Western Sky/Cash Call - Attorney General Update
Date: Tue, 12/11/2012 - 14:02
I'll keep this short since I posted in the forums before on this same subject - this is an update and new question though. I have been going back and forth with Cash Call/Western Sky for 2 months - involved the FTC, CA Attorney General and SD Attorney General. I paid back the principle plus some interest (about $1250 on the actual $1000 loaned to me) - and am refusing their request to pay more based on the forums here, and the lawsuits in MD, WVA and CO (and recent complaints in WA and Florida), and the FTC - all of whom won in court - and found that Western Sky has no "sovereign immunity" and is thus subject to state laws regarding licensing, lending and interest rates.
Today I received a letter from the SD Attorney General's Office, with a copy of a letter from a Western Sky attorney -- saying the loan was valid as I signed the contract (agreeing to pay 237% interest) and blah, blah, blah, and that they are a "legitimate tribal lender".
I guess I am wondering what to do next. They seem to be pursuing this, and the AG in South Dakota seems to find it all OK - though I know they cannot provide actual legal advice. Don't you think they would know, however, if Western Sky was in fact a legitimate tribal lender - or was predatory and illegal given that it is a business in their own state?
Of course, Western Sky never answers my questions, nor does Cash Call, regarding the issue of sovereignty, nor explains how their offers to "help me" - which lower the interest to 80% but extend the loan term by 10 months - actually do.
I’m not even actually sure that anything further is warranted.
Today I received a letter from the SD Attorney General's Office, with a copy of a letter from a Western Sky attorney -- saying the loan was valid as I signed the contract (agreeing to pay 237% interest) and blah, blah, blah, and that they are a "legitimate tribal lender".
I guess I am wondering what to do next. They seem to be pursuing this, and the AG in South Dakota seems to find it all OK - though I know they cannot provide actual legal advice. Don't you think they would know, however, if Western Sky was in fact a legitimate tribal lender - or was predatory and illegal given that it is a business in their own state?
Of course, Western Sky never answers my questions, nor does Cash Call, regarding the issue of sovereignty, nor explains how their offers to "help me" - which lower the interest to 80% but extend the loan term by 10 months - actually do.
I’m not even actually sure that anything further is warranted.