Cash Call

I don't think Cash Call is a pdl. I think it's more of an installment loan. At least that's the idea I've gotten from reading about Cash Call on the forum. And if I remember correctly, they're backed by a bank? Am I correct in this? If that's the situation, I don't think it can be treated as a pdl?

Correct, cash call is not a pdl and backed by a bank. they have taken people to civil court for judgement. I believe somebody posted that if you take out a $5,000 loan you end up paying $22,000 for it when all is said and done in the end.

my sister used them and never paid. All theycan do is send to credit. They have now sent her an option to pay less than half

they told my husband they would take him to get his wages granished .if he didnt pay them needless to say we are saving to have them paid off soon.

sorry for typos. 3year old sitting on my lap

If the loan is backed by the bank and you have a big chunk to put down on the principle can't you do this?

The loans are backed by "investors" I don't know how accurate any of us are since "guest" says they can only send you to credit and another says they will garnish. They are still hounding me, since I am 60 days behind, but I make a payment every payday and so they just start over with my aging of past due. It is good to hear that they will only turn you over to collections (if it's true)but I am wondering what a judge would actually say if they took you to court cause they are preying on people that are down on their luck and credit by charging astronomical interest rates. I can tell you I have paid off my principal plus, so I think that it may be actually a plus that the principal is paid. Can a judge actually reduce the interest rate I wonder?

I'm certainly no expert here. But, in the case of the question above, why do I doubt it? Apparently this company is abiding by the law (unfortunately) and they take people to court to sue them, etc. If there was some "good thing" going on regarding them, I don't think so many people would be on here trying to find a way out. It doesn't seem like there is one. Sad.

i am in pa i am the guest above that said about
wage granishment. i dont think they can take my
husbands wages cause pa they cant .unless
its taxes or child support.i could be wrong
as i just found this out.


chris

Just to reiterate what I have said all along, DO NOT EVER take a loan with them...Wish I hadn't.

Is PA a non-garnishment state?

yeah pa is a non-garnishment state. they only do
that if it is back taxes or child support. from
what i read.

chris

I'm from SC and I know that we are a non-garnishment state, as well. Only child support, taxes, or student loans may be garnished from our wages. It probably depends on what state you are in as to how far cash call will take it. But, it would suck royally if a judge actually allowed them to garnish wages in states in which it is allowed. They are predators and all consumers should be protected from them. (Just my humble opinion)

Well, from what I'm thinking (and I certainly could be wrong!!), if you're in a non-garnishment state, I wouldn't think they could garnish your wages! If that's so, that's a good thing!

With cash call, who knows! I have heard horror stories about them. I can only envision the mafia or some sort of mean and terrifying characters ready to "bust some kneecaps" when I think of them

I wouldn't exactly say mafia, but loan shark does come to mind. The collectors border on harassment and just push the laws that are put into place to protect consumers from vicious collection intimidation tactics. The best advise I can give anyone dealing with them is just to keep telling them the same thing that you told them the previous time you talked to them, make your payments and if you do fall behind pay when you say you are going to pay...it doesn't mean that they will stop calling you, but if for some reason it does end up in front of a judge I think you have a better leg to stand on than if you hadn't been making any kind of effort.

Absolutely. I think that something is better than nothing and I can't imagine a judge enforcing a wage garnishment when a person has made an effort to pay and they refuse it.