Commercial Development in Warminster REPAID

Listed in full in DD Central along with links to the planning applications and ownership details.

It is possibly commercially sensitive that the borrower is constructing a new purpose built facility for his business. Beyond that most of the redactions made by FS (and other p2p platforms) are pointless and simply add to the reputational hit the p2p sector is currently taking.   You wouldn't buy a company's shares without knowing who they were, so why would you buy their debt ?

fundingsecure - you do realise how bad a reputation the p2p sector is gaining for lack of transparency bordering on deceit ? Why add to it ? 

I asked the legality of keeping the id of the borrower(s) hidden as I & other investors needed this information to pursue a non paying loan. As I understand it the contract is between the lender and the borrower.

The reply is as follows:-

"Hi Mr Owly,

Thank you for your email.

FundingSecure do not disclose borrowers information as to not breach the Data Protection Act 1998 and also our Data Privacy Policy. If a borrower has given permission for their details to be passed on we would on that occasion disclose their details which we would then post on the loan page.

Further to the Terms and conditions section 6, which investors agree to when creating an account with us. FundingSecure will act on behalf of the Investors, undertake to enforce the default procedures set out in the Loan Agreement. Please see the following link for the Terms and Conditions www.fundingsecure.com/terms-and-conditions

If there is anything else I can help with please do let me know.
Kind Regards."

Furthermore I think their is a contradiction in law here and a letter to the FCA could on the cards if some of my non paying loan keep non paying as I need this information to pursue the borrower directly.

Hi jj (a.k.a. Mr Owly).. do you mind me asking, which other loan(s) do you refer to?

Thanks jj. From reading the agreement and T&Cs it seems that the loan is between FS, as your agent and security trustee, and the borrower. So your involvement is nominal, as far as I can see, and the borrower is not answerable directly to you. Not my idea of p2p. Another reason for me not to be come involved with FS, though I already have enough reasons.

Effectively FC is the same, though the loan is directly between every lender and the borrower. For some years now, FC T&Cs have required that your rights under default are novated to FC.

That's a bold statement ilmoro . My main platform is Ablrate, which, like FC, creates individual contracts between every lender and the borrower. But unlike FC, Ablrate does not require lenders to novate their individual rights of recovery automatically. With Ablrate jj would have the rights he/she expects to have:-

'12.4 If the collections agency is still unable to collect the debt, Ablrate will notify you that all of the outstanding loan parts will be novated to the security agent. We need to novate the debt to our security agents so that there is only one claimant in any legal claim against the borrower, and in order to litigate against the borrower. You will have 14 days to opt out of this novation if you decide to pursue the borrower yourself under your individual loan contract.' That's real p2p, in my judgement.

As far as I can see, and with my limited interest, FS considers itself the principal in the loan contract, in its role as agent, and does not generate individual loan contracts. Unfortunately jj has no chance of acting against any FS borrower (which might be a satisfying experience with Whitehaven), but only against FS for its performance.

Good for you! Please keep us posted.

Don't you remember the borrower tried to get another loan via unbolted with the same assets i.e. these paintings?