Cash sales – Vivenavalmoral http://vivenavalmoral.com/ Wed, 22 Jun 2022 12:10:23 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://vivenavalmoral.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/icon-12-120x120.png Cash sales – Vivenavalmoral http://vivenavalmoral.com/ 32 32 More and more students are taking training in personal finance. But is it enough? https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/19/more-and-more-students-are-taking-training-in-personal-finance-but-is-it-enough/ Sun, 19 Jun 2022 10:32:31 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/19/more-and-more-students-are-taking-training-in-personal-finance-but-is-it-enough/ Image source: Getty Images One in four high school students is required to take a personal finance course. Key points Today, almost a quarter (22.7%) of high school students must take a personal finance course to graduate. Legislatures in 26 states are introducing 60 different bills to expand access to personal finance education. People with […]]]>

Image source: Getty Images

One in four high school students is required to take a personal finance course.


Key points

  • Today, almost a quarter (22.7%) of high school students must take a personal finance course to graduate.
  • Legislatures in 26 states are introducing 60 different bills to expand access to personal finance education.
  • People with higher financial literacy are less likely to face financial hardship.

According to the S&P Global Financial Literacy Survey, 43% of Americans lack financial literacy — and gaps in financial knowledge can lead to chronic money problems. In 2018, only 16.4% of American high school graduates received training in personal finance. The number has now risen to around one in four high school students (22.7%).

As more states make financial education a mandatory part of the high school curriculum, Next Gen Personal Finance estimates that at least one-third (35.1%) of high school students will have taken a course autonomy over personal finances. That still leaves two out of three high school students without the education they need to be financially capable.

More states are implementing personal finance requirements

Currently, only eight states require high school students to take a personal finance course: Alabama, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia.

Five more states are beginning to implement personal finance education at the high school level. Personal finance education is defined as a stand-alone personal finance course that lasts at least one semester or 60 consecutive hours of instruction.

Michigan recently passed a bill that would make it the 14th state to guarantee high school students a personal finance course before graduation. Momentum has grown this year, with 26 state legislatures introducing 60 different bills to expand access to personal finance education.

The importance of personal financial education

Personal finance education directly helps people improve their financial well-being. Those with higher financial literacy are less likely to face financial hardship. Those with low financial literacy are:

  • Six times more likely to have difficulty making ends meet.
  • Five times more likely to be unable to cover a month’s living expenses.
  • Four times more likely to spend more than 10 hours a week thinking about or dealing with personal finance issues.
  • Four times more likely to be dissatisfied with their current financial situation.

Studies also show that personal financial education reduces the likelihood that young adults will use payday loans and is positively correlated with asset accumulation and net worth at age 25.

The Next Gen Personal Finance annual report found that access to personal finance education is still divided based on location, race, and socioeconomic status. Across the country, students do not have equal access to personal finance education. Expanding personal finance education to all segments of society can help close the socio-economic gap and help more people build their savings accounts.

The vast majority of millionaires haven’t inherited their money or earned six-figure incomes. Financial success often hinges on using basic personal finance principles, such as regular and consistent investments over a long period of time, staying out of debt, and sticking to a budget. Financial education is the key to financial success and can help develop good habits for the future.

Alert: The highest cash back card we’ve seen now has 0% introductory APR through 2023

If you use the wrong credit or debit card, it could cost you dearly. Our expert loves this top pick, which features an introductory APR of 0% until 2023, an insane cashback rate of up to 5%, and all with no annual fee.

In fact, this map is so good that our expert even uses it personally. Click here to read our full review for free and apply in just 2 minutes.

Read our free review

]]>
How higher gas prices are hurting even online shoppers https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/19/how-higher-gas-prices-are-hurting-even-online-shoppers/ Sun, 19 Jun 2022 10:32:27 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/19/how-higher-gas-prices-are-hurting-even-online-shoppers/ Image source: Getty Images For the first time in years, motorists are hitting the road in droves. Many are back in the office and on their daily commute, and summer trip goes into high gear. But all that driving is going to cost a little more than it did before the pandemic (or even last […]]]>

Image source: Getty Images

For the first time in years, motorists are hitting the road in droves. Many are back in the office and on their daily commute, and summer trip goes into high gear. But all that driving is going to cost a little more than it did before the pandemic (or even last year).

Indeed, the national average for a gallon of gasoline is now over $5 according to AAA — and some states are fine this brand. That’s more than twice as much as in 2019, and about $2 more than the same time last year.

This increase has led many companies to rely on contracted drivers to add extra fees to help offset costs. You’ll see it every time you order local delivery or rideshare, as Uber, Lyft, and even Instacart have all added extra charges in the name of fighting rising gas prices. Many restaurants with drivers have also added their own fuel surcharges.

Fuel price hikes mean delivery costs have risen

As if prices at the pump weren’t enough, the rising cost of fuel is also hitting many of us at home. Rising fuel prices mean shipping costs increase and retailers pass these costs on to customers.

UPS fees, for example, have increased significantly this year. International shipper fuel surcharges have jumped 3 percentage points since March. It now stands at 18% for land transport, the highest in the last 90 days.

In response to rising costs, some online retailers have increased shipping prices, as well as specific gas surcharges added to certain orders. And, as gasoline prices continue to climb, fuel-related delivery surcharges may become increasingly common for smaller retailers who simply cannot afford the cost of higher delivery charges. students.

However, it’s not just the little guys. Even retail giant Amazon, which has a major contract with USPS, not to mention its own fleet of delivery vehicles, has faced higher shipping costs.

Someone pays, somewhere

Of course, you can’t assume you’re safe just because you don’t see a gas-specific charge. When retailers pay more, so do customers. If the shipping price is not higher, the item price probably will be.

For example, Amazon recently hit sellers with a 5% “fuel and inflation” surcharge on its fulfillment service. This applies to all sellers who say “Fulfilled by Amazon”. Since many of these items ship free with Primethe only way a seller can offset the cost is to increase the price of the item itself.

So while your Prime deliveries are still free, your purchase price has likely increased. And the same is probably true at major retailers at all levels. Anywhere that maintains its free shipping policies will make a difference somewhereand raising prices is usually the easiest solution.

Picking up your purchases can make more sense

While you don’t have much recourse for higher product prices—other than being a more diligent comparison shopper—increasing shipping costs may have a workaround: picking up orders.

Many major retailers offer the option of ordering online and then picking up your purchase in-store. Depending on delivery costs (and your vehicle’s gas mileage or public transit costs), it may make more sense to drop by the store to pick up your order. This applies to retail purchases, as well as restaurants and grocery orders.

And, if you don’t have a good credit card with gas rewards, it might be time to add one to your portfolio. Earn an additional 3% to 5% back to gas won’t bring you back to 2019 prices, but it can definitely help bump up your gas budget a bit.

Alert: The highest cash back card we’ve seen now has 0% introductory APR through 2023

If you use the wrong credit or debit card, it could cost you dearly. Our expert likes this first choicewhich offers an introductory APR of 0% until 2023, an insane repayment rate of up to 5%, and all with no annual fee.

In fact, this map is so good that our expert even uses it personally. Click here to read our full review for free and apply in just 2 minutes.

Read our free review

We are firm believers in the Golden Rule, which is why editorial opinions are our own and have not been previously reviewed, approved or endorsed by the advertisers included. The Ascent does not cover all offers on the market. The editorial content of The Ascent is separate from the editorial content of The Motley Fool and is created by a different team of analysts. John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a board member of The Motley Fool. Britney Myers has no position in the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool holds positions and recommends Amazon. The Motley Fool recommends Uber Technologies. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

The views and opinions expressed herein are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Nasdaq, Inc.

]]>
Should you lock in a mortgage rate today? | Mortgages and advice https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/17/should-you-lock-in-a-mortgage-rate-today-mortgages-and-advice/ Fri, 17 Jun 2022 13:52:30 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/17/should-you-lock-in-a-mortgage-rate-today-mortgages-and-advice/ A mortgage rate lock allows you to keep your interest rate unchanged for a set period of time, usually between the time your offer to purchase is accepted and the time you close on your new home. Locking in your rate can help you better plan for future mortgage costs, as rates can fluctuate — […]]]>

A mortgage rate lock allows you to keep your interest rate unchanged for a set period of time, usually between the time your offer to purchase is accepted and the time you close on your new home. Locking in your rate can help you better plan for future mortgage costs, as rates can fluctuate — for better or worse — throughout the closing process.

Mortgage rate trends are hard to predict, and no speculator can tell you exactly which direction rates are heading over the next week or month. A rate lock can mitigate the risk of rates rising unexpectedly, but it can also leave you stuck with a higher rate if market conditions change. By asking the right questions, you can decide if or when a rate lock is the right move.

Should you lock in a mortgage rate now?

In today’s pricing environment, you may be wondering whether to lock or float your rate. Locking in a mortgage rate protects you from rate hikes that lead to higher monthly payments and long-term costs, especially during volatile times. During the first half of 2022, average mortgage rates for a 30-year fixed loan rose from around 3% at the start of the year to more than 5% in recent months.

At the same time, a rate lock can prevent you from getting a lower interest rate if rates drop while you close out your loan, although rates are unlikely to drop significantly anytime soon. The Mortgage Bankers Association expects 30-year fixed rates to remain above 5% for most of the rest of the year.

Even if you’re shopping for a home and you’re happy with current mortgage rates, you still might not be able to lock in a rate. Lenders typically require you to sign a purchase agreement with the seller in order to lock in your mortgage rate, says Sean Grzebin, consumer origination manager at Chase Home Lending.

“If you find a home you like and are comfortable with paying for the home based on today’s rates, we suggest locking in that rate so you have certainty of what what your payments on your home loan will look like,” says Grzebin.

Here are a few things you should discuss with your lender to determine if you should lock in a rate today.

Is the mortgage rate lock free?

Some mortgage lenders offer short-term rate locks at no cost, which means you can avoid paying for a rate lock as long as you close during that time. But they might not technically be free, because an initial rate lock-in period is usually built into your interest rate and loan fees. Locking your rate for a longer period – or extending your current rate lock period – usually has a cost. The fee for an extended rate lock is a fixed percentage of the total loan amount, for example 0.25%.

How long does a rate lock last?

Rate lock periods typically last between 15 and 60 days, with longer term rate locks being more expensive. Some mortgage lenders may offer a rate lock extension, but you’ll likely have to pay an additional fee to lock in your rate for a longer period. Some lenders may also extend your rate lock for an additional day or two free of charge around your closing date.

What happens if your rate lock expires before closing?

If your closing is delayed beyond your rate lock period, you may need to request a rate lock extension or your rate will be reset to the current rate. About a fifth of closures are experiencing delays, according to the National Association of Realtors. Depending on why your closing is delayed, the lender may waive the extension fee.

What happens if you don’t lock a rate?

Your lender may give you the option of bypassing a rate lock or “floating” your rate. If mortgage interest rates have been trending lower over the past few weeks and you expect them to drop further, you may decide to wait and lock in your rate later. But since no lender or borrower can accurately predict mortgage rate trends, you may end up with a higher rate.

Is there a floating rate option?

Some, but not all, mortgage lenders offer a floating provision, allowing you to take advantage of lower rates if they drop during the rate lock-in period. Lenders charge a fee for this service, and there is no guarantee that rates will improve over time. Floating options can only take effect if rates drop significantly during your rate lock period, depending on the lender.

Advantages and disadvantages of locking in your mortgage rate

Advantages

  • Reduced risk. The main benefit of locking in a mortgage rate is that you are protected against interest rate increases. If rates increase during the closing process, your locked-in mortgage rate will remain the same.
  • Low initial cost. Most mortgage lenders will allow you to lock in your rate for 30 days at no additional cost. This essentially allows you to lock in a mortgage rate without paying any extra money up front, as long as you can close the house within that time frame.

The inconvenients

  • Less flexibility. If mortgage rates drop after you lock in a rate, you could end up with a higher rate than is currently available. The exception is if you have a floating option, but this feature has an additional cost.
  • Lock Fee Rate. Lenders usually charge an upfront fee if you want to lock in a rate for a longer period, like 75 or 90 days. You may also have to pay a fee if you want to extend the rate lock period, for example when closing is delayed.

What happens if rates drop after lockdown?

Let’s say you locked in a 30-year fixed mortgage rate at 5.25%, but during the close mortgage rates dropped significantly to 5.05%. If this happens, you have several options:

Discuss your options with your mortgage lender. A rate lock freezes interest rates on all available mortgage products for the day you locked in. You may be able to pay more discount points or switch to a shorter loan term (like a 15-year mortgage instead of a 30-year mortgage). ) to lower your interest rate. However, these rates will still be based on the day your lockdown period started.

“Some lenders may allow customers to switch to a lower rate if they haven’t selected a floating option,” says Grzebin. “Customers can ask their lender if they offer options to do so and if there are any fees associated with downgrading.”

Start over with a new lender to get a lower rate. You’d lose any appraisal fees you’ve already paid to the first lender, and switching mortgage lenders would likely delay closing. Pushing back your closing date can mean losing your home (and your deposit) if the seller has a strict deadline. Contact your real estate agent before making a decision that would void your purchase contract.

Let your lock rate expire. If the seller is willing to delay closing until your rate lock expires, you may be able to take advantage of lower rates. At this point, your lender will base your new rate on the current rate. However, there is always a risk that rates will go up or that the seller will refuse to extend the closing date. And some lenders may not let you relock at a lower rate anyway, says Grzebin.

]]>
California lawmakers urge FDIC to curb banking partnerships | Ballard Spahr LLP https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/16/california-lawmakers-urge-fdic-to-curb-banking-partnerships-ballard-spahr-llp/ Thu, 16 Jun 2022 07:00:00 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/16/california-lawmakers-urge-fdic-to-curb-banking-partnerships-ballard-spahr-llp/ Four Democratic members of the California State Legislature recently sent a letter to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) urging the agency to take action against FDIC-supervised banks that partner with non-bank lenders to offer high-cost installment loans. Two of the letter’s authors, California Senator Monique Limon and Assemblyman Tim Grayson, also sponsored Assembly Bill […]]]>

Four Democratic members of the California State Legislature recently sent a letter to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) urging the agency to take action against FDIC-supervised banks that partner with non-bank lenders to offer high-cost installment loans.

Two of the letter’s authors, California Senator Monique Limon and Assemblyman Tim Grayson, also sponsored Assembly Bill AB 539, passed in 2019, which caps the annual interest rate at 36% plus the federal funds rate for consumer loans of at least $2,500 but less than $10,000 from approved lenders under the California finance law. Despite California’s usury law, FDIC-supervised banks have the ability to export their home state’s interest rate. According to the letter, at least nine high-cost lenders partnered with six FDIC-supervised banks to create consumer loans with interest rates that would exceed state interest rate caps. In their letter, the lawmakers urge the FDIC to “crack down on these schemes” to “evade state laws that protect consumers from unaffordable interest rates.” A coalition of consumer advocacy groups raised similar concerns in a letter to the FDIC in February.

The letter explains that while states have tools to prosecute these loan agreements, these tools are more expensive to use and less likely to be effective than the typical enforcement authorities provided to state financial regulators. One such tool is the “true lender” doctrine, in which a state shows that the true lender is not the bank whose name appears on the loan agreement, but rather the non-bank lender who predominant economic interest in the loan. The letter mentions as an example the trial currently in litigation in a California state court between a non-banking company, Opportunity Financial, LLC (OppFi), and the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation on whether the California law on Usury applies to loans made through OppFi’s partnership with FinWise Bank, a state-FDIC-registered bank located in Utah. Recognizing that the legal issues will likely take years to resolve, lawmakers are imploring the FDIC to use its oversight, regulatory and enforcement tools to put a stop to these lending partnerships.

California is far from alone in criticizing such partnerships. Other state authorities that have launched or threatened “true lender” attacks on model banking programs include authorities in DC, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Colorado. In addition, a growing number of states, including Illinois, Maineand New Mexico— Adopted anti-avoidance provisions tied to their state interest rate caps, allegedly in an effort to reach out to non-bank participants in banking model programs.

While we doubt the FDIC will close these programs while the OppFi litigation is ongoing, it is not unprecedented for the FDIC to close bank-model loan programs with non-banks involving high-cost payday loans. . The FDIC and OCC did so many years ago in response to similar requests from consumer advocacy groups. The big difference this time is that the APRs charged today are significantly lower than the APRs charged in closed FDIC and OCC payday loan programs.

[View source.]

]]>
California lawmakers urge FDIC to curb banking partnerships https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/15/california-lawmakers-urge-fdic-to-curb-banking-partnerships/ Wed, 15 Jun 2022 15:22:47 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/15/california-lawmakers-urge-fdic-to-curb-banking-partnerships/ Four Democratic members of the California State Legislature recently sent a letter to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) urging the agency to take action against FDIC-supervised banks that partner with non-bank lenders. to offer high cost installment loans. Two of the letter’s authors, California Senator Monique Limon and Assemblyman Tim Grayson, were also the […]]]>

Four Democratic members of the California State Legislature recently sent a letter to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) urging the agency to take action against FDIC-supervised banks that partner with non-bank lenders. to offer high cost installment loans.

Two of the letter’s authors, California Senator Monique Limon and Assemblyman Tim Grayson, were also the sponsors of Assembly Bill 539, passed in 2019, which caps the annual interest rate at 36 % plus the federal funds rate for consumer loans of at least $2,500 but less than more than $10,000 made by lenders approved under California finance law. Despite California’s usury law, FDIC-supervised banks have the ability to export their home state’s interest rate. According to the letter, at least nine high-cost lenders partnered with six FDIC-supervised banks to create consumer loans with interest rates that would exceed state interest rate caps. In their letter, the lawmakers urge the FDIC to “crack down on these schemes” to “evade state laws that protect consumers from unaffordable interest rates.” A coalition of consumer advocacy groups raised similar concerns in a letter to the FDIC in February.

The letter explains that while states have tools to prosecute these loan agreements, these tools are more expensive to use and less likely to be effective than the typical enforcement authorities provided to state financial regulators. One such tool is the “true lender” doctrine, in which a state shows that the true lender is not the bank whose name appears on the loan agreement, but rather the non-bank lender who predominant economic interest in the loan. The letter cites as an example the lawsuit currently pending in California state court between a non-banking company, Opportunity Financial, LLC (OppFi), and the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation over whether California usury law applies to loans made. through OppFi’s partnership with FinWise Bank, an FDIC-insured state-chartered bank located in Utah. Recognizing that the legal issues will likely take years to resolve, lawmakers are imploring the FDIC to use its oversight, regulatory, and enforcement tools to put an end to these lending partnerships.

California is far from alone in criticizing such partnerships. Other state authorities that have launched or threatened “true lender” attacks on model banking programs include authorities in DC, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Colorado. In addition, a growing number of states, including Illinois, Maine and New Mexico, have enacted anti-evasion provisions tied to their interest rate caps, allegedly in an effort to reach out to unregistered participants. banking to banking model programs.

While we doubt the FDIC will close these programs while the OppFi litigation is ongoing, it is not unprecedented for the FDIC to close bank-model loan programs with non-banks involving high-cost payday loans. . The FDIC and OCC did so many years ago in response to similar requests from consumer advocacy groups. The big difference this time is that the APRs charged today are significantly lower than the APRs charged in closed FDIC and OCC payday loan programs.

]]>
Business groups claiming to support service members do not https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/14/business-groups-claiming-to-support-service-members-do-not/ Tue, 14 Jun 2022 09:39:20 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/14/business-groups-claiming-to-support-service-members-do-not/ In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act (USER) with the goal of prohibiting discrimination against members of the military in employment, as well as ensuring minimal disruption to service members and their families when called into service. In 2003, Congress revised and expanded the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act […]]]>

In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment and Re-employment Rights Act (USER) with the goal of prohibiting discrimination against members of the military in employment, as well as ensuring minimal disruption to service members and their families when called into service. In 2003, Congress revised and expanded the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ Civil Relief Act of 1940, creating the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). The new law governs the treatment of service members in rental agreements, evictions, credit card interest rates, mortgage interest rates, foreclosures, civil legal proceedings, auto leases, life insurance, health insurance, income tax payments, etc.

But forced arbitration agreements inserted into many consumer and employment contracts circumvent these legal protections for service members, undermining the very reasons these bills were passed. The result is that big corporations routinely fire service members, seize their family homes, repossess their cars, rip off their pensions and even profit from life insurance policies after service members are killed, according to a 2018 report of the American Association for Justice. In 2012, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) uncovered 15,000 cases of financial institutions failing to reduce mortgage interest rates for service members who qualified for a mortgage rate cap. ‘interest. And each year, the GAO has determined that more than 300 illegal seizures occur in violation of SCRA.

More from Jarod Facundo

Violations of the SCRA are criminal and the law provides for jail time. During the financial crisis, major banks like JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Citigroup paid hundreds of millions of dollars penalties for unlawfully seizing active duty service members, in some cases while serving overseas. But no one went to jail, and arbitration agreements further protect big companies from liability.

Stand-alone bills such as the Justice for the Military Act would directly address the loophole, ensuring that the military choose for themselves whether or not to go to arbitration. The senses. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) also changes previously included to the National Defense Authorization Act which mirror the stand-alone Military Justice Bill.

Today, a group of 31 service members and veterans advocacy organizations sent a letter to the leaders of the Senate Armed Services and Veterans Affairs Committees, urging them to support the Military Justice Act, a related upcoming Senate bill, and any amendments to the NDAA that include the wording of the bill .

But organizations that claim to support the military and its members are the most vocally opposed to such reforms.

The Chamber of Commerce boasts of its “Hire our heroes“, which helps service members obtain scholarships in a range of sectors and partner companies. Yet, in the first quarter of 2022, the Chamber spent $18.6 million in lobbying expenses. Disclosure Forms reveal that these activities included lobbying on the NDAA and the 2021 law ending forced arbitration of sexual assault and sexual harassment.

On March 3, President Biden signed the Sexual Assault Bill in the law. During the signing ceremony, Biden signaled his support for broader reforms against the practice. “I know there are discussions in Congress about whether forced arbitration clauses should also be prohibited for other types of labor disputes beyond sexual harassment and assault. I think that everything is wrong and that they should be banned. he said.

Big corporations routinely fire Service members, seize their family homes, repossess their cars, rip off their pensions, and even profit from life insurance policies after Service members are killed.

The Consumer Bankers Association, a trade group that includes some of the largest financial institutions, says it supports service members through investment initiatives. The ABC even has supported extending lock protections under SCRA from three months after separation to one year. But their support rings hollow as long as forced arbitration clauses can circumvent those protections.

The ABC has spent $790,000 lobbying against the Military Loans Act, which forbidden to banks to require military personnel to submit to forced arbitration and set a maximum annual rate for loans to 36 percent military personnel. Their lobbying activities also include issues related to the SCRA.

The Chamber of Commerce and the ABC did not respond to the Perspective‘s requests for comments.

Last year on Veterans Day, the American Financial Services Association (AFSA), in a blog post titled “Remembering America’s Bestargued that the MLA is actually hurting members of the military because reputable lenders are unable to offer small loans below a 36% interest rate. AFSA’s lobbying activities, which so far total $280,000 This year, have included lobbying on MLA and SCRA “termination of lease” provisions. In other words, forced arbitration clauses.

In a statement to Perspective, the AFSA distinguished its practices as “traditional installment loan products” from predatory lenders such as payday loans and self-title loans. The AFSA said the MLA should “clearly target payday loans“.

TO SEE HOW ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS affect service members, consider the case of U.S. Navy reservist Kevin Ziober. In 2018, after ten years in the reserves, Ziober was a lieutenant commander overseeing the training and mobilization readiness of a 130-member intelligence unit based in San Diego.

As a reservist, Ziober hoped future employers would understand that his military career could require deployment on short notice for weeks, months, or even years at a time. In 2010, Ziober began working as a manager for BLB Resources, Inc., a federal contractor located in Irvine, California. Over a two-year period, Ziober helped grow the company from 18 employees to 90.

But six months after taking office, Ziober recalled in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, BLB asked him and other employees to sign several legal documents, including an arbitration agreement, as a condition of keeping their jobs. Eighteen months later, in November 2012, he was officially ordered by the Navy to deploy to Afghanistan for a year. Ziober testified that BLB had known for months that the deployment was imminent.

On November 30, 2012, Ziober’s last day of work, BLB threw a surprise party in his honor. He said: “There was even a big cake with an American flag decorated in red, white and blue, with the inscription ‘Best wishes, Kevin.’ After his party, Ziober was called in for a meeting with the human resources manager, his supervisor, and what he guessed was a labor consultant or attorney. He was told that he would have no work waiting for him when he returned from Afghanistan.

“The shock of learning that I was being fired from my job on the eve of my deployment to a combat zone created an unimaginable amount of worry and anxiety about how I would support myself and those of my family when I return,” Ziober said. “Within hours, I went from feeling supported, proud and focused on serving my country to feeling embarrassed, confused and concerned for the well-being of my loved ones.”

Ziober’s experience with forced arbitration is why veterans’ and service members’ advocacy groups have long called for an end to the practice.

For advocates like the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), the passage of the Military Justice Act or its inclusion in the latest NDAA is to restore the rights granted to military personnel under USERRA and the SCRA, and to allow individuals to decide for themselves whether to go to court. On a larger scale, forced arbitration decreases troop readiness. “Adding stressors is the worst thing you can do to the people we send into danger,” said VFW legislative director Patrick Murray.

Groups like the Chamber of Commerce, AFSA and ABC proclaim to the public that they support the troops, but critics say their lobbying activity is actively worsening the lives of service members and their families.

The AFSA told the Perspective that he did not support the Justice for Service Members Act or current and previous versions of the NDAA that include language from the bill. Instead, the AFSA said: “Arbitration has been shown to help consumers, including the military, time and time again. It’s faster, cheaper, and has a better track record of consumer relief than class action lawsuits.

Forced arbitration providers are not required to report the number of cases filed, only those that are closed, but this number has increased since 2017. Contrary to claims by the AFSA, the pass rate for consumers and workers has fallen below the five-year averages. In 2020, 4.1% of consumers won their case. And for the workers, only 82 individuals, representing 1.6% of the cases, obtained a monetary reward by forced arbitration.

As Murray told the Perspective“I can’t understand a real justification for [forced arbitration]. It is not better for the troops or the military.

]]>
Schapiro: A payday loan battle that started in Virginia with a whimper, ended with a bang | Columnists https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/07/schapiro-a-payday-loan-battle-that-started-in-virginia-with-a-whimper-ended-with-a-bang-columnists/ Tue, 07 Jun 2022 07:00:00 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/07/schapiro-a-payday-loan-battle-that-started-in-virginia-with-a-whimper-ended-with-a-bang-columnists/ Jeff Schapiro DEAN HOFFMEYER/TIMES-EXPATCH///////// Jay Speer has been lobbying the Virginia legislature for as long as he’s been a parent: 22 years. And for almost all, while he and his wife raised two children, both now out of college, Speer fought back against the high-cost instant loan industry, arguing that payday lenders and securities cars […]]]>





Jeff Schapiro


DEAN HOFFMEYER/TIMES-EXPATCH/////////



Jay Speer has been lobbying the Virginia legislature for as long as he’s been a parent: 22 years.

And for almost all, while he and his wife raised two children, both now out of college, Speer fought back against the high-cost instant loan industry, arguing that payday lenders and securities cars mainly exploit the poor. with debts they find it difficult to repay – if at all.

For Speer, executive director of the Virginia Poverty Law Center, the industry is now a much smaller target, having been held back by rules imposed by Democrats in 2020, when their party commanded every corner of state government. Even Republicans long friends of the lenders supported the reforms.

Speer’s fight with loanees may have died down, but it’s by no means over. A little-noticed mid-May settlement of a federal lawsuit filed more than three years ago by Speer’s organization and two law firms, Kelly Guzzo of Fairfax and Consumer Litigation Associates of Newport News, says as much. .

Under the settlement, 550,000 borrowers here and in other states won’t have to pay $489 million in illegal internet-based payday loans for which they were charged 600% interest. Most borrowers will split $450 million in cash repayments. An additional $39 million is for those who paid illegal amounts to lenders.

People also read…

Despite their checkered track record, Virginia was open to payday lenders — they’re so called because they provide a cash advance against a borrower’s salary — during a pro Democrat’s 2002-2006 gubernatorial term. -company, Mark Warner, now a US senator who has since cooled off in the industry.

Warner signed the legislation sent to him by a Republican-controlled General Assembly even as his top aides pressed him to reject it. One of them threatened to resign in protest. Warner’s successor, fellow Democrat Tim Kaine, not a fan of lenders, tried in vain to negotiate reforms acceptable to the industry and its opponents.

A 2009 attempt to limit the frequency of lending — it was spearheaded by several senior House Republicans and a white-shoe law firm with close ties to the GOP — drove out some lenders. To stay open in Virginia, many revamped their business model, operating under a provision of state law that allowed them to charge higher interest rates.

Over the next few years there would be other – unsuccessful – efforts to bring the lenders to heel. The industry’s footprint in Virginia expanded in 2011, when the state sanctioned car title lending under which a borrower risks losing their motor vehicle if a loan is not paid. . At the time, Republicans held the Legislative Assembly and the office of governor.

Finally, in 2020, with Democrats in full control of the state house for the first time in nearly 30 years, Virginia passed sweeping protections under the Fairness in Lending Act. The measure has generated bipartisan support that lobbyists on both sides attribute to legislative fatigue over years of fighting.

At times the debate was theatrical, overshadowing larger and lingering issues: that traditional financial institutions – banks and credit unions – then showed little interest in small loans, viewing them as risky and unprofitable. Additionally, competition among payday lenders for a seemingly captive audience was limited because their high-cost products were similar.

Lenders were blocking public hearings with credit union workers who had been bussed to Richmond, many of them from Hampton Roads, where there were many stores. Rebuking lenders as loan sharks, an enemy of the industry—a moving company executive who tried to pay off an employee’s five-figure debt—sometimes showed up in, you guessed it, a suit of shark.

Although it took effect in 2021, the law capped interest and fees on payday and car title loans and locked in the interest rate on consumer purchases paid over time at 36%. time. The law also created safeguards against online payday lenders based in other states or, like those in the May settlement, operated by sovereign Native American tribes shielded from many laws.

The Pew Charitable Trusts reports that Virginia — where lenders have worked their will through well-placed lobbyists and, since Speer’s arrival two decades ago, with millions of dollars in donations to lawmakers — is the one of four states since 2010 to enact broad protections for payday borrowers while guaranteeing access to credit. The others are Colorado, Ohio and Hawaii.

“In these states, lenders are cost-effectively offering small loans that are repaid in affordable installments and cost four times less than typical one-time payment payday loans that borrowers must repay in full on their next payday,” Pew said. in an April survey of all 32 states. who authorize payday loans.

Among Virginia’s neighbors, Washington, DC, Maryland, North Carolina and West Virginia ban payday loans, according to the Consumer Federation of America, a consumer advocacy and research group. Loans are legal in Kentucky.

The impact of Virginia’s new law on lenders is still unclear, though Pew says it would likely mean fewer payday stores. The State Corporation Commission’s Office of Financial Institutions is expected to produce a first overview of the legislature this month.

A consequence of the reform: possible competition between banks for small borrowers. Personal finance website NerdWallet says low-interest, low-dollar loans are expected to be offered by national companies such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Truist. Could this be a magnet for cash-strapped, inflation-worried customers?

It’s all part of a larger overhaul of a facet of consumer finance that in Virginia has long been described as big business exploiting the little man. Heck, they aren’t even called payday loans anymore. By law, these are short-term loans.

Contact Jeff E. Schapiro at (804) 649-6814 or jschapiro@timesdispatch.com. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter, @RTDSchapiro.

]]>
How to Find Better Alternatives to Payday Loans https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/07/how-to-find-better-alternatives-to-payday-loans/ Tue, 07 Jun 2022 07:00:00 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/07/how-to-find-better-alternatives-to-payday-loans/ When you’re faced with an emergency — a car repair, medical bill, or other unexpected expense — and you don’t have the cash to cover it, a payday loan may seem like your only choice. This is usually not the case; there are other options that are much less expensive than payday loans. Discover more […]]]>

When you’re faced with an emergency — a car repair, medical bill, or other unexpected expense — and you don’t have the cash to cover it, a payday loan may seem like your only choice. This is usually not the case; there are other options that are much less expensive than payday loans.

Discover more affordable alternatives and learn more about the risks of payday loans.

Local alternatives to payday loans

Many communities have charities, nonprofits, and other organizations that can help cover an emergency expense so you don’t need to take out a payday loan.

We have found local and regional resources that can help you, whether through assistance programs or small loans. Choose your state below to find options near you.

About these resources

NerdWallet has reviewed these organizations to ensure that they provide assistance with expenses such as rent, transportation, utilities, and other emergencies. Some offer advice and training to help you make sound financial decisions even after the immediate crisis is over.

Not only do these organizations offer alternatives to payday loans, but they also help avoid a cycle of debt that can trap you for years.

More Payday Loan Alternatives

If you cannot find a local organization to cover your financial needs, there are other alternatives to payday loans which are safer and more affordable.

Think of ways to find money quickly: If your need is relatively low, you may not need to borrow the money. There are ways to make some quick cash by getting creative, such as selling spare electronics or unused gift cards, or taking a temporary side gig.

Apply for an alternative payday loan: Alternative payday loans allow you to borrow small amounts of money at a lower cost and with a longer repayment term than a payday loan. These loans are offered at federal credit unions, although local credit unions may offer similar products. You will need to become a member of the credit union before applying.

Download a cash advance application: Cash advance apps can help you cover an emergency expense by letting you borrow against your next paycheck before you receive it. Some apps charge a small fee for using the service.

See if you can “buy now, pay later”: If you need to purchase an essential item from a major retailer, chances are you can use a buy now, pay later payment plan. These plans don’t require a credit check and split your purchase into equal, sometimes interest-free installments.

Consider an emergency personal loan: An unsecured personal loan from an online lender can cover an emergency expense, and some lenders accept applicants with bad credit (FICO score of 629 or lower). As long as you provide all the necessary documents, you can usually receive funds the day you apply or the next day.

How are payday loans harmful?

Payday loans are short-term loans, usually $500 or less, that must be repaid with your next paycheck. You can get a payday loan in person from an in-store lender or online, by providing proof of income, ID, and a bank account. Payday lenders don’t usually check your credit, which makes them accessible to more borrowers.

However, payday loans are among the riskiest loans you can get because they:

Charge high fees: The cost of borrowing varies by payday lender, but a typical fee structure is $15 for every $100 borrowed. That’s an APR of 391% – well above the 36% cap that most financial experts agree is the highest APR a loan can have and still considered affordable.

Can create a cycle of indebtedness: Due to their high cost, payday loans can create a cycle of debt that is difficult to escape. For example, if you need $100 but only owe $115 two weeks later, chances are you don’t have the money to repay. You may need to extend the due date, which means additional fees. Do this enough times and you might owe more than you originally borrowed.

Do not build credit: Your payday loan payments are generally not reported to the three major credit bureaus, which means you cannot use these loans to build credit. Having a good credit score is important for accessing more affordable financing options in the future.

Track your expenses — for free

NerdWallet’s free app helps you track your spending, find ways to save, and build your credit score.

]]>
Schapiro: Started in Virginia with a whine, ended with a bang | Government and politics https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/01/schapiro-started-in-virginia-with-a-whine-ended-with-a-bang-government-and-politics/ Wed, 01 Jun 2022 21:04:00 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/06/01/schapiro-started-in-virginia-with-a-whine-ended-with-a-bang-government-and-politics/ BY JEFF E. SCHAPIRO Richmond Times-Dispatch Jay Speer has been lobbying the Virginia legislature for as long as he’s been a parent: 22 years. And for almost all, while he and his wife raised two children, both now out of college, Speer fought back against the high-cost instant loan industry, arguing that payday lenders and […]]]>

BY JEFF E. SCHAPIRO Richmond Times-Dispatch

Jay Speer has been lobbying the Virginia legislature for as long as he’s been a parent: 22 years.

And for almost all, while he and his wife raised two children, both now out of college, Speer fought back against the high-cost instant loan industry, arguing that payday lenders and securities cars mainly exploit the poor. with debts they find it difficult to repay – if at all.

For Speer, executive director of the Virginia Poverty Law Center, the industry is now a much smaller target, having been held back by rules imposed by Democrats in 2020, when their party commanded every corner of state government. Even Republicans long friends of the lenders supported the reforms.

Speer’s fight with loanees may have died down, but it’s by no means over. A little-noticed mid-May settlement of a federal lawsuit filed more than three years ago by Speer’s organization and two law firms, Kelly Guzzo of Fairfax and Consumer Litigation Associates of Newport News, says as much. .

People also read…

Under the settlement, 550,000 borrowers here and in other states won’t have to pay $489 million in illegal internet-based payday loans for which they were charged 600% interest. Most borrowers will split $450 million in cash repayments. An additional $39 million is for those who paid illegal amounts to lenders.

Despite their checkered record, Virginia was opened up to payday lenders — they’re so called because they provide a cash advance against a borrower’s salary — during a pro-Democrat’s 2002-06 gubernatorial term. company, Mark Warner, now a US senator who has since cooled off on the industry.

Warner signed the legislation sent to him by a Republican-controlled General Assembly even as his top aides pressed him to reject it. One of them threatened to resign in protest. Warner’s successor, fellow Democrat Tim Kaine, not a fan of lenders, tried in vain to negotiate reforms acceptable to the industry and its opponents.

A 2009 attempt to limit the frequency of lending — it was spearheaded by several senior House Republicans and a white-shoe law firm with close ties to the GOP — drove out some lenders. To stay open in Virginia, many revamped their business model, operating under a provision of state law that allowed them to charge higher interest rates.

Over the next few years there would be other – unsuccessful – efforts to bring the lenders to heel. The industry’s footprint in Virginia expanded in 2011, when the state sanctioned car title lending under which a borrower risks losing their motor vehicle if a loan is not paid. . At the time, Republicans held the legislature and the governor’s office.

Finally, in 2020, with Democrats in full control of the state house for the first time in nearly 30 years, Virginia passed sweeping protections under the Fairness in Lending Act. The measure has generated bipartisan support that lobbyists on both sides attribute to legislative fatigue over years of fighting.

At times the debate was theatrical, overshadowing larger and lingering issues: that traditional financial institutions – banks and credit unions – then showed little interest in small loans, viewing them as risky and unprofitable. Additionally, competition among payday lenders for a seemingly captive audience was limited because their high-cost products were similar.

Lenders were blocking public hearings with credit union workers who had been bussed to Richmond, many of them from Hampton Roads, where there were many stores. Rebuking lenders as loan sharks, an enemy of the industry—a moving company executive who tried to pay off an employee’s five-figure debt—sometimes showed up in, you guessed it, a suit of shark.

Although it took effect in 2021, the law capped interest and fees on payday and car title loans and locked in the interest rate on consumer purchases paid over time at 36%. time. The law also created safeguards against online payday lenders based in other states or, like those in the May settlement, operated by sovereign Native American tribes shielded from many laws.

The Pew Charitable Trusts reports that Virginia — where lenders have worked their will through well-placed lobbyists and, since Speer’s arrival two decades ago, with millions of dollars in donations to lawmakers — is the one of four states since 2010 to enact broad protections for payday borrowers while guaranteeing access to credit. The others are Colorado, Ohio and Hawaii.

“In these states, lenders are cost-effectively offering small loans that are repaid in affordable installments and cost four times less than typical one-time payment payday loans that borrowers must repay in full on their next payday,” Pew said. in an April survey of all 32 states. who authorize payday loans.

Among Virginia’s neighbors, Washington DC, Maryland, North Carolina and West Virginia ban payday loans, according to the Consumer Federation of America, a consumer advocacy and research group. Loans are legal in Kentucky.

The impact of Virginia’s new law on lenders is still unclear, though Pew says it would likely mean fewer payday stores. The State Corporation Commission’s Office of Financial Institutions is expected to produce a first overview of the legislature this month.

A consequence of the reform: possible competition between banks for small borrowers. Personal finance website NerdWallet says low-interest, low-dollar loans are expected to be offered by national companies such as Bank of America, Wells Fargo and Truist. Could this be a magnet for cash-strapped, inflation-worried customers?

It’s all part of a larger overhaul of a facet of consumer finance that in Virginia has long been described as big business exploiting the little man. Heck, they aren’t even called payday loans anymore. By law, these are short-term loans.

Contact Jeff E. Schapiro at (804) 649-6814 or jschapiro@timesdispatch.com. Follow him on Facebook and on Twitter, @RTDSchapiro. Listen to his analysis at 7:45 a.m. and 5:45 p.m. Friday on Radio IQ, 89.7 FM in Richmond and 89.1 FM in Roanoke, and in Norfolk on WHRV, 89.5 FM.

]]>
Press Releases | Press | President’s Press Room | Chair https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/05/19/press-releases-press-presidents-press-room-chair/ Thu, 19 May 2022 22:02:33 +0000 https://vivenavalmoral.com/2022/05/19/press-releases-press-presidents-press-room-chair/ 19.05.22 BuzzFeed Investigation Showed KKR Puts Profits Before Patients, Leading to Abuse and Neglect and Putting Patients’ Lives at Risk washington d.c. — US Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), member of the Senate Finance and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committees; Ron […]]]>

19.05.22

BuzzFeed Investigation Showed KKR Puts Profits Before Patients, Leading to Abuse and Neglect and Putting Patients’ Lives at Risk

washington d.c. — US Senators Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Chair of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions; Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), member of the Senate Finance and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committees; Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee; and Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, sent a letter to the co-CEOs of private equity firm KKR, lambasting the company after a BuzzFeed News investigation revealed that following KKR’s acquisition of BrightSpring Health in 2019, the company provided significantly substandard care and unsafe living conditions in its intermediate care facilities (ICFs) – group homes for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. KKR and BrightSpring executives are poised to cash in as patient safety and quality of care decline. Senators are demanding answers from KKR over its troubling business practices, which put patient safety at risk.

“The BuzzFeed News The investigation found that after the KKR acquisition, care at BrightSpring’s ICFs deteriorated, with regulators finding 118 cases of “dangerously low staff” in seven states, double the rate seen at facilities. not belonging to KKR. Over the same period, KKR boasted of increasing BrightSpring’s revenue from $2.5 billion in 2018 to $5.6 billion in 2022. But there’s no indication that that revenue was used. to improve the quality of care in ICFs: “conditions [at BrightSpring ICFs] became so bad that nurses and caregivers quit en masse, a state banned the company from accepting new residents, and some of the most vulnerable people it cared for suffered and died,” write the senators.

The senators denounced the long-standing problem of the role of private equity in health care – which places short-term profit maximization above considerations of quality of care and patients. While KKR’s BrightSpring-owned small-scale ICFs in California, Indiana, Louisiana, North Carolina, Ohio, Texas, and West Virginia accounted for only 16% of ICFs, they accounted for 40% of serious citations in those states. the BuzzFeed investigation revealed that nurses and other social workers had alarming turnover rates, uncompetitive salaries and inadequate training.

BrightSpring and KKR’s failure to protect ICF patients and efforts to maximize profits have also resulted in preventable injuries and deaths. In West Virginia, state officials accused BrightSpring of ignoring multiple warnings that led to at least one preventable death and ordered BrightSpring to stop accepting new patients, ultimately closing 20% ​​of homes in West Virginia. organization in the state. Facility managers said they faced pressure to keep homes full, even with patients they could not care for, to maximize profits.

The senators criticized KKR for choosing to pocket their profits instead of improving conditions for patients. BrightSpring’s board of directors, controlled by KKR, has burdened the company with $1.1 billion in debt, and BrightSpring has paid more than $135 million a year in interest on its loans. Meanwhile, BrightSpring CEO Jon Rousseau doubled his salary to $1.6 million in 2020. Now KKR and BrightSpring executives who oversaw the company’s operations after the acquisition are ready for another payday. In October 2021, the company filed for IPO in a $100 million initial public offering, citing its access to a “combined $1.5 trillion market opportunity”.

“We have long been concerned about the deleterious impact of private equity on healthcare and patient care. Your company exemplifies how private equity firms exploit the healthcare industry to make profits at every step. Private equity has moved into healthcare services, from rural hospitals to nursing homes and hospices, to healthcare bill management and debt collection systems. , exacerbating existing issues such as surprise medical billing, inadequate training, and lack of oversight and due process,” say the senators.

The senators called on KKR to answer a series of questions about the impact of its acquisition of BrightSpring Health on patients by June 2, 2022.

Read the full letter here.

###



previous article next article

]]>