ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Company Overview and History
We are a growth-oriented, technology-enabled, highly-diversified, multi-channel and multi-product consumer finance company serving a wide range of underbanked consumers in the United States ("U.S."), Canada and, through February 25, 2019, the United Kingdom ("U.K."), and are a market leader in our industry based on revenues. We believe that we have the only true omni-channel customer acquisition, onboarding and servicing platform that is integrated across store, online, mobile and contact center touchpoints. Our IT platform, which we refer to as the “Curo Platform,” seamlessly integrates customer acquisition loan underwriting, scoring, servicing, collections, regulatory compliance and reporting activities into a single, centralized system. We use advanced risk analytics powered by proprietary algorithms and over 15 years of loan performance data to efficiently and effectively score our customers’ loan applications. From January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018, we extended over $17.1 billion in total credit across approximately 43.8 million total loans.
CURO was founded in 1997 to meet the growing needs of underbanked consumers looking for access to credit. With more than 20 years of experience, we seek to offer a variety of convenient, easily-accessible financial and loan services across all of our markets.
CURO Financial Technologies Corp., previously known as Speedy Cash Holdings Corp. ("CFTC"), was incorporated in Delaware in July 2008. CURO Group Holdings Corp., previously known as Speedy Group Holdings Corp., was incorporated in Delaware in 2013 as the parent company of CFTC. The terms “CURO," "we,” “our,” “us” and the “Company” refer to CURO Group Holdings Corp. and its directly and indirectly owned subsidiaries as a combined entity, except where otherwise stated. The term "CFTC" refers to CURO Financial Technologies Corp., our wholly-owned subsidiary, and it's directly and indirectly owned subsidiaries as a consolidated entity, except where otherwise stated.
We operate in the U.S. under two principal brands, “Speedy Cash” and “Rapid Cash,” as well as under the “Avio Credit” brand, which is currently available in 11 states. We operate in Canada under two principal brands, “Cash Money” and “LendDirect,” which offers Installment loans online and at certain stores.
In 2013, we acquired Wage Day Advance Limited, a U.K. entity and later changed the name to CURO Transatlantic Limited, although we continued to operate online in the U.K. as Wage Day Advance. On February 25, 2019, in accordance with the provisions of the U.K. Insolvency Act 1986 and as approved by the boards of directors of the Company’s U.K. subsidiaries, Curo Transatlantic Limited ("CTL") and SRC Transatlantic Limited (collectively with CTL, “the U.K. Subsidiaries”), insolvency practitioners from KPMG were appointed as administrators (“Administrators”) in respect of both of the U.K. Subsidiaries. The effect of the U.K. Subsidiaries’ entry into administration was to place the management, affairs, business and property of the U.K. Subsidiaries under the direct control of the Administrators. Accordingly, we will deconsolidate the U.K. Subsidiaries as of February 25, 2019 and will present the U.K. Subsidiaries as Discontinued Operations beginning with our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2019.
As of December 31, 2018, our store network consisted of
413
locations across
14
U.S. states and
seven
Canadian provinces and we offered our online services in
27
U.S. states,
five
Canadian provinces and the U.K.
We offer a broad range of consumer finance products, including Unsecured Installment loans, Secured Installment loans, Open-End loans and Single-Pay loans. We have tailored our products to fit our customers’ particular needs as they access and build credit. We believe that our product suite allows us to serve a broader group of potential borrowers than most of our competitors. The flexibility of our products, particularly our Installment and Open-End products, allow us to continue serving customers as their credit needs evolve and mature. Our broad product suite creates a diversified revenue stream and our omni-channel platform seamlessly delivers our products across all contact points–we refer to it as “Call, Click or Come In.” We believe these complementary channels drive brand awareness, increase approval rates, lower customer acquisition costs and improve customer satisfaction levels and customer retention.
We serve the large and growing market of individuals who have limited access to traditional sources of consumer credit and financial services. We define our addressable market as underbanked consumers in the U.S., Canada and, through February 25, 2019, the U.K. According to a study by the Center for Financial Services Innovation ("CFSI") conducted in 2017, there are as many as 121 million Americans who are underserved by financial services companies. According to studies by ACORN Canada and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an estimated 15% of Canadian residents (approximately five million individuals) classified as underbanked. With an adressable market of 126 million individuals, we believe that our scalable omni-channel platform and diverse product offerings are better positioned than our competitors to gain market share.
In April 2018, we announced that we expect to begin offering U.S. consumers a new line of credit product through a relationship with MetaBank® ("Meta"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Meta Financial Group, Inc. CURO and Meta are currently developing the pilot launch. We do not expect the Meta relationship to contribute to financial results until 2020.
Initial Public Offering
On December 7, 2017, our common stock began trading on the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE") under the symbol "CURO." We completed our initial public offering ("IPO") of
6,666,667
shares of common stock on December 11, 2017, at a price of
$14.00
per share, which provided net proceeds to us of
$81.1 million
. On January 5, 2018, the underwriters exercised their option to purchase additional shares at the IPO price, less the underwriting discount, which provided additional proceeds to us of
$13.1 million
.
On December 6, 2017 we effected a
36
-for-1 split of our common stock and on December 11, 2017 we increased the authorized number of shares of our common stock to
250,000,000
, consisting of
225,000,000
shares of common stock, with a par value of
$0.001
per share and
25,000,000
shares of preferred stock, with a par value of
$0.001
per share. All share and per share data in this Annual Report on Form 10-K ("Annual Report") have been retroactively adjusted for all periods presented to reflect the stock split as if the stock split had occurred at the beginning of the earliest period presented.
On March 7, 2018, we used a portion of the IPO net proceeds to redeem $77.5 million of the
12.00%
Senior Secured Notes due 2022 and to pay related fees, expenses, premiums and accrued interest.
Transition From Emerging Growth Company Status
At the time of our IPO, we qualified as an “emerging growth company”("EGC") under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 ("JOBS Act"). This permitted us to take advantage of reduced disclosure requirements and other benefits not available to other non-EGC companies. On August 27, 2018, we completed the issuance of our 8.25% Senior Secured Notes due 2025. This issuance, along with prior issuances of Senior Secured Notes during 2017, caused us to exceed $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt securities issued in the previous three‑year period. As a result, we no longer qualified for EGC status and thus were no longer entitled to the reporting and other advantages offered under that status.
As a result of transitioning out of EGC status, we could no longer take advantage of reduced reporting and disclosure obligations and we were required to engage an independent registered public accounting audit firm to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes Oxley Act for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018. In addition, we adopted certain recently-issued accounting pronouncements as of their effective date, for which we were previously allowed to delay adoption. The impacts on our accounting policy adoption practices are further described in
Note 1, "Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Nature of Operations"
of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report (the "Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements").
Industry Overview
We operate in a segment of the financial services industry that provides lending products to underbanked consumers in need of convenient and flexible access to credit and other financial products. In the U.S. alone, according to a study by the CFSI, these underserved consumers in our target market spent an estimated $173.2 billion on fees and interest in 2016 related to credit products similar to those we offer.
We believe our target consumers have a need for tailored financing products to cover essential expenses. According to a study in 2017 by the U.S. Federal Reserve, 44% of American adults could not cover an emergency expense costing $400 or would cover it by selling an asset or borrowing money. Additionally, a study published in 2015 by JP Morgan Chase & Co., which analyzed the transaction information of 2.5 million of its account holders in the U.S., found that 41% of those sampled experienced month-to-month income fluctuations of more than 30%.
We compete against a wide variety of consumer finance providers including online and branch-based consumer lenders, credit card companies, pawn shops, rent-to-own and other financial institutions that offer similar financial services. A study by CFSI published in November 2016 estimated that spending on credit products offered by our industry in the U.S. exhibited a compound annual growth rate of 10% from 2010 to 2015. This growth has been accompanied by shrinking access to credit for our customer base as evidenced by an estimated $142 billion reduction in the availability of non-prime consumer credit in the U.S. between the 2008/2009 credit crisis to 2015 (based on analysis of master pool trust data of securitizations for major credit card issuers).
In addition to the broad trends impacting the consumer finance landscape, we believe we are well positioned to grow our market share as a result of several changes we have observed related to consumer preferences within alternative financial services. As described below, we believe that a combination of evolving consumer preferences, increasing use of mobile devices and overall adoption rates for technology are driving significant change in our industry.
|
|
|
|
•
|
Shifting preference towards installment loans
—Given our experience in offering Installment and Open-End loan products since 2008, we believe that Single-Pay loans are becoming less popular or less suitable for a growing portion of our customers. Our customers generally have shown a preference for Installment and Open-End loan products, which typically have longer terms, lower periodic payments and a lower relative cost than Single-Pay products. Offering more flexible terms and lower payments also significantly expands our addressable market by broadening our products’ appeal to a larger proportion of consumers in the market. For example, in the U.S. our Installment and Open-End loans increased from 58.8% of total Company-Owned loans at the beginning of 2015 to 86.2% at December 31, 2018. Additionally, in Canada our aggregate Installment and Open-End loan products grew from $50.0 million in the third quarter of 2017 to $173.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2018.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Increasing adoption of online channels
—Our experience is that customers prefer service across multiple channels or touch points. Approximately 63% of respondents in a study by CFI Group published in 2016 said they conducted more than half of their banking activities electronically and they reported an overall level of satisfaction that met or exceeded the average. For the year ended December 31, 2018 our consolidated total revenue generated through our online channels totaled
$493.1 million
and represented
45%
of our total revenues for the year, compared to $367.2 million and 38%, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2017.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Increasing adoption of mobile apps and devices
—With the proliferation of pay-as-you-go and other smartphone plans, many of our underbanked customers have moved directly to mobile devices for loan origination and servicing. According to a 2016 study by the Pew Research Center covering the U.S. and Canada, smartphone penetration was 72% and 67%, respectively. Additionally, 43% of respondents in a study by CFI Group said they conduct financial transactions using a mobile banking app. In 2012, less than 44% of our U.S. customers reached us via a mobile device, whereas in the fourth quarter of 2018, that percentage had grown to over 80%.
|
Our Strengths
We believe the following competitive strengths differentiate us and serve as barriers to others seeking to enter our market.
|
|
|
|
•
|
Unique omni-channel platform / site-to-store capability
—
We believe we have the only fully-integrated store, online, mobile and contact center platform to support omni-channel customer engagement. We offer a seamless “Call, Click or Come In” capability for customers to apply for loans, receive loan proceeds, make loan payments and otherwise manage their accounts, whether in store, online or over the phone. Customers can utilize any of our three channels at any time and in any combination to obtain a loan, make a loan payment or manage their account. In addition, we have our “Site-to-Store” capability, for which customers that do not qualify for a loan online are directed to a store to complete a loan transaction with one of our associates. Our "Site-to-Store" program resulted in approximately 241,000 loans in the year ended December 31, 2018. These aspects of our platform enable us to source a larger number of customers, serve a broader range of customers and continue serving these customers for longer periods of time.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Industry leading product and geographic diversification
—In addition to channel diversification, we have increased our diversification by product and geography allowing us to serve a broader range of customers with a flexible product offering. As part of this effort, we have also developed and launched new brands and will continue to develop new brands with differentiated marketing messages. These initiatives have helped diversify our revenue streams by enabling us to appeal to a wider array of borrowers.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Leading analytics and information technology drives strong credit risk management
—We have developed a bespoke, proprietary IT platform (the "Curo Platform"), which is a unified, centralized platform that seamlessly integrates activities related to customer acquisition, underwriting, scoring, servicing, collections, compliance and reporting. Our IT platform is underpinned by over 15 years of continually updated customer data comprising over 83 million loan records (as of December 31, 2018) used to formulate our robust, proprietary underwriting algorithms. This platform then automatically applies multi-algorithmic analysis to a customer’s loan application to produce a “Curo Score” which drives our underwriting decision. Globally, as of December 31, 2018, we had approximately
190
employees who write code and manage our networks and infrastructure for our IT platform. This fully-integrated IT platform enables us to make real-time, data-driven changes to our customer acquisition and risk models, which yield significant benefits in terms of customer acquisition costs and credit performance.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Multi-faceted marketing strategy drives low customer acquisition costs
—Our marketing strategy includes a combination of strategic direct mail, television advertisements and online and mobile-based digital campaigns, as well as strategic partnerships and other commonly used modes of marketing. Our global Marketing, Risk and Credit Analytics team, consisting of approximately
82
professionals as of December 31, 2018, uses our integrated CURO Platform to cross reference marketing spend, new customer account data and granular credit metrics to optimize our marketing
|
budget across these channels in real time and to produce higher quality new loans. In addition to these diversified marketing programs, our stores play a critical role in creating brand awareness and driving new customer acquisition. From January 2015 through December 2018, we acquired nearly
2.7 million
new customers in North America.
|
|
|
|
•
|
Focus on customer experience
—We focus on customer service and experience and have designed our stores, website and mobile application interfaces to appeal to our customers’ needs. We continue to augment our web and mobile app interfaces to enhance our “Call, Click or Come In” strategy, with a focus on adding functionality across all our channels. Our stores are branded with distinct and recognizable signage, are conveniently located and typically are open seven days a week. Furthermore, we employ highly experienced store managers, which we believe is a critical component to driving customer retention, lowering acquisition costs and maximizing store-level margins. For example as of December 31, 2018 in the U.S. the average tenure for our store managers was over
eight
years, for district managers it was approximately
12
years, and for regional directors it was approximately
14
years.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Strong compliance culture with centralized collections operations
—We seek to consistently engage in proactive and constructive dialogue with regulators in each of our jurisdictions and have made significant investments in best-practice automated tools for monitoring, training and compliance management. As of December 31, 2018, our compliance group consisted of
28
individuals based in all of the countries in which we operate, and our compliance management systems are integrated into our proprietary IT platform. In addition to conducting semi-annual compliance audits, our in-house centralized collections strategy, supported by our proprietary back-end customer database and analytics team, drives an effective, compliant and highly-scalable model.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Demonstrated access to capital markets and diversified funding sources
—We have raised nearly $2.1 billion of debt financing across eight separate offerings and various credit facilities since 2008, with our most recent offering completed in August 2018. This aggregate amount includes $690.0 million of 8.25% Senior Secured Notes due 2025 and a C$175.0 million nonrecourse revolving facility due 2022 to support growth of multi‑pay products in Canada, both of which we closed in August 2018. We also have U.S. and Canadian bank revolving credit facilities to supplement intra‑period liquidity. Additionally, we raised over $90.0 million in our IPO. We believe this is an important significant differentiator if competitors have trouble accessing capital to fund their business models if credit markets tighten. For more information, see Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Experienced and innovative management team
—Our management team is among the most experienced in the industry with over a century of collective experience and an average tenure of nearly eight years. We also have deep bench strength across key functional areas including accounting, compliance, IT and legal.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
History of growth and profitability
—Throughout our operating history we have maintained strong profitability and growth. Between 2010 and 2018 we grew revenue, Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted Net Income at a compound annual growth rate of
23.4%
,
20.6%
and
18.9%
, respectively. For more information on non-GAAP measures, see “Supplemental Non-GAAP Financial Information” within “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources” below. At the same time, we have significantly expanded our product offerings to better serve our growing and expanding customer base.
|
Growth Strategy
Leverage our capabilities to continue growing Installment and Open-End products
—Installment and Open-End products accounted for
74%
of our consolidated revenue for the year ended December 31, 2018, up from 19% in 2010. We believe that the revenue growth for these products reflects our customers' preferences for these products. We anticipate that these products will continue to account for a greater share of our revenue and provide us a competitive advantage versus other consumer lenders with narrower product focus. We believe that our ability to continue to be successful in developing and managing new products is based upon our capabilities in three key areas:
|
|
|
|
•
|
Underwriting:
Installment and Open-End products generally have lower yields than Single-Pay products, which necessitates stringent credit criteria supported by sophisticated credit analytics. Our industry leading analytics platform combines data from over 83 million records worldwide (as of December 31, 2018) associated with loan information from third-party reporting agencies.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
Collections and Customer Service:
Installment and Open-End products have longer terms than Single-Pay loans, in some cases up to a total of 60 months. These longer terms drive the need for a more comprehensive collection and a credit-default servicing strategy that emphasizes curing a default and putting the customer back on a track to repaying the loan. We utilize a centralized collection model that eliminates the need for our
|
store management personnel from ever having to contact customers to resolve a delinquency. We have also invested in building new contact centers in the countries in which we operate, each of which utilizes sophisticated dialer technologies to help us contact our customers in a scalable, efficient manner.
|
|
|
|
•
|
Funding:
The shift to larger balance Installment loans with extended terms and Open-End loans with revolving terms requires more substantial and more diversified funding sources. Given our deep and successful track record in accessing diverse sources of capital, we believe that we are well-positioned to support future new product transitions.
|
Serve additional types of borrowers
—In addition to growing our existing suite of Installment and Open-End lending products, we are focused on expanding the total number of customers that we are able to serve through product, geographic and channel expansion. These efforts include expansion of our online channel, as well as continued targeted additions to our store footprint. We continue to introduce additional products to address our customers’ preference for longer term products that allow for greater flexibility in managing their monthly payments.
In the second quarter of 2017, we launched Avio Credit, a U.S. online product targeting individuals in the 600-675 FICO band. This product is structured as an Unsecured Installment loan with varying principal amounts and loan terms up to 48 months. As of April 2017, 10% of U.S. consumers had FICO scores between 600 and 649. A further 13.2% of U.S. consumers had FICO scores between 650 and 699, a portion of whom would fall into the credit profile targeted by our Avio Credit product.
We are expanding Installment and Open-End loan products under our LendDirect brand in Canada to include additional provinces and increase customer acquisition efforts in existing markets. To supplement the online channel, we opened three LendDirect stores in Canada during the fourth quarter of 2017 and seven during the year ended December 31, 2018. We have also accelerated our offering of Open-End products under our Canadian CashMoney brand. Seven million Canadians have a FICO score below 700 according to FactorTrust. We estimate that the consumer credit opportunity for this customer segment exceeds C$165 billion. We also believe these customers represent a highly-fragmented market with low penetration by our industry which represents a growth opportunity for us.
In April 2018, we announced a relationship with Meta to offer consumers in the U.S. a flexible and innovative line of credit product. CURO and Meta are currently developing the pilot launch. We do not expect the Meta relationship to contribute to our financial results until 2020.
Continue to bolster our core business through enhancement of our proprietary risk scoring models
— We continuously refine and update our credit models to drive additional improvements in our performance metrics. By regularly updating our credit underwriting algorithms we can continue to enhance the value of each of our customer relationships through improved credit performance. By combining these underwriting improvements with data-driven marketing spend, we believe our optimization efforts will produce margin expansion and earnings growth.
Expand credit for our borrowers
—Through extensive testing and our proprietary underwriting, we have successfully increased credit limits for customers, enabling us to offer “the right loan to the right customer.” The favorable take rates and credit performance have improved overall loan-vintage and portfolio performance. For the year ended December 31, 2018, our average loan amount for Unsecured and Secured Installment loans grew to $633 and $1,405, respectively, from $628 and $1,303, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2017.
Continue to improve the customer journey and experience
—We have projects in our development pipeline to enhance our “Call, Click or Come In” customer experience and execution, ranging from the redesign of our web and app interfaces to enhanced service features to payments optimization.
Enhance our network of strategic partnerships
—Our strategic partnership network generates customer applicants that we can close using our diverse array of marketing channels. By further leveraging these existing networks and expanding the reach of our partnership platform to include new relationships, we can increase the number of overall leads we receive.
Customers
Our customers require essential financial services and place a value on timely, transparent, affordable and convenient alternatives to banks, credit card companies and other traditional financial services companies. According to a May 2017 study by FactorTrust, underbanked customers in the U.S. have the following characteristics:
|
|
|
|
•
|
average age of 39 for applicants and 41 for borrowers;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
applicants are 47% male and 53% female;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
45% have a bachelor’s degree or higher; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the top five employment segments are Retail, Food Service, Government, Banking/Finance and Business Services.
|
In the U.S., our customers generally earn between $25,000 and $75,000 annually. In Canada, our customers generally earn between C$25,000 and C$60,000 annually. Our customers utilize the services provided by our industry for a variety of reasons, including that they often:
|
|
|
|
•
|
have immediate need for cash between paychecks;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
have been rejected for traditional banking services;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
maintain sufficient account balances to make a bank account economically efficient;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
prefer and trust the simplicity, transparency and convenience of our products;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
need access to financial services outside of normal banking hours; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
reject complicated fee structures in bank products (e.g., credit cards and overdrafts).
|
Products and Services
We provide Unsecured Installment loans, Secured Installment loans, Open-End loans, Single-Pay loans and a number of ancillary financial products, including check cashing, proprietary reloadable prepaid debit cards (Opt+), credit protection insurance in the Canadian market, gold buying, retail installment sales and money transfer services. We have designed our products and customer experience to be consumer-friendly, accessible and easy to understand. Our platform and product suite enable us to provide a number of key benefits that appeal to our customers:
|
|
|
|
•
|
transparent approval process;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
flexible loan structure, providing greater ability to manage monthly payments;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
simple, clearly communicated pricing structure; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
full customer account management online and via mobile devices.
|
Our centralized underwriting platform and its proprietary algorithms are used for every aspect of underwriting and scoring of our loan products. The customer application, approval, origination and funding processes differ by state, country and by channel. Our customers typically have an active phone number, open checking account, recurring income and a valid government-issued form of identification. For in-store loans, the customer presents required documentation, including a recent pay stub or support for underlying bank account activity for in-person verification. For online loans, application data is verified with third-party data vendors, our proprietary algorithms and/or tech-enabled account verification. Our proprietary, highly scalable, scoring system employs a champion/challenger process whereby models compete to produce the most successful customer outcomes and profitable cohorts. Our algorithms use data relevancy and machine learning techniques to identify approximately 60 variables from a universe of approximately 11,600 that are the most predictive in terms of credit outcomes. The algorithms are continuously reviewed and refreshed and are focused on a number of factors related to disposable income, expense trends and cash flows, among other factors, for a given loan applicant. The predictability of our scoring models is driven by the combination of application data, purchased third-party data and our robust internal database of over 83 million records (as of
December 31, 2018
) associated with loan information. These variables are then analyzed using a series of algorithms to create a score that allows us to optimize lending decisions in a scalable manner.
Geography and Channel Mix
For the
years
ended
December 31, 2018
,
2017
and
2016
, approximately
78.0%
,
76.6%
and
73.2%
, respectively, of our consolidated revenues were generated from services provided within the U.S. and approximately
17.5%
,
19.3%
and
22.7%
, respectively, of our consolidated revenues were generated from services provided within Canada. For each of the
years
ended
December 31, 2018
and
2017
, approximately
62.4%
and
60.4%
, respectively, of our long-lived assets were located within the U.S., and approximately
37.6%
and
37.8%
, respectively, of our long-lived assets were located within Canada. Additionally, for the
years
ended
December 31, 2018
,
2017
and
2016
, approximately
4.5%
,
4.1%
and
4.1%
of our consolidated revenues were generated from services provided within the U.K., which was placed into administration effective February 25, 2019. As a result of the U.K. administration, the U.K.-domiciled long-lived assets as of
December 31, 2018
were fully impaired. For the year ended December 31,
2017
, approximately
1.8%
of our long-lived assets were located within the U.K. See Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in this Annual Report for additional information on our geographic segments.
Stores:
As of
December 31, 2018
, we had
413
stores across
14
U.S. states and
seven
provinces in Canada, which included the following:
|
|
|
|
•
|
213
U.S. locations: Texas (
90
stores), California (
36
), Nevada (
18
), Arizona (
13
), Tennessee (
11
), Kansas (
10
), Illinois (
8
), Alabama (
7
), Missouri (
5
), Louisiana (
5
), Colorado (
3
), Oregon (
3
), Washington (
2
) and Mississippi (
2
);
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
200
Canadian locations: Ontario (
131
), Alberta (
27
), British Columbia (
26
), Saskatchewan (
6
), Nova Scotia (
5
), Manitoba (
4
) and New Brunswick (
1
).
|
Online
: We lend online in
27
states in the U.S.,
five
provinces in Canada and, through February 25, 2019, in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland in the U.K.
Overview of Loan Products
The following charts depict the revenue contribution, including credit services organization ("CSO") fees, of the products and services that we currently offer:
For the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, revenue generated through our online channel represented
45%
, 38% and 33%, respectively, of consolidated revenue.
Below is an outline of the primary products we offered as of
December 31, 2018
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured Installment
|
Secured Installment
|
Open-End
|
Single-Pay
|
|
Channel
|
Online and in-store: 15 U.S. states, Canada and the U.K.
(1)
|
Online and in-store: 7 U.S. states
|
Online: KS, TN, ID, UT, RI, VA, DE and Canada. In-Store: KS, TN and Canada.
|
Online and in-store: 12 U.S. states, Canada and the U.K.
(1)
|
|
Approximate Average Loan Size
(2)
|
$633
|
$1,405
|
$814
|
$316
|
|
Duration
|
Up to 60 months
|
Up to 42 months
|
Revolving/Open-Ended
|
Up to 62 days
|
|
Pricing
|
15.7% average monthly interest rate
(3)
|
11.6% average monthly interest rate
(3)
|
Daily interest rates ranging from 0.13% to 0.99%
|
Fees ranging from $13 to $25 per $100 borrowed
|
|
(1) Online only in the U.K. through February 25, 2019
|
|
(2) Includes CSO loans
|
|
(3) Weighted average of the contractual interest rates for the portfolio as of December 31, 2018. Excludes CSO fees
|
Unsecured Installment Loans
Unsecured Installment loans are fixed-term, fully amortizing loans with a fixed payment amount due each period during the term of the loan. Loans are originated and owned by us or third-party lenders pursuant to CSO and credit access business statutes, which we collectively refer to as our CSO programs. For CSO programs, we arrange and guarantee the loans. Payments are due bi-weekly or monthly to best match the customer's pay cycle. Customers may prepay without penalty or fees. Unsecured Installment loan terms are governed by enabling state legislation in the U.S., federal regulations in Canada and national regulation in the U.K. Unsecured Installment loans comprised
51.3%
,
49.8%
and
39.9%
of our consolidated revenue during the
years
ended
December 31,
2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively. We believe that the flexible terms and lower payments associated with Installment loans significantly expand our addressable market by allowing us to serve a broader range of customers with a variety of credit needs.
Secured Installment Loans
Secured Installment loans are similar to Unsecured Installment loans except that they are secured by a vehicle title. These loans are originated and owned by us or by third-party lenders through our CSO programs. For these loans the customer provides a clear title or security interest in his or her vehicle as collateral. The customer receives the benefit of immediate cash and retains possession of the vehicle while the loan is outstanding. The loan requires periodic payments of principal and interest with a fixed payment amount due each period during the term of the loan. Payments are due bi-weekly or monthly to match the customer's pay cycle. Customers may prepay without penalty or fees. Secured Installment loan terms are governed by enabling state legislation in the U.S. Secured Installment loans comprised
10.1%
,
10.5%
, and
9.8%
of our consolidated revenue during the
years
ended
December 31,
2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively.
Open-End Loans
Open-End loans are a line of credit without a specified maturity date. Customers may draw against their line of credit, repay with minimum, partial or full payment and redraw as needed. We report and earn interest on the outstanding loan balances drawn by the customer against their approved credit limit. Customers may prepay without penalty or fees. Typically, customers do not initially draw the full amount of their credit limit. Loan terms are governed by enabling state legislation in the U.S. and federal regulations in Canada. Open-End loans comprised
13.0%
,
7.6%
and
8.1%
of our consolidated revenue during the
years
ended
December 31,
2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively.
Single-Pay Loans
Single-Pay loans are generally unsecured short-term, small-denomination loans whereby a customer receives cash in exchange for a post-dated personal check or a pre-authorized debit from the customer’s bank account. We agree to defer deposit of the check or debiting of the customer’s bank account until the loan's due date, which typically falls on the customer’s next pay date
.
Single-Pay loans are governed by enabling state legislation in the U.S., provincial legislation in Canada and national regulation in the U.K. Single-Pay loans comprised
21.0%
,
27.9%
and
37.8%
of our consolidated revenue during the
years
ended
December 31,
2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively. Single-Pay loans originated in the U.S. comprised
9.8%
,
11.2%
and
14.2%
of our consolidated revenue during the
years
ended
December 31,
2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively.
Ancillary Products
We also provide a number of ancillary financial products including check cashing, proprietary reloadable prepaid debit cards (Opt+), credit protection insurance in the Canadian market, gold buying, retail installment sales and money transfer services. We had over 76,000 active Opt+ cards as of
December 31, 2018
, which includes any card with a positive balance or transaction in the past 90 days. Opt+ customers have loaded over $2.0 billion to their cards since we started offering this product in 2011. Ancillary products comprised
4.6%
,
4.2%
and
4.4%
of our consolidated revenue during the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively.
CSO Programs
Through our CSO programs, we act as a credit services organization/credit access business on behalf of customers in accordance with applicable state laws. We currently offer loans through CSO programs in stores and online in the state of Texas and online in the state of Ohio. As a CSO we earn revenue by charging the customer a fee (the "CSO fee") for arranging an unrelated third-party to make a loan to that customer. In Texas, we offer Unsecured Installment loans and Secured Installment loans with a maximum term of 180 days.
In Ohio, we currently operate as a registered CSO and provide CSO services to borrowers who apply for and obtain Unsecured Installment loans from a third-party lender. However, Ohio House Bill 123 was introduced in March 2017 to effectively eliminate the viability of the CSO model. In late July 2018, the Ohio legislature passed House Bill 123 and the Governor signed the bill into law. The principal sections of the new law are scheduled to become effective on or about April 27, 2019. As a result, we will no longer operate as a registered CSO in Ohio after April 27, 2019. Our revenue attributable to Ohio was $19.3 million in 2018, or 1.8% of our consolidated revenue, on an Unsecured Installment loan receivable balance of $5.2 million as of December 31, 2018 (average Unsecured Installment loan receivable balance of $6.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2018). After loss provisions and direct costs, our EBITDA contribution from Ohio was immaterial. The Ohio Department of Commerce granted us a short-term lender's license on February 15, 2019. Under this license, we will offer an Installment loan product for a term of 120 days. Ohio customers may originate and manage their loans online via the internet or mobile application.
We currently have relationships with four unaffiliated third-party lenders for our CSO programs. We periodically evaluate the competitive terms of our unaffiliated third-party lender contracts and such evaluation may result in the transfer of volume and loan balances between lenders. The process does not require significant effort or resources outside the normal course of business and we believe the incremental cost of changing or acquiring new unaffiliated third-party lender relationships to be immaterial.
Under our CSO programs, we agree to provide certain services to a customer in exchange for a CSO fee payable to us by the customer. One of the services is to guarantee the customer’s obligation to repay the loan the customer receives from the third-party lender. CSO fees are calculated based on the amount of the customer’s outstanding loan. For CSO loans, each lender is responsible for providing the criteria by which the customer’s application is underwritten and, if approved, determining the amount of the customer loan. We in turn are responsible for assessing whether or not we will guarantee the loan. This guarantee represents an obligation to purchase specific loans if they go in to default.
The maximum amount payable under all such CSO guarantees provided by us was
$66.9 million
at
December 31,
2018
, compared to
$65.2 million
at
December 31, 2017
. This liability is not included in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Should we be required to pay any portion of the total amount of the loans we have guaranteed, we will attempt to recover some or all of the entire amount from the applicable customer(s). We hold no collateral in respect of the guarantees.
We estimate a liability for losses associated with the guaranty provided to the CSO lenders using assumptions and methodologies similar to the allowance for loan losses, which we recognize for our consumer loans.
Our liability for incurred losses on CSO loans guaranteed by the Company was
$12.0 million
and
$17.8 million
at
December 31,
2018
and
2017
, respectively.
CSO fees are calculated based on the amount of the customer’s outstanding loan in compliance with each state's applicable statute. These laws generally define the services that we can provide to consumers and require us to provide a contract to the customer outlining our services and the costs of those services to the customer. For services we provide under our CSO programs, we receive payments from customers on their scheduled loan repayment due dates. The CSO fee is earned ratably over the term of the loan as the customers make payments. If a loan is paid off early, no additional CSO fees are due or collected. The maximum CSO loan term is 180 days and 18 months in Texas and Ohio, respectively. During the
years
ended
December 31,
2018
and
2017
,
57.3%
and
53.6%
, respectively, of Unsecured Installment loans, and
54.5%
and
53.6%
, respectively, of Secured Installment loans originated under CSO programs were paid off prior to the original maturity date.
Since CSO loans are made by a third-party lender, we do not include them in our Consolidated Balance Sheets as loans receivable. CSO fees receivable are included in “Prepaid expense and other” in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. We receive payments from customers for these fees on their scheduled loan repayment due dates.
The majority of revenue generated through our CSO programs was for Unsecured Installment loans, which comprised
97.6%
,
96.4%
and
91.6%
of our total CSO revenue for the
years
ended
December 31, 2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively.
Total revenue generated through our CSO programs comprised
25.9%
,
26.6%
, and
26.1%
of our consolidated revenue during the
years
ended
December 31, 2018
,
2017
and
2016
, respectively.
Sales and Marketing
We are focused in part on attracting new customers as demonstrated by the
2.2 million
new customers we acquired between January 2015 and December 2018 in the U.S. For the years ended
December 31,
2018
,
2017
and
2016
, U.S. advertising as a percentage of U.S. revenue was 5.7%, 4.9% and 5.0%, respectively.
United States
In the U.S., our marketing efforts focus on a variety of targeted, direct response strategies. We use various forms of media to build brand awareness and drive customer traffic in stores, online and to our contact centers. These strategies include direct response spot television in each operating market, radio campaigns, point-of-purchase materials, a multi-listing and directory program for print and online yellow pages, local store marketing activities, prescreen direct mail campaigns, robust online marketing strategies and “send a friend” and word-of-mouth referrals from satisfied customers. We also utilize our unique capability to drive customers originated online to our store locations–a program we call “Site-to-Store.”
Canada
We believe Cash Money has built strong brand awareness as a leading provider of alternative financial solutions in Canada. Cash Money’s marketing efforts have historically included high frequency television buys, print media and targeted publications, as well as local advertising in the communities we serve.
United Kingdom
Wage Day has historically built a strong brand name as a leading online provider of short-term consumer loans to individuals in the U.K. Through February 25, 2019, Wage Day’s marketing efforts included direct marketing to its existing customer base through a variety of channels, including email and text messaging, and new customer acquisition through leads purchased through its affiliates. Over the past several years we had redesigned and reformulated our U.K. loan products, including the introduction of new Installment products in 2016 and 2017, and enhanced our customer acquisition, underwriting and collection capabilities.
Information Systems
The Curo Platform is our proprietary IT platform, which is a unified, centralized platform that seamlessly integrates activities related to customer acquisition, underwriting, scoring, servicing, collections, compliance and reporting. The Curo Platform is scalable and has been successfully implemented in the U.S., Canada and the U.K. The Curo Platform is designed to enable us to support and monitor compliance with regulatory and other legal requirements applicable to the financial products we offer. Our platform captures transactional history by store and by customer, which allows us to track loan originations, payments, defaults and payoffs, as well as historical collection activities on past-due accounts. In addition, our stores perform automated daily cash reconciliation at each store and every bank account in the system. This fully-integrated IT platform enables us to make real-time, data-driven changes to our acquisition and risk models, which yield significant benefits in terms of customer acquisition costs and credit performance. Each of our stores has secure, real-time access to corporate servers and the most up-to-date information to maintain consistent underwriting standards. All loan applications are scanned and electronic copies are centrally stored for convenient access and retrieval. Our IT platform contains over 15 years of continually updated customer data comprising over 83 million loan records (as of December 31, 2018) to formulate our robust, proprietary underwriting algorithms. This platform then automatically applies multi-algorithmic analysis to a customer’s loan application to produce a “Curo Score,” which drives our underwriting decision. Globally, as of December 31, 2018, we have over
190
employees who write code and manage our networks and infrastructure for our IT platform.
Collections
To enable store-level employees to focus on customer service and to improve effectiveness and compliance management, we operate centralized collection facilities in the U.S., Canada and, through February 25, 2019, the U.K. Our collections personnel are trained to optimize regulatory-compliant loan repayment while treating our customers fairly. Our collections personnel contact customers after a missed payment, primarily via phone calls, letters and emails, and attempt to help the customer understand available payment arrangements or alternatives to satisfy the deficiency. We use a variety of collection strategies, including payment plans, settlements and adjustments to due dates. Collections teams are trained to apply different strategies and tools for the various stages of delinquency and also vary methodologies by product type.
Our collections centers in Wichita, Kansas and Toronto, Ontario employed a total of
181
collection professionals as of December 31, 2018. Our collection centers in Nottingham, U.K. employed a total of
60
collection professionals as of December 31, 2018.
We assign all our delinquent loan accounts in the U.S. to an affiliated third-party collection agency typically after 91 days without a scheduled payment. Under our policy, the precise number of days past-due to trigger a collection-agency referral varies by state and product and requires, among other things, that proper notice be delivered to the customer. Once a loan meets the criteria set forth in the policy, it is automatically referred for collection. We make changes to our policy periodically in response to various factors, including regulatory developments and market conditions. Our policy is overseen and directed by our Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President in charge of collections and our Chief Executive Officer. As delinquent accounts are paid, the Curo Platform updates these accounts in real time. This ensures that collection activity will cease the moment a customer’s account is brought current or paid in full and considered in “good standing.” See
Note 19, “Related Party Transactions"
of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a description of our relationship with our third-party collection agency.
Competition
We believe that the primary factors upon which we compete are:
|
|
|
|
•
|
flexibility of product offering;
|
Our underbanked customers tend to value service that is quick and convenient, lenders that can provide the most appropriate structure, and loan terms and payments that are affordable. We face competition in all of our markets from other alternative financial services providers, banks, savings and loan institutions, short-term consumer lenders and other financial services entities. Generally, the landscape is characterized by a small number of large, national participants with a significant presence in markets across the country and a significant number of smaller localized operators. Our competitors in the alternative financial services industry include monoline operators (both public and private) specializing in short-term cash advances, multiline providers offering cash advance services in addition to check cashing and other services and subprime specialty finance and consumer finance companies, as well as businesses conducting operations online and by phone.
Employees
As of December 31, 2018, we had approximately
4,300
employees worldwide, approximately
3,000
of whom work in our stores. We have a state-of-the-art financial technology office in Chicago which allows us to attract and retain talented IT development and data science professionals. None of our employees are unionized or covered by a collective bargaining agreement and we consider our employee relations to be good.
We believe that customer service is critical to our continued success and growth. As such, we have staffed each of our stores with a full-time Store Manager, Branch Manager or Manager, who runs the day-to-day operations of the store. The Manager is typically supported by two to three Senior Assistant Managers and/or Assistant Managers and three to eight full-time Customer Advocates. A new store will typically start with a Manager, a Senior Assistant Manager, two Assistant Managers and two Customer Advocates. Customer Advocates conduct the point-of-sale activities and greet and interact with customers from a secured area behind expansive windows. We believe staff continuity is critical to our business. We believe that our pay rates are equal to or better than all of our major competitors and we constantly evaluate our benefit plans to maintain their competitiveness.
Regulatory Environment and Compliance
The alternative financial services industry is regulated at the federal, state and local levels in the U.S.; at the federal and provincial levels in Canada; and at the national government level in the U.K. In general, these regulations are designed to protect consumers and the public, while providing standard guidelines for business operations. Laws and regulations typically impose restrictions and requirements, such as governing interest rates and fees, maximum loan amounts, the number of simultaneous or consecutive loans, required waiting periods between loans, loan extensions and refinancings, payment schedules (including maximum and minimum loan durations), required repayment plans for borrowers claiming inability to repay loans, disclosures, security for loans and payment mechanisms, licensing, and in certain jurisdictions, database reporting and loan utilization information. We are also subject to federal, state, provincial and local laws and regulations relating to our other financial products, including laws and regulations governing recording and reporting certain financial transactions, identifying and reporting suspicious activities and safeguarding the privacy of customers’ non-public personal information. For more information regarding the regulations applicable to our business and the risks to which they subject us, see the section entitled “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report.
The legal environment is constantly changing as new laws and regulations are introduced and adopted, and existing laws and regulations are repealed, amended, modified or reinterpreted. We regularly work with authorities, both directly and through our active memberships in industry trade associations, to support our industry and to promote the development of laws and regulations that are equitable to businesses and consumers alike.
Regulatory authorities at various levels of government and voters have enacted, and are likely to continue to propose, new rules and regulations impacting our industry. Due to the evolving nature of laws and regulations, further rulemaking could result in new or expanded regulations, particularly at the state level, that may adversely impact our current product offerings or alter the economic performance of our existing products and services. For example, laws were recently enacted in Ohio by legislation and in Colorado by voter initiative that impaired our lending businesses in those states
.
Additionally, a rule adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) in 2017 (the “2017 Final CFPB Rule”) will likely increase costs and lessen the effectiveness of our loan servicing and collections. If a recent CFPB proposal to rescind part of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule does not go into effect, the 2017 Final CFPB Rule could have a more significant negative impact on our business. In addition, the CFPB is expected to propose a rule that will impact debt collector communications with consumers and provide additional guidance on how to engage in such communications. Although the rule is not expected to apply directly to our activities, such a rule might impact third-party
debt collection on our behalf through such proposals, and the CFPB might use its supervisory authority to impose similar restrictions on us. We cannot provide any assurances that additional federal, state, provincial or local statutes or regulations will not be enacted in the future in any of the jurisdictions in which we operate. It is possible that future changes to statutes or regulations will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
U.S. Regulations
U.S. Federal Regulations
The U.S. federal government and its agencies possess significant regulatory authority over consumer financial services. The body of laws to which we are subject has a significant impact on our operations.
Dodd-Frank
: In 2010, the U.S. Congress passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ("Dodd-Frank"). Title X of this legislation created the CFPB, which became operational in July 2011. Title X provides the CFPB with broad rule-making, supervisory and enforcement powers with regard to consumer financial services. Title X of Dodd-Frank also contains so-called “UDAAP” provisions declaring unlawful “unfair,” “deceptive” and “abusive” acts and practices in connection with the delivery of consumer financial services and giving the CFPB the power to enforce UDAAP prohibitions and to adopt UDAAP rules defining, within constraints, unlawful acts and practices. Additionally, the Federal Trade Commission Act prohibits “unfair” and “deceptive” acts and practices in connection with a trade or business and gives the Federal Trade Commission enforcement authority to prevent and redress violations of this prohibition.
CFPB Rules
: Pursuant to its authority to adopt UDAAP rules, the CFPB published the 2017 Final CFPB Rule in the Federal Register on November 17, 2017. The provisions of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule directly applicable to us were scheduled to become effective in August 2019. However, the effectiveness of these provisions has been stayed, at least for now, by a federal district court hearing and an industry challenge to the 2017 Final CFPB Rule. While the lawsuit has also been stayed, the plaintiffs challenging the 2017 Final CFPB Rule are seeking a preliminary injunction against the 2017 Final CFPB Rule on the basis that the 2017 Final CFPB Rule is arbitrary and capricious and also on the basis that rulemaking by a single CFPB director who is not subject to discharge without cause is unconstitutional.
In February 2019, the CFPB issued two notices of proposed rulemaking proposing (i) to delay the August 19, 2019 compliance date for the so-called "Mandatory Underwriting Provisions" of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule to November 19, 2020 and (ii) to rescind such Mandatory Underwriting Provisions (the “2019 Proposed Rule”). The Mandatory Underwriting Provisions which the 2019 Proposed Rule would rescind: (i) provide that it is an unfair and abusive practice for a lender to make a covered short-term or longer-term balloon-payment loan, including our payday and vehicle title loans with a term of 45 days or less, without reasonably determining that consumers have the ability to repay those loans according to their terms; (ii) prescribe mandatory underwriting requirements for making this ability-to-repay determination; (iii) exempt certain loans from the mandatory underwriting requirements; and (iv) establish related definitions, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements.
In light of the industry challenge to the 2017 Final CFPB Rule, the CFPB's proposals to delay the effective date of the Mandatory Underwriting Provisions and ultimately rescind them, and the possibility of legal challenges to the 2019 Proposed Rule if it is adopted, we cannot predict whether or when the 2017 Final CFPB Rule will go into effect and, if so, whether and how it might be further modified; nor can we quantify the potential effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
In its issued form, the 2017 Final CFPB Rule sets forth the Mandatory Underwriting Provisions that establish ability-to-repay, ("ATR") requirements for “covered short-term loans” and “covered longer-term balloon-payment loans,” as well as payment limitations on these loans and “covered longer-term loans.” Covered short-term loans are consumer loans with a term of 45 days or less. Covered longer-term balloon payment loans include consumer loans with a term of more than 45 days where (i) the loan is payable in a single payment, (ii) any payment is more than twice any other payment, or (iii) the loan is a multiple advance loan that may not fully amortize by a specified date and the final payment could be more than twice the amount of other minimum payments. Covered longer-term loans are consumer loans with a term of more than 45 days where (i) the total cost of credit exceeds an annual rate of 36%, and (ii) the lender obtains a form of “leveraged payment mechanism” giving the lender a right to initiate transfers from the consumer’s deposit or other asset account. Post-dated checks, authorizations to initiate ACH payments and authorizations to initiate prepaid or debit card payments are all leveraged payment mechanisms under the CFPB Rule.
The 2017 Final CFPB Rule excluded from coverage, among other loans: (i) purchase-money credit secured by the vehicle or other goods financed (but not unsecured purchase-money credit or credit that finances services as opposed to goods); (ii) real property or dwelling-secured credit if the lien is recorded or perfected; (iii) credit cards; (iv) student loans; (v) non-recourse pawn loans; and (vi) overdraft services and overdraft lines of credit. These exclusions would not apply to our current loans.
Under the provisions of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule applicable to covered short-term loans and covered longer-term balloon
payment loans, a lender would need to choose between:
|
|
|
|
•
|
A “full payment test,” under which the lender must make a reasonable determination of the consumer’s ability to repay the loan and cover major financial obligations and living expenses over the term of the loan and the succeeding 30 days. Under this test, the lender must take account of the consumer’s basic living expenses and obtain and generally verify evidence of the consumer’s income and major financial obligations. However, in circumstances where a lender determines that a reliable income record is not reasonably available, such as when a consumer receives and spends income in cash, the lender may reasonably rely on the consumer’s statements alone as evidence of income. Further, unless a housing debt obligation appears on a national consumer report, the lender may reasonably rely on the consumer's written statement. As part of the ATR determination, the 2017 Final CFPB Rule permits lenders and consumers to rely on income from third parties, such as spouses, to which the consumer has a reasonable expectation of access and permits lenders in certain circumstances to consider whether another person is regularly contributing to the payment of major financial obligations or basic living expenses. A 30-day cooling off period applies after a sequence of three covered short-term or longer-term balloon payment loans.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
A “principal-payoff option,” under which the lender may make up to three sequential loans, ("Section 1041.6 Loans") without engaging in an ATR analysis. The first Section 1041.6 Loan in any sequence of Section 1041.6 Loans without a 30-day cooling off period between loans is limited to $500, the second is limited to a principal amount that is at least one-third smaller than the principal amount of the first, and the third is limited to a principal amount that is at least two-thirds smaller than the principal amount of the first. A lender may not use this option if (i) the consumer had in the past 30 days an outstanding covered short-term loan or an outstanding longer-term balloon payment loan that is not a Section 1041.6 Loan, or (ii) the new Section 1041.6 Loan would result in the consumer having more than six covered short-term loans (including Section 1041.6 Loans) during a consecutive 12-month period or being in debt for more than 90 days on such loans during a consecutive 12-month period. For Section 1041.6 Loans, the lender cannot take vehicle security or structure the loan as open-end credit.
|
These provisions from the 2017 Final CFPB Rule are included in the 2019 Proposed Rule's identification of “Mandatory Underwriting Provisions.” In proposing the 2019 Proposed Rule, the CFPB expressed the view that the Mandatory Underwriting Provisions “would have the effect of restricting access to credit and reducing competition for these products” and “would have the effect of reducing credit access and competition in the States which have determined it is in their citizens’ interest to be able to use such products, subject to State-law limitations.” The CFPB therefore reached a preliminarily conclusion that “neither the evidence cited nor legal reasons provided in the 2017 Final CFPB Rule support its determination that the identified practice is unfair and abusive, thereby eliminating the basis for the 2017 Final CFPB Rule’s Mandatory Underwriting Provisions to address that conduct.” In the 2019 Proposed Rule, the CFPB concluded that it is appropriate to propose rescinding the Mandatory Underwriting Provisions of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule.
Covered longer-term loans that are not balloon loans are not subject to the Mandatory Underwriting Provisions of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule. However, such loans are subject to the 2017 Final CFPB Rule's “penalty fee prevention” provisions ("Payment Provisions"), which apply to all covered loans. Under these provisions:
|
|
|
|
•
|
If two consecutive attempts to collect money from a particular account of the borrower, made through any channel (e.g., paper check, ACH, prepaid card) are returned for insufficient funds, the lender cannot make any further attempts to collect from such account unless the borrower has provided a new and specific authorization for additional payment transfers. The 2017 Final CFPB Rule contains specific requirements and conditions for the authorization. While the CFPB has explained that these provisions are designed to limit bank penalty fees to which consumers may be subject, and while banks do not charge penalty fees on card authorization requests, the 2017 Final CFPB Rule nevertheless treats card authorization requests as payment attempts subject to these limitations.
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
A lender generally must give the consumer at least three business days advance notice before attempting to collect payment by accessing a consumer’s checking, savings, or prepaid account. The notice must include information such as the date of the payment request, payment channel and payment amount (broken down by principal, interest, fees, and other charges), as well as additional information for “unusual attempts,” such as when the payment is for a different amount than the regular payment, initiated on a date other than the date of a regularly scheduled payment or initiated in a different channel that the immediately preceding payment attempt. A lender must also provide the borrower with a "consumer rights notice" in a prescribed form after two consecutive failed payment attempts.
|
The Payment Provisions are outside the scope of the 2019 Proposed Rule although the CFPB indicated it has received a formal request to revisit the treatment of debt cards under the Payment Provisions and it intends to examine the Payment Provisions further. If the CFPB determines that further action is warranted, it may commence a separate rulemaking initiative
.
The 2017 Final CFPB Rule also requires the CFPB’s registration of consumer reporting agencies as “registered information systems” to whom lenders must furnish information about covered short-term and longer-term balloon loans and from whom lenders must obtain consumer reports for use in extending such credit. If there is no registered information system or if no registered information system has been registered for at least 180 days, lenders will be unable to make Section 1041.6 Loans. The 2019 Proposed Rule also proposes to rescind the registered information system reporting requirements and related recordkeeping requirements.
For a discussion of the potential impact of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule and 2019 Proposed Rule on us, see “Risk Factors--Risks Relating to the Regulation of Our Industry--The CFPB promulgated new rules applicable to our loans that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations." The CFPB promulgated new rules applicable to our loans that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations” in "Risk Factors" of this Annual Report.
CFPB Enforcement.
In addition to Dodd-Frank's grant of rule-making authority, which resulted in the CFPB Rule, Dodd-Frank gives the CFPB authority to pursue administrative proceedings or litigation for violations of federal consumer financial laws (including Dodd-Frank’s UDAAP provisions and the CFPB’s own rules). In these proceedings, the CFPB can obtain cease and desist orders (which can include orders for restitution or rescission of contracts, as well as other kinds of affirmative relief) and monetary penalties ranging from $5,000 per day for ordinary violations of federal consumer financial laws to $25,000 per day for reckless violations and $1 million per day for knowing violations. Also, where a company has violated Title X of Dodd-Frank or CFPB regulations promulgated thereunder, Dodd-Frank empowers state attorneys general and state regulators to bring civil actions for the kind of cease and desist orders available to the CFPB (but not for civil penalties). Potentially, if the CFPB, the FTC or one or more state officials believe we have violated the foregoing laws, they could exercise their enforcement powers in ways that would have a material adverse effect on us.
CFPB Supervision and Examination.
Additionally, the CFPB has supervisory powers over many providers of consumer financial products and services, including explicit authority to examine (and require registration) of payday lenders. The CFPB released its Supervision and Examination Manual, which includes a section on Short-Term, Small-Dollar Lending Procedures, and began field examinations of industry participants in 2012. The CFPB commenced its first supervisory examination of us in October 2014. The scope of the CFPB’s examination included a review of our Compliance Management System, our Short-Term Small Dollar lending procedures and our compliance with federal consumer financial protection laws. The 2014 examination did not materially affect our financial condition or results of operations, and we received the final CFPB Examination Report in September 2015.
The CFPB commenced its second examination of us in February 2017 and completed the related field work in June 2017. The scope of the 2017 examination included a review of our Compliance Management System, our substantive compliance with applicable federal laws and other matters requiring attention. The 2017 examination did not materially affect our financial condition or results of operations, and we received the final CFPB Examination Report in February 2018.
Reimbursement Offer. Possible Changes in Payment Practices.
During 2017, it was determined that a limited universe of our borrowers may have incurred bank overdraft or non-sufficient funds fees because of possible confusion about certain electronic payments we initiated on their loans. As a result, we decided to reimburse such fees through payments or credits against outstanding loan balances, subject to per-customer dollar limitations, upon receipt of (i) claims from potentially affected borrowers stating that they were in fact confused by our practices and (ii) bank statements from such borrowers showing that fees for which reimbursement was sought were incurred at a time that such borrowers might reasonably have been confused about our practices. As of September 30, 2018, net of payments made, we no longer have a liability for this matter.
Additionally, in June 2018 we discontinued the use of secondary payment cards for affected borrowers referenced above who did not explicitly reauthorize the use of secondary payment cards. For those borrowers, in the event we cannot obtain payment through the bank account or payment card listed on the borrower’s application, we will need to rely exclusively on other collection methods such as delinquency notices and/or collection calls. Our discontinuance of using secondary cards for affected borrowers will increase collections costs and reduce the effectiveness of our collection efforts.
While we do not expect that matters arising from our past CFPB examinations will have a material impact on us, we have made in recent years and are continuing to make, at least in part to meet the CFPB's expectations, certain enhancements to our compliance procedures and consumer disclosures. For example, we are in the process of evaluating our payment practices. Even if the Payment Provisions do not become effective, we may make changes to these practices in a manner that will increase our costs and/or reduce our consolidated revenues.
Anti-Arbitration Rule
. Under its authority to regulate pre-dispute arbitration provisions pursuant to Section 1028 of Dodd-Frank, in July 2017 the CFPB issued a final rule prohibiting the use of mandatory arbitration clauses with class action waivers in agreements for certain consumer financial products and services, including those applicable to us. Subsequently, Congress overturned the
rule and the President signed a joint resolution on November 1, 2017 to repeal the Anti-Arbitration Rule. As a result, the rule will not become effective, and, pursuant to the Congressional Review Act, substantially similar rules may only be reissued with specific legislative authorization.
MLA.
The Military Lending Act (the "MLA"), enacted in 2006 and implemented by the Department of Defense (the "DoD"), imposes a 36% cap on the “all-in” annual percentage rates charged on certain loans to active-duty members of the U.S. military, reserves and National Guard and their dependents. As initially adopted, the MLA and related DoD rules applied to our loans with terms up to 90 days but not our longer-term loans. However, effective in October 2016, the DoD expanded its MLA regulations to encompass some of our longer-term Installment and Open-End Loans that were not previously covered. As a result, we ceased offering short-term consumer loans to these applicants in 2007 and all loans to these applicants in 2016.
Enumerated Consumer Financial Services Laws, TCPA and CAN-SPAM.
Federal law imposes additional requirements on us with respect to our consumer lending. These requirements include disclosure requirements under the Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"), and Regulation Z. TILA and Regulation Z require creditors to deliver disclosures to borrowers prior to consummation of both closed-end and open-end loans and, additionally for open-end credit products, periodic statements and change in terms notices. For closed-end loans, the annual percentage rate, the finance charge, the amount financed, the total of payments, the number and amount of payments and payment due dates, late fees and security interests must all be disclosed. For open end credit, the borrower must be provided with key information that includes annual percentage rates and balance computation methods, various fees and charges, and security interests.
Under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ("ECOA"), and Regulation B, we may not discriminate on various prohibited bases, including race, gender, national origin, marital status and the receipt of government benefits, or retirement or part-time income, and we must also deliver notices specifying the basis for credit denials, as well as certain other notices.
The Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA") regulates the use of consumer reports and reporting of information to credit reporting agencies. FCRA limits the permissible uses of credit reports and requires us to provide notices to customers when we take adverse action or increase interest rates based on information obtained from third parties, including credit bureaus.
We are also subject to additional federal requirements with respect to electronic signatures and disclosures under the Electronic Signatures In Global And National Commerce Act ("ESIGN") and requirements with respect to electronic payments under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act ("EFTA)" and Regulation E. EFTA and Regulation E requirements also have an important impact on our prepaid debit card services business. The EFTA and Regulation E protect consumers engaging in electronic fund transfers and contain restrictions, require disclosures and provide consumers certain rights relating to electronic fund transfers, including electronic fund transfers authorized in advance to recur at substantially equal intervals.
Additionally, we are subject to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (the "TCPA"), the CAN-SPAM Act and the regulations of the Federal Communications Commission, which include limitations on telemarketing calls, auto-dialed calls, pre-recorded calls, text messages and unsolicited faxes. While we believe that our practices comply with the TCPA, the TCPA has given rise to a spate of litigation nationwide.
We apply the rules under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") as a guide to conducting our collections activities for delinquent loan accounts, and we are subject to applicable state collections laws as well.
Bank Secrecy Act and Anti-Money Laundering Laws.
Under regulations of the U.S. Department of the Treasury (the "Treasury Department") adopted under the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 ("BSA"), we must report currency transactions in an amount greater than $10,000 by filing a Currency Transaction Report ("CTR"), and we must retain records for five years for purchases of monetary instruments for cash in amounts from $3,000 to $10,000. Multiple currency transactions must be treated as a single transaction if we have knowledge that the transactions are by, or on behalf of, the same person and result in either cash in or cash out totaling more than $10,000 during any one business day. We will file a CTR for any transaction which appears to be structured to avoid the required filing and the individual transaction or the aggregate of multiple transactions would otherwise meet the threshold and require the filing of a CTR.
The BSA also requires us to register as a money services business with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Treasury Department ("FinCEN"). This registration is intended to enable governmental authorities to better enforce laws prohibiting money laundering and other illegal activities. We are registered as a money services business with FinCEN and must re-register with FinCEN by December 31 every other year. We must also maintain a list of names and addresses of, and other information about, our stores and must make that list available to FinCEN and any requesting law enforcement or supervisory agency. That store list must be updated at least annually.
Federal anti-money-laundering laws make it a criminal offense to own or operate a money transmittal business without the appropriate state licenses, which we maintain. In addition, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 and its corresponding federal regulations require us, as a “financial institution,” to establish and maintain an anti-money-laundering program. Such a program must include: (i) internal policies, procedures and controls designed to identify and report money laundering; (ii) a designated compliance officer; (iii) an ongoing employee-training program; and (iv) an independent audit function to test the program. In addition, federal regulations require us to report suspicious transactions involving at least $2,000 to FinCEN. The regulations generally describe four classes of reportable suspicious transactions: one or more related transactions that the money services business knows, suspects or has reason to suspect (i) involve funds derived from illegal activity or are intended to hide or disguise such funds, (ii) are designed to evade the requirements of the BSA (iii) appear to serve no business or lawful purpose or (iv) involve the use of the money service business to facilitate criminal activity.
The Office of Foreign Assets Control ("OFAC") publishes a list of individuals and companies owned or controlled by, or acting for or on behalf of, targeted or sanctioned countries. It also lists individuals, groups and entities, such as terrorists and narcotics traffickers, designated under programs that are not country-specific. Collectively, such individuals and companies are called “Specially Designated Nationals.” Their assets are blocked and we are generally prohibited from dealing with them.
Privacy Laws.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 and its implementing federal regulations require us generally to protect the confidentiality of our customers’ nonpublic personal information and to disclose to our customers our privacy policy and practices, including those regarding sharing the customers’ nonpublic personal information with third-parties. That disclosure must be made to customers at the time the customer relationship is established and at least annually thereafter, unless posted on our website.
In 2018, the California Privacy Act (“CPA”) was passed into law, to be effective January 1, 2020. CPA would broaden consumer rights with respect to their personal information, imposing obligations to disclose the categories and specific pieces of personal information a business collects and providing consumers the right to opt out of the sale of personal information and the right to request that a business delete any personal information about the consumer under certain circumstances. CPA contains serious penalties for violations in both enforcement proceedings and private actions. CPA contains a number of ambiguities and has been amended once and could be amended again prior to its effective date. Other states may adopt laws similar to the CPA. Additionally, it is possible that the federal government will adopt a law that could supplement or fully or partially preempt the CPA.
U.S. State and Local Regulations
Short-term consumer loans must comply with extensive laws of the states where our stores are located or, in the case of our online loans, where the borrower resides. These laws impose, among other matters, restrictions and requirements governing interest rates and fees; maximum loan amounts; the number of simultaneous or consecutive loans, and required waiting periods between loans; loan extensions and refinancings; payment schedules (including maximum and minimum loan durations); required repayment plans for borrowers claiming inability to repay loans; collections; disclosures; security for loans and payment mechanisms; licensing; and (in certain jurisdictions) database reporting and loan utilization information. While the federal FDCPA does not typically apply to our activities, comparable, and in some cases more rigorous, state laws do apply.
In the event of serious or systemic violations of state law by us or, in certain instances, our third-party service providers when acting on our behalf, we would be subject to a variety of regulatory and private sanctions. These could include license suspension or revocation (not necessarily limited to the state or product to which the violation relates); orders or injunctive relief, including orders providing for rescission of transactions or other affirmative relief; and monetary relief. Depending upon the nature and scope of any violation and/or the state in question, monetary relief could include restitution, damages, fines for each violation and/or payments to borrowers equal to a multiple of the fees we charge and, in some cases, principal as well. Thus, violations of these laws could potentially have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
The California Financing Law caps interest rates on loans under $2,500 but imposes no interest rate limit on loans of $2,500 or more. The California Department of Business Oversight (the “DBO”) has asserted that the interest rate cap applies to loans in an original principal amount of $2,500 or more that are partially prepaid shortly after origination to reduce the principal balance below $2,500. While we disagree with this interpretation of the law, we nevertheless entered into a consent order with the DBO addressing the matter to eliminate the cost, distraction and risks of potential litigation. The consent order does not contain any admission of wrongdoing and will not have a material effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
In the case of
De La Torre v. CashCall, Inc
., in 2017, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals certified the following question to the California Supreme Court: “Can a 96% interest rate on consumer loans of $2500 or more governed by California Finance Code § 22303, render the loans unconscionable under California Finance Code § 22302?” In August of 2018, the California Supreme Court answered the certified question in the affirmative (i.e., it found that the interest rate on a consumer loan of $2,500 or more can render the loans unconscionable under Cal. Fin. Code § 22303). However, the court did not address whether the loans in question were in fact unconscionable. The court stressed that in order to find that an interest rate is unconscionable, courts must
conduct an individual analysis of whether "under the circumstances of the case, taking into account the bargaining process and prevailing market conditions" a "particular rate was 'overly harsh,' 'unduly oppressive,' or 'so one-sided as to shock the conscience.'" This analysis is "highly dependent on context" and "flexible," according to the court. The court warned that lower courts should be wary of and must avoid remedies that amount to an "across-the-board imposition of a cap on interest rates."
In September 2018, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against the Company in the Southern District of California alleging that certain loans made by the Company in amounts of $2,500 or greater are unconscionable and therefore a violation of California law. The Company filed its answer and motion to compel arbitration on October 30, 2018.
During the past few years, legislation, ballot initiatives and regulations have been proposed or adopted in various states that would prohibit or severely restrict our short-term consumer lending. For example, during 2018, legislation was enacted in Ohio and a ballot initiative was adopted in Colorado restricting our loans in those states. Also, during the 2018 session, three bills were introduced in the California Assembly which would have directly impacted the products we currently offer. Assembly Bill 2500 as introduced would have imposed a 36% APR cap on all consumer loans between $2,500 and $5,000 and a 24% APR cap on all consumer loans between $5,000 and $10,000. Assembly Bill 2953 would have imposed a 36% APR cap on all auto title loans. Assembly Bill 3010 as introduced would have limited borrowers to one outstanding payday loan at a time across all lenders using a common database to enforce the one loan restriction. Assembly Bill 2500 did not pass out of the Assembly by the May 31, 2018 deadline. Assembly Bills 2953 and 3010 advanced to the Senate but did not pass out of the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee by the June 30, 2018 deadline. Nevertheless, similar bills may be introduced and/or enacted in the 2019 or subsequent legislative sessions.
On February 13, 2019, Assembly Bill 593 in California was introduced. Primarily, Assembly Bill 593 proposes an interest rate cap on all consumer loans between $2,500 and $10,000 of 36% plus the Federal Funds Rate. While it is very early in the legislative process, this bill as written would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
We, along with others in the short-term consumer loan industry, intend to continue to inform and educate legislators and regulators and to oppose legislative or regulatory action that would unduly prohibit or severely restrict short-term consumer loans as compared with those currently allowed. Nevertheless, if legislative or regulatory action with that effect were taken in states in which we have a significant number of stores (or at the federal level), that action could have a material adverse effect on our loan-related activities and revenues.
In some states, check cashing companies or money transmission agents are required to meet minimum bonding or capital requirements and are subject to record-keeping requirements and/or fee limits.
Currently, approximately 30 states in the U.S. have enabling legislation that specifically allows direct loans of the type that we make. In Texas and Ohio, we currently operate under a CSO model. In Texas, the CSO model is expressly authorized under Section 393 of the Texas Finance Code. As a CSO, we serve as arranger for consumers to obtain credit from independent, non-bank consumer lending companies and we guaranty the lender against loss. As required by Texas law, we are registered as a CSO and also licensed as a Credit Access Business ("CAB"). Texas law subjects us to audit by the State’s Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner and requires us to provide expanded disclosures to customers regarding credit service products.
The Texas cities of Austin, Dallas, San Antonio, Houston and several others (nearly 45 cities in total as of December 31, 2018) have passed substantially similar local ordinances addressing products offered by CABs. These local ordinances place restrictions on the amounts that can be loaned to customers and the terms under which the loans can be repaid. As of December 31, 2018, we operated 68 stores in Texas cities with local ordinances. We have been cited by the City of Austin for alleged violations of the Austin ordinance but believe that: (i) the ordinance conflicts with Texas state law and (ii) our product in any event complies with the ordinance, when it is properly construed. The Austin Municipal Court agreed with our position that the ordinance conflicts with Texas law and, accordingly, did not address our second argument. In September 2017, the Travis County Court reversed this decision and remanded the case to the Municipal Court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion (including, presumably, a decision on our second argument). To date, a hearing and trial on the merits has not been scheduled. Accordingly, we do not expect to have a final determination of the lawfulness of our CAB program under the Austin ordinance (and similar ordinances in other Texas cities) for some time. An adverse final decision could potentially result in material monetary liability in Austin and elsewhere and would force us to restructure the loans we arrange in Texas.
In Ohio, we currently operate as a registered CSO and provide CSO services to borrowers who apply for and obtain Unsecured Installment loans from a third-party lender. However, in late July 2018, the Ohio legislature passed House Bill 123 which significantly limits permissible fees and other terms on short term loans in Ohio. The Governor signed House Bill 123 into law on July 30, 2018, which effectively eliminated the viability of the CSO model in Ohio. The principal sections of the new law are scheduled to become operative on or about April 27, 2019. As a result, we will no longer operate as a registered CSO in Ohio after that date. The Ohio Department of Commerce granted us a short-term lender's license on February 15, 2019. Under this license, we will
offer an Installment loan product for a term of 120 days. Ohio customers may originate and manage their loans online via the internet or mobile application.
Our businesses are supervised by state authorities in each state where we operate, whether through storefronts or online. We are subject to regular state examinations and audits and must address with the appropriate state agency any findings or criticisms resulting from these examinations and audits.
In addition to state laws governing our lending activities, most states have laws and regulations governing check cashing and money transmission, including licensing and bonding requirements and laws regarding maximum fees, recordkeeping and/or posting of fees, and our business is subject to various local rules, such as local zoning and occupancy regulations. These local rules and regulations are subject to change and vary widely from state to state and city to city.
We cannot provide any assurances that additional state or local statutes or regulations will not be enacted in the future in any of the jurisdictions in which we operate. Additionally, we cannot provide any assurances that any future changes to statutes or regulations will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
Canadian Regulations
In May 2007, Canadian federal legislation was enacted that exempts from the criminal rate of interest provisions of the Criminal Code (which prohibit receiving (or entering into an agreement to receive) interest at an effective annual rate that exceeds 60% on the credit advanced under the loan agreement) cash advance loans of $1,500 or less if the term of the loan is 62 days or less (“payday loans”) and the person is licensed under provincial legislation as a short-term cash advance lender and the province has been designated under the Criminal Code.
In March 2017, Bill S-237 titled “An Act to Amend the Criminal Code” was introduced in the Senate (of Canada). The bill proposed to reduce the Criminal Rate of interest from 60% APR to 20% plus the Bank of Canada overnight interest rate. In February of 2018, the bill was amended in committee to a maximum interest rate cap of 45% plus the Bank of Canada overnight interest rate. A similar bill was introduced by the same Senator in 2015 and did not pass out of the Senate. We cannot speculate as to the likelihood of this bill progressing in the legislative process.
Currently, Ontario, Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan and New Brunswick have provincial enabling legislation allowing for payday loans and have also been designated under the Criminal Code. Newfoundland has been designated under the Criminal Code, but enabling legislation is not yet in force. Under the provincial payday lender legislation there are generally cost of borrowing disclosure requirements, collection activity requirements, caps on the cost of borrowing that may be recovered from borrowers and restrictions on certain types of lending practices, such as extending more than one payday loan to a borrower at any one time.
Canadian provinces periodically review the regulations for payday loan products. Some provinces specify a time period within the Act while other provinces are silent or simply note that reviews will be periodic.
Nova Scotia
In September 2018, Nova Scotia completed its triennial review process. In November 2018, the Utility and Review Board announced its decision to reduce the maximum cost of borrowing from C$22 per C$100 to C$19 per C$100, effective February 1, 2019. The remaining recommendations of the Review Board, mainly an extended payment plan offering, may be considered by the Minister. Cash Money operated five retail store locations as of
December 31, 2018
and has an internet presence in Nova Scotia.
British Columbia
Effective January 1, 2017, the British Columbia Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General (the "Ministry") reduced the total cost of borrowing from C$23 per C$100 lent to C$17 per C$100 lent. A further reduction to C$15 per C$100 lent came into effect on September 1, 2018. On February 26, 2019, the Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General introduced in Parliament bill 7 titled “Business Practices and Consumer Amendment Act." With respect to high cost credit products, including the types of loans we offer, this act would give the authority to the Ministry to, among other things, proscribe a lower interest rate, prohibit presentments upon default, set fees for optional products and impose a cooling off period. Given that it is early in the legislative process and most of the provisions would be subject to a further regulatory process to determine exact specifications, we are unable to predict the effect on our business and results of operations.
As of
December 31, 2018
, we operated
26
of our
200
Canadian stores and conducted online lending in British Columbia. Revenues in British Columbia were approximately
10.8%
of
our
Canadian revenues and
1.9%
of total consolidated revenues for the
year ended
December 31, 2018
.
Ontario
In April 2016, the Ontario Ministry of Government and Consumer Services (the "Ministry"), published a consultation to consider the total cost of borrowing for payday lending in Ontario, which was C$21 per C$100 lent. Under consideration was whether the rate should remain at C$21 or be lowered to C$19, C$17 or C$15 per C$100 lent. In August 2016, the Ministry published another consultation seeking public input on a two-stage reduction in the total cost of borrowing, proposing a maximum rate of C$18 per C$100 lent effective January 1, 2017 and a further reduction to C$15 per C$100 lent effective January 1, 2018. In November 2016, the Ministry introduced new legislation and announced a reduction in the total cost of borrowing to C$18 per C$100 lent effective January 1, 2017.
In December 2015, Bill 156 titled “the Alternative Financial Services Statute Law Amendment Act” was introduced. This legislation (i) proposed additional consumer protections such as a cooling-off period and extended repayment plan and (ii) provided the Ministry with the authority, subject to a regulatory process, to impose additional requirements such as establishing a maximum loan amount. The Alternative Financial Services Statute Law Amendment Act passed second reading before the Parliament recessed in June 2016.
Upon the Ontario Parliament returning from summer recess in September 2016, the Premier of Ontario prorogued the legislature. Therefore all prior bills died. In November 2016, the Ministry introduced Bill 59 titled “Putting Consumers First Act (the “PCF Act”), which encompassed many of the provisions of the previous legislation (the Alternative Financial Services Statute Law Amendment Act) and incorporated the provisions of three other previous, unrelated pieces of legislation. Bill 59 officially received Royal Assent in April 2017. A majority of the Single-Pay-loan-related provisions in the PCF Act, including but not limited to installment repayment plans, advertising requirements, prohibitions on number of loans in a year and disclosure requirements were subject to a further regulatory process.
With respect to the regulatory process for the authorities granted to the Ministry in Bill 59, the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services issued a consultation document in July 2017 requesting feedback on whether and how regulations should change regarding most notably extended payment plans, maximum loan amounts, a cooling off period between loans and limits on fees charged to cash government checks. After considering responses, in December 2017 the Ministry announced the new regulations with respect to payday loans. Most notably, the Ministry detailed two new regulations effective July 1, 2018: (i) a requirement to make the third loan originated by the same customer within 63 days repayable in two or three installments, depending on the customer’s pay frequency, and; (ii) a requirement for the loan amount not to exceed 50% of the customer’s net pay in the month prior to the loan. Additionally, in the December 2017 announcement, the Ministry confirmed a decrease in the maximum cost of borrower from C$18 per C$100 lent to C$15 per C$100 lent.
We conducted online lending and operated
131
of our
200
Canadian stores in Ontario as of
December 31, 2018
. Revenues originated in Ontario represented approximately
62.7%
of revenue generated in Canada and
11.0%
of our total consolidated revenues for the
year
ended
December 31, 2018
. We are currently evaluating the effects of the foregoing regulations on our Ontario operations.
Alberta
In May 2016, the Alberta Government introduced Bill 15 titled “An Act to End Predatory Lending,” which, among other things, included for loans in scope a reduction in the maximum cost of borrowing from C$23 to C$15 per C$100 lent and a requirement that all loans be repaid in installments. For customers paid semi-monthly, bi-weekly or on a more frequent basis, at least three installment payments would be required. For customers paid on a monthly basis, at least two installment payments would be required. All covered loan terms must be no less than 42 days and no greater than 62 days, with no penalty for early repayment. Additionally, the Bill included a provision for a reduction in the cost of borrowing to 60% APR when alternative options for credit exist and are being utilized by a sufficient number of individuals.
In May 2016, Bill 15 received Royal Assent. The maximum cost of borrowing of C$15 per C$100 lent became effective in August 2016 and final regulations for the installment payments effective November 30, 2016. As a result of these regulatory changes, we introduced an Installment product during 2016 and, by the end of 2017, exclusively offered only Installment and Open-End products.
In November 2017, the Alberta Government introduced a new bill titled “A Better Deal for Consumers and Businesses Act,” which covered a number of industries including high-cost credit businesses and was intended to provide the government with the
authority to promulgate certain regulations to further insure consumer protection. The act passed and formally received Royal Assent on December 15, 2017. In February 2018, the Alberta Government initiated a consultation process respecting high-cost credit products, which resulted in additional regulations being passed setting out a regime for such products, including installment loans with an APR of 32% or more and lines of credit with an annual interest of 32% or more. Among other things, high-cost lenders are required to hold a license and to provide additional disclosures to borrowers. This high-cost credit regime became effective on January 1, 2019.
We operated
27
of our
200
Canadian stores (as of
December 31, 2018
) and conducted online lending in Alberta. Revenues in Alberta were approximately
17.3%
of Canadian revenues and
3.0%
of total consolidated revenues for the
year
ended
December 31, 2018
and were approximately 13.4% of Canadian revenues and 2.6% of total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2017. We are currently evaluating the effects of our product changes in Alberta. For additional information, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”
Manitoba
In January 2016, the province of Manitoba announced a Public Utilities Board ("PUB") hearing to specifically review and consider a reduction in the rate from C$17 per C$100 lent to C$15 per C$100 lent and a reduction in the maximum amount borrowers can loan from 30% of net pay to 25% of net pay. In June 2016, the PUB issued its report to the government recommending that these proposed changes not be made. It is unknown if and when the government may adopt the recommendations of the PUB. As of
December 31, 2018
, we operated
four
stores in Manitoba.
Saskatchewan
Effective in February 2018, Saskatchewan amended its Payday Loan Regulations to provide that the maximum rate that may be charged to a borrower be reduced from C$23 per C$100 lent to C$17 and the maximum fee for a dishonored check be reduced from C$50 to C$25. As of
December 31, 2018
, we operated
six
stores in Saskatchewan.
Installment and Open-End loans are subject to the Criminal Code interest rate cap of 60%. Providers of these types of loans are also subject to provincial legislation that requires lenders to provide certain disclosures, prohibits the charging of certain default fees and extends certain rights to borrowers, such as prepayment rights. These laws are harmonized in many Canadian provinces. However, in Ontario, the PCF Act which received Royal Assent in April 2017, provides the Ontario Ministry with the authority to impose additional restrictions on lenders who offer installment loans, subject to a regulatory process, including: (i) requiring a lender to take into account certain factors with respect to the borrower before entering into a credit agreement with that borrower; (ii) capping the amount of credit that may be extended; (iii) prohibiting a lender from initiating contact with a borrower for the purpose of offering to refinance a loan; and (iv) capping the amount of certain fees that do not form part of the cost of borrowing. In July 2017, the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services issued a consultation document requesting feedback on questions regarding a new regime for high-cost credit and limits on optional services, such as optional insurance. The proposed high-cost credit regime would apply to loans with an annual interest rate that exceeds 35%. The Ministry summary accompanying the consultation document stated that a further consultation paper would be issued in the fall of 2017 on those matters and that the Ministry expected that regulation would be enacted in early 2019. The Ministry has not yet published this further consultation paper.
Other Federal Matters
In Canada, the federal government generally does not regulate check cashing businesses, except in respect of federally regulated financial institutions (and other than the Criminal Code of Canada provisions noted above in respect of charging or receiving in excess of 60% annual interest on the credit advanced in respect of the fee for a check cashing transaction) nor do most provincial governments generally impose any regulations specific to the check cashing industry. The exceptions are the provinces of Quebec, where check cashing stores are not permitted to charge a fee to cash a government check; and Manitoba, British Columbia and Ontario, where the province imposes a maximum fee to be charged to cash a government check. The province of Saskatchewan also regulates the check cashing business but only in respect of provincially regulated loan, trust and financing corporations. Cash Money does not operate in the province of Quebec.
The Financial Transaction and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada is responsible for ensuring that money services businesses comply with the legislative requirements of the Proceeds of Crime (Money Laundering) and Terrorist Financing Act (the "PCMLTFA"). The PCMLTFA requires the reporting of large cash transactions involving amounts of C$10,000 or more received in cash and maintenance of certain records relating to the exchange of foreign currency. The PCMLTFA also requires submitting suspicious transactions reports when there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a transaction or attempted transaction is related to the commission of a money laundering offense or to the financing of a terrorist activity, and the submission of terrorist financing reports where a person has possession or control of property that they know or believe to be owned or controlled by or
on behalf of a terrorist or terrorist group. The PCMLTFA also imposes obligations on money services businesses in respect of record keeping, identity verification, and implementing a compliance policy.
U.K. Regulations
On February 25, 2019, we announced that a proposed Scheme of Arrangement (“SOA”) related to CTL, as previously disclosed in our Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 31, 2019, will not be implemented. We also announced that effective February 25, 2019, in accordance with the provisions of the U.K. Insolvency Act 1986 and as approved by the boards of directors of our U.K. Subsidiaries, insolvency practitioners from KPMG were appointed as administrators (“Administrators”) in respect of both of the U.K. Subsidiaries. The effect of the U.K. Subsidiaries’ entry into administration was to place the management, affairs, business and property of the U.K. Subsidiaries under the direct control of the Administrators. Accordingly, we will deconsolidate the U.K. Subsidiaries as of February 25, 2019 and will present the U.K. Subsidiaries as Discontinued Operations in the first quarter of 2019. Although the U.K. regulations below will not apply to our U.S. and Canadian operations, these regulations applied to our U.K. Subsidiaries through February 25, 2019.
In the U.K., consumer lending is governed by The Consumer Credit Act 1974, which was amended by the Consumer Credit Act 2006 (the "CCA") and related rules and regulations supplemented by guidance. On April 1, 2014, the Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA") assumed responsibility for regulating consumer credit from the Office of Fair Trading ("OFT"), as enacted under the Financial Services Act 2012. The FCA is the regulatory body in the U.K. that is responsible for the regulation and oversight of the consumer credit industry. Firms operating with consumer credit licenses originally issued by the OFT were required to register with the FCA in the fall of 2013 to obtain interim permission to conduct consumer credit activities from April 1, 2014 until they had applied for and obtained full authorization from the FCA. In February 2016, we were notified that our two lending businesses in the U.K., SRC Transatlantic Limited and CURO Transatlantic Limited (f/k/a Wage Day Advance Limited), had received full authorization from the FCA to undertake certain categories of regulated consumer credit business under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. In late 2017, SRC Transatlantic Limited ceased active trading via its store premises although it retained authorizations necessary to continue collection activities in respect of existing customers.
While U.K. consumer credit businesses are principally regulated by the FCA, there is additional legislation and regulation that governs consumer credit, including the CCA. The CCA imposes various obligations on lenders, and any person who exercises the rights and duties of lenders to correctly document credit agreements and guarantees and indemnities, give borrowers rights to withdraw, provide post contract information such as statements of account, notices of sums in arrears and default notices, protect consumers who purchase a good or service from a linked supplier and not to take certain recovery or enforcement action until prescribed forms of post-contractual notices have been served and prescribed time periods have elapsed. Any failure to comply with such legislation or regulation may have serious consequences for our U.K. operations, as well as a risk that the FCA may revoke or suspend our authorization.
The FCA and its predecessor, the OFT, have already taken action against, and have imposed requirements on, a number of well-known U.K. financial institutions. In addition, U.K. operations are subject to various regulations concerning consumer protection and data protection, among others.
Our U.K. Subsidiaries were also subject to the powers of the U.K. Information Commissioner’s Office (the "ICO") to take enforcement action in relation to data protection. By virtue of doing business with financial institutions and other FCA regulated companies in the U.K., our subsidiaries were typically contractually obligated to comply with certain other requirements such as the Consumer Finance Association and the Credit Services Association’s Code of Practice.
Financial Conduct Authority Regulations
Firms wishing to carry on regulated consumer credit activities must comply with all applicable sections of the FCA Handbook, as well as the applicable consumer credit laws and regulations. The FCA Handbook provides both general sourcebooks (that all authorized firms must comply with) and specialist sourcebooks (that apply to firms carrying out a specific regulated activity). The FCA Handbook has a specialist consumer credit sourcebook ("CONC") for the consumer credit sector, which includes rules and guidance in relation to, inter alia, financial promotions, pre-contract responsibilities and disclosure, affordability and creditworthiness assessments, the handling of vulnerable customers, communications with customers, arrears, default and recovery of debt, debt advice and statute barred debt.
By virtue of doing business with financial institutions and other FCA regulated companies in the U.K., lending entities are typically contractually obligated to comply with certain other requirements, such as the U.K. Lending Standards Board’s Standards of Lending Practice (which financial institutions usually comply with on a voluntary basis), the Finance and Leasing Association’s Lending Code and the Credit Services Association’s Code of Practice. Curo Transatlantic is signatory to the Consumer Finance Association (“CFA”) Code
,
which is stated by the CFA to encompass and exceed the Good Practice Customer Charter, which is
the set of minimum standards agreed by the Government (Department of Business, Skills and Innovation), former regulator ("OFT") and three other trade associations representing short-term lenders.
The FCA regards lending and collections of loans as a “high risk” activity and therefore dedicates special resources to more intensive monitoring of businesses in this sector. CONC provides that firms that undertake consumer credit regulated activities should, for example, be required to treat a customer in default or arrears difficulties with forbearance and consideration and may consider suspending, reducing or waiving any further interest payments or charges from that customer or accepting token payments from the customer for a reasonable period. Regarding statute barred debt, a firm which undertakes consumer credit regulated activities must not mislead a customer by suggesting that said customer could be subject to court action for the sum of the statute barred debt, when that firm knows, or reasonably ought to know, that the relevant limitation period has expired.
The Money Laundering Regulations 2017 implement the European Union 4th Money Laundering Directive (2015/849/EU) and apply to lenders and specify that all lenders must be supervised for money laundering compliance. Through February 25, 2019, our U.K. subsidiaries were supervised by the FCA for these purposes.
In June 2013, the U.K. Competition & Markets Authority ("CMA") commenced a market investigation into payday lending to investigate whether certain features of the industry prevented, restricted or distorted competition and if so to recommend suitable remedies. This market investigation led to a final order by the CMA entitled “The Payday Lending Market Investigation Order 2015” which is discussed below.
Our U.K. Subsidiaries were required to self-report suspicious activities and to appoint a designated anti-money laundering officer with the overall responsibility for the compliance of the business and employees under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and the Money Laundering Regulations 2017.
The CMA published its final report in February 2015; its recommendations were implemented under the Payday Lending Market Investigation Order 2015, under which:
|
|
|
|
•
|
online lenders must provide details of their products on at least one FCA authorized price comparison website, or PCW, and include a hyperlink from their website to the relevant PCW; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
payday lenders must provide existing customers with a summary of their cost of borrowing.
|
The FCA is undertaking various reviews relevant to consumer credit businesses, which may affect lenders in the U.K. For example, in July 2017 the FCA published a consultation paper on Assessing Creditworthiness in consumer credit. This consultation is designed to enable the FCA to provide further clarity around the factors for Lenders to consider when deciding the proportionality of an affordability assessment and expectations for a firm’s policies and procedures. The FCA provided final guidance under its Policy Statement PS 18/19: Assessing creditworthiness in consumer credit which caused our U.K. subsidiaries to make changes to creditworthiness assessments taking into account the final published Policy Statement.
Data Protection
As a consumer finance business, our U.K. Subsidiaries were required to comply with the requirements established by the data protection legislation regarding processing the personal data of our customers. The applicable data protection legislation has undergone considerable change in the last few years, culminating in the GDPR and Data Protection Act 2018, as further described below. Any business controlling the processing of personal data (that is, determining the purposes of the processing and the manner in which it is carried out), such as consumer credit firms, must in particular maintain a data protection registration with the ICO for each of its companies. The ICO is an independent governmental authority responsible for maintaining, upholding and promoting the best business practices and legislative requirements for processing personal data and safeguarding the information rights of individuals and their rights to access their personal data.
Our U.K. Subsidiaries controlled the processing of significant amounts of personal data; therefore, they had a data protection registration for each relevant subsidiary which controls the processing of personal data, a data protection policy and have established data protection processes, which are reviewed and updated from time to time for the purposes of compliance with the requirements of the Data Protection Act and the applicable guidance issued from time to time by the ICO, such as the handling of data subject access requests from individuals. The ICO is empowered to impose requirements through enforcement notices (in effect, stop orders), issue monetary fines and prosecute criminal offenses under the Data Protection Act. Through February 25, 2019, our U.K. Subsidiaries had not received any such notices from the ICO.
Furthermore, our U.K. Subsidiaries received third-party data from sources governed by the Steering Committee on Reciprocity ("SCOR") such as mainstream credit bureaus, and from private sources such as closed user groups ("CUGs"). CUGs operate by a CUG host taking responsibility for housing the underlying data, matching the records and for compliance with data protection
regulations. If one of the contributors of the CUG were to violate data protection laws or other regulatory requirements, it could have harmed the business or resulted in penalties being imposed on our U.K. Subsidiaries. An entity's ability to obtain, retain and otherwise manage such data is governed by data protection and privacy requirements and regulatory rules and guidance issued by, among others, the ICO and influenced by SCOR.
The EU Data Protection Regulation came into effect in May 2016 and is directly applicable in Member States (including the U.K.). It applies to all affected businesses as of May 25, 2018, when enforcement of that regulation began. The EU Data Protection Regulation introduced substantial changes to the EU data protection regime and imposed a substantially higher compliance burden on our U.K. Subsidiaries, increasing data protection costs and restricting the ability to use data. Examples of this higher burden include expanding the requirement for informed opt in consent by customers to processing of personal data, where companies rely on customer consent to process personal data, and granting customers a “right to be forgotten,” restrictions on the use of personal data for profiling purposes-disclosure requirements of data sources to customers, the possibility of having to deal with a higher number of subject access requests, among other requirements. The EU Data Protection Regulation also increased the maximum level of fine for the most serious compliance failures in the case of a business to the greater of four per cent of annual worldwide turnover or €20,000,000. As the EU Data Protection Regulation is directly applicable, and directly effective, the U.K. does not have control over its manner of implementation (except to the extent that the EU Data Protection Regulation expressly grants such control to EU Member States). The ICO is currently consulting on its draft written guidance on consent under the EU Data Protection Regulation. There is a memorandum of understanding in place between the ICO and the FCA which (among other things) provides for information-sharing between the two bodies.
The U.K. government has also enacted the Data Protection Act 2018, which is now effective. This substantially replaces the Data Protection Act 1998 and address further detail and increase the regulation which will be brought in by the EU Data Protection Regulation. The current published version of the Data Protection Bill 2017 does not increase the regulatory penalties regime which will become effective under the EU Data Protection Regulation.
In addition, the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003 originating as the implementation of European Directive 2002/58/EC, also known as the E-Privacy Directive, impose obligations on U.K. businesses in respect of electronic marketing by email and marketing by telephone calls and SMS.
Available Information
Our internet address is www.curo.com. We make a variety of information available, free of charge, at our Investor Relations website, www.ir.curo.com. This information includes our Registration Statements, Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file those reports with or furnish them to the SEC, as well as our code of business conduct and ethics and other governance documents.
The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file documents electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov.
The contents of these websites, or the information connected to those websites, are not incorporated into this report. References to websites in this report are provided as a convenience and do not constitute, and should not be viewed as, incorporation by reference of the information contained on, or available through, the website.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and uncertainties that could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and future results. You should carefully consider the risk factors. While we believe we have identified and discussed below the key risk factors affecting our business, there may be additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results or share price in the future.
Risks Relating to Our Business
We have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting. If we are not able to remediate this material weakness appropriately and timely, or if we are unable to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in the future, this could result in losses from errors, harm our reputation or cause investors to lose confidence in the reported financial information, all or any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition, which, in turn, could adversely affect the market price of our common
stock, our access to debt or other capital markets or other aspects of our business, prospects, results of operations or financial condition.
As a public company, we are required to maintain internal control over financial reporting and to report any material weaknesses in such internal control. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley requires that we evaluate and determine the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and provide a management report on internal control over financial reporting. Sarbanes-Oxley also requires that our management report on internal control over financial reporting be attested to by our independent registered public accounting firm.
Management regularly reviews and updates our internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures and corporate governance policies and procedures. Any system of controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of the controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
As discussed further in Item 9A, “Controls and Procedures, we have identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting resulting from the improper or incomplete application of technical GAAP standards and related interpretations to complex or non-routine matters. We describe the specific issues leading to these conclusions in Item 9A, “Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.” We expect to remediate the material weakness in 2019.
The actions we are taking to remediate the material weakness may be insufficient and we may in the future discover areas of our internal controls that need improvement, whether related to improper consideration of recoveries or otherwise. Failure to maintain effective controls or to timely implement any necessary improvement of our internal and disclosure controls could, among other things, result in losses from errors, harm our reputation, or cause investors to lose confidence in the reported financial information, all or any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
If we have an additional material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, we may not detect errors on a timely basis and our financial statements may be materially misstated. If we identify material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, if we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley in a timely manner, if we are unable to assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to access debt markets, equity investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could be adversely affected, and we could become subject to investigations by the New York Stock Exchange, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources.
If our allowance for loan losses is not adequate to absorb our actual losses, this could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
We face the risk that our customers will fail to repay their loans in full. We maintain an allowance for loan losses for estimated probable losses on company-funded loans and loans in default. See
Note 1, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Nature of Operations”
of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for factors considered by management in estimating the allowance for loan losses. We also maintain a liability for estimated probable losses on loans funded by unrelated third-party lenders under our CSO programs, but for which we are responsible. As of December 31, 2018, the sum of our aggregate reserve and allowance for losses on loans and liability for losses associated with the guaranty provided to the CSO lenders for loans not in default (including loans funded by unrelated third-party lenders under our CSO programs) was
$91.4 million
. This reserve, however, is an estimate. Actual losses are difficult to forecast, especially if such losses stem from factors beyond our historical experience, and unlike traditional banks, we are not subject to periodic review by bank regulatory agencies of our allowance for loan losses. As a result, our allowance for loan losses may not be comparable to that of traditional banks subject to regulatory oversight or sufficient to cover actual losses. If actual losses are greater than our reserve and allowance, this could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
Because of the non-prime nature of our customers, we have historically experienced a high rate of net charge-offs as a percentage of revenues, and our ability to price appropriately in response to this and other factors is essential. We rely on our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models in the forecasting of loss rates. If we are unable to effectively forecast loss rates, it may negatively impact our operating results.
Because of the non-prime nature of our customers, our business has much higher rates of charge-offs than traditional lenders. Accordingly, it is essential that our products are appropriately priced to take into account the credit risks of our customers. In making a decision whether to extend credit to prospective customers, and the terms on which we or the originating lenders are willing to provide credit, including the price, we and the originating lenders rely heavily on the CURO Platform, our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models, which comprise an empirically derived suite of statistical models built using third-party data, data from customers and our credit experience gained through monitoring the performance of customers over time. Our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models are based on previous historical experience. Typically, however, our models will become less effective over time and need to be rebuilt regularly to perform optimally. If we are unable to rebuild our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models, or if they do not perform up to target standards the products will experience increasing defaults or higher customer acquisition costs.
If our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models fail to adequately predict the creditworthiness of customers, or if they fail to assess prospective customers’ financial ability to repay their loans, or any or all of the other components of the credit decision process described in this Annual Report fails, higher than forecasted losses may result. Similarly, if our scoring models overprice our products, we could lose customers. Furthermore, if we are unable to access the third-party data used in our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models, or access to such data is limited or cost prohibitive, the ability to accurately evaluate potential customers using our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models will be compromised. As a result, we may be unable to effectively predict probable credit losses inherent in the resulting loan portfolio, and we, and the originating lender, may consequently experience higher defaults or customer acquisition costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations or financial condition.
Additionally, if we make errors in the development and validation of any of the models or tools used to underwrite loans, such loans may result in higher delinquencies and losses. Moreover, if future performance of customer loans differs from past experience, which experience has informed the development of our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models, delinquency rates and losses could increase.
If our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models were unable to effectively price credit to the risk of the customer, lower margins would result. Either our losses would be higher than anticipated due to underpricing products or customers may refuse to accept the loan if products are perceived as overpriced. Additionally, an inability to effectively forecast loss rates could also inhibit our ability to borrow from our debt facilities, which could further hinder our growth and have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations or financial condition.
Changes in the demand for our products and specialty financial services and our failure to adapt to such changes could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations or financial condition.
The demand for a particular product or service may change due to a variety of factors such as regulatory restrictions that reduce customer access to particular products, the availability of competing or alternative products, reduction in our marketing spend, macroeconomic changes or changes in customers’ financial conditions. If we fail to adapt to a significant change in our customers’ demand for, or access to, our products, our revenue could decrease significantly. Even if we make adaptations or introduce new products to fulfill customer demand, customers may resist or may reject products whose adaptations make them less attractive or less available. The effects of product changes on our business may not be fully ascertainable until the changes have been in effect for a period of time and could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations or financial condition.
Our business and results of operations may be materially adversely affected if we are unable to manage our growth effectively.
There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully grow our business or that our current business, results of operations and financial condition will not suffer if we fail to prudently manage our growth. Failure to grow the business and generate estimated future levels of cash flow could inhibit our ability to service our debt obligations. Our expansion strategy, which contemplates disciplined growth in Canada and the U.S., increasing the market share of our online operations, selectively expanding our offering of installment loans and potential expansion in other international markets, is subject to significant risks. The profitability of our current operations and any future growth is dependent upon a number of factors, including our ability to appropriately price our products, our ability to manage credit risk, our ability to obtain and maintain financing to support these opportunities, our ability to hire, train and retain an adequate number of qualified employees, our ability to obtain and maintain any required regulatory permits and licenses and other factors, some of which are beyond our control, such as the continuation of favorable regulatory and legislative environments.
As a result, the profitability and cash flows of our current operations could suffer if we do not successfully implement our growth strategy.
Our substantial indebtedness could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
As of December 31, 2018, we had approximately
$804.1 million
of debt outstanding, net of deferred financing costs, premiums and discounts. Our high level of indebtedness could have significant effects on our business, including the following:
|
|
|
|
•
|
it may be more difficult for us to satisfy our financial obligations;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, strategic acquisitions or general corporate purposes may be impaired;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
we must use a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to pay interest on our debt, which reduces funds available to use for operations, invest in our business, pay dividends to our stockholders and use for other purposes;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
we could be at a competitive disadvantage compared to those of our competitors that may have proportionately less debt;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the terms of our debt restricts our ability to pay dividends; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate may be limited.
|
For instance, as described above, if future changes in regulations affecting our products or services are enacted, these changes could adversely impact our current product offerings or alter the economic performance of our existing products and services. These changes, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to comply with the terms of our debt.
If our cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, or if we confront regulatory uncertainty in our industry or challenges in debt capital markets, we may not be able to refinance our indebtedness prior to maturity on favorable terms, or at all. In addition, prevailing interest rates or other factors at the time of refinancing could increase our interest or other debt capital expense. A refinancing of our indebtedness could also require us to comply with more onerous covenants and restrictions on our business operations. If we are unable to refinance our indebtedness prior to maturity we will be required to pursue alternative measures that could include restructuring our current indebtedness, selling all or a portion of our business or assets, seeking additional capital, reducing or delaying capital expenditures or taking other steps to address obligations under the terms of our indebtedness.
Our ability to meet our obligations depends on future performance, which will be affected by financial, business, economic, regulatory and other factors, many of which we cannot control or predict. Our business may not generate sufficient cash flow from operations in the future and our currently anticipated growth in revenue and cash flow may not be realized, either or both of which could result in our being unable to repay indebtedness, or to fund other liquidity needs. If we do not have enough funds, we may be required to refinance all or part of our then existing debt, sell assets or borrow more funds, which we may not be able to accomplish on terms acceptable to us, or at all. In addition, the terms of existing or future debt agreements may restrict us from pursuing any of these alternatives.
Changes in our financial condition or a potential disruption in the capital markets could reduce available capital.
If funds are not available from our operations, excess cash or from our credit agreements, we will be required to rely on the banking and credit markets to meet our financial commitments and short-term liquidity needs. We also expect to periodically access the debt capital markets to obtain capital to finance growth. Efficient access to the debt capital markets will be critical to our ongoing financial success. However, our future access to the debt capital markets could become restricted due to a variety of factors, including a deterioration of our earnings, cash flows, balance sheet quality, or overall business or industry prospects, adverse regulatory changes, a disruption to or deterioration in the state of the capital markets or a negative bias toward our industry by consumers. Disruptions and volatility in the capital markets may cause banks and other credit providers to restrict availability of new credit. We may have more limited access to commercial bank lending than other businesses due to the negative bias toward our industry. As a result, commercial banks and other lenders have and may continue to restrict access to credit for participants in our industry. Our ability to obtain additional financing in the future will depend in part upon prevailing capital market conditions. A disruption in the capital markets may adversely affect our efforts to arrange additional financing on terms that are satisfactory to us, if at all. If adequate funds are not available, or are not available at favorable terms, we may not have sufficient liquidity to fund our operations, make future investments, take advantage of acquisitions or other opportunities or respond to competitive challenges, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to advance our strategic plans. Additionally, if the capital and credit markets experience volatility, and the availability of funds is limited, third parties with whom we do business may incur increased costs or business disruption and this could have a material adverse effect on our business relationships with such third parties.
Any disruption in the availability of our information technology systems could have a material adverse effect on our business operations.
We rely heavily upon our Curo Platform in almost every aspect of our business, including to process customer transactions, provide customer service, determine loan amounts, manage collections, account for our business activities, support regulatory compliance and to generate the reporting used by management for analytical, loss management and decision-making purposes. Our store and online platform is part of an integrated data network designed to manage cash levels, facilitate underwriting decisions, reconcile cash balances and report revenue and expense transaction data. Our Curo Platform could be disrupted and become unavailable due to a number of factors, including power outages, a failure of one or more of our information technology, telecommunications or other systems and cyber-attacks on or sustained disruptions of these systems. Our back-up systems and security measures could fail to prevent a disruption in the availability of our information technology systems. A disruption in our Curo Platform could prevent us from performing fundamental aspects of our business, including loan underwriting, customer service, payments and collections, internal reporting and regulatory compliance.
Adverse economic conditions could cause demand for our loan products to decline or make it more difficult for our customers to make payments on our loans and increase our default rates.
We derive the majority of our revenue from consumer lending. Factors that may influence demand for our products and services include macroeconomic conditions, such as employment, personal income and consumer sentiment. Our underwriting standards require, among other things, our customers to have a steady source of income as a prerequisite for making a loan. Therefore, if unemployment increases among our customer base, the number of loans we originate will likely decline and the number of loan defaults could increase. If consumers become more pessimistic regarding the outlook for the economy and therefore spend less and save more, demand for consumer loans in general may decline. Accordingly, poor economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
Goodwill comprises a significant portion of our total assets. We assess goodwill for impairment at least annually. If we determine that it is necessary to implement a material, non-cash write-down, that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
The carrying value of our goodwill was $119.3 million, or approximately 12.9% of our total assets, as of December 31, 2018. We assess goodwill for impairment on an annual basis at the reporting unit level, as defined by Financial Accounting Standard Board’s
ASC 280 - Segment Reporting
. Goodwill is assessed between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying value.
In recent months, the U.K. business, which meets the definition of a reporting unit for purposes of testing goodwill, received an elevated number of customer redress claims in connection with certain of its regulatory obligations to consumers. The reporting unit incurred over
$11.5 million
of costs to address the redress complaints during the year ended December 31, 2018. Effective February 25, 2019, in accordance with the provisions of the U.K. Insolvency Act 1986 and as approved by the boards of directors of the U.K. Subsidiaries, insolvency practitioners from KPMG were appointed as Administrators in respect of the U.K. Subsidiaries.
The effect of the U.K. Subsidiaries’ entry into administration was to place the management, affairs, business and property of the U.K. Subsidiaries under the direct control of the Administrators. Accordingly, we will deconsolidate the U.K. Subsidiaries as of February 25, 2019 and will present the U.K. Subsidiaries as Discontinued Operations in the first quarter of 2019. Due to the lack of expected future cash flows from the U.K. reporting unit, the carrying value exceeded the fair value under the Step 1 goodwill analysis, which is required annually and performed by the Company on October 1. As a result, a full impairment of goodwill for the U.K. reporting unit of
$22.5 million
was recognized and included in Goodwill impairment charges in our Consolidated Statements of Operations during the fourth quarter of 2018.
Our impairment reviews require extensive use of accounting judgment and financial estimates. Application of alternative assumptions and definitions, such as reviewing goodwill for impairment at a different organizational level, could produce significantly different results. We may be required to recognize impairment of goodwill based on future events or circumstances which could include a significant change in the business climate, a change in strategic direction, legal factors, operating performance indicators, a change in the competitive environment, the sale or disposition of a significant portion of a reporting unit or future economic factors such as unfavorable changes in the estimated future discounted cash flows of our reporting units. Impairment of goodwill could result in material charges that could, in the future, result in a material, non-cash write-down of goodwill, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Due to the current economic environment and the uncertainties regarding the impact that future economic consequences will have on our reporting units, there can be no assurance that our estimates and assumptions made for purposes of our annual goodwill impairment test will prove to be accurate predictions of the future. If our assumptions regarding forecasted revenues or margins for certain of our reporting units are not achieved, we may be required to record goodwill impairment losses in future periods. It is not possible at this time to determine if any such future impairment will occur, and if it does occur, whether such charge would be material.
Our lending business is somewhat seasonal, which causes our revenues to fluctuate, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to service our debt obligations.
Our U.S. lending business typically experiences reduced demand in the first quarter as a result of our customers’ receipt of tax refund checks. Demand for our U.S. lending services is generally greatest during the fourth quarter. This seasonality requires us to manage our cash flows over the course of the year. If a governmental authority were to pursue economic stimulus actions or issue additional tax refunds or tax credits at other times during the year, such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition during those periods.
Our lending business in Canada is somewhat seasonal, although to a lesser extent than our U.S. lending business. We typically experience our highest demand in Canada in the third and fourth calendar quarters with lower demand in the first quarter; however, the reduction in volume relating to tax refunds is not prevalent as in the U.S. If our consolidated revenues were to fall substantially below what we would normally expect during certain periods, our annual financial results and our ability to service our debt obligations could be materially and adversely affected.
We have covenants in our debt agreements which may restrict our flexibility to operate our business. If we do not comply with these covenants, our failure could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and our financial condition.
Our debt agreements contain customary restrictive covenants, including limitations on consolidated indebtedness, liens, investments, subsidiary investments and asset dispositions, and require us to maintain certain leverage and interest coverage ratios. Failure to comply with these covenants could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, could result in reduced liquidity and could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. In addition, an event of default under one of our debt agreements may result in our then-outstanding debt to become immediately due and payable. This would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, financial position and results of operation.
The implementation of new or changes in the interpretation of existing accounting principles, financial reporting requirements or tax rules could have a material adverse effect on our financial statements.
We prepare our financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and its interpretations are subject to change over time. If new rules or interpretations of existing rules require us to change our accounting, financial reporting or tax positions, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected, and we could be required to restate historical financial reporting.
In March 2016, FASB issued new lease accounting guidance under ASC 842,
Leases
, which is effective for our interim and annual fiscal periods beginning January 1, 2019. The new guidance introduces a lessee model that results in the recording of most leases on the balance sheet. Prior to adoption of the new standard, our leases were primarily classified as operating leases and were
not presented on our Consolidated Balance Sheet. Implementation of ASC 842 has required additional investments and we have estimated what the impact of adopting the standard will be to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. If we are not able to properly implement ASC 842 in a timely manner, the operating costs that we recognize and the related balance sheet and footnote disclosures that we provide under ASC 842 may not be accurately reported.
In June 2016, FASB issued new guidance that will require lenders to adopt the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) approach to evaluate impairment of loans. The CECL approach requires evaluation of credit impairment based on an estimate of life of loan losses whereas rules currently in effect require utilization of incurred losses. We are required to adopt the provisions of the CECL standard effective January 1, 2020. See Note 1, "Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Nature of Operations" to our Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on the new standard and its potential effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
Failure to keep up with the rapid changes in e-commerce and the uses and regulation of the Internet could harm our business.
The business of providing products and services such as ours over the internet is dynamic. We must keep pace with rapid technological change, consumer use habits, Internet security risks, risks of system failure or inadequacy and governmental regulation and taxation, and each of these factors could adversely impact our business. In addition, concerns about fraud, computer security and privacy and/or other problems may discourage additional consumers from adopting or continuing to use the Internet as a medium of commerce. In markets such as the U.S., where e-commerce generally has been available for some time and the level of market penetration of our online financial services is relatively high, acquiring new customers for our services may be more difficult and costly than it has been in the past. To expand our customer base, we must appeal to and acquire consumers who historically have used traditional means of commerce to conduct their financial services transactions. If these consumers prove to be less profitable than our previous customers, and we are unable to gain efficiencies in our operating costs, including our cost of acquiring new customers, our business could be adversely impacted.
Because we depend in large part on third-party lenders to provide the cash needed to fund our loans, an inability to affordably access third-party financing could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our principal sources of liquidity to fund the loans we make to our customers are cash provided by operations, funds from third-party lenders under our CSO programs and our Non-Recourse Canada SPV Facility, which finances the origination of eligible U.S. and Canada Unsecured, Secured Installment and Open-End loans. However, we cannot guarantee we will be able to secure additional operating capital from third-party lenders or refinance our existing revolving credit facilities on reasonable terms or at all. As the volume of loans that we make to customers increases, we may have to expand our borrowing capacity on our existing Non-Recourse Canada SPV Facility or add new sources of capital. If the underlying collateral does not perform as expected, our access to the Non-Recourse Canada SPV Facility could be reduced or eliminated. The availability of these financing sources depends on many factors, some of which lie outside of our control. In the event of a sudden or unexpected shortage of funds in the banking system or capital markets, we may not be able to maintain necessary levels of funding without incurring high funding costs, suffering a reduction in the term of funding instruments or having to liquidate certain assets. If our cost of borrowing increases or we are unable to arrange new or alternative methods of financing on favorable terms, we may have to curtail our origination of loans, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
We may be unable to protect our proprietary technology and analytics or keep up with that of our competitors.
The success of our business depends to a significant degree upon the protection of our proprietary technology, including our proprietary credit and fraud scoring models, which we use for pricing loans. We seek to protect our intellectual property with non-disclosure agreements we sign with third parties and employees and through standard measures to protect trade secrets. We also implement cybersecurity policies and procedures to prevent unauthorized access to our systems and technology. However, we may be unable to deter misappropriation of our proprietary information, detect unauthorized use or take appropriate steps to enforce our intellectual property rights. Our employees, including those working on our Curo Platform, have not been required to execute agreements assigning us proprietary rights to technology developed in the scope of their employment, although we intend to have employees sign such agreements in the future. Additionally, while we currently have a number of registered trademarks and pending applications for trademark registration, we do not own any patents or copyrights with respect to our intellectual property.
If competitors learn our trade secrets (especially with regard to our marketing and risk management capabilities), others attempt to acquire patent protection of algorithms similar to ours or our employees attempt to make commercial use of the technology they develop for us, it could be difficult to successfully prosecute to recover damages. Additionally, a third-party may attempt to reverse engineer or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technology without our consent. The pursuit of a claim against a
third-party or employee for infringement of our intellectual property could be costly, and there can be no guarantee that any such efforts would be successful. If we are unable to protect our software and other proprietary intellectual property rights, or to develop technologies that are as adaptive to changing consumer trends or appealing to consumers as the technologies of our competitors, we could face a disadvantage relative to our competitors.
If the information provided by customers or third parties to us is inaccurate, we may misjudge a customer’s qualification to receive a loan, and our operating results may be harmed.
Our lending decisions are based partly on information provided to us by loan applicants. To the extent that these applicants provide information to us in a manner that is inaccurate or misleading, our scoring may not accurately reflect the associated risk. In addition, data provided by third-party sources is a significant component of our scoring of loan applications and this data may contain inaccuracies. Inaccurate analysis of credit data that could result from false loan application information could harm our reputation, business and operating results. In addition, we use identity and fraud check analyzing data provided by external databases to authenticate each customer’s identity. There is a risk, however, that these checks could fail, and fraud may occur. We may not be able to recoup funds underlying loans made in connection with inaccurate statements, omissions of fact or fraud, in which case our revenue, operating results and profitability will be harmed. Fraudulent activity or significant increases in fraudulent activity could also lead to regulatory intervention, negatively affect our operating results, brand and reputation and require us to take steps to reduce fraud risk, which could increase our costs.
The failure of third parties who provide products, services or support to us could disrupt our operations or result in a loss of revenue.
Some of our lending activity depends in part on support we receive from unaffiliated third parties. This includes third-party lenders who make loans to our customers under our CSO programs as well as other third parties that provide services to facilitate lending, loan underwriting and payment processing in our online lending consumer loan channels. The loss of our relationship with any of these third parties and an inability to replace them or the failure of these third parties to maintain quality and consistency in their programs or services or to have the ability to provide their products and services, could cause us to lose customers and substantially decrease the revenue and earnings of our business. Our revenue and earnings could also be adversely affected if any of those third-party providers make material changes to the products or services that we rely on. We also use third parties to support and maintain certain of our communication systems and information systems. If a third-party provider fails to provide its products or services, makes material changes to such products and services, does not maintain its quality and consistency or fails to have the ability to provide its products and services, our operations could be disrupted, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.
In Texas and Ohio, we rely on third-party lenders to conduct business. Regulatory actions can materially and adversely affect on our third-party product offerings in these states.
In Texas and Ohio, we currently operate as a CSO or a CAB, arranging for unrelated third-parties to make loans to our customers. Through December 31, 2018, our CSO programs in Texas and Ohio generated revenues of $272.2 million and $19.3 million, respectively. There are a limited number of third-party lenders that make these types of loans and there is significant demand and competition for the business of these companies. These third parties rely on borrowed funds to make consumer loans. If they lose their ability to make loans or become unwilling to make loans to us and we are unable to find another third-party lender, we would be unable to continue offering loans in Texas and Ohio as a CSO, which would prevent us from receiving revenue from these activities. This could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
In late July 2018, the Ohio legislature passed House Bill 123 which significantly limits permissible fees and other terms on short term loans in Ohio. The Governor signed House Bill 123 into law on July 30, 2018 which effectively eliminated the viability of the CSO model in Ohio. The bill was effective 90 days thereafter and certain sections apply to loans made 180 calendar days after the effective date. As a result, loan product changes in Ohio will occur on or near April 27, 2019.
As Texas’ legislative session begins in 2019, the results of Ohio’s House Bill 123 could be used as a model to implement a similar law in Texas. If we are not able to adapt or introduce new products to counteract the impact of a similar law and ruling in Texas as that of Ohio’s House Bill 123, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected.
Competition in the financial services industry could cause us to lose market share and revenues.
The industry in which we operate is highly fragmented. While we believe the market for U.S. storefronts is mature, it is likely that competition for market share will intensify. We believe the Canadian market is less saturated, but still experiences significant competition by both large, well-financed operators as well as significant numbers of smaller competitors. Across all geographies,
we see a growing number of sophisticated online-based lenders. Increased competition in any of the geographies in which we operate could lead to consolidation in our industry. If our competitors get stronger through consolidation, and we are unable to identify attractive consolidation opportunities, we could be at a competitive disadvantage and could experience declining market share and revenue. If these events materialize, they could negatively affect our ability to generate sufficient cash flow to fund our operations and service our debt obligations.
In addition to increasing competition among companies that offer traditional consumer loan products, there is a risk of losing market share to new market entrants. Increased competition from secured title loan lenders, pawn lenders and unsecured installment loan lenders could also adversely affect our revenues.
Our growth strategy contemplates disciplined opening of additional stores in the U.S. and Canada, and expanding our online presence in each of those geographies. If our competitors aggressively pursue store expansion, competition for store sites could result in our failing to open our planned number of stores, or increase our costs to secure additional sites, both of which could result in slower growth and diminished operating performance. Increased competition in our online business could result in higher advertising and marketing costs to attract and retain customers, leading to lower margins.
The international scope of our operations leads to increased cost and complexity, which could negatively affect operations.
The international nature of our operations has increased the complexity of managing our business. This has led to enhanced administrative burdens related to regulatory compliance, tax compliance, labor controls and other federal, state, provincial and local requirements. Additional resources, both internal and external, have been added to comply with these increasing requirements, resulting in an increase in our corporate costs. Other future changes to laws or regulations may result in further cost increases, thereby negatively impacting our profitability.
Our core operations are dependent upon maintaining relationships with banks and other third-party electronic payment solutions providers. Any inability to manage cash movements through the banking system or the Automated Clearing House (“ACH”) system would materially impact our business
.
We maintain relationships with commercial banks and third-party payment processors. These entities provide a variety of treasury management services including providing depository accounts, transaction processing, merchant card processing, cash management and ACH processing. We rely on commercial banks to receive and clear deposits, provide cash for our store locations, perform wire transfers and ACH transactions and process debit card transactions. We rely on the ACH system to deposit loan proceeds into customer bank accounts and to electronically withdraw authorized payments from those accounts. It has been reported that the U.S. Department of Justice and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as well as other federal regulators, have taken or threatened actions, commonly referred to as “Operation Choke Point,” intended to discourage banks and other financial services providers from providing access to banking and third-party payment processing services to lenders in our industry. We can give no assurances that actions akin to Operation Choke Point will not intensify or resume, or that the effect of such actions against banks and/or third-party payment processors will not pose a future threat to our ability to maintain relationships with commercial banks and third-party payment processors. The failure or inability of retail banks and/or third-party payment providers to continue to provide services to us could adversely affect our operations if we are unable or unsuccessful in replacing those providers with comparable service providers.
Public perception of our business and products as being predatory or abusive could negatively affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Negative press coverage and efforts of special interest groups to persuade customers that the consumer loans and other alternative financial services provided by us are predatory and abusive could also negatively affect demand for our products and services. Widespread adoption of this opinion could potentially have negative consequences for our business or our products, including lawsuits, adverse legislative or regulatory changes, difficulty attracting and retaining qualified employees, decreased demand for our products and services and reluctance or refusal of other parties, such as banks or other electronic payment processors, to transact business with us. These consequences could have a material adverse impact on our business and result in a significant decrease in our revenues and results of operations.
Improper disclosure of customer personal data, including by means of a cyber-attack, could result in liability and harm our reputation. Cybersecurity risks and security breaches, in general, could result in increasing costs in an effort to minimize those risks and to respond to cyber incidents.
We store and process large amounts of personally identifiable information, including data that is considered sensitive customer information. We believe that we maintain adequate policies and procedures, including antivirus and malware software and access controls, and use appropriate safeguards to protect against attacks. It is possible that our security controls over personal data, our training of employees and other practices we follow may not prevent the improper disclosure of personally identifiable information. Such disclosure could harm our reputation and subject us to liability under laws that protect personal data, resulting in increased costs or loss of revenue.
In addition, we are subject to cybersecurity risks and security breaches, which could result in the unauthorized disclosure or appropriation of customer data. To date, no actual or attempted cyberattacks have had a material effect on our operations or financial condition. However, we may not be able to anticipate or implement effective preventive measures against these types of security breaches, especially because the techniques change frequently or are not recognized until launched. We may need to expend significant resources to protect against security breaches or to address problems caused by breaches. Actual or anticipated attacks and risks may cause us to incur increasing expenses, including costs to deploy additional personnel and protection technologies, train employees and engage third-party experts and consultants. It is also possible that our protective measures would fail to prevent a cyber-attack and the resulting disclosure or appropriation of customer data. A significant data breach could harm our reputation, diminish our customer confidence and subject us to significant legal claims, any of which may contribute to a loss of customers and have a material adverse effect on us.
A successful penetration or circumvention of the security of our systems could cause serious negative consequences, including significant disruption of our operations, misappropriation of our confidential information or that of our customers or damage to our computers or systems or those of our customers and counterparties, and could result in violations of applicable privacy and other laws, financial loss to us or to our customers, loss of confidence in our security measures, customer dissatisfaction, significant litigation exposure and harm to our reputation, all of which could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, our applicants provide personal information, including bank account information when applying for loans. We rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties to provide the security and authentication to effectively secure transmission of confidential information, including customer bank account and other personal information. The technology used by us to protect transaction data may be breached or compromised due to advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography or other developments. Data breaches can also occur as a result of non-technical issues.
Our servers are also vulnerable to computer viruses, physical or electronic break-ins and similar disruptions, including “denial-of-service” type attacks. We may need to expend significant resources to protect against security breaches or to address problems caused by breaches. Security breaches, including any breach of our systems or by persons with whom we have commercial relationships that result in the unauthorized release of consumers’ personal information, could damage our reputation and expose us to a risk of loss or litigation and possible liability. In addition, many of the third parties who provide products, services or support to us could also experience any of the above cyber risks or security breaches, which could impact our customers and our business and could result in a loss of customers, suppliers or revenues.
In addition, federal and some state regulators are considering promulgating rules and standards to address cybersecurity risks and many U.S. states have already enacted laws requiring companies to notify individuals of data security breaches involving their personal data. These mandatory disclosures regarding a security breach are costly to implement and may lead to widespread negative publicity, which may cause customers to lose confidence in the effectiveness of our data security measures.
Indemnifications associated with assumed liabilities of acquired entities may be insufficient to cover our exposures to litigation and settlement costs.
In 2011, we completed the acquisition of Cash Money Group, Inc. (“Cash Money”). While the agreement governing our acquisition provides us with limited indemnification for litigation and settlement costs for activities related to Cash Money’s operations prior to acquisition, our recourse with respect to those matters is limited to set-off against a C$7.5 million escrow note. Through December 31, 2018, we have set off approximately C$4.2 million of class action settlement costs and related expenses, and C$0.3 million of tax indemnification amounts against the escrow note. The balance of this escrow note is included in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as Subordinated Stockholder Debt in this Annual Report.
In 2012, we completed the acquisition of The Money Store, L.P., which operated under the name The Money Box® Check Cashing (“The Money Box”). The acquisition agreement provides us with limited indemnification for certain matters related to The Money Box’s operations prior to the date of acquisition; however, our recovery is limited in most cases to an aggregate amount of $2.4
million and our ability to make claims is subject to certain time limitations. To date, no indemnification payments have been made or claimed under The Money Box acquisition agreement.
In 2013, we completed the acquisition of Wage Day Advance Limited (“Wage Day”). The acquisition agreement provides us with limited indemnification for certain matters related to Wage Day’s operations prior to the date of acquisition. To date, no indemnification payments or claims have been made under this provision.
These indemnifications provide us with only limited recourse against the sellers of these businesses in the event we incur substantial costs in connection with actions occurring prior to our acquisition of the businesses. The agreements limit the amount we can recover, limit the causes of action for which we can pursue recovery and place other restrictions on our ability to recover for such losses. Accordingly, if we incur substantial costs for issues arising prior to our acquisitions of these businesses, our financial position and results of operations may be adversely affected.
If we lose key management or are unable to attract and retain the talent required to operate and grow our business or if we are required to substantially increase our labor costs to attract and retain qualified employees, our business and results of operations could be adversely affected.
Our continued growth and future success will depend on our ability to retain the members of our senior management team, who possess valuable knowledge of, and experience with, the legal and regulatory environment of our industry, who have experience operating in our international markets and who have been instrumental in developing our strategic plans and procuring capital to enable the pursuit of those plans. The loss of the services of one or more members of senior management and our inability to attract new skilled management could harm our business and future development. We do not maintain any key man insurance policies with respect to any senior management or employees.
Labor costs represent a significant portion of our total expenses. If we are required to substantially increase our labor costs to attract or retain a sufficient number of qualified employees for our current operations, we may not be able to operate our business in a cost-effective manner. We also believe having experienced employees and staff continuity in our stores is an important contributor to the success of our business. If we were unable to retain our experienced managers and staff, it could adversely affect our customer service and our loan volume could suffer.
Adverse real estate market conditions or zoning restrictions may result in increased operating costs or a reduction in new store development, which could adversely affect our profitability and growth plans.
We lease all of our store locations. An increase in lease costs, property taxes or maintenance costs for lease renewals or new store locations could result in increased operating costs for these locations, thereby negatively impacting the stores’ operating margins.
A recent trend among some municipalities in the U.S. and Canada has been to enact zoning restrictions in certain markets. These zoning restrictions may limit the number of payday lending stores that can operate in an area or require certain distance requirements between competitors, residential areas or highways. These restrictions may make it more difficult to find suitable locations for future expansion, thereby negatively affecting our growth plans.
Our operations could be subject to natural disasters and other business disruptions, which could adversely affect future revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.
Our services and operations are vulnerable to damage or interruption from tornadoes, hurricanes, earthquakes, fires, floods, power losses, telecommunications failures, terrorist attacks, acts of war, human errors and similar events. A significant natural disaster, such as a tornado, hurricane, earthquake, fire or flood, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to conduct business, and our insurance coverage may be insufficient to compensate for losses that may occur. Acts of terrorism, war, civil unrest, violence or human error could cause disruptions to our business or the economy as a whole. Any of these events could cause consumer confidence to decrease, which could result in a decreased number of loans being made to customers.
We rely on trademark protection to distinguish our products from the products of our competitors.
We rely on trademark protection to distinguish our products from the products of our competitors. We have registered various trademarks, including “The Money Box,” “Speedy Cash®,” “OPT+SM” and “Rapid Cash,” in the U.S. and/or Canada, and are in the process of registering other trademarks in those jurisdictions. For trademarks we use that are not registered, and as permitted by applicable local law, we rely on common law trademark protection. Third parties may oppose our trademark applications, or
otherwise challenge our use of the trademarks, and may be able to use our trademarks in jurisdictions where they are not registered or otherwise protected by law. If our trademarks are successfully challenged or if a third party is using confusingly similar or identical trademarks in particular jurisdictions before we do, we could be forced to rebrand our products, which could result in loss of brand recognition, and could require us to devote additional resources to marketing new brands. If others are able to use our trademarks, our ability to distinguish our products may be impaired, which could adversely affect our business.
The failure to successfully integrate newly acquired businesses into our operations could negatively affect our profitability.
From time-to-time, we may consider opportunities to acquire other products or technologies that may enhance our product platform or technology, expand the breadth of our markets or customer base or advance our business strategies. The success of the acquisitions we have completed, as well as future acquisitions is, and will continue to be, dependent upon our ability to effectively integrate the management, operations and technology of acquired businesses into our existing management, operations and technology platforms. Integration can be complex, expensive and time-consuming. The failure to successfully integrate acquired businesses into our organization in a timely and cost-effective manner could materially adversely affect our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition. It is also possible that the integration process could result in loss of key employees, disruption of ongoing businesses, incurrence of tax costs or inefficiencies or inconsistencies in standards, controls, information technology systems, procedures and policies. As a result, our ability to maintain relationships with customers, employees or other third-parties or our ability to achieve the anticipated benefits of acquisitions could be adversely affected and harm our financial performance. We do not know if we will be able to identify acquisitions we deem suitable, whether we will be able to successfully complete any such acquisitions on favorable terms or at all or whether we will be able to successfully integrate any acquired products or technologies. Additionally, an additional risk inherent in any acquisition is that we fail to realize a positive return on our investment.
We may be subject to damages resulting from claims that our employees or we have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.
Many of our employees were previously employed at other financial technology companies, including our competitors or potential competitors, and we may hire employees in the future that are so employed. We could in the future be subject to claims that these employees, or we, have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers. If we fail in defending against such claims, a court could order us to pay substantial damages and prohibit us from using technologies or features that are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. If any of these technologies or features are important to our products, this could prevent us from selling those products and could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, such litigation could result in substantial costs and divert the attention of management.
Changes in our ability to access preapproved marketing lists from credit bureaus or other developments impacting our use of direct mail marketing could adversely affect our ability to grow our business.
Direct mailings of preapproved loan offers to potential loan customers comprise one of the most important marketing channels for loans we originate as well as those originated by third-party lenders. Our marketing techniques identify candidates for preapproved loan mailings in part through the use of preapproved marketing lists purchased from credit bureaus. If access to such preapproved marketing lists were lost or limited due to regulatory changes prohibiting credit bureaus from sharing such information or for other reasons, our growth could be significantly and adversely affected. If the cost of obtaining such lists increases significantly, it could substantially increase customer acquisition costs and decrease profitability.
Similarly, federal or state regulators or legislators could limit access to these preapproved marketing lists with the same effect.
In addition, preapproved direct mailings may become a less effective marketing tool due to over-penetration of direct mailing-lists. Any of these developments could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations or financial condition.
Because we maintain a significant supply of cash in our stores, we may be subject to cash shortages due to employee and third-party theft and errors. We also may be subject to liability as a result of crimes at our stores.
Our business requires us to maintain a significant supply of cash in each of our stores. As a result, we are subject to the risk of cash shortages resulting from theft and errors by employees and third-parties. Although we have implemented various programs in an effort to reduce these risks, maintain insurance coverage for theft and utilize various security measures at our facilities, it is possible that employee and third-party theft and errors will occur in material amounts. Cash shortages from employee and
third-party theft and errors were $0.6 million (0.06% of consolidated revenue) and $0.3 million (0.03% of consolidated revenue) for the year ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively. The extent of our cash shortages could increase as we expand the nature and scope of our products and services. Although we have experienced break-ins by third parties at our stores in the past, none of these has had, either individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our operations. Going forward, theft and errors could lead to cash shortages and could materially and adversely affect our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition. It is also possible that violent crimes such as armed robberies may be committed at our stores. We could experience liability or adverse publicity arising from such crimes. For example, we may be liable if an employee, customer or bystander suffers bodily injury or other harm. Any such event may have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition.
The preparation of our financial statements and certain tax positions taken by us require the judgment of management, and we could be subject to risks associated with these judgments.
The preparation of our financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions, including allowances for loan losses, certain assumptions related to goodwill and intangibles, accruals related to self-insurance and CSO guarantee liability, that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities, at the dates of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. In addition, management’s judgment is required in determining the provision for income taxes, the deferred tax assets and liabilities and any valuation allowance recorded against deferred tax assets. As a result, our assumptions and provisions may not be sufficient to cover actual losses. If actual losses are greater than our assumptions and provisions, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.
Risks Relating to the Regulation of Our Industry
Given the level of legal settlement expenses incurred through December 31, 2018 and unsuccessful discussions with the FCA, we made the decision to exit the U.K. market, thereby decreasing the size of our total addressable market and curtailing growth plans in the U.K.
Effective February 25, 2019, in accordance with the provisions of the U.K. Insolvency Act 1986 and pursuant to approval by the boards of directors of our U.K. Subsidiaries, due to unsuccessful discussions with the FCA, insolvency practitioners from KPMG were appointed as Administrators in respect of the U.K. Subsidiaries. The effect of the U.K. Subsidiaries’ entry into administration was to place the management, affairs, business and property of the U.K. Subsidiaries under the direct control of the Administrators. Accordingly, we will deconsolidate the U.K. Subsidiaries as of February 25, 2019 and will present the U.K. Subsidiaries as Discontinued Operations in the first quarter of 2019. These actions decrease the size of our total addressable market and curtail our growth plans in the U.K.
The CFPB examination authority over our U.S. consumer lending business could have a significant impact on our U.S. business.
Under Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act, enacted in July 2010, the CFPB regulates U.S. consumer financial products and services, including consumer loans offered by us. The CFPB has regulatory, supervisory and enforcement powers over providers of consumer financial products and services, including explicit supervisory authority to examine and require registration of providers such as us.
The CFPB has examined our lending products, services and practices, and we expect to continue to be examined on a regular basis by the CFPB. The CFPB’s examination authority permits CFPB examiners to inspect the books and records of providers of short-term, small dollar loans, and ask questions about their business practices, and the examination procedures include specific modules for examining marketing activities; loan application and origination activities; payment processing activities and sustained use by consumers; collections, accounts in default and consumer reporting activities as well as third-party relationships. As a result of these examinations, we could be required to change our products, services or practices, whether as a result of another party being examined or as a result of an examination of us, or we could be subject to monetary penalties, which could materially adversely affect us.
Furthermore, because the CFPB is a relatively new entity and its authority and activities have been influenced by the political party in power, its practices and procedures regarding examination, enforcement and other matters relevant to us and other CFPB-regulated entities are subject to further development and change. Where the CFPB holds powers previously assigned to other regulators, the CFPB may not continue to apply such powers or interpret relevant concepts consistent with previous regulators’ practice.
The CFPB also has broad authority to prohibit unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices and to investigate and penalize financial institutions that violate this prohibition. In addition to having the authority to obtain monetary penalties for violations of applicable federal consumer financial laws (including the CFPB’s own rules), the CFPB can require remediation of practices, pursue administrative proceedings or litigation and obtain cease and desist orders (which can include orders for restitution or rescission of contracts, as well as other kinds of affirmative relief). Also, where a company has violated Title X of the Dodd-Frank Act or CFPB regulations implemented thereunder, the Dodd-Frank Act empowers state attorneys general and state regulators to bring civil actions to remedy violations. If the CFPB or one or more state attorneys general or state regulators believe that we have violated any of the applicable laws or regulations, they could exercise their enforcement powers in ways that could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The CFPB promulgated new rules applicable to our loans that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
The CFPB has adopted the 2017 Final CFPB Rule and the 2019 Proposed Rule, which directly apply to our business. See "Business--Regulatory Environment and Compliance--U.S. Regulations--U.S. Federal Regulations--CFPB Rules" for a description of these rules.
The 2017 Final CFPB Rule established ATR requirements for “covered short-term loans,” such as our single-payment loans, and for “covered longer-term balloon-payment loans,” such as our revolving lines of credit, as currently structured. It also establishes the Payment Provisions that will apply to all of our loans, including our covered short-term loans, covered longer-term balloon-payment loans and our installment loans, which are “covered longer-term loans” under the 2017 Final Rule. While there are certain coverage exceptions, the exceptions do not apply to our loans.
The ATR provisions of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule apply to covered short-term loans and covered longer-term balloon-payment loans but not to covered longer-term loans. Under these provisions, to make a covered short-term loan or a covered longer-term balloon-payment loan, a lender has two options: (i) a “full payment test,” under which the lender must make a reasonable determination of the consumer’s ability to repay the loan in full and cover major financial obligations and living expenses over the term of the loan and the succeeding 30 days; or (ii) a “principal-payoff option,” under which the lender may make up to three sequential loans, without engaging in an ATR analysis. We believe that conducting a comprehensive ATR analysis would be costly and that many of our short-term borrowers would not be able to pass a full payment test. Accordingly, we believe that the full payment test option would have little, if any, utility for us. The option to make loans using the principal-payoff option might be more viable but the restrictions on these loans under the 2017 Final CFPB Rule would significantly reduce the permitted borrowings by individual consumers. Accordingly, unless they are substantially revised or eliminated, the ATR provisions could have an adverse impact on individual customers’ ability to borrow and, ultimately, our business.
In addition, the Payment Provisions of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule will require significant modifications to our payment, customer notification and compliance systems and create delays in initiating automated collection attempts where payments we initiate are initially unsuccessful. These modifications would increase costs and reduce revenues. Accordingly, this aspect of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule could have a substantial adverse impact on our results of operations.
In April 2018, the Community Financial Services Association of America (the “CFSA”) and the Consumer Service Alliance of Texas (the “CSAT”) filed a lawsuit against the CFPB in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, seeking to invalidate the CFPB Rule. The lawsuit alleges that the 2017 Final Rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) because it exceeds the CFPB’s statutory authority and is arbitrary, capricious and unsupported by substantial evidence. The lawsuit also argues that the CFPB’s structure is unconstitutional under the Constitution’s separation of powers because the agency’s powers are concentrated in a single, unchecked Director who is improperly insulated from both presidential supervision and congressional appropriation, and hence unaccountable to the American people. In June 2018, the judge granted a joint motion of the plaintiffs and the CFPB to stay the litigation but denied their motion to stay the compliance date of the 2017 Final Rule. In September 2018, the plaintiffs sought leave to seek a preliminary injunction against the 2017 Final Rule. In November 2018, the court reversed course and on its own initiative granted a stay of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule’s compliance date pending further order of the court. It continued in force its stay of the lawsuit. Potentially, this stay in the effective date could be lifted by the court before or after the August 19, 2019 date established by the 2017 Final CFPB Rule. At this time, we are unable to predict whether and when the 2017 Final Rule and 2019 Proposed Rules will go into effect and, if so, whether and how they might be further modified or quantify the impact on our business and operations.
Our industry is strictly regulated everywhere we operate, and these regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
We are subject to substantial regulation everywhere we operate. In the U.S. and Canada, our business is subject to a variety of statutes and regulations enacted by government entities at the federal, state or provincial, and municipal levels. These regulations affect our business in many ways, and include regulations relating to:
|
|
|
|
•
|
the amount we may charge in interest rates and fees;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the terms of our loans (such as maximum and minimum durations), repayment requirements and limitations, number and frequency of loans, maximum loan amounts, renewals and extensions, required repayment plans and reporting and use of state-wide databases;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
underwriting requirements;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
collection and servicing activity, including initiation of payments from consumer accounts;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the establishment and operation of CSOs or CABs;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
licensing, reporting and document retention;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
disclosures, notices, advertising and marketing;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
loans to members of the military and their dependents;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
requirements governing electronic payments, transactions, signatures and disclosures;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
currency and suspicious activity recording and reporting;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
privacy and use of personally identifiable information and consumer data, including credit reports;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing requirements, including currency and suspicious transaction recording and reporting;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
posting of fees and charges; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
repossession practices in certain jurisdictions where we operate as a title lender, including requirements regarding notices and prompt remittance of excess proceeds for the sale of repossessed automobiles.
|
For a more detailed description of the regulations to which we are subject and the regulatory environment in the jurisdictions in which we operate see “Regulatory Environment and Compliance” in this Annual Report.
These regulations, outside of our control, affect our business in many ways, including affecting the loans and other products we can offer, the prices we can charge, the other terms of our loans and other products, the customers to whom we are allowed to lend, how we obtain our customers, how we communicate with our customers, how we pursue repayment of our loans and many others. Consequently, these restrictions adversely affect our loan volume, revenues, delinquencies and other aspects of our business, including our results of operations.
Additionally, in June 2018, we discontinued the use of secondary payment cards for affected borrowers who do not explicitly reauthorize the use of secondary payment cards. For these borrowers, in the event we cannot obtain payment through the bank account or payment card listed on the borrower’s application, we must rely exclusively on other collection methods, such as delinquency notices and/or collection calls. The discontinuation for affected borrowers of our current use of secondary cards will increase collections costs and reduce collections effectiveness. Even in advance of the effective date of the 2017 Final CFPB Rule (and even if the 2017 Final CFPB Rule does not become effective), it is possible that we will make further changes to our payment practices in a manner that will increase costs and/or reduce revenues.
The California Financing Law caps rates on loans under $2,500 but imposes no limit on loans of $2,500 or more. The California Department of Business Oversight (the “DBO”) has suggested that the interest rate cap applies to loans in an original principal amount of $2,500 or more that are partially prepaid shortly after origination to reduce the principal balance below $2,500. While we disagree with this interpretation of the law, we nevertheless entered into a consent order with the DBO addressing the matter with the DBO to eliminate the cost, distraction and risks of potential litigation.
If we fail to adhere to applicable laws and regulations, we could be subject to fines, civil penalties and other relief that could have a material adverse effect our business and results of operations
.
The governmental entities that regulate our business have the ability to sanction us and obtain redress for violations of these regulations, either directly or through civil actions, in a variety of different ways, including:
|
|
|
|
•
|
ordering remedial or corrective actions, including changes to compliance systems, product terms and other business operations;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
imposing fines or other monetary penalties, including for substantial amounts;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
ordering the payment of restitution, damages or other amounts to customers, including multiples of the amounts charged;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
requiring disgorgement of revenues or profits from certain activities;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
imposing cease and desist orders, including orders requiring affirmative relief, targeting specific business activities;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
subjecting our operations to additional regulatory examinations during a remediation period;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
revoking licenses required to operate in particular jurisdictions;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
ordering the closure of one or more stores; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
other impactful consequences.
|
The regulatory environment in which we operate is very complex, which increases our costs of compliance and the risk that we may fail to comply in ways that could have a material adverse effect our business.
The regulatory environment in which we operate is very complex, with applicable regulations being enacted by multiple agencies at each level of government. Accordingly, our regulatory requirements, and consequently, the actions we must take to comply with regulations, vary considerably among the many jurisdictions where we operate. Managing this complex regulatory environment is difficult and requires considerable compliance efforts. It is costly to operate in this environment, and it is possible that our costs of compliance will increase materially over time. This complexity also increases the risks that we will fail to comply with regulations in a way that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
Current and future legal, class action and administrative proceedings directed toward our industry or us may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.
We have been the subject of administrative proceedings and lawsuits, as well as class actions, in the past, and may be involved in future proceedings, lawsuits or other claims. Other companies in our industry have also been subject to regulatory proceedings, class action lawsuits and other litigation regarding the offering of consumer loans. We could be adversely affected by interpretations of state, federal, foreign and provincial laws in those legal and regulatory proceedings, even if we are not a party to those proceedings. We anticipate that lawsuits and enforcement proceedings involving our industry, and potentially involving us, will continue to be brought in the future.
We may incur significant expenses associated with the defense or settlement of current or future lawsuits, the potential exposure for which is uncertain. The adverse resolution of legal or regulatory proceedings, whether by judgment or settlement, could force us to refund fees and interest collected, refund the principal amount of advances, pay damages or monetary penalties or modify or terminate our operations in particular local, state, provincial or federal jurisdictions. The defense of such legal proceedings, even if successful, requires significant time and attention from our senior officers and other management personnel that would otherwise be spent on other aspects of our business, and requires the expenditure of substantial amounts for legal fees and other related costs. Settlement of proceedings may also result in significant cash payouts, foregoing future revenues and modifications to our operations. Additionally, an adverse judgment or settlement in a lawsuit or regulatory proceeding could in certain circumstances provide a basis for the termination, non-renewal, suspension or denial of a license required for us to do business in a particular jurisdiction (or multiple jurisdictions). A sufficiently serious violation of law in one jurisdiction or with respect to one product could have adverse licensing consequences in other jurisdictions and/or with respect to other products. Thus, legal and enforcement proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our business, future results of operations, financial condition and our ability to service our debt obligations.
Existing or new local regulation of our industry could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
In recent years, a number of local laws have been passed by municipalities that regulate aspects of our business. For example, a number of municipalities have sought to use zoning and occupancy regulations to limit consumer lending storefronts. If additional local laws are passed that affect our business, this could materially restrict our business operations, increase our compliance costs or exacerbate the risks associated with the complexity of our regulatory environment.
Approximately 45 different Texas municipalities have enacted ordinances that regulate aspects of products offered under our CAB programs, including loan sizes and repayment terms. The Texas ordinances have forced us to make substantial changes to the loan products we offer and have resulted in litigation initiated by the City of Austin challenging the terms of our modified loan products. We believe that: (i) the Austin ordinance (like its counterparts elsewhere in the state) conflicts with Texas state law and (ii) our product in any event complies with the ordinance, when it is properly construed. The Austin Municipal Court agreed with our position that the ordinance conflicts with Texas law and, accordingly, did not address our second argument. In September
2017, the Travis County court reversed this decision and remanded the case to the Municipal Court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion (including, presumably, a decision on our second argument). To date, a hearing and trial on the merits has not been scheduled. Accordingly, we will not have a final determination of the lawfulness of our CAB program under the Austin ordinance (and similar ordinances in other Texas cities) for some time. A final adverse decision could potentially result in material monetary liability in Austin and elsewhere and would force us to restructure the loans we arrange in Texas.
The regulations to which we are subject change from time-to-time, and future changes, including some that have been proposed, could restrict us in ways that have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
The laws and regulations to which we are subject change from time-to-time, and there has been a general increase in the volume and burden of laws and regulations that apply to us in the jurisdictions in which we operate, at the federal, state, provincial and municipal levels. We describe certain proposed laws and regulations that could apply to our business in greater detail under “Business” in this Annual Report.
At the U.S. federal level for example, in 2017, the CFPB adopted the CFPB Rule and a final rule prohibiting the use of mandatory arbitration clauses with class action waivers in consumer financial services contracts (the “CFPB Anti-Arbitration Rule”). However, Congress overturned the CFPB Anti-Arbitration Rule in October 2017 and the CFPB has announced plans to reconsider the CFPB Rule, or at least the ATR provisions thereof. Additionally, the CFPB has announced tentative plans to propose rules affecting debt collection, debt accuracy and verification. Also, during the past few years, legislation, ballot initiatives and regulations have been proposed or adopted in various states, including most recently Ohio and Colorado, that would prohibit or severely restrict our short-term consumer lending. We, along with others in the short-term consumer loan industry, intend to continue to inform and educate federal, state and local legislators and regulators and to oppose legislative or regulatory actions and ballot initiatives that would prohibit or severely restrict short-term consumer loans. Nevertheless, if changes in law with that effect were taken nationwide or in states in which we have a significant number of stores, such changes could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
In Canada, most of the provinces have proposed or enacted legislation or regulations that limit the amount that lenders offering single-pay loans may charge or that limit certain business practices of single-pay lenders. Some provinces have also proposed or enacted legislation or regulations that impose a higher regulatory burden on installment loans or open-end loans that are determined to be “high cost.” In the U.K., Parliament and the applicable regulatory bodies have been expanding laws and regulations applicable to our industry. These include preparations by the U.K.’s Treasury, or Treasury, and FCA for the U.K. leaving the E.U. The Treasury is in the process of amending its rules to ensure that certain E.U. regulations and directives continue to apply following Brexit as well as introducing rules of conduct and similar duties of responsibility applicable to certain of our senior managers and other employees (effective beginning in December 2019). There are ongoing regulatory reviews relating to the consumer credit market including a review of high-cost short-term credit providers approach to responsible lending along with forthcoming regulatory changes with the wider high-cost credit products.
We expect that the interest in increasing the regulation of our industry will continue. It is possible that the laws and regulations currently proposed, or other future laws and regulations, will be enacted and will adversely affect our pricing, product mix, compliance costs or other business activities in a way that is detrimental to our results of operations.
Judicial decisions or new legislation could potentially render our arbitration agreements unenforceable
.
We include pre-dispute arbitration provisions in our loan agreements. These provisions are designed to allow us to resolve any customer disputes through individual arbitration rather than in court. Our arbitration provisions explicitly provide that all arbitrations will be conducted on an individual and not on a class basis. Thus, our arbitration agreements, if enforced, have the effect of shielding us from class action liability.
Our use of pre-dispute arbitration provisions will remain dependent on whether courts continue to enforce these provisions. We take the position that the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”) requires that arbitration agreements containing class action waivers of the type we use be enforced in accordance with their terms. In the past, a number of courts, including the California and Nevada Supreme Courts, have concluded that arbitration agreements with class action waivers are “unconscionable” and hence unenforceable, particularly where a small dollar amount is in controversy on an individual basis. However, in April 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision in
AT&T Mobility
v.
Concepcion
held that the FAA preempts state laws that would otherwise invalidate consumer arbitration agreements with class action waivers. Our arbitration agreements differ in some respects from the agreement at issue in
Concepcion
, and some courts have continued to find reasons to find arbitration agreements unenforceable following the
Concepcion
decision. Thus, it is possible that one or more courts could use the differences between our arbitration agreements and the agreement at issue in
Concepcion
as a basis for a refusal to enforce our arbitration agreements, particularly if such courts are hostile to our kind of lending or to pre-dispute mandatory consumer arbitration agreements. Further,
it is possible that a change in composition at the U.S. Supreme Court could result in a change in the U.S. Supreme Court’s treatment of arbitration agreements under the FAA. Further, it is possible that anti-arbitration legislation could be enacted. If our arbitration agreements were to become unenforceable for some reason, we could experience an increase to our costs to litigate and settle customer disputes and exposure to potentially damaging class action lawsuits, with a potential material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
The U.S. Congress and Trump administration may make substantial changes to fiscal, political, regulatory and other federal policies that may adversely affect our business, financial position, operating results and cash flows.
Changes in general economic or political policies in the U.S. could adversely affect our business. For example, the current administration under President Donald Trump has indicated that it may propose significant changes with respect to a variety of issues, including international trade agreements, import and export regulations, tariffs and customs duties, foreign relations, immigration laws, tax laws, corporate governance laws and corporate fuel economy standards, that could have a positive or negative impact on our business.
Risks Relating to Owning Our Common Stock
We may fail to meet our publicly announced guidance or other expectations about our business and future operating results, which would cause our stock price to decline.
We have provided in the past and may provide guidance in the future about our business and future operating results. In developing this guidance, our management must make certain assumptions and judgment about our future performance, including projected revenues, key consumer trends such as allowance and the timing of regulatory approvals. Furthermore, analysts and investors may develop and publish their own projections of our business, which may form a consensus about our future performance. The assumptions used or judgment applied to our current state to project future operating and financial results may be inaccurate and could result in a material reduction in the price of our common stock. Our business results may also vary significantly from our guidance or our analyst’s consensus due to a number of factors which are outside of our control and which could adversely affect our operations and financial results. Furthermore, if we make downward revisions of our previously announced guidance, as we made in February 2019 for the year ended December 31, 2018, or if our publicly announced guidance of future operating results fails to meet expectations of securities analysts, investors or other interested parties, the price of our common stock could decline.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish misleading or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about our business. If one or more of the security or industry analysts that covers us downgrades our shares or publishes misleading or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our shares could decrease, which could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.
Future sales of shares by existing stockholders could cause our stock price to decline.
A majority of our outstanding shares of common stock are held by a relatively small number of our stockholders. Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market by our significant stockholders or pursuant to new issuances by us, or the perception that such sales could occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the effect that such sales may have on the prevailing market price of our common stock.
As of December 31, 2018, we had 46,412,231 shares of our common stock outstanding, of which 28,812,962 shares are held by our affiliates and subject to the resale restrictions of Rule 144 under the Securities Act. As of December 31, 2018, holders of a majority of approximately 32,542,555 shares, or 70%, of our outstanding common stock have registration rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering the sale of their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders in the future.
Your ownership interest in us could rank junior to and be diluted by future offerings of debt or equity securities. Similarly, your ownership interest in us will be diluted by future awards or exercises of outstanding stock options under our equity incentive plans.
If we issue debt securities in the future, which would rank senior to shares of our common stock, it is likely that they will be governed by an indenture or other instrument containing covenants restricting our operating flexibility. We and, indirectly, our
stockholders will bear the cost of issuing and servicing such securities. We could also issue preferred equity, which would have superior rights relative to our common stock, including with respect to voting and liquidation.
Furthermore, if we raise additional capital by issuing new convertible or equity securities at a lower price than the initial public offering price, your interest will be diluted. This may result in the loss of all or a portion of your investment. If our future access to public markets is limited or our performance decreases, we may need to carry out a private placement or public offering of our common stock at a lower price than the initial public offering price.
Because our decision to issue debt, preferred or other equity or equity-linked securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Thus, holders of our common stock will bear the risk of our future offerings reducing the market price of our common stock and diluting the value of their shareholdings in us.
Similarly, any future awards of equity to our employees and the exercise of outstanding stock options by employees will dilute your ownership interest in us. As of December 31, 2018, we had options outstanding that, if fully exercised, would result in the issuance of approximately 1,445,332 shares of our common stock. All of the shares of our common stock issuable upon the exercise of options have been registered under the Securities Act. Accordingly, these shares will be able to be freely sold in the public market upon issuance as permitted by any applicable vesting requirements, except for shares held by affiliates, who will be subject to the resale restrictions under the Securities Act.
We are currently subject to a securities class action lawsuit, the unfavorable outcome of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In December 2018, a putative securities class action lawsuit was filed against us and our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and chief operating officer. While we are, and will continue to, vigorously contest this lawsuit, we cannot determine the final resolution of the lawsuit or when it might be resolved. In addition to the expenses incurred in defending this litigation and any damages that may be awarded in the event of an adverse ruling, our management’s efforts and attention may be diverted from the ordinary business operations to address these claims. Regardless of the outcome, this litigation may have a material adverse effect on our results because of defense costs, including costs related to our indemnification obligations, diversion of resources and other factors. We discuss this lawsuit further in
Note 17, "Contingent Liabilities"
of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We are no longer an “emerging growth company” and, as a result, we are subject to increased disclosure and governance requirements. The requirements of being a public company may strain our resources and distract our management, which could make it difficult to manage our business, particularly with the loss of emerging growth company status.
We qualified as an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, through August 27, 2018. The loss of emerging growth company status has substantially increased our compliance costs and makes some activities more time consuming and costly. In particular, we incurred significant expenses and devoted substantial management effort toward ensuring compliance with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and these expenditures of resources will continue. Failure to comply with these requirements could also subject us to enforcement actions by the SEC, further increase costs and divert management’s attention, damage our reputation and adversely affect our business, operating results or financial condition.
As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, Sarbanes-Oxley, the Dodd-Frank Act, the listing requirements of the NYSE and other applicable securities rules and regulations. Compliance with these rules and regulations, which continue to evolve over time, has increased our legal and financial compliance costs, will make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly, will increase demand on our employees, systems and resources and will divert management's time and attention from revenue generating activities. Given these requirements, management’s attention may be diverted from other business concerns, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
The additional burdens of complying with being a public company along with following new rules and regulations have made it more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and in the future we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These factors could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors, particularly to serve on our audit committee and compensation committee, and qualified executive officers.
The market price of our common stock may be volatile.
The stock market is highly volatile. As a result, the market price and trading volume for our common stock may also be highly volatile, and investors in our common stock may experience a decrease in the value of their shares, including decreases unrelated to our operating performance or prospects. Factors that could cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly include:
|
|
|
|
•
|
our operating and financial performance and prospects and the performance of other similar companies;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
our quarterly or annual earnings or those of other companies in our industry;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
conditions that impact demand for our products and services;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
our ability to accurately forecast our financial results;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the public’s reaction to our press releases, financial guidance and other public announcements, and filings with the SEC;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
changes in earnings estimates or recommendations by securities or research analysts who track our common stock;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
market and industry perception of our level of success in pursuing our growth strategy;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
strategic actions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions or restructurings;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
changes in government and other regulations;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
changes in accounting standards, policies, guidance, interpretations or principles;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
arrival or departure of members of senior management or other key personnel;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
the number of shares that are publicly traded;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
sales of common stock by us, our investors or members of our management team;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
factors affecting the industry in which we operate, including competition, innovation, regulation, the economy and other factors; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
changes in general market, economic and political conditions in the U.S. and global economies or financial markets, including those resulting from natural disasters, telecommunications failures, cyber-attacks, civil unrest in various parts of the world, acts of war, terrorist attacks or other catastrophic events.
|
Any of these factors may result in large and sudden changes in the trading volume and market price of our common stock and may prevent you from being able to sell your shares at or above the price you paid for them.
Following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders may file securities class action lawsuits against a company. Our involvement in a class action lawsuit, such as the lawsuit described above in “--We are currently subject to a securities class action lawsuit, the unfavorable outcome of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows" could be costly to defend and divert our senior management’s attention and, if adversely determined, could involve substantial damages that may not be covered by insurance.
Our common stock has relatively low trading volume and an active trading market for our common stock may not develop, which could further depress the market price for our common stock.
Our common stock is relatively thinly traded and our average daily trading volume is relatively low compared to the number of shares of common stock that are outstanding. The low trading volume of our common stock can cause our stock price to fluctuate significantly as well as make it more difficult for a stockholder to sell their shares of common stock quickly. As a result of our stock being thinly traded and/or current levels of our stock price, institutional investors might not be interested in owning our common stock. Given the limited trading history of our common stock, an active trading market for our common stock may not be sustained, which could adversely impact your ability to sell your shares of common stock and could depress the market price of those shares.
The FFL Holders and Founder Holders together own more than 50% of our common stock, and their interests may conflict with ours or yours in the future.
At December 31, 2018, FFL Holders and Founder Holders owned approximately 19.74% and 42.34%, respectively, of our outstanding common stock. As a result, the FFL Holders and the Founder Holders collectively have the ability to elect all of the members of our board of directors and thereby control our policies and operations, including the appointment of management, future issuances of our common stock or other securities, the payment of dividends, if any, on our common stock, the incurrence or modification of debt by us, certain amendments to our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws, and the entering into of extraordinary transactions, and their interests may not in all cases be aligned with your interests. In addition, the FFL Holders together with Founder Holders may have an interest in pursuing acquisitions, divestitures and other transactions that, in their respective judgment, could enhance their investment, even though such transactions might involve risks to you. For example, the FFL Holders together with the Founder Holders could cause us to make acquisitions that increase our indebtedness or cause us to sell revenue-generating assets.
In connection with the completion of our IPO, we entered into the Amended and Restated Investors Rights Agreement with certain of our existing stockholders, including the Founder Holders and Freidman Fleisher & Lowe Capital Partners II, L.P. (and its affiliated funds, the “FFL Funds”), whom we collectively refer to as the principal holders. Pursuant to the Amended and Restated Investors Rights Agreement, we have agreed to register the sale of shares of our common stock held by the stockholders party thereto under certain circumstances. We completed a registration pursuant to these registration rights in May 2018.
The FFL Holders and their affiliated funds are in the business of making investments in companies and may from time-to-time acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us.
Provisions in our charter documents could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider favorable.
Certain provisions in our governing documents could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving us difficult, even if such events would be beneficial to the interests of our stockholders. Among other things, these provisions:
|
|
|
|
•
|
permit our board of directors to establish the number of directors and fill any vacancies and newly-created directorships;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
authorize the issuance of “blank check” preferred stock that our board of directors could use to implement a stockholder rights plan;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
provide that our board of directors is expressly authorized to amend or repeal any provision of our bylaws;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
restrict the forum for certain litigation against us to Delaware;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
establish advance notice requirements for nominations for election to our board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at annual stockholder meetings;
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
establish a classified board of directors with three staggered classes of directors, where directors may only be removed for cause (unless we de-classify our board of directors);
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
require that actions to be taken by our stockholders be taken only at an annual or special meeting of our stockholders, and not by written consent; and
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
establish certain limitations on convening special stockholder meetings.
|
These provisions may delay or prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace members of our management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management. These provisions also may delay, prevent or deter a merger, acquisition, tender offer, proxy contest or other transaction that might otherwise result in our stockholders receiving a premium over the market price for their common stock. We believe these provisions will protect our stockholders from coercive or otherwise unfair takeover tactics by requiring potential acquirers or investors aiming to effect changes in management to negotiate with our board of directors and by providing our board of directors with more time to assess any proposal. However, such anti-takeover provisions could also depress the price of our common stock by acting to delay or prevent a change in control of us.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees and may discourage these types of lawsuits.
We may not pay regular cash dividends on our common stock and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment may depend on appreciation in the price of our common stock.
Any decision to declare and pay dividends will be dependent on a variety of factors, including earnings, cash flow generation, financial position, results of operations, the terms of our indebtedness and other contractual restrictions, capital requirements, business prospects and other factors our board of directors may deem relevant. The terms of our indebtedness limits our ability to pay dividends to holders of our common stock. As a result, you should not rely on an investment in our common stock to provide dividend income and the success of an investment in our common stock may depend upon an appreciation in its value.