Eduardo De La Torre, Plaintiffs and Appellants v. Cashcall, Inc., Defendant and Respondent.

Summary

The court held that an interest rate on a California consumer loan of $2,500 or more may be unconscionable under Financial Code section 22302, even though section 22303 imposes no numerical interest-rate cap on such loans. It reasoned that unconscionability is a context-dependent inquiry requiring consideration of procedural and substantive unfairness, rather than a mechanical comparison with a statutory rate ceiling. The court also held that an unconscionable loan may support an unlawful-business-practices claim under the UCL. The opinion contains no separate writings.