Product: Payday loan, title loan, or personal loan

In XX/XX/XXXX, I was approved for an online loan with Advance.Cash. In hindsight, this was a foolish, uneducated decision made on my part. I erroneously assumed that this company would follow all laws and regulations. 
Advance.Cash holds no license to issue loans to South Carolina residents. I am a resident of South Carolina. I contacted the South Carolina State Department of Financial Institutions and they verified that Advance.Cash is not licensed in South Carolina, therefore the loan contracts I had with Advance.Cash, according to my state 's laws, were never enforceable. To give Advance.Cash the benefit of the doubt, I requested a copy of its license to conduct business in South Carolina and was never provided a copy. 
South Carolina Code 34-39-110 regulates consumer loan lenders in South Carolina. As a resident of SC, I am subject to its laws. Lenders must have a license in South Carolina under the state law. Advance.Cash may be subject to tribal law based on its affiliation with Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation. I am not a member of that community ; therefore, I am not subject to tribal law. Because it is not licensed by my state and because I am not subject to tribal law, ALL loan contracts entered into are null and void. 
As a resident of South Carolina, I am protected by the South Carolina Code of Laws, The Consumer Finance Act, Title 34 Banking, Financial Institutions and Money XXXX XXXX Consumer Finance Law. Section D clearly states that Advance.Cash has no right to collect any portion of the money lent in violation of South Carolina law. It reads as follows : ( a ) " Consumer finance company '' shall include all persons conducting the business of making advances of cash in amounts of seventy-five XXXX dollars or less. ( a ) No person shall engage in the business of lending in amounts of seventy-five XXXX dollars or less and contract for, exact or receive directly or indirectly, or in connection with any such loan, any charges, whether for interest, compensation, consideration or expense, which in the aggregate are greater than the interest rate permitted by the general usury statute, except as provided in and authorized by this chapter and without first having obtained a license from the Board. d ) Any contract of loan, the making or collecting of which violates subsection ( a ) of this section shall be void and the lender shall have no right to collect, receive or retain any principal, interest or charges whatsoever, except in the case of bona fide error. 
I quickly learned that Advance.Cash is Makes Cents Inc. Despite claiming that it is not Makes Cents Inc, on its website, Advance.cash solely lists Makes Cents Inc in the " Contact Us '' area.

Makes Cents Inc is embroiled in numerous legal issues. I have also uncovered interesting information regarding XXXX XXXX and its connection to Makes Cents Inc. In an XX/XX/XXXX news article, it states : " XXXX XXXXbased business XXXX XXXX XXXX and founding co-owners XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX are facing a class-action lawsuit over an alleged nationwide payday lending program that imposed exorbitant annual interest rates while using Native American tribes as a front ... In an effort to avoid state and federal regulations on usurious lending schemes, XXXX XXXX XXXX allegedly hid behind the XXXX Nation, a XXXX American group composed of the Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara tribes located in XXXX XXXX, a remote reservation in North Dakota, the lawsuit alleged. While the XXXX XXXX acts as the tribal lender on paper, XXXX XXXX XXXX directs the lending operation ''. 
South Carolina lending laws are outlined in a lawsuit pending against Makes Cents Inc. A lawsuit was filed in XX/XX/XXXX against Makes Cents Inc and the Mandan , Hidatsa , and Arikara Nation . The suit states : In recent years, online lenders have concocted various schemes to make high- interest loans over the internet while avoiding state usury laws, including the off-shore scheme and the tribal or sovereign lending scheme. In the so-called off-shore model, the lender is purportedly located off-shore, such as in XXXX, but in reality, the lender operates in the United States. In XXXX, the Department of Justice initiated XXXX XXXX. Since XXXX XXXX, online lenders have transitioned to tribal lending schemes. In a tribal lending scheme, the lender affiliates with a Native American tribe to attempt to enhance the appearance of tribal ownership and insulate the scheme from federal and state law by piggy-backing on the tribes sovereign legal status and the tribes general immunity from suit under federal and state laws. In a tribal lending scheme, the tribe sets up a company that purportedly makes the loans while entering into an agreement with a servicing or consulting company that controls the entire business and retains the vast majority of the revenue from the scheme, leaving the tribe with one or two percent of the revenue. In this case, non-tribe members XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX and their company XXXX XXXX XXXX VI, LLLP ( collectively, the XXXX XXXX Defendants ) ran the lender Makes Cents , Inc. XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ), a purportedly tribal entity of the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation ( collectively XXXX the XXXX Nation or the XXXX XXXX in North Dakota that makes XXXX XXXX to persons located throughout the United States. '' At the time of this dispute in XXXX, Makes Cents Inc did not conduct its business on the XXXX XXXX XXXX, home of the Three Affiliated Tribes Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation. It actually conducted its business outside of the United States. Makes Cents Inc claims to be wholly governed by Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara Nation, which is part of the Three Affiliated Tribes of the XXXX XXXX XXXX. In my dispute against Makes Cents Inc d/b/a Advance.Cash, I did extensive research. I made numerous telephone calls and, through those, I learned that it was actually located in XXXX even within the United States let alone North Dakota or on the XXXX XXXX Reservation! 
Makes Cents Inc d/b/a Advance.Cash owes me {$250.00} that I paid to this illegal loan. Again, per South Carolina law, the lender shall have no right to collect, receive or retain any principal, interest or charges whatsoever. Advance.Cash owes me that {$250.00} I paid as it had now legal right to collect any money from me. 
Makes Cents Inc also owes me from a loan under its XXXX name. I paid approximately {$4500.00} in fees for this loan. Makes Cents Inc only refunded {$2000.00}. Again, per South Carolina law, the lender shall have no right to collect, receive or retain any principal, interest or charges whatsoever. Makes Cents Inc still owes me {$2500.00}.