Funny, Don, but that's not what appeals courts in California and Colorado said about Indian tribe-made loans earlier this year. And it's definitely not what the U.S. Supreme Court has said (many times) about off-reservation business activities by Indian tribes in general. Tribes are immune period, and only lose that immunity if they (the tribes) explicitly waive the immunity. There is no such thing as an implied waiver when a tribe was involved.
Having said this, immunity is a one way street. It prevents you or your state regulator from suing the tribe. But it doesn't give them any special right to make loans or power to enforce their contracts in your state. All the defenses you have that your state laws apply can still be argued. In that sense the tribal lender is no different than a lender that has a Utah or Delaware license. And the law is on your side on that issue (although its far from clear cut) ever since the Quik Payday case was decided.
Cash Advance Network sends pretty much all of its debt out to 3rd parties like ACA and Accounts Receivable Management. Expect a ton of calls, but they are all bark and no bite. Besides, they may say or do something stupid and you can sue them (the CA, still not the tribe unfortunately) under the FDCPA.
Linear Mode
