Unable To Repay Usury, Wenzhou Smes Are Frequently Subject To Violence.

Many small and medium enterprises owners who once sought help from private usury to solve the financial crisis may be regretting the decision. Because of the inability to repay debts owed by private usury, Wenzhou's small and medium enterprises operators are in an awkward situation of lawsuits, and even repeatedly encounter criminal acts such as violent debt collection or illegal detention, etc. in Wenzhou.

Yesterday, the Wenzhou Yongjia court external propaganda director Jiang Zhongke said that before July this year, the court accepted private lending disputes almost doubled, in addition to part of the creditors through litigation to claim, there are debtors encountered violent debt or illegal detention and the creditors to court.

This problem has attracted the attention of Zhejiang provincial high court.

Frequent cases of violent debt collection

Tang Jingjing, a publicizing officer of the Wenzhou Yongjia court office, provided data and data yesterday. In 1~7 months of this year, 394 cases of private lending cases were handled in Yongjia court, an increase of 91.8% over the same period.

In these private lending cases, in addition to the creditors' desire to claim compensation through the court, a large proportion of them are the cases of debtors who are unbearable to commit illegal acts such as violent debt collection, illegal detention, and so on.

According to information disclosure, illegal crimes such as illegal detention caused by non-governmental lending disputes are showing a trend of high incidence. As at the end of July, the hospital handled 43 criminal cases of illegal detention, involving 83 people, of whom 28 were caused by private lending disputes, involving 68 people, an increase of 169.2% over the same period last year.

Jiang Zhongke said that from the present point of view, there are three main characteristics in the criminal activities such as violence caused by private lending, and so on: first, when the borrower is unable to claim debts, in order to recover the principal and obtain high interest, he often forces the debtor or his relatives to repay debts by means of threats, beating and holding hostages. Two, many of the "Ma Zi" employed by the interest groups directly engage in violent debt collection, while the real creditors hide behind the scenes. Three, because of the characteristics of "short-term interest rate, high interest rate and favorable profits" of private lending, and the characteristics of lenders' "loan pfer, interest spread and weekly change", the lenders execute illegal detention to force the debtor to repay the debt as soon as possible.

"Many private lending disputes are debtors who can not stand the violence and ask creditors to sue, thereby exposing private usury cases."

Jiang Zhongke said that this situation has attracted the attention of Zhejiang provincial high court.

The relevant leaders have specifically instructed them to focus on this phenomenon and collect relevant materials.

The court is in a dilemma.

From the present point of view, in the disputes caused by private lending, the owners of small and medium-sized enterprises may become "defendants" and may also become "plaintiffs".

The defendant became a defendant because he could not repay the usurious loan in time. He became a "plaintiff" and brought the creditor to court because of violence, debt collection or even illegal detention.

"In the case of the current trial, most of the creditors are Guarantee corporation or underground banks; the debtor is generally the owner of the business. In the case of violent debt pursuit, the Guarantee corporation generally does not directly come out, but hire" the horse "to carry out.

Jiang Zhongke told reporters that in the trial of private usury cases, the court is in a dilemma: if the loan sides have usury, then the court does not protect the interests of creditors. Therefore, in the trial of private lending cases, the court will require creditors and debt hostages to see whether there is a usury.

On the other hand, if the debtor of the defendant has no sufficient evidence, the court will not be able to protect the defendant.

"At present, it is difficult for the defendant to give evidence."

"The general interest rate of civil usurious contracts is 1% to 3% monthly interest rate, but the actual monthly interest rate is 5% or even 10%."

Jiang Zhongke pointed out the "trick". "Lenders will deduct interest first, and the borrower can only get part of the interest deduction."

Therefore, despite the existence of usury in this process, borrowers are unable to give evidence.

This also brings great obstacles to the trial of the court. "

Avoid trial and affect business operation

A senior official who declined to be named in the private usury industry said that "in general, the usurious loan will appropriately relax the repayment period in debt collection, or hire some personnel to borrow money from the borrowers.

The torn face was brought to court to show that it had arrived at a last resort.

He also said he was also troubled by the fact that loans could not be effectively recovered at the moment.

In the aspect of borrowers, although small and medium-sized owners borrow money from usury, it is difficult for them to get legal protection because of the burden of proof, but Chiang believes that the court decision will give full consideration to the reasonable requirements of enterprises on the basis of respecting the objective facts, and will try to save the enterprises that have hope for development.

"The court has also taken special safeguard measures for enterprises, hoping to avoid the negative impact of case trials on the operation of enterprises, and enterprises should not fail due to improper private lending disputes."

He also pointed out that in the current circumstances, the court is very cautious about the usury dispute cases, because if the usurer wins the lawsuit, the court may be considered to support usury and safeguard illegal interests, but if the borrower wants to win a lawsuit, he must have sufficient evidence.