If you actually read the things this bank has done and think it’s ok, then you are one of these people, they pray on poor and desperate people and take advantage on their situation, it’s predatory and illegal, hence the $550mil fine.
4 Likes
I get a feeling as time goes on that the number of financially savvy people is fairly low.
Worts part some resist being educated.
1 Like
OMG, they’re horrific. They have been forever.
1 Like
This is a good read for anyone that isn’t familiar with these Aholes
2 Likes
You could also let him speak for himself. He’s here in the thread posting obviously.
I am no fan of Santander, but they buy deep (deeper than FCA). I think Payday lenders shouldn’t exist, but nobody is stepping up to loan their customers at rates lower than (usury - 0.25).
Likewise, nobody other than Santander seems to be doing much business at Tier 6 and below. There are plenty of very profitable captives who could loan and lease deeper than C paper, most don’t.
2 Likes
Payday and other subprime lenders are lice. Their model isn’t to give people who need one a break, it’s to turn them into revolving debtors forever. They drink the blood of poor people.
4 Likes
They shouldn’t exist, they don’t benefit anyone other than themselves.
1 Like
I didn’t make his view up…I said that in response to his comment
So I wasn’t speaking on his behalf, I was just responding to his response
So I’m not going to speak for trism, but what I took from his post is: if NOT Santander, then who? Who is going to Loan Fred 500-credit-score-with-open-BK a Honda Civic? Who is going to hang paper so their customers can go to their jobs? These same people we’re all screaming need to go back to work because our hair is long and our crafting cubby is out of yarn - those people need cars too.
2 Likes
If Santander told dealers to inflate income on applications or did other deceptive things like that, they should indeed face legal consequences.
If people willingly signed atrocious finance contracts that spell out the costs in detail… well, that’s on them.
The whole notion of them being bad because they extended financing beyond what people can afford is hilarious. I can go to any number of lenders (vehicle or mortgage) that will extend financing to me that is far beyond what I can afford. Doesn’t mean they should face legal prosecution because of it. Means I should not take it.
2 Likes
I must have scrolled past that horny-on-main. They all had to sign on the line, they just did so on the wrong casting couch.
I’m sure there’s more to it then just that.
I believe that more often than not serious penalties come when there is a plan to hide, lie & deceive the borrower.
It’s not just 1 act but series of acts that lead to such a high fine.
You think Santander lawyers would have just taken the fine if they had a way out & there wasn’t paper trail that proved their actions…
1 Like
Did you miss my first sentence?
1 Like
I was just going to say that loan applicants do also bear some responsibility. Don’t get me wrong, predatory lenders who prey on those with sub-prime credit were plain old greedy and unethical, along with the car dealers that played along.
1 Like
Being deceptive is one thing, but charging (a lot) more to sub-prime applicants isn’t necessarily greedy or unethical; its necessary to offset the significantly higher risk.
1 Like
The first guy profiled in the story went in to a dealer and chose a truck that’s worth what my two (owned) vehicles are worth - combined.
He then added a $2,500 service contract.
And then agreed to 25% APR.
The guy’s main problem isn’t Santander.
The sales price of his truck was about $21,000. Woodrum purchased a service contract for $2,500, and the dealer worked out a loan that carried an annual percentage rate of 25 percent. The terms required him to pay $573 per month for the next six years.
3 Likes
And then the story has the nerve to say “the cost after financing is the same as a new Ram Rebel!”.
Yes, because the alternative here is paying cash on a $45k truck. 
5 Likes
It doesn’t absolve a person completely for not knowing what they signed.
But it is easy to ignore the facts & vulnerable stage of life these people are in.
- Ppl need a reliable car to go to work.
- Having a bad credit
- Can’t get a car
Catch 22.
The issue is “25%” interest, that’s not to cover the risk it’s to make outrageous profit, it’s just predatory.
Their own audit showed 1 out of 11 dealers provided right income information & continued to supply loans.
But he discovered that Santander tried to return a consumer’s car to them, even if it was evidently clear they couldn’t afford the loan. It worked out to be a lucrative arrangement for Santander; not only would the consumer pay what was past-due, they’d owe repo fees on top.
Time and again, he found the same consumers getting the same car repossessed by Santander.
“That makes Santander look good, because they say this is business on the books,” said Robinson, who now works as a member of the Committee for Better Banks, a group that’s working to unionize Santander employees. Time and again, he found the same consumers getting the same car repossessed by Santander.
ADVERTISEMENT
“I’ve seen people get repoed three or four times,” he said. “There was pressure there, even when I was working in the reinstatement department, the key there was… how many customers we could get back in the car. That’s how we’d make our bonus.”
Even after repossession & knowing they can’t pay, provided the car back & added the fees to old payments & which resulted in more repossessions.
1 Like
What @justsharing is pointing out, this has nothing to do with stupid people signing terrible deals, the things that Santander does as far as collections and multiple repos and adding fees on top of fees after they have already made their money and then some, that’s predatory. If you could do these kind of things to people and sleep at night, I guess you have lower morals than me, and I use to sell cars!
2 Likes
I wonder if the rest of these types of lenders will go down too. There’s gonna be a lot more people taking the bus. Woo less traffic.
1 Like