has been
a significant amount of work done at a European level in respect
of assessing the causes and extent of overindebtedness and the
measures that may be effective in preventing this. Debt on our
Doorstep would therefore like to see this incorporated into the
Directive as a balance against a liberalisation of the consumer
credit market. If the market is to be liberalised and competition
encouraged across national boundaries (which we accept is a major
part of the rationale for the EU) then this should not come about
at all costs but be balanced with the needs of individual consumers
to remain in control of their finances.
1.19 There appears to be no single measure
of APR proposed within the Directive. This is also absent from
the UK Government's Consumer Credit Bill. This is confusing to
borrowers with recent evidence given to the UK Treasury Select
Committee demonstrating that even mathematics professors have
difficulty in understanding how APR's have been calculated by
lenders in respect of certain types of agreement. If there is
to be harmonisation across the EU then there should be harmonisation
concerning how interest rates are calculated and expressed by
lenders.
1.20 All nation states should sign up to
anti-usury controls prior to harmonization. At the present time,
nearly all European countries have usury rates or rate ceilings
which prevent exorbitant pricing in credit and a systematic exploitation
of consumers who feel or are personally forced to take up credit,
to prolong credit at any price. While most countries like France,
Italy and the Benelux as well as Scandinavian countries prefer
administratively fixed rate ceilings (informed by the work of
the equivalents of the Office of Fair Trading), Germany and Austria
use the old systems of usury linked to the legal concepts of "bona
fide" or reasonableness that has been developed through case-law.
In all systems, however, the rate ceiling is fixed according to
a market rate at about 150 to 200 per cent of the average market
rate in consumer credit. This margin gives enough space to allocate
different risks and service intensity in the provision of consumer
credit and have proven to be acceptable for the credit industry.
1.21 It should be noted that the increase
in confidence and trust in such regulated consumer credit systems
has kept the levels of financial exclusion low in comparison to
those few countries (unfortunately including the UK) who still
accept credit extension at any rate. In countries without price
regulation, we have experienced a retreat of banks from the provision
of credit to lower income households, increased denial of access
and the growth of a "grey" market that menaces especially
those consumers who face temporary income problems or are already
overindebted.
1.22 All goals of this directive: harmonisation,
consumer protection and the prevention of overindebtedness necessitate
the core regulation of some form of limit on prices. The present
situation leads to basically different systems of cost allocation
and hinders trans-border credit extension. They are to the detriment
of the economic interests of weak consumers and they are to a
large extent a reason for overindebtedness which rises through
unscrupulous refinancing and ever higher interest rates. The Directive
therefore appears to Debt on our Doorstep to necessitate a debate
as to whether we wish to see a European credit market without
an upper limit on credit prices, or a European market with that
regulation in place in all EU countries. It will simply not be
possible to have a harmonized market along the lines envisaged
in the Directive that contains some countries with interest rate
ceilings and some without,as the US experience teaches us that
those countries that reject interest rate ceilings will eventually
erode the protection in other states.
1.23 The amended Directive (Article 9) proposes
that lenders adhere to the principle of "responsible lending".
We support that, however the Directive only then refers to the
provision of information at pre-contractual stage in this regard.
To our mind this is completely inadequate and there needs to be
a significant strengthening of the concept of responsible lending
to include a requirement that borrowers properly take into account
the means of the borrower at the time of making the loan and their
long term ability to repay. It is of note that such a concept
is also currently absent from the UK Consumer Credit Bill.
1.24 For example, on other EU countries
the concept of responsible lending incorporates "reckless
lending" "unconscionable credit extension", "sittenwidrige
Überschuldung" etc as they are now combined in the notion
of "responsible lending" of Swiss law.
8 June 2005
Annex
LIST OF
MEMBERS OF
DEBT ON
OUR DOORSTEP
AS AT
8 JUNE 2005
All Saint's Church, Kings Heath,
Birmingham
Association of British Credit
Unions Ltd
Barnardo's Candl Project
Birmingham Money Advice &
Grants
Bristol Debt Advice Centre
Bulwell Credit Union Limited
Cambridge Housing Society
Cheltenham Community Support Centre
Church Action on Poverty
Church in Society, Maidstone
Clwyd Coast Credit Union Ltd
Conference of Religious
Daughters of Mary & Joseph, Kent
Diocese of Llandaff BSR
East Bristol Advice Centre
East End Reinvestment Trust
Exchange House National Traveller
Mabs
Five Lamps Organisation
Foxhill and Parson Cross Advice Service
Glasgow Taxi Trade Credit Union
Halifax Citizens Advice Bureau
Hartlepool Credit Union
Hull East of the River Credit
Union
Hull Northern Credit Union
Justice and Peace, Scotland
Kendray Laying the Foundations
Kirby Unemployed Centre
Landsker Community Credit Union
Ltd
Lea Road URC, Wolverhampton
Leicester City Council Advice
Services
Merseyside Region Church Action on
Poverty
Millom and District Credit Union
Money Go Round Bristol Inner City
Credit Union
Money Tree Credit Union
Moneywise Newcastle Credit Union
National Association of Bank and
Insurance Customers
National Housing Federation
No1 Copperpot Credit Union
Our Lady of England, RC Church, Reigate
Oxfam UK Poverty Programme
Penwith Credit Union Limited
Pilch Lane and District Credit
Union
Radcliffe Resource Centre, Manchester
Sandwell Advice & Moneylink
Single Parent Action Network
South West Lancashire TUC Centre
Student Christian Movement
Tower View Community Credit Union
Trading Standards Team Hartlepool
Unitarian Social Responsibility
United Reform Church Responsibility
UVP Advice in the Community, Barnsley
Walsall Money Advice Project
Wansbeck Citizens Advice Bureau
Welfare Rights & Money Advice
Service, Bristol City Council
Worcester Black Pear Credit Union
York Credit Union Study Group
Yorkshire Chapter of Credit Unions
|