Violation of the Interest Limitation Act—Decision Not to Refer for Prosecution; No Suspicion

This case involved a decision not to refer the matter for prosecution and a finding of no suspicion concerning an alleged violation of the Interest Limitation Act. The complainant alleged that the client had repeatedly received interest exceeding the statutory maximum interest rate. However, the investigative authorities determined that the alleged offense could not readily be established after considering the identification of the borrowing relationship, the nature of the payments, and whether the interest rate could be calculated.

01
Identification of the Borrowing Relationship
02
Whether the Payments Constituted Interest
03
Whether the Statutory Interest Rate Was Exceeded
04
Distinction from Separate Transactions

MEGA X organized the factual circumstances separately from the legal issues and provided an opinion regarding whether the elements of the alleged offense were established based on the submitted materials and the sequence of statements. In particular, we reviewed the matter with a focus on the point that the receipt of money alone does not establish receipt of interest exceeding the statutory maximum interest rate; rather, the borrowing relationship, the nature of the payments, and the feasibility of calculating the interest rate must all be verified.

We also explained that, where multiple monetary transactions existed, the borrowing at issue had to be distinguished from the other transactions. To the extent publicly disclosable, the key issue in this case was not merely whether money had changed hands, but whether the factors necessary to establish the alleged offense had been sufficiently identified.

No Suspicion