The Fair Gap: Individual and Relational Damages in Consumer Finance

• In Event: 3411 - Economic Sociology Regular Session: Theoretical Perspectives

Abstract

Debates over what is fair animate the social science literature, as tensions over what is morally right or wrong lead individuals and institutions to modify or block legally permissible transactions. This study, drawing on 7,147 complaint narratives submitted to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, reveals how consumers write about what is unfair and how the government bureau, charged with “making sure banks, lenders, and other financial companies treat [consumers] fairly,” responds to their charges of unfair treatment. The data come from student loan complaints, but the findings resonate with complaints about credit cards, debt collection, and consumer financial services more generally. We identify the multiple meanings of fairness, those ascribed to an individual’s circumstances versus those that reside in the individual’s relationships (relational claims). By contrasting how those complaints are resolved, we identify a “fair gap,” a difference in whether individual or relational damages are recognized and affirmed through sanctions.

Authors

• Frederick F. Wherry, Princeton University

• Parijat Chakrabarti, Princeton University

• Isabel Jijon, Princeton University

• Kathleen Donnelly, Princeton University