|
|
Post by tomder on Mar 13, 2019 22:30:03 GMT
I have investments with both LY and FS. I have a significant sum invested in each platform.
I am sick of being fed the same BS by both platforms when they do care to update us. For most loans I am 1- 3 years overdue! I doesn't take a great detective to find out who the borrowers are, so why don't we go after them directly? This might shock them and pressure them into dealing with the platforms than hundreds of individual investors. I think the platforms have been an easy touch by borrowers and have been taken advantage of and even worse WE have been taken advantage of by those paper pushers running the platforms.
I for one am not prepared to sit back and let this travasty happen, we all seem to be waiting for the arrival of more paper pushers (administrators). We need to be proactive and fight while we still can.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Mar 14, 2019 0:48:52 GMT
I have investments with both LY and FS. I have a significant sum invested in each platform. I am sick of being fed the same BS by both platforms when they do care to update us. For most loans I am 1- 3 years overdue! I doesn't take a great detective to find out who the borrowers are, so why don't we go after them directly? This might shock them and pressure them into dealing with the platforms than hundreds of individual investors. I think the platforms have been an easy touch by borrowers and have been taken advantage of and even worse WE have been taken advantage of by those paper pushers running the platforms. I for one am not prepared to sit back and let this travasty happen, we all seem to be waiting for the arrival of more paper pushers (administrators). We need to be proactive and fight while we still can. Define "directly". I'm not against the idea, but depending on what you mean by the above, you could get yourself in some trouble.
|
|
|
|
Post by tomder on Mar 14, 2019 5:02:15 GMT
I mean start individual legal proceedings directly against the borrowers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Mar 14, 2019 6:35:22 GMT
A lot of platforms 'Terms and Conditions' prohibit direct contact between lenders and borrowers. I'm not sure what the legal ramifications would be in breaking those terms but I do envisage the opening of a sizable can of worms.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368 
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 14, 2019 7:09:13 GMT
I mean start individual legal proceedings directly against the borrowers. You can't and even if you could all you could do is appoint a receiver which would leave you in precisely the position you are in now.
|
|
|
|
Post by investor1925 on Mar 14, 2019 9:19:26 GMT
Correct me if I'm wrong, but we, as investors, can only do what FS, LY etc SHOULD be doing anyway, ie calling in the assets which back the loan.
Once we have possessed & subsequently sold those assets, only then can we pursue the borrower, & only then if there is a shortfall.
As I have said a few times on various threads, FS and others are too tardy in doing this.
If they repossessed & sold assets a bit quicker, they would give us more confidence.
Mind you, doing this with a building is not a 5 minute job, but as has been said, 3 years is a bit too long.
Get a move on FS, LY etc & we'll all be a lot happier (and re-invest on your platforms)
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 14, 2019 9:53:44 GMT
Correct me if I'm wrong, but we, as investors, can only do what FS, LY etc SHOULD be doing anyway, ie calling in the assets which back the loan. Once we have possessed & subsequently sold those assets, only then can we pursue the borrower, & only then if there is a shortfall. As I have said a few times on various threads, FS and others are too tardy in doing this. If they repossessed & sold assets a bit quicker, they would give us more confidence. Mind you, doing this with a building is not a 5 minute job, but as has been said, 3 years is a bit too long. Get a move on FS, LY etc & we'll all be a lot happier (and re-invest on your platforms) But you can't though. There is a strict legal process you have to follow which involves appointing receivers. These processes are notoriously long. You can't just take possession of a property if you have a charge against it. You also can't pursue a borrower if there is a shortfall. You can only do this if there is a personal guarantee in place. If there is, you can go after their personal assets but you have to stump up all the costs yourself upfront (although you can add them to the debt). It's not cheap and extremely slow, I know this from personal experience of going down this route.
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Mar 14, 2019 11:02:05 GMT
While anybody can issue court papers against anybody else (and pay the court fee).....
the court process quickly requires you to show that you are the 'proper' claimant and the other side is the 'proper' respondent.
That means a valid claim in some aspect of law that produces an unsatisfied obligation exists and that YOU are the right person to bring the claim and the person you claim from is the right person to defend it.
It would be essential to have and understand all the loan contract agreements - these are the contractual matrix upon which your claim would rest and the claim at the outset would need to explain the borrowers obligation to you which allows the claim to proceed. I think it certain this would be a fairly complex argument which would need the assistance of a solicitor and be allocated to multi-track as a minimum, ie expensive for an individual lender.
If a claim was heard by the court, I expect it would be as a direct unsecured money claim. That is because FS / LY have a Trustee company that holds the security and only the security holder can enforce the security.
If anybody feels like bringing such a claim, do let the forum know how you get on.....
--------------------------------------------------------------
Personally I am trying to force my agents FS / LY to do a better job and am pulling on my kicking boots to that effect.
And if that were ramped up by co-ordinated lender action I think that is the only legally coherent way to go - ie require the security holder to enforce the security. At least FCA are starting to show an interest.
|
|
pip
Posts: 542
Likes: 725
|
Post by pip on Mar 14, 2019 11:43:55 GMT
I think there are two different things here:
a) contacting the borrower directly to get an update from the horses mouth
b) taking legal action against the borrower directly rather than through the platform
For a) pretty sure that you are not meant to do this in most platforms terms and conditions. In all likelihood there is little that the platform could do about you doing this although you need to be careful. Asking a borrower once for the status of the repayment to the loan by email or letter is probably fine. Repeated messages, going to their house, going to their workplace, posting on their social media accounts etc. is dodgy territory as creditors have a lot (some may argue too much) protection from harassment laws.
For b) I believe that legally the borrower has borrowed from the platform not you directly so you may not have a claim legally but I am not sure. Practically though taking legal action against tens of borrowers who by definition are not easy to get money out of (the platforms may not be great debt collectors, but sure they have at least asked!) is going to be a major headache for you. I have taken a business to a small claims court before and let me tell you it is stressful, takes a lot of time and there is no guarantee you will eventually get paid even if you win. Be prepared for being royally messed around. For me the levels of money involved mean that this course of action is not one I would go down for my defaulted p2p loans. I am just writing them off and learning from the experience.
In any case if you do plan to go down either route a or b do some research before you try. Harassment of creditors is a criminal offence and people that owe money try anything to have a claim against you for assault etc even if it has no truth. There is a reason why bailiffs wear cameras these days!
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 6,558
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 14, 2019 11:51:02 GMT
For b) I believe that legally the borrower has borrowed from the platform not you directly so you may not have a claim legally but I am not sure. It depends on the platform t&c's but in the case of FS they act as our agent. There is in fact established case law (which I can't link to as it might identify a certain London Loan on a different platform) which details how the borrower can sue some 5000 lenders in a pacific loan bypassing the agent. No reason why this couldn't work in reverse although I suspect would take a lot of legal effort which wouldn't be worth it.
(deliberate easter egg in there before you ask)
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Mar 14, 2019 13:47:05 GMT
Agree with the above i.e. individual action will be expensive , problematic and liable to fail to realise any money as the law is just in favour of the debtors. But as with most things in life money talks and if action is to be taken against FS I think it needs to be done by a specialist legal team who know what they are doing. I hope the BHs allied with a class action by forum members can do something about, at least, the art loans.
I have worked for a company that was sued by a US based class action for market manipulation and they won big time but ,from memory, it took 5 years...
What I am saying is that specialist legal advice is needed - hello - anybody out there?
|
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Mar 14, 2019 14:21:25 GMT
For b) I believe that legally the borrower has borrowed from the platform not you directly so you may not have a claim legally but I am not sure. It depends on the platform t&c's but in the case of FS they act as our agent. There is in fact established case law (which I can't link to as it might identify a certain London Loan on a different platform) which details how the borrower can sue some 5000 lenders in a pacific loan bypassing the agent. No reason why this couldn't work in reverse although I suspect would take a lot of legal effort which wouldn't be worth it.
(deliberate easter egg in there before you ask)
I asked for legal advice regarding that London loan from an insurer which included a "24 hour legal advice helpline" with their policy. They said "You need to get legal advice". Really helpful!
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 14, 2019 14:24:02 GMT
Agree with the above i.e. individual action will be expensive , problematic and liable to fail to realise any money as the law is just in favour of the debtors. But as with most things in life money talks and if action is to be taken against FS I think it needs to be done by a specialist legal team who know what they are doing. I hope the BHs allied with a class action by forum members can do something about, at least, the art loans. I have worked for a company that was sued by a US based class action for market manipulation and they won big time but ,from memory, it took 5 years... What I am saying is that specialist legal advice is needed - hello - anybody out there? You are constantly calling for a class action against FS. What exactly do you aim to achieve by this? To push them into administration so investors are stuck in timeless limbo like they are with loans made through Collateral (and yes FS still has loans repaying)? Maybe this fits in with picking up FS security being sold at distressed prices (and may also explain why you run so many polls asking for assets to be put to auction with no reserve) but it does not help people with actual money invested in these loans. It's probably worth mentioning that FS along with other platforms are limited liability companies. This means that even if any 'class action' was successful, the liability of FS is limited to whatever the assets of the company can be liquidated for. Do you really think this is going to run into millions and millions (take a look at their balance sheet for a clue)? The (new) owner would then be left with a choice of either pumping in a few million of his own cash to pay the award of the court or just walking away and let the company being wound up, with administrators taking most of whats left. Yes this will lead to a distressed sale of a lot of these assets but it will also rack up huge costs and massive losses for investors. You seem to think the BH's in these loans are going to fund this expensive and time consuming legal action but they are not. If an investor has £500k+ in an individual set of loans do you think that's the extent of their investment on the platform or do you think maybe they have several times that amount invested in other loans. Does having the platform collapsing for no compensation help their position? The new owner only took ownership of FS a few months ago. Maybe better to let him get on with sorting out the numerous issues he has inherited.
|
|
pip
Posts: 542
Likes: 725
|
Post by pip on Mar 14, 2019 15:58:02 GMT
Completely agree with BG and Mousey. Both comments very measured and sensible.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Mar 14, 2019 16:14:52 GMT
I am not replying to your personal rant despite the fact I found it quite amusing and as others I question your underlying motive but I respect free speech although your logic puzzles me. I have said for me, personally, I would like to see FS taken over by an institution such as V**gin who know what they are doing e.g. RS took over GR loans. As to the art loans - damn right I hope we investors can sue FS for our money providing it is practical. Even if we got 20% back it would be better than nothing. However to add something positive to the discussion I don't agree - I thought legislation had been passed so that if any p2p company went bust the loans are passed to a managing agent www.4thway.co.uk/candid-opinion/what-happens-when-a-p2p-lending-website-goes-bust/I think your logic assumes FS has no future if we sue and a rosy one if we don't - I would question both of those viewpoints...FS need to worry about BHs and not people such as I with only 4 figures invested although I suspect it will be 3 figures after the art loan fiasco. Be interested to see where we are at the end of the year. |
|
