trouble
Member of DD Central
Posts: 127
Likes: 97
|
Post by trouble on Aug 24, 2019 0:37:58 GMT
AC will just delete the questions
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Aug 24, 2019 8:37:32 GMT
The original sin here lies squarely with Assetz. They decided to take on a £6 million loan, which was way bigger than anything the platform had attempted before. How could they get that away on the platform, with the red flag attached that the previous lender taking couple of million pound write-off to get away from this borrower?
How indeed could such a disproportionate loan get filled? But aha! What about the new Great British Business Account? At the time, this was a black box account, promising lenders a 7% return with a provision fund guarantee covering loan default. And this loan would return Assetz 12%. Look at the windfall to AC between the 7% and the 12% if the loan keeps paying! And why would this work? Becaused the GBBA lenders could not see how their funds had been apportioned to different loans. The T&C just said "Maximum 20%" in any one loan. So all GBBA lenders could be parcelled 20% of this loan Kerching!
Subsequently, one thing changed and one thing became evident.. Firstly, Assetz revealed their holdings to the GBBA investors, an unpleasant surprise. And what became evident was that if a loan is never declared in default, there would be no question of using the provision fund to bale out investors who had a guarantee. Thus this loan last made an interest payment in September 2017, but no! It is not in default! You fools!
|
|
alibaba
Member of DD Central
Posts: 341
Likes: 245
|
Post by alibaba on Aug 24, 2019 10:16:48 GMT
agree 100%, I know that all things are relative but in my case a very substantial amount of my investment was allocated to this loan without my consent or knowledge.
|
|
kathy
Posts: 38
Likes: 37
|
Post by kathy on Aug 24, 2019 10:42:05 GMT
agree 100%, I know that all things are relative but in my case a very substantial amount of my investment was allocated to this loan without my consent or knowledge. Likewise. While I still have money with AC, this loan and the Wind Turbines account for some major losses. At the very least these loans demonstrate a high level of incompetence on the part of AC, but then of course it isn't AC taking the hit. Most of my money is now in the 30day accounts and I think I may be withdrawing that before long.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 24, 2019 11:14:17 GMT
The original sin here lies squarely with Assetz. They decided to take on a £6 million loan, which was way bigger than anything the platform had attempted before. How could they get that away on the platform, with the red flag attached that the previous lender taking couple of million pound write-off to get away from this borrower? How indeed could such a disproportionate loan get filled? But aha! What about the new Great British Business Account? At the time, this was a black box account, promising lenders a 7% return with a provision fund guarantee covering loan default. And this loan would return Assetz 12%. Look at the windfall to AC between the 7% and the 12% if the loan keeps paying! And why would this work? Becaused the GBBA lenders could not see how their funds had been apportioned to different loans. The T&C just said "Maximum 20%" in any one loan. So all GBBA lenders could be parcelled 20% of this loan Kerching! Subsequently, one thing changed and one thing became evident.. Firstly, Assetz revealed their holdings to the GBBA investors, an unpleasant surprise. And what became evident was that if a loan is never declared in default, there would be no question of using the provision fund to bale out investors who had a guarantee. Thus this loan last made an interest payment in September 2017, but no! It is not in default! You fools! Just to correct a few facts. There is no windfall to AC for the interest rate margin as that goes to the PF for lenders benefit (at some point). AC fee is in addition to the displayed rate and isnt of that magnitude normally.
The loan is in default, albeit a solvent recovery, and has been since April 18. Note the use of the PF was ruled out by lenders when they voted to roll up interest to the end of the loan so no interest is due to be covered. As lenders, including those in the GBBA, have voted not to initiate formal recovery then there is no confirmed loss for the PF to cover.
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Aug 24, 2019 13:21:59 GMT
Perfectly correct. Investors in the loan should continue to bear in mind that posted comments could influence recovery. There will perhaps eventually be a further vote giving the silent majority an opportunity for expression.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,520
Likes: 2,665
|
Post by cb25 on Aug 24, 2019 13:30:33 GMT
Perfectly correct. Investors in the loan should continue to bear in mind that posted comments could influence recovery. There will perhaps eventually be a further vote giving the silent majority an opportunity for expression. I think that's b.s. put out by AC in an attempt to get lenders to stop complaining about AC's pitiful handling of this loan. Imo the idea that professional deal-makers who might have an interest in DM would be influenced by a few lenders complaining about their treatment by AC and/or DM lacks credibility.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Aug 24, 2019 14:00:31 GMT
Nothing in my post that isn't in the original loan offer. Re-reading the text of the vote which apparently resulted in lenders voting an interest free six month extension, well, those who voted yes to that on the strength of what was promised must be kicking themselves. After taking a long run-up.
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Aug 24, 2019 18:42:07 GMT
1) At the time this loan was filled the provision fund rules had not been made clear, other than the fact it was discretionary. The clear implication was that the fund would be available to cover capital losses.
2) Similarly, most investors were unaware of the size of their investment into this loan, despite the quoted interested rate signalling the increased risk.
During the loan period and the extended delays the borrower has shown little interest is property sales to repay the loan. Assetz, meanwhile, has been content to push the borrowers extensions as the preferred option, by putting forward as option 'A'.
Option 'A' - " Agree to what we suggest"
Option 'B' - "Are you sure?, this a very bad idea, please vote 'A'.
I think there are reasonable grounds for complaint if the current sale process leads to another dead end.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2019 19:47:49 GMT
I'm in for the full 20%.
I don't know the people on this site who say Assetz is great and they can't put enough money into the Assetz site but they can only be sh*lls.
It's about time Assetz draw a line under this and offer money back to the investors. I'd be happy with 99p on the pound. If it means wiping out the PF and the owners of Assetz having to cough up a little of their undoubted large salaries then so be it and a lesson learned.
Too many P2P sites regard investors as high net worth individuals. We are not. Most of us just want to do a little better than what the High Street banks are offering. We don't want to be taken for a ride.
Too many occurrences like this will affect investor confidence, the P2P sites will close and honest businesses will miss out on good loans.
|
|
|
Post by roandy55 on Aug 25, 2019 5:07:32 GMT
I find it difficult to believe there may still be lenders holding out hope that any future vote will result in a decision other than to extend further. Given we know that votes are proportional on basis of the amount of an investors holding, it seems clear to me that along with Assetz themselves, a few major lenders are simply unwilling to allow this bad debt to crystalize.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,547
Likes: 4,166
|
Post by agent69 on Aug 25, 2019 8:52:54 GMT
I don't know the people on this site who say Assetz is great and they can't put enough money into the Assetz site but they can only be sh*lls.
The fact that through good fortune or good DD people have made money on AC does not make them shills. I have done well from the platform, but have withdrawn most of my funds over the last couple of years. I take no joy in other peoples missfortune, but many of the complaints on here are clearly missguided:
- I believe that 7% return on GBBA 1 was a target, not a guarantee
- Nobody guaranteed that the provision fund would cover all losses
- It was clear that up to 20% of GBBA funds could be invested in one loan
- The platform were not obliged to get your approval before investing your money in any particular loan
I only put a small amount in GBBA1, having had a bad experience with a similar account on TC (I invested £1000 in one of their lending clubs and got a diamond and 5 dog t*rds). My main dissapointment with AC is that they had a couple of big bridging loans that went south in the early day, and we were told at the time the procedures to vet borrowers would be strengthened. However, it is apparent that too many people with questionable intentions are still slipping through the net.
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Aug 25, 2019 9:38:49 GMT
This loan will not delay indefinitely.
The current sale exploration will expose the realistic value of the properties
The business appears to be short of cash having secured limited operating funds according to an earlier update.
By the end of the year we will either have an offer to consider (perhaps rather lower than we would like) or the business entering administration leading to a piecemeal disposal, which itself could be quite drawn out.
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Aug 26, 2019 8:31:47 GMT
I don't know the people on this site who say Assetz is great and they can't put enough money into the Assetz site but they can only be sh*lls.
The fact that through good fortune or good DD people have made money on AC does not make them shills. I have done well from the platform, but have withdrawn most of my funds over the last couple of years. I take no joy in other peoples missfortune, but many of the complaints on here are clearly missguided:
- I believe that 7% return on GBBA 1 was a target, not a guarantee
- Nobody guaranteed that the provision fund would cover all losses
- It was clear that up to 20% of GBBA funds could be invested in one loan
- The platform were not obliged to get your approval before investing your money in any particular loan
That might all be factually so, but this investment remains my worst ever single investment - one that I never even chose to make. I do feel misled, and on many fronts. Once I pick up a few more bonuses from Assetz, I'll come out about even, and then good riddance to them for ever. These <word removed> schemes cannot last forever.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 970
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Aug 26, 2019 9:24:00 GMT
The fact that through good fortune or good DD people have made money on AC does not make them shills. I have done well from the platform, but have withdrawn most of my funds over the last couple of years. I take no joy in other peoples missfortune, but many of the complaints on here are clearly missguided:
- I believe that 7% return on GBBA 1 was a target, not a guarantee
- Nobody guaranteed that the provision fund would cover all losses
- It was clear that up to 20% of GBBA funds could be invested in one loan
- The platform were not obliged to get your approval before investing your money in any particular loan
That might all be factually so, but this investment remains my worst ever single investment - one that I never even chose to make. I do feel misled, and on many fronts. Once I pick up a few more bonuses from Assetz, I'll come out about even, and then good riddance to them for ever. These **** cannot last forever. If your worst ever investment ends up with you being about even on balance, then I'd say you'd done very well. There are people on COL and elsewhere who won't be able to say that. And, yes, you did choose to make this investment, perhaps not in this specific loan but in this account which always had this sort of risk attached. I get that you are angry with yourself for buying into something that you didn't understand, but that's no excuse for making libellous claims on this board (which I won't repeat).
|
|