Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.1857 (2026)

Fees or charges servicing extension of credit; charge, collection, and receipt by depository institution; credit card arrangement fees and charges considered as interest; excessive fee or charge.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

CREDIT REFORM ACT

Act 162 of 1995

445.1857 Fees or charges servicing extension of credit; charge, collection, and receipt by depository institution; credit card arrangement fees and charges considered as interest; excessive fee or charge.

Sec. 7.

(1) In addition to the interest or finance charges that are authorized under section 4, a depository institution may charge, collect, and receive from a borrower or buyer all fees and charges that are agreed to or accepted by the borrower or buyer including those relating to making, closing, processing, disbursing, extending, committing to extend, readjusting, renewing, collecting payments upon, or otherwise servicing an extension of credit or any occurrence or transaction related to an extension of credit.

(2) For any credit card arrangement, all fees and charges allowed by this section are considered interest.

(3) A depository institution shall not require a borrower or buyer to pay an excessive fee or charge.

History: 1995, Act 162, Eff. Mar. 28, 1996

Compiler's Notes:

For transfer of authority, powers, duties, functions, and responsibility of the financial institutions bureau and the commissioner of the financial institutions bureau to the commissioner of the office of financial and insurance services and the office of financial and insurance services by type III transfer, see E.R.O. No. 2000-2, compiled at MCL 445.2003 of the Michigan compiled laws.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2001–2023 · leading case: Dressel v. Ameribank, 664 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dressel v. Ameribank, 664 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. 2003). · cites it 2× “Basic to these conclusions was the determination that, because defendant was engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, its activities were proscribed by the Credit Reform Act's prohibition on excessive fees.”

Dressel v. Ameribank, 635 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “MCL 445.1857(1). This grant of authority to charge fees is limited, however, to fees that are not excessive.”

Soaring Pine Capital Real Est. v. Park Street Grp. Realty (Mich. 2023). “1854; MCL 445.1857. 7 MCL 438.31c(11). 8 MCL 438.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.1857(1) — 1 case

Dressel v. Ameribank, 635 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “MCL 445.1857(1). This grant of authority to charge fees is limited, however, to fees that are not excessive.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.1857(3) — 2 cases

Dressel v. Ameribank, 664 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. 2003). “Basic to these conclusions was the determination that, because defendant was engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, its activities were proscribed by the Credit Reform Act's prohibition on excessive fees.”

Dressel v. Ameribank, 635 N.W.2d 328 (Mich. Ct. App. 2001). “MCL 445.1857(1). This grant of authority to charge fees is limited, however, to fees that are not excessive.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.