henryjford
Member of DD Central
Posts: 105
Likes: 139
|
Post by henryjford on Mar 17, 2019 19:07:51 GMT
As I've said before I don't think a class action law suit is appropriate at this time. This is a FCA regulated company not Daves Dodgy Cars Ltd. Jaw-Jaw not War-War!
In terms of recovery strategy - in the committal hearing FS submitted that the borrower has avoided coming back to the UK for fear of extradition to the US (fwiw the judge accepted this submission). It's not too far fetched that if he was extradited from Spain to the UK then he or parties close to him might be persuaded to settle the debt to avoid a subsequent yoinkment by the US. Clearly this is not a normal recovery route and unlikely to feature in most investment exit plans. Apart from a pension plan that matures in 5 years time I have not seen any other viable recoveries. Of course fundingsecure should be able to sell the paintings but they hold none of them.
fundingsecure should note that I intend to pursue repayment of the investment including interest to date so they may well find it cheaper to settle with us now rather than at an unknown point in the future. I am sure they wouldn't even consider deducting legal fees from the proceeds.
I'm continuing a dialogue with a third party (not a law firm) regarding strategy for dealing with this and I should be able to report back by Friday.
If this has the potential to collapse FS then that's more of a reason to make a statement to lenders and be honest.
I am most aggrieved at how this is being handled by fundingsecure . Hi Mousey, not to pressure but do you have any news re your strategy above please please... I am sure we are all anxious about this one, and don't want to each to try to find an individual strategy if we band together we are stronger of course and you have done so much to lead us, which I am sure is so gratefully received.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Mar 18, 2019 0:04:21 GMT
As I've said before I don't think a class action law suit is appropriate at this time. This is a FCA regulated company not Daves Dodgy Cars Ltd. Jaw-Jaw not War-War!
In terms of recovery strategy - in the committal hearing FS submitted that the borrower has avoided coming back to the UK for fear of extradition to the US (fwiw the judge accepted this submission). It's not too far fetched that if he was extradited from Spain to the UK then he or parties close to him might be persuaded to settle the debt to avoid a subsequent yoinkment by the US. Clearly this is not a normal recovery route and unlikely to feature in most investment exit plans. Apart from a pension plan that matures in 5 years time I have not seen any other viable recoveries. Of course fundingsecure should be able to sell the paintings but they hold none of them.
fundingsecure should note that I intend to pursue repayment of the investment including interest to date so they may well find it cheaper to settle with us now rather than at an unknown point in the future. I am sure they wouldn't even consider deducting legal fees from the proceeds.
I'm continuing a dialogue with a third party (not a law firm) regarding strategy for dealing with this and I should be able to report back by Friday.
If this has the potential to collapse FS then that's more of a reason to make a statement to lenders and be honest.
I am most aggrieved at how this is being handled by fundingsecure . Hi Mousey, not to pressure but do you have any news re your strategy above please please... I am sure we are all anxious about this one, and don't want to each to try to find an individual strategy if we band together we are stronger of course and you have done so much to lead us, which I am sure is so gratefully received. Let’s just send Big Jimmy on an EasyJet £20 flight to Spain where he hires a van and a crate and persuades the borrower to return to UK.
|
|
henryjford
Member of DD Central
Posts: 105
Likes: 139
|
Post by henryjford on Mar 18, 2019 7:15:58 GMT
This might be funny to you, but it is not a laughing matter. I would kindly ask you to refrain from the hundreds of comments you have made on this thread, none of which are helpful.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,742
Likes: 3,137
|
Post by jonno on Mar 18, 2019 10:18:31 GMT
This might be funny to you, but it is not a laughing matter. I would kindly ask you to refrain from the hundreds of comments you have made on this thread, none of which are helpful. Why limit it to this thread?
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 6,558
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 19, 2019 13:38:44 GMT
As I've said before I don't think a class action law suit is appropriate at this time. This is a FCA regulated company not Daves Dodgy Cars Ltd. Jaw-Jaw not War-War!
In terms of recovery strategy - in the committal hearing FS submitted that the borrower has avoided coming back to the UK for fear of extradition to the US (fwiw the judge accepted this submission). It's not too far fetched that if he was extradited from Spain to the UK then he or parties close to him might be persuaded to settle the debt to avoid a subsequent yoinkment by the US. Clearly this is not a normal recovery route and unlikely to feature in most investment exit plans. Apart from a pension plan that matures in 5 years time I have not seen any other viable recoveries. Of course fundingsecure should be able to sell the paintings but they hold none of them.
fundingsecure should note that I intend to pursue repayment of the investment including interest to date so they may well find it cheaper to settle with us now rather than at an unknown point in the future. I am sure they wouldn't even consider deducting legal fees from the proceeds.
I'm continuing a dialogue with a third party (not a law firm) regarding strategy for dealing with this and I should be able to report back by Friday.
If this has the potential to collapse FS then that's more of a reason to make a statement to lenders and be honest.
I am most aggrieved at how this is being handled by fundingsecure . Hi Mousey, not to pressure but do you have any news re your strategy above please please... I am sure we are all anxious about this one, and don't want to each to try to find an individual strategy if we band together we are stronger of course and you have done so much to lead us, which I am sure is so gratefully received. Hi Henry, As FS are a regulated firm it's reasonable for us to pursue this issue initially through the FCA and the FOS - particularly as my first complaint wasn't answered properly and it's been more than 8-weeks. I have a follow up response to send to FS which I'll aim to send out tomorrow morning giving them until the end of the month to reply. I'll also be seeking other examples of where Funding Secure have misrepresented the security in order to induce investors into contracting. I have three so far but this will be the subject of a second thread to keep it all in one place.
The fundamental issue here is that Funding Secure misrepresented the security. Clearly where you allow the borrower to keep possession of the chattels this significantly raises the risk involved.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Mar 19, 2019 14:58:52 GMT
Well I don't think many of us would argue with that - I am no lawyer but when I worked in the finance and auction industry it was made extremely clear to us that such action was "proper naughty" to use the technical legal term based on mediaeval Norman French. Would I be right in thinking that should this be a case of misrepresentation FS would not have a leg to stand on?
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 6,558
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 19, 2019 15:55:32 GMT
The FCA website states "All financial promotions must be clear, fair and not misleading regardless of the media type."
And in my correspondence with the FCA they have advised "Our expectation is that firms are clear fair and not misleading about the information they provide."
I think best outcome would be the FOS ruling that FS make up the difference when they exhaust their recovery efforts. Had they made a statement to that effect on day one of this saga I suspect they would have a lot more good will.
Their game plan instead seems to have relied on no one pursuing this!
|
|
|
Post by beepbeepimajeep on Mar 19, 2019 16:33:30 GMT
Their game plan instead seems to have relied on no one pursuing this! Then they are screwed, it is well documented on here how to complain with the aim of escalating and they have misrepresented on several loans. I have had enough of their garbage now and will probably go for Whitehaven first.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,856
Likes: 2,760
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 19, 2019 16:54:22 GMT
The FCA website states "All financial promotions must be clear, fair and not misleading regardless of the media type."
And in my correspondence with the FCA they have advised "Our expectation is that firms are clear fair and not misleading about the information they provide."
I think best outcome would be the FOS ruling that FS make up the difference when they exhaust their recovery efforts. Had they made a statement to that effect on day one of this saga I suspect they would have a lot more good will.
Their game plan instead seems to have relied on no one pursuing this!
Thanks Mousey and I may well come back to this thread to remind myself the sorts of grounds my complaint should be based on. And while I'm here thanks also for your reporting of the case. I definitely understand why you were not able to respond to my PM of a few weeks back - you probably get hundreds ! Anyway, the main point of this post is to ask wouldn't it be better to wait until FS cease all efforts to recover the money? I'm not sure how you would determine that but it seems clear they are at least active right now?
|
|
petrichory
Member of DD Central
Posts: 59
Likes: 207
|
Post by petrichory on Mar 20, 2019 11:21:24 GMT
Hi Mousey, not to pressure but do you have any news re your strategy above please please... I am sure we are all anxious about this one, and don't want to each to try to find an individual strategy if we band together we are stronger of course and you have done so much to lead us, which I am sure is so gratefully received. Hi Henry, As FS are a regulated firm it's reasonable for us to pursue this issue initially through the FCA and the FOS - particularly as my first complaint wasn't answered properly and it's been more than 8-weeks. I have a follow up response to send to FS which I'll aim to send out tomorrow morning giving them until the end of the month to reply. I'll also be seeking other examples of where Funding Secure have misrepresented the security in order to induce investors into contracting. I have three so far but this will be the subject of a second thread to keep it all in one place.
The fundamental issue here is that Funding Secure misrepresented the security. Clearly where you allow the borrower to keep possession of the chattels this significantly raises the risk involved.
Mousey - Does this include loans that were properly represented at the time but were later changed by FS (after bids were made) in a way that misrepresented the security? It would be hard to prove intent behind a misrepresentation or omission. In cases where the loan differs materially from the initial offering, a breach of contract is much easier to argue. I have made a breach of contract complaint on one specific loan that was completely changed by FS over a month after my bid was submitted, without informing existing lenders.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 6,558
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 23, 2019 13:47:09 GMT
The FCA website states "All financial promotions must be clear, fair and not misleading regardless of the media type."
And in my correspondence with the FCA they have advised "Our expectation is that firms are clear fair and not misleading about the information they provide."
I think best outcome would be the FOS ruling that FS make up the difference when they exhaust their recovery efforts. Had they made a statement to that effect on day one of this saga I suspect they would have a lot more good will.
Their game plan instead seems to have relied on no one pursuing this!
Thanks Mousey and I may well come back to this thread to remind myself the sorts of grounds my complaint should be based on. And while I'm here thanks also for your reporting of the case. I definitely understand why you were not able to respond to my PM of a few weeks back - you probably get hundreds ! Anyway, the main point of this post is to ask wouldn't it be better to wait until FS cease all efforts to recover the money? I'm not sure how you would determine that but it seems clear they are at least active right now? I've had about 20 PM's about this loan and they all have the subject "art loans"!
There's two questions that need to be addressed: 1) Was there actionable misrepresentation on the loans? ie Did fundingsecure act deliberately and dishonestly in order to induce us into making a contract. 2) As a result of alleged actionable misrepresentation have we suffered a loss?
I can see no reason why question 1 can't be answered now. Question 2 will not be answered until at least July 31st 2019 however the borrower has been declared bankrupt and has no assets.
If the answer to 1 and 2 are both to the affirmative then I would expect to fundingsecure to compensate us for this loss. As a result they may well find it easier to make an offer now to avoid their liability increasing.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 23, 2019 15:32:55 GMT
Thanks Mousey and I may well come back to this thread to remind myself the sorts of grounds my complaint should be based on. And while I'm here thanks also for your reporting of the case. I definitely understand why you were not able to respond to my PM of a few weeks back - you probably get hundreds ! Anyway, the main point of this post is to ask wouldn't it be better to wait until FS cease all efforts to recover the money? I'm not sure how you would determine that but it seems clear they are at least active right now? I've had about 20 PM's about this loan and they all have the subject "art loans"!
There's two questions that need to be addressed: 1) Was there actionable misrepresentation on the loans? ie Did fundingsecure act deliberately and dishonestly in order to induce us into making a contract. 2) As a result of alleged actionable misrepresentation have we suffered a loss?
I can see no reason why question 1 can't be answered now. Question 2 will not be answered until at least July 31st 2019 however the borrower has been declared bankrupt and has no assets.
If the answer to 1 and 2 are both to the affirmative then I would expect to fundingsecure to compensate us for this loss. As a result they may well find it easier to make an offer now to avoid their liability increasing. What can we do when they inevitably try to sweep this under the carpet.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Mar 23, 2019 16:46:53 GMT
not arguing with the above but I thought FS have to do more than the above i.e. make the contract clear and concise legal blah blah and stick to the conditions i.e. I for one presumed the art was in storage and under their control which it clearly wasn't and this alone whether deliberately dishonest or not is in breach of consumer law/their contract i.e. is the legal bar a bit lower than the above statement?
Whatever thanks for all your help and keep up the good work.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 6,558
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 23, 2019 19:49:52 GMT
adrian77 I'm not qualified to talk about the height of various legal bars so can't really comment on that aspect.
Ultimately fundingsecure are a regulated company and so we have the option to complain through the Financial Ombudsman Service who can issue a binding ruling on FS to "pay an award for financial loss". Please bare in mind that it is highly unlikely that a court will hear a case like this that hasn't been dealt with through the FOS system first and if the FOS rules against us then this will present quite a big hurdle for us to overcome in any subsequent court hearing.
I've also made a post on DDC that our borrower has another bankruptcy hearing this coming Monday.
|
|
p2ploser
Member of DD Central
Posts: 163
Likes: 221
|
Post by p2ploser on Mar 23, 2019 20:05:53 GMT
Does anyone have any reason to think that fs have anywhere near enough funds to compensate for this sort of loss? It’s a small tin pot outfit after all. Thanks Mousey and I may well come back to this thread to remind myself the sorts of grounds my complaint should be based on. And while I'm here thanks also for your reporting of the case. I definitely understand why you were not able to respond to my PM of a few weeks back - you probably get hundreds ! Anyway, the main point of this post is to ask wouldn't it be better to wait until FS cease all efforts to recover the money? I'm not sure how you would determine that but it seems clear they are at least active right now? I've had about 20 PM's about this loan and they all have the subject "art loans"!
There's two questions that need to be addressed: 1) Was there actionable misrepresentation on the loans? ie Did fundingsecure act deliberately and dishonestly in order to induce us into making a contract. 2) As a result of alleged actionable misrepresentation have we suffered a loss?
I can see no reason why question 1 can't be answered now. Question 2 will not be answered until at least July 31st 2019 however the borrower has been declared bankrupt and has no assets.
If the answer to 1 and 2 are both to the affirmative then I would expect to fundingsecure to compensate us for this loss. As a result they may well find it easier to make an offer now to avoid their liability increasing.
|
|