Update: October 22, 2009
This issue involves a contract under the Illinois Consumer Installment Loan Act. In Illinois, the Consumer Installment Loan Act allows an entity to charge any interest rate it desires. Does the Governor of Illinois and President Obama know about this Act? Does this "fly" in the face of our country's financial solutions? Who is responsible for passing this Act?
October 14, 2009
The Payday Loan Store of Illinois, Inc.
Mr. Bob & Dan Wolfberg, Presidents
300 North Elizabeth, Suite 4
Chicago, Illinois 60607
CERTIFIED MAIL
Re:
PD029-63419-38720005, PD029-63419-38720006, PD029-63419-38720007, PD029-63419-38720008, PD029-63419-38720009, PD029-63419-38720010, PD029-63419-38720012, PD029-63419-38720013
Mr. Wolfberg:
On or about June 2, 2009 my wife entered into a contractual agreement with your company borrowing $3,000.00. This loan originated at 1006B 162nd Street, South Holland Illinois. My wife states that your company told her that this loan had to be in 3 equal parts, that is, she was given 3 loans for $1000.00 each. This is questionable. This allows your company to get an abnormal increased interest rate.
I do not have my wife’s original paperwork. She went to the South Holland office to get copies of the original paperwork, but was only given the re-financed paperwork. From an examination of the refinanced paperwork, it appears she did not make a payment or re-pay the loan of June 2, 2009 by July 3, 2009. On July 3, 2009 your employees of the South Holland office intimidated and threatened my wife with garnishment of her payroll check if she did not pay the loan.
My wife attempted to bring payments of $200.00 at the end of June 2009, and $300.00 in July 2009 but your employees at the South Holland office refused to take these payments because it was not what my wife agreed to in the original contract. To alleviate the intimidation and threat, your employees told my wife that she would have to refinance the $3000.00 loan, and pay the outstanding late payments. This is the re-structure your South Holland office offered and implemented.
On July 3, 2009 my wife refinanced this $3000.00 loan in the following fashion:
This is the first refinanced loan for $1000.00:
$800.00 (amount financed) $1577.88 (finance charge) 702.05% = $2377.88 total payments (PD029-63419-38720005)
$800.00 (amount financed) $1577.88 (finance charge) 702.05% = $2377.88 total payments (PD029-63419-38720006)
$800.00 (amount financed) $1577.88 (finance charge) 702.05% = $2377.88 total payments (PD029-63419-38720007)
$800.00 (amount financed) $1577.88 (finance charge) 702.05% = $2377.88 total payments (PD029-63419-38720008)
$800.00 (amount financed) $1577.88 (finance charge) 702.05% = $2377.88 total payments (PD029-63419-38720009)
$800.00 (amount financed) $1577.88 (finance charge) 702.05% = $2377.88 total payments (PD029-63419-38720010)
This is the second and third refinanced loans:
$1000.00 (amount financed) $1837.16 (finance charge) 702.14% = $2837.16 total payments (PD029-63419-38720012)
$1000.00 (amount financed) $1837.16 (finance charge) 702.14% = $2837.16 total payments (PD029-63419-38720013)
This brings my wife’s total payments for this original $3000.00 loan to $19,941.60.
My wife’s loan was transferred to your collection department. My wife talked to Ms. Hamilton of your collection department. My wife states that Ms. Hamilton commented on the irregularities of this loan. My wife states that Ms. Hamilton could not understand how this loan was structured by your South Holland office. Ms. Hamilton sent my wife’s loan back to the South Holland office with instructions.
On August 28, 2009 my wife was ordered to pay $250.00 on loan number PD029-63419-38720005 to become “current” with this loan; and $250.00 on loan number PD029-63419-38720006 to become “current” with this loan.
On August 31, 2009 Payday Loan Store (PLS) loaned my wife an additional $991.02 for loan number PD029-63419-38720008 to pay on PD029-63419-38720008 so that she could become “current” with this loan; and PLS loaned my wife an additional $991.02 for loan number PD029-63419-38720009 to pay on PD029-63419-38720009 so that she could become “current” with this loan. This is ludicrous, and outrageous.
When I called 708-360-4151 on October 13, 2009 asking for Ms. Hamilton of collections at approximately 10:01 am (CST) I spoke to Mr. Gerald. Mr. Gerald informed me Ms. Hamilton would not be in her office until 12:00 pm (CST). Mr. Gerald asked me my concerns. I told him the above. Mr. Gerald informed me that my wife’s account was no longer in collections, but was transferred back to the South Holland, Illinois office.
I asked Mr. Gerald for the corporate number and the Vice President’s name. Mr. Gerald gave me the South Holland office number, which is 708-596-4500, suggesting I talk to the District Manager. I called and talked to Anika from the South Holland office requesting the Vice President’s name and phone number. Ms. Anika directed me to her supervisor Sherrie Hatcher. I talked to Ms. Hatcher. I asked her for the Vice President’s name and phone number. Ms. Hatcher directed me to her District Manager Patrick Cadet. I called and left a message on his answering machine.
I called the 708-360-4151 number again at approximately 3:00 pm (CST). When I called this time I asked for the operator. The operator connected me with Ms. Christy. I explained the above. I asked Ms. Christy for the President’s name. Ms. Christy informed me that there were 2 Presidents, and that, they were brothers. Ms. Christy gave me their names and address because I told her I wanted to write this letter to them. Ms. Christy informed me that she would contact the District Manager, Mr. Cadet. Mr. Cadet called me. I explained the above to him. Mr. Cadet told me he would investigate my issues, and contact me by Friday, October 16, 2009. I informed Mr. Cadet that my wife would pay the $3000.00 loan right now, but that we will have to talk about what the interest rate “should” be on this loan. It appears that my wife has paid $500.00 out-of-pocket toward this loan.
On October 13, 2009 I talked to my daughter about Pay Day Loans. She informed me that she received a Pay Day Loan for $200.00 to pay her light bill once. She informed me that she did not keep up her payment plan. She informed me that she finally paid them about $500.00 for this loan.
Something is wrong with this picture. I am requesting that the Honorable Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan, the Honorable U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, and the Honorable President Barack Obama investigate these issues and allegations, along with the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., Ph.D.
Human Services/Social Policy Analysis
cc:
http://clickforjusticeandequalty.blogspot.com/
Mr. Bob & Dan Wolfberg (fax copy and certified mail)
Mr. Patrick Cadet (fax copy)
Mr. Brent E. Adams, Acting Secretary of the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (U.S. Mail)
Ms. Lisa Madigan, Illinois Attorney General (U.S. Mail)
Mr. Eric Holder, U.S. Attorney General (U.S. Mail & Website email)
President Barack Obama (U.S. Mail & Website email)
Update: October 18, 2009
I received a letter dated October 15, 2009 on October 17, 2009 from Mr. Robert Wolfberg of The Payday Loan Store of Illinois reporting the receipt of the above correspondence and his response to the issue. Mr. Wolfberg does not deny that this "unusual and unfair" business practice exist. Mr. Wolfberg's response suggest that the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation-Division of Financial Institutions is part, and partial to this "unusual and unfair" business practice. Mr. Wolfberg is suggesting that this "Illinois" entity is okay with allowing financial institutions to "break the backs" of consumers of financially. It appears that The Payday Loan Store of Illinois is part of the financial disaster that has plague America. I think this is a direct insult to President Obama's plans to restore financial stability to families across America.
In part, this is Mr. Robert Wolfberg's response:
"...Please be informed that The Payday Loan Store of Illinois is regulated and licensed by the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation-Division of Financial Institutions to make loans under the provisions of the Consumer Installment Loan Act and Payday Loan Reform Act...Be assured The Payday Loan Store of Illinois takes the comments of our customers most seriously...Based on your correspondence, it appears that you are not a party to these loans...we would be most interested in scheduling a time to discuss this matter with her personally...For the purpose of scheduling this meeting, she should contact our Director of Lending Operations, Mr. Jeff Bendy at (773) 469-0467...."
It appears Mr. Wolfberg does not want me present during this meeting. If I was present, it will be a more productive meeting and meaning toward an end that would bring closure not only for my wife, but for past and future financial borrowers of Illinois and The Payday Loan Store of Illinois.
Update: October 25, 2009
October 24, 2009
Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation
Division of Financial Institutions
Mr. Paul Vasilakos, Supervisor of Consumer Credit Section
100 West Randolph Street, 9th Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601
CERTIFIED MAIL
Mr. Vasilakos:
On October 23, 2009 my wife and I met with The Payday Loan Store of Illinois (PLS) representatives Mr. Jeff Bendy (Bendy) and Ms. Melodie Barron (Barron). My wife and I requested copies of the original loan agreement. The representatives of PLS report we should receive copies by Tuesday, October 27, 2009. Even though all parties agreed to a solution to the issues, my wife and I still want an investigation into the practices of PLS.
After repeated request during the meeting for interest rates attached to the “original and re-financed” loan, Bendy would not and did not disclose the interest rates attached to these loans. Rather, Bendy continued to report the “dollar” amount of the interest attached to the loan. The “dollar” amount, to me, seemed to be 60% interest attached to the loans. I argued this fact, but Bendy declined agreement and did not disclose. My wife and I want to know the interest rate attached to the loans.
The original loan was $3000.00. Bendy came to the table with a “re-financed” loan value of $4800.00 with an additional cost (interest) of $4548.00. The “re-financed” loan of $4800.00 was broken up into six (6) loans of $800.00 each. According to Bendy quoting PLS records, this “re-financed” loan of $4800.00 occurred on or about July 3, 2009. After a heated discussion on PLS practices and interest rates, Bendy brought his monetary interest cost down to $2274.00. I argued this number, and an agreement was reached for $1137.00 monetary interest cost. This brought the total loan cost owed to $4137.00.
My wife had made a payment of $500.00, which PLS separated into 2 payments of $250.00applying the 2 payments to two of the $800.00 “re-financed” loans. My wife argued that she made an additional $800.00 payment to Brittany, a PLS representative. PLS representatives, Bendy and Barron, stated they did not see any payment of $800.00 in their records. My wife became irate at this statement. My wife almost broke down in tears. The parties agreed that my wife would immediately go to her bank; get a cashier’s check for $2500.00, which with the $500.00 would pay the original principal loan of $3000.00.
My wife returned with a cashier’s check for $2400.00. My wife began to argue about the $800.00 payment she made that PLS reports were not recorded in their records. All the time during my wife’s argument she was making reference to the PLS representative that received her $800.00 payment. PLS representatives Bendy and Barron ignored my wife. My wife persisted with her claim. Finally, my wife approached the PLS representative Brittany, asking her about the $800.00 transaction. PLS representative, Brittany told my wife that she did receive $800.00 from her, but did not record it as a “regular” payment, but rather, incorporated it as a payment to my wife’s loan. My wife and I are not sure why this “transaction” did not produce a receipt.
This changed the payment owed to PLS. Originally, the parties agreed that my wife had a total loan payment of $4137.00. The parties agreed that my wife had paid $500.00, would present a $2500.00 payment in the form of a certified check, paying the principal of $3000.00 (the original loan). The “interest” payment of $1137.00 would be paid in 3 equal monthly payments of $379.00.
With the new information regarding the payment of $800.00 incorporated into my wife’s “re-financed” contract, the loan payment agreement changed. PLS acknowledged that my wife had made a $500.00, $800.00, and a $2400.00 payment to their company. PLS representatives Bendy and Barron determined that my wife’s final payment on this loan would be $379.00, which would be paid on November 18, 2009.
My wife and I want a full investigation to continue. How many other people are suffering similar dilemmas with this company? If I had not complained as I did, my wife would have been taken advantage of by the powers that manipulate the system and its laws to oppress individuals during this financial fiasco our nation endures at this time. My wife suffered anxiety and distress during this ordeal. This only compounded her woes and desires to advance during her financial dilemma. There was nothing in my wife’s loan agreement or documents illustrating the payment in the “re-financed” loan agreement of $800.00. If Brittany had not come forth stating she received the $800.00 from my wife, Bendy and Barron were ready to discount the payment.
From this detailed account of PLS operating practices is why my wife and I want a comprehensive investigation. What other “victims” are still out there who deal with or have dealt with PLS? Please request receipts for all transactions. Attached are 6 PLS receipts totaling $2400.00, a copy of the certified check to PLS for $2400.00, and 2 copies of PLS receipts reporting payments $400.00, $400.00, $225.00, $225.00, $25.00, $25.00, $25.00 (NSF fee), and $25.00 (NSF fee). I am not sure how we are supposed to interpret these receipts. The monies paid on this “loan” went to 2 of the $800.00 loans, which are PD029-63419-38720005 and PD029-63419-38720006.
Respectfully submitted,
Fred Nance Jr., Ph.D.
