[Suggestion] Late Fees

Your second idea is literally how late fees are enforced already. If specified in the agreement, they will be enforced and the lender cannot file a complaint on the borrower until the late fees end and the loan hasn't been paid back in full.

 

Please correct me if I am simply missing it - but where exactly is it stated that those fees are not enforced?

• I don't have the time available to search for a complaint about the first link now; I will need to search more information about that.

• The second link (i.e., first complaint) didn't even reach a status of late fee discussion/voiding since the user did not respond, so the fees would be set on the appeal then (which I have not found from this user).
• Late fees that were agreed upon in advance generally end when a complaint is filed earlier. In this case, the complaint was locked four days after the due date, thus accounting for four days worth of late fees.

I fail to see the missing enforcement from these examples here...

Open ended late fees are usually capped; late fees with absolutely ridiculous rates are usually voided; normal contract late fees are usually enforced. I don't quite understand the problem yet.

 

It's kind of a roundabout point and the issue isn't with late fees themselves.

In the 2 complaints that resulted in a ban, both had set clauses for late fees of 14 days. HOWEVER, the complaints were both filed and bans both issued before 14 days had passed after the initial due date. Staff weren't enforcing the agreement to an extension, just the initial bit. Personally I'd go as far as to even say those bans were issued wrongfully, because the players were banned before they actually breached the agreement. The same point stands for the SCGen complaint, as well.

The complaints should have simply been dismissed until 14 days AFTER the initial due date, because of the allowed extension via late fees, but they weren't.

 

Anyway I disagree with changes to late fees themselves as this isn't an issue with them.

This is an issue with staff enforcing agreements incorrectly and banning wrongfully.

 

I agree with @Nicit6, the issue is that either the person giving the loan does not understand the late fees themselves, or the staff are not being consistent with understanding them either. Not a problem with the rules.

You can't have open ended late fees. (that one is actually pretty clear at this point actually on all ends)

You can't file a complaint while accruing late fees without at the very least losing the right to those fees and actually the complaint should be dismissed until the period of late fees is over. Anticipatory complaints should be dismissed entirely imo (even a forum warning if repeat offender imo).

A user shouldn't be banned during the time they are still accumulating late fees because that's the point of having them.

If a complaint is filed after the late fee time has elapsed and the agreement had a reasonable time-frame of late fees in the contract, they should be enforced. (and in this case, they have been from what I've seen)

 

Alright, if I may offer my view on the situation here...

I think late fees should be declared as what they are currently - i.e., they offer a set rate per late day and state the absolute maximum a user should receive in any case.

After all, a loan agreement has basically not been fulfilled as soon as the due date passed. Late fees simply regulate the additional money the player has to pay in addition to prevent a user complaint if they exceed the actual due date and if the donor is willing to offer the debtor more time in exchange for money.

From my point of view, late fee timeframes serve as a maximum only - A loaner may decide to relinquish possible late fees at the cost of missing out on an additional monetary reward. After the set timeframe, they no longer suffer from any disadvantages caused by waiting.

My main problem with late fees is that they should normally not be reached. They are not part of the actual timeframe, so the debtor has already violated the due date term of their contract if they occur at all. Although this can be see as negated by late fee agreements, they have still failed to uphold one of the contract requirements. As soon as the due date passes, the loaner should be entitled to filing a complaint at any time; extending the rental time should be done at their discretion.

I favour the current system - late fees that are neither open-ended nor simply ridiculous are usually enforced. If they do not fulfil these criteria, they are limited or negated.

 

Morally I agree that you just shouldn't have to get to the late fee point.

But that isn't how late fees work in real life, that isn't how they should work in ecc If I am late paying my light bill 30 days, there is a late fee you had better believe, but they don't come shut it off until I fail to pay that in another month. It's a fee because it is late, not a breach of contract. Contractually they are allowed to be that late, as long as they pay. If there was no late fee agreement, it would immediately be breach of contract and they'd be immediately in their right to file a complaint. Late fees are an entirely different beast, they're a shot for the person who owes them to get back caught up and a chance for the person who loaned it to cut them a break and make a little more money at it at the same time. If you don't wanna mess with waiting to file for your late fees to be over, don't put 'em in the contract.

 

The thing is, late fees have already been agreed to by both players in the above agreements. If this were the extension we typically see negotiated to in a complaint, sure, I'd agree. That's not what this is. These are extensions that are built into contracts that players have already agreed to. Once that agreement is made, the lender no longer has the choice on whether to give the extension, because they already have, and that is the agreement that both players came to.

 

Well, it kind of is a problem with the rules. The rules for staff, at least.

What really needs to be done is editing the staff guidelines to explicitly dictate how late fees should be handled. That will avoid the inconsistency in how staff handles late fees.

 

Yeah I guess it needs clarified but what I meant really is that the staff needs to 1. decide the rule. 2. know the rule. 3. enforce it consistently and that is the width and breadth of the problem entirely. Since I've been on the server which is only 5 months, late fees have run the gamut of being infinite to being limited and all over the place. God I'd love the moderation to get in there and make some concrete rules regarding the enforcement of contractual agreements and actually define terms like "late fees". I get all tingly even thinking about it happening.

 

My thoughts on this and loan enforcement as a whole.

I see no reason for the excessive policing of loans. What you can do and what you can't do. Example: You can only have X amount of late fees or its "predatory." That agreement wasn't "fair to the one lending." I don't understand why you all want this. If someone agrees to pay something they should pay what they agreed to. No more, no less. Staff declaring deals unfair is just ridiculous. Now everyone and their mothers are getting loan repayment plans and whining at staff to make their debt go away. Enforcement isn't consistent because this policy is silly. It's based off feeling bad for people who get themselves into mounds of debt instead of reading the actual contract they agreed to. Get rid of this dumb idea that people aren't responsible for paying what they agreed to and you fix the enforcement problem.

 

Not stopping predatory lending will just exacerbate the current loan scamming problem, decrease the player count and hurt the economy. There's absolutely no reason to enforce these types of loans unless you want both the lender and borrower to lose and I really can't see why anyone would want to enforce something that has only negative effects from enforcement. Absolutely NOBODY gets benefits from enforcement of predatory lending - The borrower gets banned and NEVER RETURNS and the lender gets scammed and LOSES THEIR MONEY.

You're now asking us to head towards a server where you're free to troll new/younger users into accepting predatory loan agreements and getting banned - That will just lead to a decreased player count, unnecessary drama and bad reviews from players who just joined the server about the server. Not only that, but it will hurt the economy by increasing loan scamming as players will get buried in piles of debt that they cannot pay - And ECC is an economy server; Hurting the economy is quite a bad thing. Do you really want to enforce these types of loans? You're literally asking for the server to be hurt.

What really needs to happen is staff having explicit guidelines for how to handle loans/late fees and what qualifies as a predatory loan. That is what will solve the problem, not your solution, which will only create problems, not solve them.

 

This is why I love United. I actually love you too Ryan like as a user, contributor to the community and and on the forum and I think this is about the only way we differ but the vision you're having in reality is like Dubai. Sure parts of it look pretty and the rich sure do get to do whatever the heck they want, but if you look a mile out you see nothing but slums and that's not a sustainable future for a country or a server.

​