大学生缺乏社会经验，辨别能力相对较弱，欠缺基础金融知识和风险意识。不法网贷机构利用这些弱 点，有的在签订合同时书面金额远高于学生实际到手金额，有的诱骗学生在空白合同上签字，之后随意 填写不利于学生的条款。不法网贷机构还以"无抵押、高额度、低利率"为噱头，故意降低门槛、通过诱 导性营销，诱导学生过度消费、超前消费、盲目借贷。部分学生因无力偿还债务而遭受非法催收。 面对非法"校园贷"入侵校园，需要多方发力共同当好校园金融安全的"守门人"。 广大学生应树立科学理性的消费观。大学生应培养良好的消费习惯，量入为出，合理规划日常开销，避 免超前消费、过度消费。如确有资金需求，需要事先与父母沟通，认真评估自身还款能力，向学校申请 助学贷款、助学金等，或通过正规持牌金融机构咨询办理业务。 近日，国家金融监督管理总局北京监管局发出提醒：警惕非法"校园贷"，辨别非法外衣，共同保护学生 群体茁壮成长。 非法"校园贷"进入校园往往披着各式各样的外衣。监管部门已披露的案例中，不法网贷机构往往通过电 商平台、社交平台甚至本地生活服务平台引流，给非法"校园贷"披上"培训贷""美容贷""回租贷""刷单 贷""求职贷"等形式多样的外衣，极具迷 ...

Core Viewpoint - The Beijing Financial Regulatory Bureau has issued a consumer risk warning regarding illegal "campus loans," highlighting four main deceptive practices used by illicit lending institutions [1][4]. Group 1: Deceptive Practices - Illicit lending institutions disguise "campus loans" under various names such as "training loans," "beauty loans," "rent-back loans," "order-filling loans," and "job-seeking loans," making them highly misleading [4]. - Some institutions exploit students' lack of social experience by having them sign contracts with inflated amounts compared to the actual funds received, or by tricking them into signing blank contracts that are later filled with unfavorable terms [4]. - These institutions lure students with claims of easy loans requiring only an ID and student card, promoting "no collateral, high limits, and low interest rates," which encourages excessive and impulsive borrowing [4]. - Once students fall behind on payments, they face aggressive collection tactics, including threats and harassment, leading to severe personal safety concerns [4]. Group 2: Recommendations for Students and Parents - Students and parents are advised to adopt a rational consumption mindset, practicing frugality and planning expenses to avoid overspending [5]. - It is recommended to seek financial assistance through legitimate channels, such as discussing needs with parents and applying for student loans or scholarships from schools or licensed financial institutions [5]. - Consumers should enhance their self-protection awareness by safeguarding personal information, avoiding unauthorized agreements, and thoroughly reviewing loan contracts to ensure legality and fairness [5]. - In case of falling into illegal "campus loan" traps, it is crucial to remain calm, inform parents and teachers, keep evidence of transactions and communications, and report to authorities for legal recourse [5].

Core Viewpoint - The newly issued "Consumer Rights Protection Regulatory Evaluation Measures" by the National Financial Supervision Administration introduces a five-level classification system for evaluating consumer rights protection in financial institutions, with potential penalties including business suspension for the most serious violations [2][6]. Group 1: Regulatory Framework - The evaluation will be based on seven key standards: "system mechanism," "suitability management," "marketing behavior management," "dispute resolution," "financial education," "consumer services," and "personal information protection," which are more refined and detailed compared to the previous six standards [6][4]. - Financial institutions that do not engage in personal business or have a small proportion of personal business may not be subject to this evaluation [3][4]. Group 2: Evaluation Process - The evaluation process will occur annually, with the evaluation period from January 1 to December 31, and results expected by mid-March of the following year [9][8]. - The evaluation includes several steps: information collection, initial evaluation, re-evaluation, and review, with the possibility of adjusting evaluation results based on significant violations or data inaccuracies [9][10]. Group 3: Consequences of Evaluation Results - Institutions rated 1 or 2A may receive reduced on-site inspection frequency and be prioritized for participation in consumer protection policy trials, while those rated lower may face various regulatory measures, including guidance and potential business restrictions [7][6]. - Institutions rated 4 may be restricted from opening new businesses or branches if they fail to rectify issues, while those rated 5 could face business suspension and accountability for responsible personnel [7][6].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the alarming practices of high-interest lending apps like "Yun Dou Hua," which have rebranded from "Yun Dou Fen" to evade regulatory scrutiny while continuing to exploit consumers with exorbitant interest rates and aggressive collection tactics [1][3][5]. Group 1: User Experiences - Users like Li Fei and Zhang Bin have reported being trapped in a cycle of debt due to high annualized interest rates, with Li Fei facing a staggering 1460% rate and Zhang Bin experiencing an 876% rate [1][4]. - Complaints on platforms like Black Cat Complaints indicate a pattern of short-term loans with high interest, where users face harassment from collection agents after missed payments [4][6]. Group 2: Company Operations - "Yun Dou Hua" is linked to Shanghai Zui Meng Zhe Internet Technology Co., which has no financial business licenses and has been involved in multiple rebrandings to avoid regulatory action [5][10]. - The app operates under a "borrowed shell" model, where it is part of a larger network associated with "Kua Niu" capital, which has a history of high-interest lending practices [6][8]. Group 3: Regulatory Issues - The article points out significant regulatory gaps, particularly in how banks manage their lending partnerships, allowing funds to flow into unregulated platforms like "Yun Dou Hua" [9][10]. - Users are required to sign blank contracts, which enables the platform to impose hidden fees and complicates the process of seeking recourse in disputes [10].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the emergence of a predatory debt planning industry that exploits individuals in financial distress, despite regulatory crackdowns and previous rejections by loan platforms [1][8]. Group 1: Industry Practices - Numerous companies are hiring debt planners and credit management specialists, offering salaries as high as 500 RMB per hour, to attract a large pool of indebted individuals [2][5]. - The recruitment process emphasizes finding clients through social media, short videos, and other online platforms, while also utilizing illegal data acquisition methods to target potential victims [2][4]. - The industry has developed a modular approach, with organized operations that include creating fake legal documents and using deceptive marketing tactics to lure clients [3][5]. Group 2: Risks to Consumers - Consumers are often misled into paying high service fees for ineffective debt solutions, which can lead to further financial distress and potential identity theft [6][10]. - The article notes that some organizations may disappear after collecting fees, leaving clients with unresolved debts and damaged credit records [6][10]. - There is a growing trend of using fraudulent practices, such as identity theft to secure new loans, exacerbating the debt crisis for individuals [6][10]. Group 3: Regulatory Response - Regulatory bodies and law enforcement agencies are increasing efforts to combat the rise of fraudulent debt optimization schemes, emphasizing the need for collaboration among financial institutions, platforms, and regulators [7][9]. - New measures include stricter advertising regulations on social media platforms and enhanced scrutiny of debt-related services to protect consumers from scams [9][10]. - Experts suggest that clearer regulations and better consumer education are essential to mitigate the risks associated with these predatory practices [10][11].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the emergence of a predatory debt planning industry that exploits individuals in financial distress, despite regulatory crackdowns and previous rejections by loan platforms [1][4][8] Group 1: Industry Practices - Numerous companies are aggressively recruiting debt planners and credit management specialists, offering hourly wages as high as 500 yuan, to target a large pool of indebted individuals [3][4] - The recruitment process emphasizes minimal experience requirements, with training provided to new hires on negotiation tactics and debt optimization strategies [3][4] - The operational model of these companies is highly structured, involving multiple stages from client consultation to contract signing, utilizing social media and online platforms for customer acquisition [3][4] Group 2: Exploitation Tactics - The debt planning black market has developed a systematic approach, utilizing illegal data acquisition and deceptive advertising to lure clients [4][5] - Fraudulent entities often promise unrealistic debt solutions, such as complete debt forgiveness or extended repayment terms, while charging high service fees of 5% to 10% of the debt amount [5][6] - There are reports of these organizations disappearing after collecting fees, leaving clients with unresolved debts and potential identity theft risks due to the sensitive information shared [6][8] Group 3: Regulatory Response - Regulatory bodies and platforms are intensifying efforts to combat the rise of fraudulent debt optimization schemes, emphasizing the need for collaboration among financial institutions, platforms, and regulators [8][9] - Recent actions include stricter advertising regulations on social media and short video platforms, limiting promotions to licensed legal entities and banning misleading content [9][10] - Experts suggest that clearer regulations and enhanced consumer education are essential to mitigate the risks associated with these predatory practices [10]

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the risks associated with debt management services marketed by certain law firms and debt optimization companies, which often mislead consumers with false promises and may engage in fraudulent practices [1][12][13]. Group 1: Debt Management Services - Many consumers encounter advertisements for "debt optimization" and "overdue negotiation" services, often presented by individuals claiming to be legal assistants or financial advisors [1][3]. - These services promise to alleviate debt burdens by offering solutions such as "no payments for 1 to 3 years" and "only repaying the principal," which are often unrealistic and misleading [3][5][11]. - The operations of these companies typically involve high-pressure sales tactics and vague contractual agreements that can lead to consumer exploitation [12][13]. Group 2: Consumer Experiences - Consumers report being drawn to local law firms that claim to have extensive experience in handling debt issues, often leading to significant service fees without any real solutions [11][12]. - Complaints on platforms like Black Cat Complaints reveal numerous instances of consumers feeling deceived, with reports of service fees collected without any effective resolution of their debt issues [12][13]. - The article notes that many of these firms have expanded their reach to local markets, using targeted advertising to attract consumers in distress [9][11]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Concerns - Legal experts express skepticism about the legitimacy of the services offered, particularly the claims that debt management can be conducted without impacting credit scores [7][8]. - The practices of these debt management companies may violate regulations regarding consumer protection and financial practices, leading to potential legal repercussions for both the companies and the consumers involved [12][13]. - The article emphasizes the need for consumers to be cautious and to seek services from licensed financial institutions rather than unregulated debt management firms [12][13].

Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the risks associated with debt management services marketed by certain law firms and debt optimization companies, which often mislead consumers into believing they can avoid repayment or mitigate their debts without consequences [1][6][14]. Group 1: Debt Management Services - Many consumers encounter advertisements for "debt optimization" and "overdue negotiation" services, often presented by individuals claiming to be legal assistants or financial advisors [1][3]. - These services promise to help individuals manage their debts by offering solutions such as "1 to 3 years without repayment" and "only repaying the principal" [5][8]. - The operations of these companies often involve high-pressure sales tactics and misleading claims, leading consumers to believe they can avoid the repercussions of their debts [14][15]. Group 2: Consumer Experiences - Consumers report being drawn in by local law firms that claim to have extensive experience in handling debt issues, with some advertising that they have assisted over 10,000 individuals [3][12]. - Many consumers have shared negative experiences, including being charged service fees without receiving any effective assistance in resolving their debts [8][14]. - Complaints on platforms like "Black Cat Complaints" reveal a pattern of consumers feeling deceived by these services, which often fail to deliver on their promises [8][14]. Group 3: Legal and Regulatory Concerns - Legal experts have raised concerns about the legitimacy of the claims made by these debt management services, particularly regarding their ability to prevent negative impacts on credit reports [7][8]. - The methods employed by these companies, such as intercepting collection calls, are viewed as potentially illegal and could exacerbate the consumer's financial situation [7][8]. - The article emphasizes the need for consumers to be cautious and to seek services from legitimate financial institutions rather than these dubious debt management firms [14][15].

Group 1 - The article highlights the expansion of high-interest online lending products, with rates approaching 36%, amidst a backdrop of declining consumer loan rates from banks [1][3] - Financing guarantee companies play a crucial role in the online lending ecosystem, providing credit enhancement services such as risk sharing and compensation guarantees [1][6] - The "dual guarantee" model is emerging in the industry, allowing lenders to circumvent the 24% interest rate cap by splitting the pricing into two parts, which increases borrower debt vulnerability [1][7] Group 2 - The proliferation of online lending access points through various apps reflects a strong market demand for financial services, particularly in areas underserved by traditional financial institutions [2][3] - Many online lending platforms are now offering loans with interest rates that can exceed the legal cap of 24%, particularly in the case of licensed financial institutions [3][4] - The high fees associated with financing guarantees are often not disclosed upfront to borrowers, leading to consumer complaints about unexpected costs [8][9] Group 3 - The "dual guarantee" model, while expanding financial service coverage, raises concerns about compliance and consumer protection due to its complexity and potential for high costs [7][9] - Regulatory oversight is needed to address issues such as excessive borrowing, misleading marketing practices, and inadequate risk disclosures by online lending platforms [9][10] - Financial institutions and lending platforms must prioritize data security and transparency in their operations to protect consumer information and rights [10]

Core Viewpoint - The National Financial Regulatory Administration has issued a risk warning regarding fraudulent online loan practices, highlighting three main deceptive tactics used by illegal institutions to mislead consumers into taking out loans [1][2][3]. Group 1: Deceptive Tactics - The first tactic involves confusing concepts to mislead borrowers, where illegal platforms use ambiguous terms like "installment payment" instead of "installment loan," leading consumers to sign contracts without fully understanding the terms [1][2]. - The second tactic is making false promises to entice borrowers, such as exaggerated claims about loan approval or government assistance, often accompanied by unfavorable contract terms that benefit the lender [2][3]. - The third tactic is concealing the actual cost of loans, where platforms advertise low interest rates while hiding higher effective rates and additional fees, resulting in borrowers facing unexpected financial burdens [2][3]. Group 2: Current Market Situation - As of the end of 2024, there are approximately 350 million online loan users in China, with 120 million having overdue payments, indicating a significant market penetration and associated risks [3]. - In the first half of 2025, law enforcement uncovered 58,000 cases of fraudulent loans, arresting over 41,000 suspects and seizing 57.7 billion yuan in illicit funds, reflecting the scale of the issue [3]. - A significant portion of victims, 68.3%, are university students, highlighting the vulnerability of certain demographics to these fraudulent practices [3]. Group 3: Recommendations for Consumers - Consumers are advised to critically evaluate promotional content from online loan platforms, ensuring they do not fall for enticing offers that may lead to financial traps [4]. - It is essential for consumers to verify the legitimacy of loan institutions by consulting regulatory bodies or official websites to avoid scams [4]. - Careful examination of contract terms is crucial, with consumers encouraged to seek clarification on any ambiguous clauses before signing [4]. - Protecting personal information is vital, and consumers should take measures to safeguard sensitive data during the loan application process [4].