Quick loans, since they emerged in their present form, have been surrounded by a forest of opinions, opinions and rumors. Not infrequently, these have a direct negative tone and circulate stories and reports of people who, in the heat of the moment, have taken quick loans, often for pleasure or consumption, fast loans that have caused not only difficulties but in some cases total destruction of the entire borrower’s private finances. It is true that such cases exist and that is something that authorities, the media and the industry have been quick to report. More information at left-bank.org
Authorities want to prevent citizens from getting into financial hardship
Which costs the citizen also costs the state. Therefore, the requirements have also been tightened when it comes to assessing a person’s repayment ability in a credit report. The media wants stories to tell and stories about people who, in their view, have been able to, more or less subconsciously, take quick loans that have ruined their finances are of course both dramatic and engaging.
The industry, in turn, does not want it to get a bad reputation, players in the market who misbehave hurt the confidence of those who do. But there is also the aspect that some established players do not like to see too much competition, the one who can not keep up with the development inevitably makes losses and of course you want to avoid that.
These and other aspects have given rise to rumors and perceptions that can be good to look into, and, if possible, pinpoint what is true or false and what can be clarified.
Not necessarily better interest rates at established banks
A common task that circulates is that one should turn to established players in the market as these, unlike businesses that offer fast loans, can demonstrate that they have better interest rates. Of course, this should be discussed on a case-by-case basis and from bank to bank, but in general, you can say that many major banks offer very low interest rates, but provided they have security for this. If you, as a bank, know that you can take someone’s house, it is easier to be benevolent with the interest rate, so the perception that you get better conditions with them is a truth with modification, especially if you cannot offer the required security.
It is natural for banks to be more careful about security, unlike their newly emerged competitors, other and more expenses are tied to their operations, such as local costs. There are aspects that you can easily understand, but it is not so certain that you, as a borrower, earn it for that matter.
The interest rate on the loan is not as flexible as you think
When you take out a loan at a bank, one of the most common selling techniques is that you can change the interest rate later, something that you as a borrower can take as a promise that interest expenses can be more advantageous if you just take the loan now and wait a while.
It gives you a sense of security, which means that you might opt out, for example, of the opportunity to take a quick loan. It is certainly true that as a bank you can adjust interest rates, but these must unconditionally relate to the policy rate set by the Riksbank, and it immediately puts forward the proposal for adjustment later in part on other days.