Home > Personal Loans > An Early Christmas Gift From the CFPB: 200K Borrowers Get Relief

Comments 2 Comments

A short-term, high-cost lender that tried to collect debts by in-person visits at borrowers’ homes and workplaces has ceased dealing in payday loans, and about 200,000 consumers will get refunds or debt collection relief, federal regulators said Wednesday.

Austin-based EZCORP is accused of potentially revealing details about consumers’ debts to third parties during home or workplace collection attempts, a violation of federal law. The firm is also accused of simultaneously initiating electronic transfers valued at 50%, 30%, and 20% of a consumers’ outstanding debt balance, causing overdrafts and other problems for borrowers.

EZCORP operates a collector of pawn shops in and around Texas, and until recently, provided high-cost, short-term, unsecured loans, including payday and installment loans, in 15 states and from more than 500 storefronts. It did this under names including “EZMONEY Payday Loans,” “EZ Loan Services,” “EZ Payday Advance,” and “EZPAWN Payday Loans,” the CFPB said.

In a consent order, the bureau ordered EZCORP to refund $7.5 million to 93,000 consumers, pay $3 million in penalties, and stop collection of remaining payday and installment loan debts owed by roughly 130,000 consumers.

“People struggling to pay their bills should not also fear harassment, humiliation, or negative employment consequences because of debt collectors,” CFPB director Richard Cordray said in a statement. “Borrowers should be treated with common decency. This action and this bulletin are a reminder that we will not tolerate illegal debt collection practices.”

In July, after the CFPB announced its investigation of the firm, EZCORP announced that it would cease offering payday, installment, and auto-title loans in the United States. The public firm, which trades on the NASDAQ stock exchange, continues to operate pawn shops.

EZCORP did not admit or deny the CFPB’s consent order, but said it had settled with the bureau as a way to put legacy issues behind it.

“Given our decision in July 2015 to exit all payday, installment and auto title lending activities in the United States, we believe it is in the interests of all stakeholders to bring this issue to an amicable close,” EZCORP Chief Executive Officer Stuart Grimshaw said in a written statement. “Our focus will continue to be on responsibly and respectfully meeting our customers’ need for access to cash when they want it through our pawn business lines. We will also continue to enhance our policies, processes and procedures to improve our business performance and profitability.”

Describing in-person visits in the consent order, the CFPB says that EZCORP representatives involved third parties in their collection efforts. “If a consumer was not present or not available to speak during an in-person collection visit, then Respondent’s employee would attempt to leave a letter for the consumer with a third party, such as the consumer’s supervisor, co-worker, parent, child or roommate,” the order says.

“Third parties at consumers’ workplaces at times refused to accept these letters because the consumer could not engage in personal business matters at work. In addition, at times, Respondent’s employees were turned away from a consumer’s workplace by a third party, such as a supervisor, co-worker, receptionist or security officer, because the consumer was not permitted to have personal visitors at work,” the order said.

In a press release, the CFPB also alleged that the firm:

  • Visited consumers’ homes and workplaces to collect debt in an unlawful way: Until at least October 2013, EZCORP made in-person collection visits that disclosed or risked disclosing consumers’ debt to third parties, and caused or risked causing adverse employment consequences to consumers such as disciplinary actions or firing.
  • Illegally contacted third parties about consumers’ debts and called consumers at their workplaces despite being told to stop: Debt collectors called credit references, supervisors and landlords, and disclosed or risked disclosing debts to third parties, potentially jeopardizing  consumers’ jobs or reputations. It also ignored consumers’ requests to stop calls to their workplaces.
  • Deceived consumers with threats of legal action: In many instances, EZCORP threatened consumers with legal action. But in practice, EZCORP did not refer these accounts to any law firm or legal department and did not take legal action against consumers on those accounts.
  • Lied about not conducting credit checks on loan applicants: From November 2011 to May 2012, EZCORP claimed in some advertisements it would not conduct a credit check on loan applicants. But EZCORP routinely ran credit checks on applicants targeted by those ads.
  • Required debt repayment by pre-authorized checking account withdrawals: Until January 2013, EZCORP required many consumers to repay installment loans through electronic withdrawals from their bank accounts. By law, consumers’ loans cannot be conditioned on pre-authorizing repayment through electronic fund transfers.
  • Exposed consumers to fees through electronic withdrawal attempts:  EZCORP would often make three simultaneous attempts to electronically withdraw money from a consumer’s bank account for a loan payment: for 50%, 30%, and 20% of the total due. The company also often made withdrawals earlier than promised. As a result, tens of thousands of consumers incurred fees from their banks, making it even harder to climb out of debt when behind on payment.
  • Lied to consumers that they could not stop electronic withdrawals or collection calls or repay loans early: EZCORP told consumers the only way to stop electronic withdrawals or collection calls was to make a payment or set up a payment plan. In fact, EZCORP’s consumers could revoke their authorization for electronic withdrawals and demand that EZCORP’s debt collectors stop calling. Also, EZCORP falsely told consumers in Colorado that they could not pay off a loan at any point during the loan term or could not do so without penalty. Consumers could in fact repay the loan early, which would save them money.

More Money-Saving Reads:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • tokyo121

    And this is why people need to stay away from these type of loans. They are inherently predatory. Unfortunately, probably the vast majority of the people getting these kinds of “loans” have no other options.

  • Paul Hertz

    A real classy company to do business with! Let me guess, the CEO still is running the company and collecting the big bucks!

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team