michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,844
Likes: 2,758
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 23, 2019 19:19:37 GMT
A lot more information could be made available. Proof of that is existing platforms provide updates relating to the loans they hold. It doesn't contain all the detail but some. From BDO and the CC we get very much less.
I also don't appreciate being told how I may or may not spend my money because I'm deemed too stupid. Preventing adults doing things that don't harm other adults is a part of what communism and the nanny state is. Certainly Corbyn would be very happy to tell lots of people what they can and can't do (with their cash and otherwise).
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Feb 23, 2019 21:06:11 GMT
A lot more information could be made available. Proof of that is existing platforms provide updates relating to the loans they hold. It doesn't contain all the detail but some. From BDO and the CC we get very much less. I also don't appreciate being told how I may or may not spend my money because I'm deemed too stupid. Preventing adults doing things that don't harm other adults is a part of what communism and the nanny state is. Certainly Corbyn would be very happy to tell lots of people what they can and can't do (with their cash and otherwise). I thought at the moment you can pretty much do as you like in P2P, although there may be restrictions in future about retail lenders. Have you had a problem with a particular platform? I think on BDO and Col there may be a lot of restrictions on what can be said at present due to legal action etc.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,844
Likes: 2,758
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 23, 2019 22:39:17 GMT
A lot more information could be made available. Proof of that is existing platforms provide updates relating to the loans they hold. It doesn't contain all the detail but some. From BDO and the CC we get very much less. I also don't appreciate being told how I may or may not spend my money because I'm deemed too stupid. Preventing adults doing things that don't harm other adults is a part of what communism and the nanny state is. Certainly Corbyn would be very happy to tell lots of people what they can and can't do (with their cash and otherwise). I thought at the moment you can pretty much do as you like in P2P, although there may be restrictions in future about retail lenders. Have you had a problem with a particular platform? I think on BDO and Col there may be a lot of restrictions on what can be said at present due to legal action etc. NO problem with a particular problem. The post I was mainly referring to which was immediately preceding mine got deleted !
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Feb 23, 2019 23:08:19 GMT
Anyone recall why the CC needed to sign the NDAs as they were? What would have happened if they refused? They'd be accused (by BDO) of sapping more time? Simple. They wouldn't have been allowed access to confidential information. This really isn't very hard, people - for BDO to do their work, including pursuing/settling/negotiating loans, they need to be able to work in private. If you want the CC to be able to see what they're doing, and thereby form a sensible view on whether BDO are being effective, they have to sign NDAs. I have to say, if the FCA are looking for reasons to limit or regulate the P2P market on the grounds that "investors" have no understanding of what they are letting themselves in for, they only have to read this thread (and, to be fair, quite a few others on these boards). I hope I can eventually exit from COL, LY, FS, MT. I will do so a lot wiser, a LOT LOT poorer and a lot more bitter about what this world we live in has unfortunately become.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Feb 24, 2019 8:58:38 GMT
A lot more information could be made available. Proof of that is existing platforms provide updates relating to the loans they hold. It doesn't contain all the detail but some. From BDO and the CC we get very much less. I also don't appreciate being told how I may or may not spend my money because I'm deemed too stupid. Preventing adults doing things that don't harm other adults is a part of what communism and the nanny state is. Certainly Corbyn would be very happy to tell lots of people what they can and can't do (with their cash and otherwise). I agree that more information would be nice, and that some could be made available without threatening any outcomes. But why should they? Solvent platforms have to provide this information because they have live secondary markets in which people are actively trading, and platforms should do all they can to keep a level playing field. In COL, there is no market. The process of deciding what information can safely be put out, and then putting it out so everyone can see it, would only add to the bill. The only difference it could make to the eventual payout would be negative - so, it could be argued, they are positively required NOT to do it. As for the other point - well, no-one wants to think themselves stupid, although it could be considered to be an essential part of the human condition. However, I don't think that is the primary consideration behind potential restrictions to P2P. The question is, is it possible to construct a market which is actually fair? If not, shouldn't people be offered protection against the fraudsters and charlatans who would willingly help themselves to the contents of your bank account? This is a tricky one to get right and I certainly wouldn't want to claim to have the answers, but it's definitely not as simple as "you're stupid so you can't be trusted".
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 5,638
|
Post by duck on Feb 24, 2019 10:14:18 GMT
Accepting that there is a lot of disquiet over fees, disclosure of work carried out etc most of this is covered in STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 9 (ENGLAND AND WALES) the document is available here.
|
|
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 Feb 24, 2019 11:45:43 GMT
Accepting that there is a lot of disquiet over fees, disclosure of work carried out etc most of this is covered in STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 9 (ENGLAND AND WALES) the document is available here. Collateral is not insolvent it is just in administration for breaching FCA rules.
|
|
seb8072
Member of DD Central
Posts: 177
Likes: 99
|
Post by seb8072 on Feb 24, 2019 12:05:03 GMT
A number of the Col loans must have fully repaid with relatively minimal administration costs. Why can't these funds minus costs be returned to lenders?
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 5,638
|
Post by duck on Feb 24, 2019 12:36:46 GMT
Accepting that there is a lot of disquiet over fees, disclosure of work carried out etc most of this is covered in STATEMENT OF INSOLVENCY PRACTICE 9 (ENGLAND AND WALES) the document is available here. Collateral is not insolvent it is just in administration for breaching FCA rules. Accepting that point it should be noted that SIP2 refers to 'Adminstrative Receivers' (as do other SIP's) so whilst the terminology may change the principals remain.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Feb 24, 2019 16:09:25 GMT
A number of the Col loans must have fully repaid with relatively minimal administration costs. Why can't these funds minus costs be returned to lenders? Because there are two different categories of costs. There are the costs directly relating to each loan, which will indeed be known for those loans which are settled. But there are also costs attributable to the administration as a whole - for example, data recovery, CC meetings, and more - which won't be known until the administration is either complete or near-enough complete that the costs can be accurately calculated. If we're very, very lucky these costs might be covered by loose cash in the companies' books, but I'd have to say I think that unlikely. It's like administering an estate - executors shouldn't make payments until they are absolutely certain that they know what the payments should be, else they'll find themselves personally liable. It's why beneficiaries often get very steamed up about non-payment way too early. That doesn't mean, of course, that some executors aren't incompetent or dishonest, but in the COL case we at least have the benefit of the CC keeping some sort of eye on the proceedings.
|
|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Feb 25, 2019 14:32:41 GMT
A number of the Col loans must have fully repaid with relatively minimal administration costs. Why can't these funds minus costs be returned to lenders? Because there are two different categories of costs. There are the costs directly relating to each loan, which will indeed be known for those loans which are settled. But there are also costs attributable to the administration as a whole - for example, data recovery, CC meetings, and more - which won't be known until the administration is either complete or near-enough complete that the costs can be accurately calculated. If we're very, very lucky these costs might be covered by loose cash in the companies' books, but I'd have to say I think that unlikely. It's like administering an estate - executors shouldn't make payments until they are absolutely certain that they know what the payments should be, else they'll find themselves personally liable. It's why beneficiaries often get very steamed up about non-payment way too early. That doesn't mean, of course, that some executors aren't incompetent or dishonest, but in the COL case we at least have the benefit of the CC keeping some sort of eye on the proceedings. Whilst I largely agreed with the position you've stated, Col slightly differs in that there are lots of stand alone loans with associated stakeholder registers, as opposed to a collective single estate, & they should all be treated separately, not least because they all had different risk profiles & selling a bit of bling or a car is an entirely different proposition to a half finished development project. To expect those investors who only had a few easily liquefied loans to have to wait until the final loans are resolved, which could be very possibly many years down the line is completely unreasonable, unfair & improper.
I also accept the whole administration costs might not be known for many years but that doesn't prevent a reasonable estimate being made & that would then allow say a 75% initial dispersement to be made immediately with the remaining 25% being held back to cover any costs but obviously could be released when the final costs position was clearer. BDO have no incentive to do this though as they can just carry on commission reports, shuffling paperwork & issuing clarifications whilst racking up obscene fees & I'm afraid neither the FCA, CC or courts/judge will be able to lift a finger to prevent it.
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 1,842
|
Post by archie on Feb 25, 2019 14:58:02 GMT
Anniversary of administration on Thursday.
|
|
|
Post by red on Feb 27, 2019 17:11:38 GMT
On the subject of information not being shared: I'm struggling to think of a reason why we can't be provided with even a current total of costs incurred by BDO.
What would that jeopardise and/or how would that run afoul of data protection? The costs are going to have to be disclosed during the court process at some point, surely. So why not provide even basic information?
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,569
Likes: 5,638
|
Post by duck on Feb 28, 2019 17:02:11 GMT
On the subject of information not being shared: I'm struggling to think of a reason why we can't be provided with even a current total of costs incurred by BDO. What would that jeopardise and/or how would that run afoul of data protection? The costs are going to have to be disclosed during the court process at some point, surely. So why not provide even basic information? If you look at the 6 month report (issued 26/11/2018) you will see some figures. From my research this form of reporting is 'normal' (to accepted standards) as you would expect from one of the 'big companies'. That said independent research (various reports) show/illustrate this form of reporting is opaque in the extreme to the extent that the big banks reject it. The problems relate explicitly to clarity on what work was carried out, to what ends and was an appropriate 'grade' used. Whilst we are promised an updated estimate at/before the next 6 month report I don't expect that it will make comfortable reading. Further figures will be contained in the second report and I will try to pull out what I can. IMHO the 'Big Question' that still remains unanswered is 'What exactly is the data issue and how/why did it happen?' To date the FCA have not been forthcoming on this matter, they are being chased .....
|
|