blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Sept 22, 2017 11:09:00 GMT
It's not just the issues of errors in the borrower-supplied information, it is also the issue of having time to read and evaluate the information before bidding and the fact that some loans are filled before that can be done. Last time that happened Ablrate said that a solution, such as a delay between presentation and bidding, would be considered. So we have two issues here which are both consequences of the system provided. 1. We are required to read all the information before bidding so that we can make an informed decision - and sometimes that is not possible because there is insufficient time, even if you are at the screen on time. 2. Errors in the borrower-supplied information are for us to find and Ablrate are not liable for any consequential loss (rightly), but few of us are equipped/have time to do the full due diligence on every part of an offer - more than Ablrate do presumably or the errors would not be there. And we rely on the scrutiny of the lender body to find these things, preferably before we bid.
These are not hypothetical issues - there are real and identifiable. A delay between posting and bidding might resolve both. I am trying to resist the conclusion that Ablrate would rather be sitting reviewing matters with the money bid, than without it bid. I can see that damage could be unfairly caused to a loan proposal during the scrutiny period.
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Sept 22, 2017 12:01:18 GMT
an update has been sent by email that security will be enhanced and things made more clear cut.
|
|
|
Post by investorman on Sept 22, 2017 12:30:19 GMT
an update has been sent by email that security will be enhanced and things made more clear cut. Yes, not sure what make make of that. If the proposal is accurate, then there is a 40% LTV and dont need enhanced security, if the proposal is wrong then it doesnt matter if they top up the security now, people have been misled (not blaming Ablrate, as they would have been misled too), and surely there is a trust issue with continuing with the loan.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,924
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by macq on Sept 22, 2017 12:47:05 GMT
hopefully the extra security will be checked with a fine tooth comb
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2017 13:08:58 GMT
to be fair ablrite's loans move pretty slowly, normally offering at least 24 hours to do DD or read other people's
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Sept 22, 2017 14:14:48 GMT
an update has been sent by email that security will be enhanced and things made more clear cut. Yes, not sure what make make of that. If the proposal is accurate, then there is a 40% LTV and dont need enhanced security, if the proposal is wrong then it doesnt matter if they top up the security now, people have been misled (not blaming Ablrate, as they would have been misled too), and surely there is a trust issue with continuing with the loan. I just don't want to end up in another container loans type situation.
|
|
|
Post by ablrate on Sept 22, 2017 14:38:04 GMT
Perhaps as investors we have become our own worst enemies in that because we think we are going to miss out on the deal of the day, month, year etc we are finding ourselves just over inclined to rush in where perhaps a more prudent approach would be to avoid the lending opportunities being presented to us by ablrate until such time as an alternative to the existing set up can be sensibly implemented. Let's face it they're likely shedding no tears over whether we undertake any due diligence or not after their primary interest lies firstly with furthering themselves and secondly in funding their Borrowers Their loyalty and for that matter that of all other Platforms stops there, Abl like others exist to fill loans, make profits and we on the other hand are just fodder to achieving that objective. If Abl were truly willing to consider their Investor interests then they would afford us at least a 12-24 hour advance 'preview period' before 'Live' in which to undertake our personal and/or group due diligence, I don't see this, does anyone else? Now if DBW is truly serious about growing his Platform he needs our loyalties to be with him and his ambition, but that's for David to ponder. Goodness - what a cynical view - Lenders, the platform and borrowers have a symbiosis in this business. Our success is utterly dependent on the success of both borrowers and lenders, if we were the only ones who gained it wouldn't make for a very good business model. In all the loans we have done , there are very few that have filled super quick.... however, we are going to implement 'timed bids' meaning you can bid and cancel within a certain period of time (48 hrs probably). This will be time to review the docs and cancel the bids if you are not happy.. and some other features on this theme
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Sept 22, 2017 14:48:29 GMT
Sounds good although allowing cancellations instead of a preview period means some may abuse it if other lending opportunities come up.
I sold down loans at a loss to fund this so for the update could you confirm the final unencumbered security value please (having accepted the borrower’s unvetted 1.3M only to find out most of the boats already have/had charges I’m none the wiser!).
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,561
Likes: 1,170
|
Post by shimself on Sept 22, 2017 15:00:58 GMT
Goodness - what a cynical view - Lenders, the platform and borrowers have a symbiosis in this business. Our success is utterly dependent on the success of both borrowers and lenders, if we were the only ones who gained it wouldn't make for a very good business model. In all the loans we have done , there are very few that have filled super quick.... however, we are going to implement 'timed bids' meaning you can bid and cancel within a certain period of time (48 hrs probably). This will be time to review the docs and cancel the bids if you are not happy.. and some other features on this theme Great news you are making this change. Seems an odd way to do it, and not particularly to your advantage but anyway great and thanks With regard to the fishy loan, would I be "safe" investing now, will you be able to make reassurances about the various concerns inside the next 48 hours and could I withdraw if I don't fancy it afterwards? (Are you really able to make sure of your facts by - erm Sunday evening - or is it Tuesday evening?) Cynicism - in fact I believe in your good faith and overall competence, so what follows doesn't really apply to you, but that's just a feeling not based on facts and data: Absolutely everyone in the money business will say that they have to look after customers or else their reputation will be lost and they would be out of business. Some of them often forget to add that in the meanwhile they may have pocketed huge fees and they can start up again the next week. We've seen utterly delinquent monitoring on a number of platforms, probably imho incompetence rather than outright villainy, and anyway when a business is running into real problems the temptation to overlook things, to hope for the best, is considerable. from Madoff down it happens. There are a few platforms on here which have a significant number of loans looking very ropy, so logically they may fail I don't know if the platform owners would go broke (or at any rate, have to get a new job straightaway), but I think maybe not. The one thing which would go the furthest to assuage my cynicism is if a platform invested in its own loans (and held to term), to the point that if a loan failed they would be out of pocket. Go on, please be a pioneer.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 6,021
|
Post by registerme on Sept 22, 2017 15:06:55 GMT
The one thing which would go the furthest to assuage my cynicism is if a platform invested in its own loans (and held to term), to the point that if a loan failed they would be out of pocket. Go on, please be a pioneer. I thought they were prohibited from doing so?
|
|
|
Post by peerlessperil on Sept 22, 2017 15:11:04 GMT
shimself Ablrate wouldn't be the first. Kuflink Bridging Ltd (previously Alpha Bridging) take a subordinated 20% tranche of all bridging loans available on platform operated by Kuflink Ltd. They are subordinated via the agreement by which they novate across a chunk of the loan to you, but share the same legal charge. Not as good as separate 1st & 2nd charge as they will of course manage defaults with their own interest in mind, but in a poor recovery they would get wiped. Your accrued also ranks ahead of their capital. Of course whether the "senior tranche" you end up with is better risk/reward than what they retain for themselves is another matter entirely - you can bet the coupons will be very different, and the cynics might suggest investors are providing very cheap leverage.
|
|
rgog
Member of DD Central
Posts: 95
Likes: 70
|
Post by rgog on Sept 22, 2017 15:20:06 GMT
Goodness - what a cynical view - Lenders, the platform and borrowers have a symbiosis in this business. Our success is utterly dependent on the success of both borrowers and lenders, if we were the only ones who gained it wouldn't make for a very good business model. In all the loans we have done , there are very few that have filled super quick.... however, we are going to implement 'timed bids' meaning you can bid and cancel within a certain period of time (48 hrs probably). This will be time to review the docs and cancel the bids if you are not happy.. and some other features on this theme Great news you are making this change. Seems an odd way to do it, and not particularly to your advantage but anyway great and thanks With regard to the fishy loan, would I be "safe" investing now, will you be able to make reassurances about the various concerns inside the next 48 hours and could I withdraw if I don't fancy it afterwards? (Are you really able to make sure of your facts by - erm Sunday evening - or is it Tuesday evening?) Cynicism - in fact I believe in your good faith and overall competence, so what follows doesn't really apply to you, but that's just a feeling not based on facts and data: Absolutely everyone in the money business will say that they have to look after customers or else their reputation will be lost and they would be out of business. Some of them often forget to add that in the meanwhile they may have pocketed huge fees and they can start up again the next week. We've seen utterly delinquent monitoring on a number of platforms, probably imho incompetence rather than outright villainy, and anyway when a business is running into real problems the temptation to overlook things, to hope for the best, is considerable. from Madoff down it happens. There are a few platforms on here which have a significant number of loans looking very ropy, so logically they may fail I don't know if the platform owners would go broke (or at any rate, have to get a new job straightaway), but I think maybe not. The one thing which would go the furthest to assuage my cynicism is if a platform invested in its own loans (and held to term), to the point that if a loan failed they would be out of pocket. Go on, please be a pioneer. While I agree with what you say, I think Madoff (very unlike Abl) was a criminal con artist from day one. Not sure, is that permitted for p2p sites? Admit to being a tad hazy on that one but skin in the game would give me a huge amount more confidence (sorry the emoji is a product of my G&T!).
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,561
Likes: 1,170
|
Post by shimself on Sept 22, 2017 15:32:32 GMT
The one thing which would go the furthest to assuage my cynicism is if a platform invested in its own loans (and held to term), to the point that if a loan failed they would be out of pocket. Go on, please be a pioneer. I thought they were prohibited from doing so? Chapter and verse? According to post below Kufflink (who I shall visit asap) manage it in some form.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,212
Likes: 6,021
|
Post by registerme on Sept 22, 2017 15:43:27 GMT
shimself not to hand, no. But it has been discussed in a number of threads over the last couple of years and I believe that at least one difficulty was the FCA not wanting platforms to have skin in the game (vis Lendy's dropping of INPL and MT's no longer pre-funding off their own balance sheet). Now I accept that the aim here was to get loans off the ground but iirc the same problems exist with platforms co-investing.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Sept 22, 2017 15:44:01 GMT
I prefer my operators to be just intermediaries and neither lenders nor borrowers. I think Magenta14 was being devil's advocate rather than expressing a firm opinion, and I would not share the belief that Albrate has less interest in lenders than borrowers. However, borrowers are the source of business and they pay the fees, and lenders need to remind Ablrate of their needs and interest occasionally, just as borrowers do. This is not FC where individual loans are of no importance to the operator and lenders are just a source of funds. Every loan is important to a small platform, and the opinion of each lender has some influence, especially through this forum. The timed bids idea sounds like an interesting solution. I can see Ablrate's reluctance to hold bidding until everyone has had a chance to kick the tyres. A good compromise, as long as it works also for the loans which go at high speed.
|
|