论文部分内容阅读
现时,部分信用社的信贷员在清收贷款过程中,遇到贷户无钱归还贷款本息的情况,往往向贷户收取少量“放空费”,少则5元,多则近百元。某信用社一信贷员一个月就收回“放空费”21笔,金额345元。信贷员凭这个收费一来可以向领导反映一天的工作动态,便于考核贷户的跑面情况,二来可以增加信用社“第三收入”,三来通过小额收费,可以延长诉讼时效,可谓起到了一石三鸟的作用。但是笔者在基层实际工作中发现,由此收费引发的负效应却是得不偿失的。 其一:“放空费”的收取,淡化了贷户的信用观念。贷户作为债务人按期归还贷款本息本是必须履行的义务,如果到期不还而只收取“放空费”信用观念必将受到影响,如某农户贷款2000元,当信贷员上门催收时,贷
At present, some loan officers of credit unions encounter loanlessness to repay the principal and interest of loans in the course of loan collection. They often charge a small amount of “freefall fee” to borrowers, ranging from as little as $ 5 as many as nearly $ 100. A credit cooperatives a loan officer a month to recover the “vent fee” 21 pen, the amount of 345 yuan. With this charge, loan officers can reflect the day’s work dynamics to the leadership, facilitate the assessment of the running situation of the loan clients, and secondly, increase the third income of the credit cooperatives. Third, through the small fee collection, the limitation of actions can be extended. Played a stone three birds role. However, the author found in the actual work at the grassroots level that the negative effect caused by such charges is outweighed by the losses. First, the charging of “venting fees” has weakened the credit concept of lenders. Loan as the debtor to repay the loan principal and interest on schedule is the obligation to be fulfilled. If the deadline expires, only the “empty pay” credit concept will surely be affected. If a peasant household loan is 2,000 yuan,