District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania has highlighted once more the regulatory dangers that the alleged lender that isвЂњtrue doctrine can make for internet-based loan providers who partner with banking institutions to determine exemptions from relevant state customer security legislation (including usury laws and regulations). Even though Court didn’t achieve a concluding decision on the merits, it declined to simply accept federal preemption as grounds to dismiss an enforcement action brought by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania against an internet-based payday loan provider who arranged for a state-chartered bank to invest in loans at interest levels surpassing the Pennsylvania usury limit.
The attention prices on these loans far surpassed those allowed under Pennsylvania usury laws and regulations.
The truth is Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Think Finance, Inc. (January 14, 2016). 1 The defendants Think Finance and companies that are affiliatedthe вЂњDefendantsвЂќ) had for many years operated internet-based payday lenders that made loans to Pennsylvania residents. 2 The Defendants initially made these loans straight to Pennsylvania residents and did therefore lawfully given that Pennsylvania Department of Banking (the вЂњDepartmentвЂќ) took the positioning that the usury laws used just to loan providers whom maintained a presence that is physical Pennsylvania.