Many Canadians with poor credit rely on alternative lenders, oftentimes online lenders, for their financing needs. Although alternative lenders offer far more flexible qualification requirements for their credit products, the cost of borrowing is often much higher than at a traditional lending institution. In order to better understand the experiences and challenges credit-constrained borrowers face in the alternative lending industry, we’ve surveyed 3480 Canadians who have applied for a personal loan online.
Survey respondents who applied for an online personal loan, whether they were rejected or approved, can be considered as credit constrained as survey results indicated the following:
As mentioned, alternative lenders have more flexible lending standards in comparison to big banks and other traditional financial institutions. This is why many Canadians with subprime credit rely on alternative lenders, especially for personal loans. According to the survey results, 81.8% of respondents have been rejected for an online personal loan while only 71.4% have been approved for an online personal loan at some point in time. Conversely, almost a third of respondents (28.6%) have never been approved for a loan while only 18.2% have been approved for a loan without ever experiencing a loan rejection.
| Respondents who have been rejected for an online personal loan | 81.8% |
| Respondents who have been approved for an online personal loan | 71.4% |
| Respondents who have never been rejected for a personal loan they’ve applied for online | 18.2% |
| Respondents who have never been approved for a personal loan they’ve applied for online | 28.6% |
When respondents were asked why they were rejected for an online personal loan, these were the top reasons given for rejection:
| Credit score was too low | 85.3% |
| Income requirements not met | 61.1% |
| Debt-to-income ratio too high | 47.4% |
| Lender not interested in application | 46.7% |
| Additional documentation required | 38.1% |
| Borrower was not understood by lender | 35.7% |
Online lenders tend to have a bad reputation due to the higher cost of borrowing they offer. However, they are still a necessary avenue for credit for a significant portion of individuals in Canada. Notably, survey results showed respondents who applied for an online personal loan had a fairly positive experience.
Of the respondents who were rejected for an online personal loan:
Online lenders are often seen as deceptive credit providers who prey on credit-constrained individuals. But according to the survey results, 77% of respondents who were approved for a loan reported that their lender explained the personal loan costs clearly. Though it is good to see the majority of credit-constrained borrowers have had at least one borrowing experience where costs were well explained, there is still room for improvement.
While Canadians are fairly responsible when it comes to paying back their debt, some may have trouble keeping up with their payments due to unexpected events like job loss or financial emergencies such as a car repair or medical expense. When this happens, individuals may end up defaulting on their loan. However, in other cases, some are offered payment relief solutions by their lender. According to the survey results, respondents who could not afford to make payments were offered solutions by their lender to help repay the loan.
| Loan payment deferral | 54.1% |
| Loan restructuring | 40.8% |
| Lower interest rate | 25.2% |
While there are reputable online lenders, there are also predatory lenders who use unethical practices to pressure and confuse borrowers into accepting unfair lending terms. One of the most common tactics used is charging undisclosed or hidden fees. According to the survey, 34.5% of respondents approved for a loan said they’ve dealt with lenders who charged them fees that were different from the costs explained. This is in line with an alternative lending study conducted by Loans Canada in 2020, where 22.4% and 32.8% of respondents reported lenders charging undisclosed or hidden fees, respectively.
Other shady behaviours reported by respondents who were approved for a loan included being pressured to complete the application quickly (40.4%) and being pressured into buying credit building services (44.8%).
| Charged fees that were different than explained. | 34.5% |
| Felt pressured to fill their loan application quickly. | 40.4% |
| Felt pressured to accept credit building services. | 44.8% |
In fact, some lenders even added loan protection insurance into the contract without the respondent being aware. Loan protection insurance is an optional product that covers the borrower’s payments in the event they are unable to make their payments. This is often a costly and unnecessary expense for most borrowers. When asked, 23.8% of respondents approved for a loan reported being charged for loan protection insurance without signing up for it or knowing what it was.
| Respondents who did not have loan protection insurance. | 42.6% |
| Respondents who did have loan protection insurance. | 33.6% |
| Respondents who had loan protection insurance but did not sign up for it or know what it was. | 23.8% |
It is in every lender’s right to take action when a borrower is unable to repay their loan. Depending on the lender, some may choose to help the borrower make their payments by offering payment deferrals, loan restructuring, or a lower interest rate. On the other hand, some may resort to more aggressive forms of debt collection when a borrower is uncooperative and refuses to pay. Lenders may at times also sell debt to collection agencies. While all this is legal, some lenders use more unfair debt collection tactics. This includes excessive calling, using coercive language, threats and other harassive debt collection practices.
Unfortunately, while there are debt collection rules that prohibit collection agencies and federally regulated institutions from using certain aggressive debt collection practices, high-cost credit businesses like online lenders are not subject to these same restrictions given they are provincially regulated.
In Canada, there are currently only four provinces (AB, QC, BC and MB) that have implemented laws to regulate these alternative lenders. Depending on the province, some debt collection practices used by lenders could be illegal. To find out, please check your province’s high cost of credit legislation.
According to the survey results, lenders often attempted to recoup payments using some of the following methods:
In an effort to collect payment from respondents who missed a payment, lenders have:
| Used hostile language toward them or their references | 28.4% |
| Threatened to charge them with a crime | 28.5% |
| Threatened to have their wages garnished | 37.7% |
| Contacted their friends, family or employer through social media | 36.2% |
| Contacted their references (work, family or friends) to discuss their debt | 44.8% |
| Sold their debt to a collection agency | 60.2% |
Overall, the survey showed borrowers overall have had a more positive experience than a negative one. However, the results skew when comparing the experience of those who have only been rejected or approved. As expected, those who were only rejected had a more negative experience while those who were only approved had a more positive experience.
The gender wage gap issue is a concern for many Canadians. According to Statistics Canada, women between the ages of 25 and 54 earned on average 13.3% less per hour than men. This inequity between men and women has warranted closer attention, as women have been surpassing men in attaining higher education, which is synonymous with higher income.
The data showed similar inequality between men and women in terms of income, debt, and access to online personal loans.
Of the respondents who identify as female, 75.2% have been rejected for an online personal loan, whereas only 69.8% of the respondents who identify as male reported being rejected. This discrepancy may be explained by the fact that more women fell into the lower-income brackets than men. Similarly, the percentage of respondents who identified as female and carried debt, increased as the level of debt rose.
When comparing the level of debt between the two genders, a higher percentage of women carried debt than men at every debt level. Moreover, of the respondents rejected due to a high debt-to-income ratio, 56.6% were female and 43.4% were male, while those rejected due to income requirements, 58% were female and 42% were male.
According to Statistics Canada, low income is defined as a household that earns less than 50% of the median household income which is $62,900 as of 2019. This means those earning less than $31,450 fall into the low-income bracket. As such, we looked at the experience of those with an income below $30,000 versus those with an income above $60,000. When comparing the borrowing experience, those with a higher income had a better one because:
However, surprisingly those with a higher income were more likely to be rejected due to a low credit score and a high debt-to-income ratio. In fact, data showed that as income increased, the number of people rejected due to a high debt-to-income ratio also increased.
When comparing the Indigenous group vs the rest of the respondents, results suggested that there may be some inequity in their experiences with online borrowing. Data showed that there was a 7.9% difference between the rejection rates between Indigenous people (88.5%) and the rest of the respondents (80.6%). This difference is seen more with Indigenous men than women.
| Indigenous | The Rest | Difference In Rejection Rates | |
| Female | 87.9% | 81.8% | 6.1% |
| Male | 89.1 | 79% | 10.1% |
| Everyone | 88.5% | 80.6% | 7.9% |
This difference can be seen in various areas of the online borrowing experience. When comparing the reasons for rejecting it was noted that more indigenous men and women were rejected because :
| Indigenous Women | The Rest of the Women | Difference | |
| Their lender needed additional documents that they could not provide. | 43.4% | 34.6% | 8.8% |
| Their lender was not interested in their application. | 54.7% | 42.7% | 12% |
| They had trouble being understood by their lender. | 41.6% | 32.6% | 9% |
| Indigenous Men | The Rest of the Men | Difference | |
| Their lender needed additional documents that they could not provide. | 47.7% | 38.6% | 9.1% |
| Their lender was not interested in their application. | 51.6% | 47.6% | 4% |
| They had trouble being understood by their lender. | 43.9% | 35.7% | 8.2% |
Similarly, data suggested that more Indigenous people were subject to lender pressure tactics and other unethical practices like charging them fees that were different than explained. The tables below show that there was approximately a 10% gap between the indigenous females (39.8%) and the rest of the women (30.6%) when asked if their lender ever charged fees that were different than explained. It also shows that more Indigenous men felt pressured to fill their loan applications quickly. There was a 12.1% gap between the Indigenous men (53.9%) and the rest of the men (41.8%). It should also be noted that more Indigenous females felt pressured to accept credit building services and were more likely to pay for loan protection insurance without knowing what it was or signing up for it.
| Indigenous | The Rest | Difference | |
| Female | 27.6% | 22.1% | 5.5% |
| Male | 24.3% | 24.2% | 0.1% |
| Indigenous | The Rest | Difference | |
| Female | 47.6% | 38.9% | 8.7% |
| Male | 53% | 48.3% | 4.7% |
| Indigenous | The Rest | Difference | |
| Female | 38.2% | 37.3% | 0.9% |
| Male | 53.9% | 41.8% | 12.1% |
| Indigenous | The Rest | Difference | |
| Female | 39.8% | 30.6% | 9.2% |
| Male | 39.1% | 36% | 3.1% |
According to the Canadian Survey on Disability (2017) by Statistics Canada, 22% or 6.2 million Canadians live with at least one disability. Those with a disability have historically been at a disadvantage in almost every facet of life. Oftentimes, marginalized groups such as those with a disability face inequity in terms of employment opportunities, financial security, and access to different products and services.
Unfortunately, despite alternative lenders being more open to those with subprime credit, the data suggests that those with a disability still face many hurdles when qualifying for a personal loan. Some of the main complaints respondents have were that there was a lack of representation and that their government-funded income was being excluded as a source of reliable income.
Here are some complaints straight from the respondents:
Of the respondents with very good health (no disability or illness), 77.7% have been rejected for a loan, while respondents with very poor health (major disability or illness), 89.3% have been rejected for a loan.
When comparing respondents with very good health vs. very poor health, data showed that as the level of health deteriorated, respondents reported more negative borrowing experiences. For example, 23.0% of respondents with very good health said their lender was rude, while 34.8% of the respondents with very poor health said their lender was rude. Similarly, where only 29.2% of respondents with very good health felt uneducated due to the way their lender treated them, this number rose by 10% for those with very poor health (39.8%). People with disabilities or illness have a demonstrably worse borrowing and customer experience than those without disabilities or illness.
Similarly, when comparing the experiences of respondents who’ve been approved for a loan, 51.7% of the respondents with very poor health reported being pressured to complete their loan application quickly, while only 37.1% of those with very good health reported the same. This trend continues in terms of the fees charged versus what was explained and pressure to accept credit building services. Furthermore, when it came down to respect, those with very good health reported feeling respected as an individual, which is 8% more than respondents with very poor health.
| Respondents with very poor health (major disability or illness | Respondents with very good health (no disability or illness) | Difference in experience | |
| Cost of the loan was clearly explained by the lender | 73.2% | 78% | -4.8% |
| The fees charged were different than explained by the lender | 43.6% | 32.5% | 11.1% |
| Felt pressured to complete the loan application quickly by the lender | 51.7% | 37.1% | 14.6% |
| Was taken seriously by the lender | 59.7% | 62.5% | -2.8% |
| Felt pressured to accept credit building services by the lender | 51.7% | 41% | 10.7% |
| Felt respected as an individual by the lender | 70.5% | 78.4% | -7.9% |
Of course, that’s not to say that all Canadians with a major disability or illness only have negative experiences. Of the respondents with very poor health (major disability or illness), 66.2% have still been approved for a loan.
Whether you borrow from a traditional bank, credit union or online lender, each comes with its own advantages and disadvantages. With online lenders, credit-constrained borrowers can take advantage of more favourable qualification requirements and gain access to credit products that they otherwise aren’t able to qualify for. Likewise, they also have to watch out for higher costs, hidden costs and other unfair lending practices.
Loans Canada believes increased financial literacy is a good solution to many of these problems, as this would equip consumers with the knowledge they need to borrow more responsibly.
From March 16, 2021, to April 19, 2021, a survey was conducted by Loans Canada. A convenience sample of 3480 Canadians who have applied with an online lender were asked questions related to their borrowing experience. Participants were asked 24 questions and data was collected using Google Forms.
Rating of 5/5 based on 5 votes.
Priyanka Correia is a Marketing Coordinator and personal finance expert at Loans Canada. Priyanka completed her Bachelor's degree in Marketing at Concordia University and has published work that has been mentioned in various news media. She is passionate about money management and educating Canadian consumers about how to take control of their financial lives.
Save time and money with Loans Canada. Research and compare lenders before you apply. Share your experiences with Canada's top lenders.
Loans Canada is pleased to announce it placed No. 131 on the 2022 Report on Business ranking of Canada’s Top Growing Companies.
Frank Mortgage is Canada’s one-stop shop for mortgages. Get up to $1,500 cash back on your mortgage.
Great unsecured credit card for customers currently in, or recently discharged from, a consumer proposal or bankruptcy
Earn an average 5%¹ cashback at thousands of partners and at least 0.5%² cashback guaranteed with Neo.
KOHO’s Credit Building Program helps you build a better credit history with easy to manage payments for just $10/month.
All consultations and conversations with Loans Canada and its partners are confidential and risk-free. Speak with a trusted specialist today and see how we can help you achieve your financial goals faster. Loans Canada and its partners will never ask you for an upfront fee, deposit or insurance payments on a loan. Loans Canada is not a mortgage broker and does not arrange mortgage loans or any other type of financial service.
When you apply for a Loans Canada service, our website simply refers your request to qualified third party providers who can assist you with your search. Loans Canada may receive compensation from the offers shown on its website.
Only provide your information to trusted sources and be aware of online phishing scams and the risks associated with them, including identity theft and financial loss. Nothing on this website constitutes professional and/or financial advice.
