|
|
Post by df on Mar 14, 2019 16:33:20 GMT
Borrower missed first payment and HC put it in to default...
"Should the money come in next week then it is likely we will deem it best to allow the loan to carry on to the original payment terms - but it is important borrowers don't think we are a soft touch and they will be penalised accordingly."
Very robust approach.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,560 
Likes: 1,169
|
Post by shimself on Mar 14, 2019 16:54:41 GMT
Borrower missed first payment and HC put it in to default... "Should the money come in next week then it is likely we will deem it best to allow the loan to carry on to the original payment terms - but it is important borrowers don't think we are a soft touch and they will be penalised accordingly." Very robust approach. I have no specific knowledge about this loan, nor Huddle really (don't fancy them)
REBS used to have a problem with borrowers missing their first payment. It turned out that they set the 30day timer running the moment the loan was financed on the platform, not when it was drawn down by the borrower; it was so silly they actually had a few borrowers who were supposed to make a repayment before they had actually received the funds from REBS. REBS saw sense, and problem has gone away. Is this a similar snafu do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by westcountry on Mar 14, 2019 17:00:24 GMT
Borrower missed first payment and HC put it in to default... "Should the money come in next week then it is likely we will deem it best to allow the loan to carry on to the original payment terms - but it is important borrowers don't think we are a soft touch and they will be penalised accordingly." Very robust approach. I have no specific knowledge about this loan, nor Huddle really (don't fancy them)
REBS used to have a problem with borrowers missing their first payment. It turned out that they set the 30day timer running the moment the loan was financed on the platform, not when it was drawn down by the borrower; it was so silly they actually had a few borrowers who were supposed to make a repayment before they had actually received the funds from REBS. REBS saw sense, and problem has gone away. Is this a similar snafu do you think?
Unfortunately that's not what happened in this case - the loan was marketed on 25th Jan, drawn down on 11th Feb and first payment due on 11th March.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,560
Likes: 1,169
|
Post by shimself on Mar 14, 2019 17:04:10 GMT
I have no specific knowledge about this loan, nor Huddle really (don't fancy them)
REBS used to have a problem with borrowers missing their first payment. It turned out that they set the 30day timer running the moment the loan was financed on the platform, not when it was drawn down by the borrower; it was so silly they actually had a few borrowers who were supposed to make a repayment before they had actually received the funds from REBS. REBS saw sense, and problem has gone away. Is this a similar snafu do you think?
Unfortunately that's not what happened in this case - the loan was marketed on 25th Jan, drawn down on 11th Feb and first payment due on 11th March. If Huddle had a routine (hah!) of phoning up 2 weeks in and making sure the Standing Order was in place and still they weren't paid then yes, bad borrower. But on the other hand it seems early days to throw the kitchen sink unless they know something
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 14, 2019 17:11:18 GMT
Unfortunately that's not what happened in this case - the loan was marketed on 25th Jan, drawn down on 11th Feb and first payment due on 11th March. If Huddle had a routine (hah!) of phoning up 2 weeks in and making sure the Standing Order was in place and still they weren't paid then yes, bad borrower. But on the other hand it seems early days to throw the kitchen sink unless they know something I think they want to send a message to investors that HC is now going to be tough, unlike some other platforms. I do hope the borrower will make this payment and the issue will be resolved.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Mar 14, 2019 17:36:11 GMT
I think this is the right approach. You have to be brutal in this game
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 14, 2019 17:57:20 GMT
I think this is the right approach. You have to be brutal in this game I like it. I think it is similar to ABL approach and it's probably not too difficult to do if the loan book is very small. Also "parent company (Rebs?ABL?, not sure which one is a parent) as well as our management team invest their own funds along side our lenders" - more incentive to be brutal.
|
|
|
|
Post by westcountry on Mar 14, 2019 18:15:52 GMT
I think this is the right approach. You have to be brutal in this game I like it. I think it is similar to ABL approach and it's probably not too difficult to do if the loan book is very small. Also "parent company (Rebs?ABL?, not sure which one is a parent) as well as our management team invest their own funds along side our lenders" - more incentive to be brutal. Parent Company is A***** C********* F****** - behind/agent for the borrower of quite a lot of loans on ABL platform.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Mar 15, 2019 11:17:57 GMT
Unfortunately that's not what happened in this case - the loan was marketed on 25th Jan, drawn down on 11th Feb and first payment due on 11th March. If Huddle had a routine (hah!) of phoning up 2 weeks in and making sure the Standing Order was in place and still they weren't paid then yes, bad borrower. But on the other hand it seems early days to throw the kitchen sink unless they know something Huddle have been in contact with the borrower, and let's just say the response from the borrower wasn't acceptable (without divulging the details). Huddle aren't known for their pro-active updates to lenders but on this occasion credit where credit is due. As per westcountry, if you have an interest in APF loans on ABL or for that matter ABL itself (they've taken an equity stake in HC) then it's worth keeping an eye on what happens over at HC (IMO, of course).
|
|
