You are here:
NZLII >>
Databases >>
New Zealand Ad Hoc Government Discussion Papers >>
2001 >>
[2001] NZAHGovDP 1
Database Search
| Name Search
| Recent Documents
| Noteup
| LawCite
| Download
| Help
Consumer Credit Law Review: Further consultation on proposals in respect of charging interest and calculating balances [2001] NZAHGovDP 1 (26 March 2001)
Last Updated: 18 April 2020
Consumer Credit Law Review: Further Consultation on
Proposals in Respect of Charging Interest and Calculating Balances
Purpose of this paper
- The
purpose of this paper is to seek further feedback concerning proposals by the
Ministry, as part of the Consumer Credit Law Review
(CCLR), in respect of
charging interest and the calculation of balances. In particular, the Ministry
is keen to hear from submitters
who might be affected by the proposals (were
they to be implemented) because their software and billing systems would need to
be
changed.
What is interest?
- Interest
is of central and obvious importance to consumer credit, as interest is usually
by far the greatest cost paid by consumers
in return for the use of credit. In
considering what interest is, it is helpful to begin with common law
definitions:
- “Interest
is the return or compensation for the use or retention by one person of a sum of
money belonging to or owed to another.
Interest accrues from day to day even
if payable only at intervals, and is, therefore, apportionable in respect of
time between persons on succession entitled to the principal” (emphasis
added).
Halsbury, Laws of England (4th Ed), Vol 32, “Money”,
par 106.
- “[T]he
essence of interest is that it is a payment which becomes due because the
creditor has not had his money at the due date.
It may be regarded as either
representing the profit he might have made if he had had the use of the money,
or conversely the loss
he has suffered because he had not had that use. The
general idea is that he is entitled to compensation for that deprivation.”
Per Lord Wright in Riches v Westminster Bank [1947] AC 390, at 400.
- “[I]nterest
is compensation for delay in payment”. Per Fowler J in Bond v Barrow
Haemitite Steel Co [1902] UKLawRpCh 9; [1902] 1 Ch 353, at 363.
Methods used to
charge interest and calculate balances by New Zealand lenders
- There
are a variety of methods for determining the interest payable on a credit
contract and of distributing it over the term of the
loan. By examining a wide
range of consumer credit contracts the Ministry has found that the methods
described below are commonly
used.[1]
We have not surveyed the extent of usage of the different
methods.
Accrued interest methods
Daily rate methods
3.1. The daily method involves applying a daily interest rate to the unpaid
daily balance. The combined daily charges over a payment
period are then
deducted from the payment which is made at the end of the period. If the payment
is late or not made the charges
may be added to the balance (i.e.
“capitalised” or “compounded”). Generally, lenders in
New Zealand do not
compound the interest between payment periods (e.g. daily
compounding).
3.2. A variation on the daily rate method which achieves the same result is the
average daily balance method whereby at the end of
each payment period the
interest charge is calculated by applying a periodic rate (usually monthly) to
the average of all the daily
balances for the period.
3.3. The daily rate method is used by lenders offering revolving credit
contracts.[2] It is used for fixed
credit contracts (of all varieties) offered by banks and the larger, mainstream
finance companies and other
mortgage lenders.
3.4. This is the most flexible and accurate method of charging interest and has
considerable advantages for lenders and
consumers.[3] For instance, if a
borrower makes a late payment, the balance continues to accrue interest charges.
If a borrower makes an early
payment, the balance is automatically adjusted and
the borrower will save on interest. If the borrower repays the loan early, he
or
she will only be liable for interest accrued to the date of
payment.
Actuarial method
3.5. Other lenders use a slightly less sophisticated accrued method of charging
interest. Interest is calculated over the course
of the loan by applying a
periodic interest rate to the reducing balance. This produces an interest charge
for each period which
is deducted first from the periodic payment. Standard
amortisation tables and the functions in widely used spreadsheet software
calculate
interest in this way.
3.6. The difference between this method and the daily rate method is that no
adjustments are made for the exact number of days in
a period – all
periods are presumed to be of the same length – or for the timing of
payments. A borrower will not receive
the benefit of an early payment. A late
payment will not result in the borrower paying additional interest charges at
the contract
rate, but the contract is likely to provide for default charges to
compensate the lender for the loss due to late payment. If the
borrower repays
the loan early, interest will be accrued to the end of the complete payment
period during which the balance is repaid.
3.7. This method is used by smaller finance companies, including some cash loan
lenders, and by some mainstream hire purchase lenders
for fixed credit products.
Flat rate (or add-on) method
3.8. This method has traditionally been used by small finance companies and cash
loan companies and hire purchase sellers offering
fixed credit.
Interest is calculated as a proportion of the initial balance. In the
event of early repayment or refinancing, lenders usually use
the Rule of 78 as a
means of distributing the interest charge over the term of the loan.
3.9. This method is currently used by small finance/cash loan companies, but is
no longer common.
Rule of 78
3.10. The Rule of 78 refers to a method of distributing interest over the term
of a loan i.e. of calculating the interest component
of each payment made by the
borrower.[4] It is often used by
lenders who pre-calculate interest using a flat rate to calculate the
outstanding balance on early repayment
by the borrower.
3.11. Many hire purchase lenders (including mainstream lenders) use this method.
Many finance companies and cash loan companies also
use it for personal loans.
The lender’s software is programmed to amortise the loan using the Rule of
78 and calculate the
finance rate for disclosure purposes.
3.12. If the consumer pays according to the payment schedule, it will not make
any difference whether the interest is distributed
by the Rule of 78 or
actuarially, however, it can have a considerable impact on early repayment or
when a loan is refinanced.
3.13. Some lenders also calculate the interest actuarially for the purposes of
disclosure and calculating repayments, but in the
event that the loan is repaid
early or refinanced, use the Rule of 78. Lenders adopting this practice are
likely to lend at high
rates and refinancing using the Rule, rather than an
actuarial calculation, will result in an additional
return.
Problems in the consumer credit market relating to the
manner in which interest is calculated
Non-standardised quotation of rates
- One
of the most important grounds for intervening in the consumer credit market is
because of information difficulties faced by consumer.
A key manifestation of
these difficulties is the multitude of both the ways by which interest can be
charged in respect of contracts,
and the way those charges can be disclosed. A
flat rate, for instance, appears to be lower than an accrued rate – this
has
the potential to be misleading as well as raise information costs for
consumers.
- This
problem has to some extent been resolved by the requirement on lenders to
disclose the finance rate.[5] If the
finance rate were no longer required to be disclosed, the proposed measures in
this paper would also deal with the problem
of non-standardised quotation of
rates.
Unfair rules on early payment
- Another
widely known problem with some methods of balance calculation is that they have
an unfair impact on early repayment. This
refers in particular to the Rule of
78. The Ministry discussed the impact of this rule in detail in its
Transparency document. In summary, the rule apportions the interest and
the principal component of each instalment payment in such a way as to
disproportionately load the interest on to the early stages of the contract.
Lenders who accept early repayment of loans with long
terms or high rates can
gain significant unearned interest in a manner that is not transparent to the
consumer.
No credit for extra payments
(“prepayments”)
- The
Hire Purchase Act gives consumers a right to pay off in full the loan at any
time. In this case, the consumer is entitled to a
rebate of the “terms
charges”. However, if the consumer makes an extra payment, over and above
the scheduled instalments
(a “prepayment”), they are not entitled to
receive any credit for that payment. In practice, many lenders do not give
credit for prepayments. This is contrary to the basic principles of interest
discussed in paragraph 2, which imply
that consumers should only be liable to pay interest on the actual balance
outstanding: if the balance has been reduced
by a prepayment, it follows that
the consumer should pay less interest. As interest is “compensation”
to the lender for
being denied the use of the funds outstanding, it logically
follows that if the funds have been “recovered" via a prepayment,
the
lender is not entitled to compensation.
- An
extreme example of this problem appeared on television’s Fair Go
programme. A consumer borrowed $2,500; with finance charges,
the amount to be
repaid was $3,500 over three years. They decided to settle early and the
settlement figure was $2,581.75. Two years
later, the consumers received a bill
for $888, calculated as 24% on $2,581.75 – the problem was the consumer
forgot to pay
the 75 cents but interest was charged on the $2,581.75. Clearly, a
result like this is unfair.
The Ministry’s
proposals
- The
following section outlines the Ministry’s proposals.
An
interest charge cannot exceed the amount arrived at by applying a daily interest
rate(s) to the unpaid daily balance(s) owed by
the debtor.
- The
Ministry considers that the daily rate method is the most transparent and
equitable method of charging interest. It accords with
the common law treatment
of interest. It is the required method in Australian law and used by many
mainstream lenders in New Zealand.
- The
advantages to consumers and lenders who use this method have been discussed. The
advantages from a policy perspective in adapting
Australian provisions
are:
- It
provides for standardisation in the quotation of interest rates.
- It
results in the fairest method of calculating the outstanding balance during the
loan.
- It
is substantially more simple than the alternatives: such as requiring lenders to
disclose a finance rate to meet the concern in
(a); or to include formulas in
legislation to meet the concern in (b).
Views of
submitters
- The
daily rate method proposal was canvassed in Transparency and received a
divided response from submitters. Pointedly, there was no unanimity within the
finance industry on this point. In
its submission the New Zealand Bankers’
Association stated:
“The additional costs imposed on those
lenders that do not use [an accrued interest method] will not outweigh the
advantages
to be gained generally.”
- Other
lenders supported the proposal, as did consumer groups. However, two major hire
purchase lenders disagreed, arguing that such
a requirement would make
instalment hire purchase credit more complex and expensive to administer and
would lead to its demise in
favour of revolving credit products. This, it was
said, would be to the disadvantage of low income consumers who utilise
straightforward
instalment credit as a means of financing consumer goods.
- The
Ministry therefore recommends modifying the general principle that interest must
be calculated daily to take account of these
concerns by allowing interest to be
calculated on monthly, quarterly or half-yearly rests and by allowing lenders
the right to “hold”
early payments until
payable.
Lenders are permitted to charge for monthly, quarterly
and half-yearly periods by applying monthly, quarterly or half-yearly rates
to
the average unpaid daily balance for that period.
- The
majority of fixed consumer credit contracts require monthly payments to be made
by the consumer. As explained earlier, lenders
do not always make adjustments to
take account of the timing of the payment or the exact number of days in a
period, which they would
be required to if calculating interest on a daily
basis. For these lenders, it is more straightforward to accept the payments when
they are made, and treat them as if they had been made on the day they were due
(subject to the lender’s treatment of overdue
payments). This appears to
be the standard practice in relation to hire purchase.
- To
accommodate this practice, lenders should be permitted to calculate interest on
monthly, as well as quarterly and half-yearly rests.
In these cases the annual
interest rate is divided by 12, 4 or 2 and is applied to the average unpaid
daily balance for the period.
The effect of this is that interest charges for
months, quarters and half-years can be calculated on the basis that all months,
quarters
and half-years are of the same length. However, the average unpaid
daily balance of a period must be calculated on the actual number
of days in the
period.
- Some
examples demonstrate this method:
(a) Whole period – payment
made on time (or contract prohibits early payments, see paragraphs 21-24).
- interest charges
cover the month of January i.e. 31 days
- unpaid daily
balance $1,000 on each of days 1 to 31
- average unpaid
daily balance:
$1,000 x 31 = $31,000 ÷ 31[days] = $1,000
- interest charges
for January:
(annual interest rate ÷ 12) x $1000
(b) Part period – prepayment made during period
- interest charges
cover the month of January i.e. 31 days
- extra-payment of
$250 made during period on January 16
- unpaid daily
balance $1,000 on each of days 1 to 15
- unpaid daily
balance of $750 on each of days 16 to 31
- average daily
unpaid balance:
($1,000 x 15) + ($750 x 16) = $27,000 ÷ 31
[days] = $870.97
- interest charges
for January:
(annual interest rate ÷ 12) x $870.97
(c) Part period – balance repaid in full during period
- interest charges
cover the first 15 days of January – the loan is repaid in full on 16
January
- the unpaid daily
balance on each of days 1 to 15 is $1,000
- average unpaid
daily balance:
$1,000 x 15 = $15,000 ÷ 31 [days] = $483.87
- Interest charges
for January :
(annual interest rate ÷ 12) x $483.87
Lenders must credit payments as soon as practicable after receipt.
- Once
a borrower has made a payment, they should receive the immediate benefit of it.
Thus, the lender must credit the payment as soon
as practicable after receipt
i.e. adjust the borrower’s unpaid balance. This accords with the general
principle that debtors
should only pay for the credit that they use and that
lenders should not benefit from unearned interest.
- Some
lenders credit a payment on the day it is processed, while others credit it on
the day it is received, despite it being processed
at a later date. This latter
practice is known as “effective dating”. For example, a withdrawal
made by a customer on
a non-business day (e.g. by drawing on a line of credit
through an automatic teller machine on a non-business day) may not be processed
by the lender until the next business day. For the purpose of calculating the
balance and interest charges, the lender may treat
the withdrawal as having been
made on the date it was actually made, that is the lender gives the transaction
an “effective”
date of the non-business day. A similar example might
involve a borrower making a payment on a non-business day, e.g. through an
ATM.
Effective dating also occurs where a lender corrects an error in previous
processing.
- Legislation
should explicitly contemplate the practice of effective dating as failure to do
so may make contracts difficult to administer
under a daily interest rate
regime.
Lenders may prohibit early payments in the credit
contract.
- Strict
application of the rule that payments must be credited as soon as practicable
after receipt may be inconvenient for lenders
offering instalment credit, such
as hire purchase. Many of these loans are structured so that consumers pay a
fixed amount of interest
each payment and a fixed amount of total interest. If a
scheduled payment is made early, the lender has to make adjustments to the
entire amortisation schedule as a result of crediting the payment immediately.
- To
avoid instalment credit becoming more complex to administer, lenders should be
permitted to “hold” scheduled payments
until they become payable (in
practice, this means the payment is likely to be assigned an effective date of
when it became payable).
However, lenders will need to provide for this in their
contracts. Lenders that do not make provision will have to comply with the
rules
outlined above.
- There
is a similar provision in the Australian Code, which provides that lenders must
credit payments as soon as they are made, but
may also hold payments until they
become payable. As well as providing for this in the contract, the lender must
inform the consumer
that he/she will not receive credit for the payment until it
is payable. This latter requirement appears to be unnecessarily cumbersome
if
the early payment is simply a scheduled instalment made a few days early. The
Ministry therefore does not recommend it.
- In
respect of an extra payment made over and above the scheduled instalment
(referred to in Australia as “prepayments”),
the lender may refuse
to accept it if provided for in the contract. However, if such a payment is
accepted, it must be credited as
soon as is practicable. The lender will have to
determine how it treats such a payment. Options are:
- The lender could
refuse to accept the payment. This is probably difficult in practical
terms.
- The term of the
loan may be shortened.
- The size of the
instalments could be reduced over the remaining term of the loan.
- Future
instalments, equating to the value of the prepayment, could be
deferred.
Impact on lenders
- Any
changes resulting from the CCLR will lead to some transitional cost on lenders
e.g. lenders will need to update their documentation
and procedures, retrain
staff etc. The specific impact on lenders from the proposals relating to
interest rates are:
- Lenders will
need to review their software to ensure that the way in which it calculates
balances and debits charges is consistent
with the proposals. This will impact
unevenly on lenders. Some lenders currently use systems which are compatible
(this would apply
to lenders which offer revolving credit). Also, for many
lenders, the terms of their software support contract provide that any changes
to legislation are automatically included in new versions of the software which
the supplier provides as part of its ongoing relationship
with the lender. These
lenders will not incur significant extra costs. However, others will need to
install new software systems
or reprogramme their systems at some cost –
particularly if they have custom built programmes, older systems or no support
contract with their provider.[6]
- Lenders must
consider whether they will credit early payments. If they do not wish to, they
must ensure that this is provided for
in the contract. They will also have to
consider how they deal with prepayments.
- Lenders must
review the systems they use to assign dates to payments. For instance, credit
card contracts differ on whether payments
are credited on the day they were
received or the day they were processed. The meaning of “as soon as
practicable” (taken
from the Australian Code) suggests that payments
should be given an effective date of the day they were received.
- It has been
suggested that the proposals may adversely affect participants in securitisation
programmes. The only effect that the
Ministry is aware of is it may make cash
flows less certain for investors in securitised portfolios as lenders will be
less able
to guarantee the exact amount of interest to be earned. However, this
situation already exists because of the consumer’s right
to early
repayment and the possibility of default. It is a risk that exists with
securitisation of variable rate mortgages and credit
card receivables (etc), so
it is a familiar risk to investors in securitisation programmes and to rating
agencies. The Ministry is
therefore not unduly concerned by this
aspect.
Conclusion
- The
proposals outlined in this paper are being seriously considered by the Ministry
under the CCLR. They are not the only options
for dealing with the problems
concerned, but the Ministry believes they are the best – subject to the
views of submitters through
further consultation. The Ministry’s proposals
would set the daily rate method of interest charging as the basic method to
be
used for all credit contracts. This method is currently used by a large
proportion of lenders and is the required method in Australia.
- The
modifications proposed by the Ministry – permitting interest to be
calculated on monthly rests, allowing lenders to credit
early payments only when
they are payable, and giving lenders flexibility in the way they deal with
prepayments – should reassure
those submitters who considered that a daily
interest rate regime would make instalment credit
impossible.[7] In fact, instalment
credit is entirely possible under a daily rate regime, even if lenders accept
early payments (the result is that
the outstanding balance is brought to zero
sooner and a readjustment of the final payment will be needed).
- These
modifications will not impact on the three key advantages in paragraph 11 (standardised quotation of interest
rates, equitable rules on early repayment and simplified legislation) while
providing more flexibility
for lenders.
- In
responding to this proposal as raised in the Transparency discussion
document, some submitters revealed certain misunderstandings. It is important to
note that the Ministry’s recommendations
will
- not require
monthly payments to vary in amount according to the exact number of days in a
month,
- not require
monthly statements for fixed credit contracts; and
- not prevent
lenders from taking security over goods purchased on credit.
- Following
the transition period, as lenders adjust to the new regime it is reasonable to
expect that fixed credit will be no more
difficult to administer than it is at
present.
Submission Details
Although it has not asked specific questions, the Ministry is interested in
comments on any aspects of this paper and the proposals
it discusses. Please
direct comments by 4:00pm, 30 April 2001 to:
Nick McBride
Consumer Credit Law Review Team
Ministry of Consumer
Affairs
PO Box 1473
WELLINGTON
Ph 04 474 2818
Fax 04 473 9400
Email nick.mcbride@mca.govt.nz
26 March 2001
[1] The Ministry has viewed a large
number of consumer credit contracts and it has talked to those in the industry.
It has noted that,
with the exception of banks and mainstream finance companies,
lenders generally do not disclose the method of charging interest in
the
contract. There may be other methods used by lenders (e.g. discount interest),
but these are clearly not common. Theoretically,
there are numerous other ways
in which lenders might charge interest.
[2] The Ministry has not seen any
contracts which use alternative methods for charging interest on revolving
credit accounts known as
the “previous balance” method and the
“adjusted balance” method.
[3] See Transparency at page
16, 52-53.
[4] The Rule is discussed in
Transparency at 45-47; a technical explanation of the Rule is at
80-81.
[5] Only to some extent: lenders
sometimes quote a flat rate and the finance rate. There are also issues
concerning the finance rate
generally.
[6] Many lenders with such systems
have had to upgrade them in response to the Personal Property Securities Act
1999.
[7] The position is actually
similar in Australia. The CCH Consumer Credit Law Reporter (para 52.600) states:
“Because of a number
of exceptions as to the way in which balances are
calculated, credit providers, if they choose to, can introduce systems,
documentation
and procedures which will enable them to mimic the effect of a
predetermined interest charge [a contract in which the amount of interest
payable is fixed at the outset of the contract].
NZLII:
Copyright Policy
|
Disclaimers
|
Privacy Policy
|
Feedback
URL: http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/NZAHGovDP/2001/1.html