woodland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 95
Likes: 42
|
Post by woodland on Jan 6, 2018 17:26:57 GMT
Has anyone had time to do any detailed DD on this one?
My brief digging around shows planning was granted in 2013 & a trench was dug to comply with commencement within 3 yrs of approval. Nothing more has happened. There is lengthy & detailed valuation report, mostly based upon the potential of a successfully operated nursing home but also highlighting the risks of local competition in an area where NH beds seem oversupplied.
I don't think this one is for me but I am getting itchy fingers with lots of un-invested FS monies. Is it just me becoming more risk averse or is the pipeline coming with higher risks? Is ther a timing factor here with fewer quality offerings over Xmas & into early New Year?
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jan 6, 2018 18:52:59 GMT
Has anyone had time to do any detailed DD on this one? My brief digging around shows planning was granted in 2013 & a trench was dug to comply with commencement within 3 yrs of approval. Nothing more has happened. There is lengthy & detailed valuation report, mostly based upon the potential of a successfully operated nursing home but also highlighting the risks of local competition in an area where NH beds seem oversupplied. I don't think this one is for me but I am getting itchy fingers with lots of un-invested FS monies. Is it just me becoming more risk averse or is the pipeline coming with higher risks? Is ther a timing factor here with fewer quality offerings over Xmas & into early New Year? You may have since read FS DD..there is some more info
|
|
woodland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 95
Likes: 42
|
Post by woodland on Jan 6, 2018 19:41:17 GMT
Not a lot of DD by FS that I can see rogerthat. Am I missing something?
|
|
lobster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 636
Likes: 467
|
Post by lobster on Jan 7, 2018 9:31:27 GMT
Not a lot of DD by FS that I can see rogerthat. Am I missing something? I think by "DD" , rogerthat is referring to the "DD Central" bulletin board which does indeed have some info on this loan
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Jan 7, 2018 9:33:51 GMT
Has anyone had time to do any detailed DD on this one? My brief digging around shows planning was granted in 2013 & a trench was dug to comply with commencement within 3 yrs of approval. Nothing more has happened. There is lengthy & detailed valuation report, mostly based upon the potential of a successfully operated nursing home but also highlighting the risks of local competition in an area where NH beds seem oversupplied. I don't think this one is for me but I am getting itchy fingers with lots of un-invested FS monies. Is it just me becoming more risk averse or is the pipeline coming with higher risks? Is ther a timing factor here with fewer quality offerings over Xmas & into early New Year? You may have since read FS DD..there is some more info Likewise woodland. It definitely appears that the pipeline is coming with higher risks as i am refusing far more loans, percentage wise, than i did a year ago when i started out with P2P, when i was 'wet behind the ears', but very, very cautious.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 1,466
|
Post by bugs4me on Jan 7, 2018 11:23:30 GMT
Likewise woodland. It definitely appears that the pipeline is coming with higher risks as i am refusing far more loans, percentage wise, than i did a year ago when i started out with P2P, when i was 'wet behind the ears', but very, very cautious. Not sure the loans are coming with higher risks but certainly more and more lenders/investors IMO are becoming far more clued up about the cavalier approach that many platforms have taken during the past - using our money to fund their growth and learning curve at minimal risk to themselves. The only risk to themselves is reputation which (most) do not seem bothered about whilst every 'opportunity' is fully funded within a short period of time and the platform(s) appearing to supply fewer and fewer (convenient) details about the prospective borrowers. As the FCA are about as useful as a chocolate teapot I would welcome a legal case against a platform where they were found lacking in a duty of care regarding lenders funds irrespective as to their stated T's&C's. This would serve as a 'wake up' call to all platforms. Setting up a web site and loaning other folks hard earned cash without responsibility is simply not the name of the P2P game.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jan 7, 2018 13:27:59 GMT
Likewise woodland. It definitely appears that the pipeline is coming with higher risks as i am refusing far more loans, percentage wise, than i did a year ago when i started out with P2P, when i was 'wet behind the ears', but very, very cautious. Not sure the loans are coming with higher risks but certainly more and more lenders/investors IMO are becoming far more clued up about the cavalier approach that many platforms have taken during the past - using our money to fund their growth and learning curve at minimal risk to themselves. The only risk to themselves is reputation which (most) do not seem bothered about whilst every 'opportunity' is fully funded within a short period of time and the platform(s) appearing to supply fewer and fewer (convenient) details about the prospective borrowers. As the FCA are about as useful as a chocolate teapot I would welcome a legal case against a platform where they were found lacking in a duty of care regarding lenders funds irrespective as to their stated T's&C's. This would serve as a 'wake up' call to all platforms.Setting up a web site and loaning other folks hard earned cash without responsibility is simply not the name of the P2P game. I think much of the above and in particular, those two sentences, encapsulates the feelings of many other subjects under this P2P autocracy. I am ever hopeful that a test case comes to fruition and this is clarified once and for all. I migrated to FS around 6 months ago, for no other reason than dissatisfaction (and it wasn't the first time) with the apparent laissez-faire attitude displayed by another P2P with my money, an example of which, is currently in the hands of the receiver. Needless to say, that investigation has already exceeded it's projected time frame, so the chance of any recovered funds (after costs) becomes more remote as each day passes. I have no legal back round whatsoever but in this particular case. my opinion is one of crass negligence despite repeated concerns expressed by the lenders themselves long before the curtains came down. The fact that the borrower/s (in one guise or other) are still trading with ostensibly quite a lot of my money is particularly galling. One assumes that with FCA approval, P2P platforms are operating within the specified guidelines. A very short straw maybe but I am hopeful that the investigation of this particular case proves otherwise and in doing so, gives lenders across all platforms more transparency and P2P's far more accountability.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 7, 2018 14:56:57 GMT
I don't think that platforms have any legal duty of care towards lenders' funds, except where they are holding those funds - when the normal rules on client money apply. The platforms do not actually lend the money, we do. Setting aside the FCA regulation, the responsibilities that the platforms have towards the lenders are primarily those which are set out in the terms and conditions. If lenders could show that the platforms breached the T&Cs, or prove negligence in carrying out their responsibilities under the T&Cs, which led directly to lenders' loss, then lenders would probably have a case under contract law. You would have to look carefully at what undertakings and guarantees the platform had given about its due diligence process. Probably not much. More fruitful would be security. If the platform had made statements about the nature and value of the security, other than those passed on from the borrower without endorsement, or if the platform had made undertakings to take a charge on the security and had not done so, or if the platform had placed a limit the LTV and failed to take reasonable steps to make that so, then I think there could be scope there to establish negligence. (Among the many things I am not, is a lawyer).
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 8, 2018 4:33:21 GMT
I don't think that platforms have any legal duty of care towards lenders funds, except where they are holding those funds - when the normal rules on client money apply. The platforms do not actually lend the money, we do. The above may well be correct. The grey area, IMHO, occurs when the platforms cover their backs by saying that investors must do their own DD, but don't reveal enough about the security and/or borrower to allow the investors to do the necessary DD. Or set loans live on their platforms very shortly after revealing the first details, giving investors insufficient time to do the necessary DD before the investment opportunity is gone.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 1,466
|
Post by bugs4me on Jan 8, 2018 9:34:48 GMT
Like yourself blender a lawyer I am definitely not. However I do not feel that the detailed T's&C's which are worded in such a way that they exonerate the platform, any platform, from their common obligations to lenders are fair and reasonable in many cases. I would suggest that those T's&C's may fail the Unfair Contract Terms Act possibly. More details here. The point made by mikes1531 regarding the suggestion/demand etc by platforms that you carry out your own DD prior to investing. Good advice provided you have sufficient time to carry out such DD and the base information, known to the platform, is disclosed. Carrying out some detailed DD on the platforms themselves leaves a lot to be desired regarding more than one or two individuals yet those same platforms are able to hide behind the respectability of the FCA logo. It's in everyone's interests for P2P to succeed in general and for the numerous companies operating in the market to be successful. But as time goes on, I must confess to becoming more disillusioned with the conduct of some platforms.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 8, 2018 9:54:11 GMT
Like yourself blender a lawyer I am definitely not. However I do not feel that the detailed T's&C's which are worded in such a way that they exonerate the platform, any platform, from their common obligations to lenders are fair and reasonable in many cases. I would suggest that those T's&C's may fail the Unfair Contract Terms Act possibly. More details here. The point made by mikes1531 regarding the suggestion/demand etc by platforms that you carry out your own DD prior to investing. Good advice provided you have sufficient time to carry out such DD and the base information, known to the platform, is disclosed. Carrying out some detailed DD on the platforms themselves leaves a lot to be desired regarding more than one or two individuals yet those same platforms are able to hide behind the respectability of the FCA logo. It's in everyone's interests for P2P to succeed in general and for the numerous companies operating in the market to be successful. But as time goes on, I must confess to becoming more disillusioned with the conduct of some platforms. Yes, unfair contract terms could apply if you lend as an individual. However, the major contract for any loan is that with the borrower, and the platform can try to hide behind that fact that as an introducer, taking only a small commission (pittance), there is a limit to what the platform can be liable for. One thing I did not mention - too many points in one post - is a platform's responsibility to disclose relevant information which it has at the time of offering the loan. If, for example, the platform knows of contingent liabilities which are not disclosed to the lenders, then I believe that non-disclosure of those risks, or other known material risks, places the platform at risk from claims following consequential loss. This is the wrong board, but I suspect another operator of knowing of pending ccjs and not making that knowledge explicit. However, there is the problem of this being in the category of unknown unknowns, and very hard to find.
|
|
woodland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 95
Likes: 42
|
Post by woodland on Jan 8, 2018 18:17:00 GMT
Thank you new2p2p - that makes sense. I haven't quite reached the dizzying heights of DD Central yet!
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jan 8, 2018 18:58:43 GMT
I think by "DD" , rogerthat is referring to the "DD Central" bulletin board which does indeed have some info on this loan Isn't a ongoing requirement of DD Central membership that info posted there is also posted here for non-members?As far as I'm aware info posted on FS DD Central is available to anyone who has an interest and there are reasons why certain info cant be posted on the open forum as explained via the link below. Whether having 50 posts on the open forum is unduly onerous to gain access to that information is not for me to decide..Thems the rules p2pindependentforum.com/thread/10667/dd-central-launched
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Jan 8, 2018 20:33:22 GMT
There is a great deal of information on DD central which could not be posted here, where posts can be seen by the general public without membership or logging in. Many of the posts here would just have to refer to the existence of a relevant post on DD Central, without repeating the info. That should be done, but as I see it the purpose would be to direct members of DD central to that place. It's easy enough to join DD central - not invitation only or anything similar. I was a bit suspicious of it before joining, but now find it useful. I have not posted there.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jan 8, 2018 23:01:29 GMT
As far as I'm aware info posted on FS DD Central is available to anyone who has an interest and there are reasons why certain info cant be posted on the open forum as explained via the link below. Whether having 50 posts on the open forum is unduly onerous to gain access to that information is not for me to decide..Thems the rules p2pindependentforum.com/thread/10667/dd-central-launchedAnd yet your link states: "The intent is NOT to create a two tier forum, and just as with the AC Private board, the presumption is posts should be made on the public forum in the first instance. DD Central should primarily be a repository of background due diligence material, and it is the responsibility of all members of DD Central to ensure a suitably redacted summary of all key information they post on DD Central is posted onto the public forum in a timely manner. Failure to do so may result in access to DD Central being withdrawn." I wasn't actually disagreeing with your point in general, though my experience has been that mostly everything ( that is allowable) can be found openly discussed in the public forum by everyone who wishes to contribute. I do check in on the DD occasionally but I glean far more from the opinion on the public forum.
|
|