iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 2,450
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 18, 2024 11:50:54 GMT
The problem is, zaff , that your last post no longer exists. If you didn't delete it yourself, it could be considered that it was removed by the Forum's admin / moderators - either at the request of the platform to which it referred or as a result of it having breached the forum rules. Perhaps you could review those rules and repost that original post in such a way as to stay within the guidelines? Otherwise, without that context, your recent post and this thread are largely redundant of meaning.
|
|
|
Post by zaff on Mar 18, 2024 17:04:41 GMT
I deleted the post to keep a promise I made upon their request. I will later explain to clarify.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 2,692
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 19, 2024 13:16:35 GMT
I deleted the post to keep a promise I made upon their request. I will later explain to clarify. Never quite manage to get to the point, if there actually is one.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 2,692
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 21, 2024 13:01:38 GMT
Dear Zaff Be good to speak with you, just in the process of hopefully clearing our notice with admin to go live. Regards SEISMAN I agree, I am not sure how the other folks in here follow the Somos' business practice. The investers belame borrowers and that might be true in some cases. What would they think if they knew that there are borrowers agreeing to pay the loan despite the extensive default charges and the rates and requesting a redemption statement which is ignored behind poorly drafted lies in writing. Have they ever truely checked Soomos' company formation and its' ties? I have been searching Somo and their peoples' background inline with their contunious out of order business practice for some time besides, I know that I am not the only one. I actually didn't have time to spend for them but, it's coming to a point that they really, really need! someone to gather all the evidences spread throughout the country in many devestated homes, encourage people to seek for their rightfull losts, arrange the funds (the easiest part) for a proper show. I feel that they are already aware something big is coming on them as long as they insist on moving things in this way. I would love to tell more but I can't now, not yet. Maybe, things will get where they are supposed to within their natural cause. Who knows? Another tease. And you are (not) answering a post that is 7 months old.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 2,692
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 21, 2024 20:06:22 GMT
Dear Greenwood. It's not a tease. It was and still a fact which I left it to silence in an agreement proposed which I accepted. I am simply honouring my promise. " Amidst the dance of shadows, a gentle reminder awaits: the truth, a shimmering gem, reveals itself to those who dare to look beyond the veil" someone else tells more in the following link, like many others. www.propertytribes.com/serious-concerns-about-bridgecrowd-t-127644029.html Like individual threads weaving into a tapestry, something fragile becomes unbreakable when bound together with others. Be patient, time will show, if you can not see it yourself. All the best. Blah
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 2,692
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 21, 2024 20:08:16 GMT
What particularly is concerning?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 21, 2024 22:59:44 GMT
Also, I noticed this statement on Somos' website. Why would they need to remind you that? "Don’t invest unless you’re prepared to lose all the money you invest. This is a high-risk investment, and you are unlikely to be protected if something goes wrong. Take 2 mins to learn more." Don't you have 2 minutes to be convinced and be rest assured:)))) Erm, because its a mandatory warning statement required to be displayed by all platforms under UK financial regulations.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 2,692
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 22, 2024 9:20:17 GMT
Erm, because its a mandatory warning statement required to be displayed by all platforms under UK financial regulations. A small refernece to Greenwood, do you know whats going with FCA and Somo relationships? I bet you know. Would you like to share with us? Are they having a pint after work? ) The only thing I know is that SOMO's loans are not regulated as P2P loans and not FSCS protected. And I prefer a G&T.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 2,450
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 22, 2024 12:45:19 GMT
I agree, I am not sure how the other folks in here follow the Somos' business practice. The investers belame borrowers and that might be true in some cases. What would they think if they knew that there are borrowers agreeing to pay the loan despite the extensive default charges and the rates and requesting a redemption statement which is ignored behind poorly drafted lies in writing. Have they ever truely checked Soomos' company formation and its' ties? I have been searching Somo and their peoples' background inline with their contunious out of order business practice for some time besides, I know that I am not the only one. I actually didn't have time to spend for them but, it's coming to a point that they really, really need! someone to gather all the evidences spread throughout the country in many devestated homes, encourage people to seek for their rightfull losts, arrange the funds (the easiest part) for a proper show. I feel that they are already aware something big is coming on them as long as they insist on moving things in this way. I would love to tell more but I can't now, not yet. Maybe, things will get where they are supposed to within their natural cause. Who knows? Let's break this down... and Do you have any figures? An estimate of how many defaulting Borrowers have ignored when it comes to redemption statements? (You will know this, but others may not, so for context SoMo have some 1,350 closed loans and of the c. 450 live loans, around 150 are out of Term. Therefore, there are potentially 1,500 loans against which a defaulted Borrower may have had a request for a redemption statement ignored.) As for the " despite the extensive default charges and the rates" are those charges and fees not wholly outlined in the Loan Agreement? If so, would you agree that Borrowers are aware of what to expect should they breach the terms outlined in the Loan Agreement? And from the Borrowers' FAQ, SoMo appear to insist on the Borrowers engaging legal representation prior to signing the Loan Agreement. If that is the case, any irregularities with the Loan Agreement would presumably be picked up and highlighted by the Borrowers' solicitors. Or are you suggesting that SoMo unilaterally vary the terms of the Loan Agreement once the Borrower has defaulted? If so, then it should be a (comparatively) simple case for the Borrowers' appointed legal reps to put a stop to such practices. (Regulated loans or not, contract law relating to variations is quite clear when it comes to protecting either party in a contract.) And if that had happened, I would there would be evidence of SoMo being taken to task through the Courts by irate Borrowers who know the law is on their side. Is there any? I've not been able to find anything. Why? What would they find? Where are things " supposed to be"? SoMo have been undertaking bridging loans since 2014, as far as I can see. My opinion would have to be that either: a) they've been 'getting away with it' for 10 years or so, or b) they're not doing anything wrong other than upset the occasional borrower by enforcing the terms as outlined in the Loan Agreement; an agreement signed by the Borrower after consultation with their own legal counsel. Hopefully this thread does serve a purpose, zaff ? If it's to deter Lenders, then I don't think it will work - not unless you have verifiable evidence of platform wrong-doing. (All I've seen so far are very vague insinuations.) If it's to deter Borrowers from entering an agreement without being very careful to fully understanding the implications of breaching the Terms of the Loan Agreement, then I'm all for that. A loan book of defaulted loans put a Platform at risk. A book of loans that conclude at term with no shenanigans on the part of the Borrower make for happy Lenders, Platforms and Borrowers.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 2,450
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 22, 2024 13:08:05 GMT
apart from being my birthday i mean. changing the trading name . Hmm. when is the last time you decided to change your name? Whats the rationale behind this necessity? When did the new charges on the company applied? When the Isle of Man connections got on board? Keep up with the good work, you will get there little by little? Or maybe just nevermind… Plenty of organisations re-brand and/or have multiple trading names. Checkout some the Lloyds or Virgin entities on that register.... are they up to no good, too? (Rhetorical question ) As for the IoM-connected Charge registered against Social Money Ltd at Companies House, I note that is with specific regard to 'Social Money Ltd (T/A Payl8r)'. My best guess - based on my understanding that Payl8r is a B2B / B2C consumer credit company - is that this charge secures a variable / floating overdraft arrangement between the IoM bank and SML / Payl8r so that SML can be confident it can cover funding demands made by consumer requests for loans (either directly or indirectly via its' B2B agents) without having to hold significant cash reserves. I doubt there is anything to be read into the Chargor being registered in the IoM other than it suits the Chargor for tax reasons. (Those tax benefits may extend to the Chargee, I don't know.)
|
|
p2pfan
Member of DD Central
Full-Time Investor
Posts: 742
Likes: 835
|
Post by p2pfan on Mar 22, 2024 13:25:17 GMT
iRobot , the points you make are spot on. Zaff is making a lot of insinuations without providing facts. It's difficult to understand what he is trying to say with all his spelling and grammatical errors (did this person ever go to school?), but his gripe seems to be that SoMo enforce the terms of the mutually-signed contracts when borrowers default on paying back the money they have borrowed. My advice to borrowers who are the type to borrow money without any intention to pay it back and ignore repeated demands to return money taken from lenders is for them to borrow through the majority of P2P platforms, but not SoMo. In the P2P space most platforms who do property-backed lending are lackadaisical and inept with getting borrowers to pay back on time or shortly afterwards. Fantastic for borrowers. Fantastic for the P2P platforms whose staff earn their hefty guaranteed monthly salaries without having to put an effort in. Not so fantastic for lenders. That's why I've stopped lending through most P2P platforms except SoMo. The very brilliant SoMo are rare in being tenacious and skilled in pursuing lying, cheating, fraudulent, thieving borrowers and successfully getting them to return the money they've borrowed.
|
|
|
Post by zaff on Mar 22, 2024 14:09:18 GMT
apart from being my birthday i mean. changing the trading name . Hmm. when is the last time you decided to change your name? Whats the rationale behind this necessity? When did the new charges on the company applied? When the Isle of Man connections got on board? Keep up with the good work, you will get there little by little? Or maybe just nevermind… Plenty of organisations re-brand and/or have multiple trading names. Checkout some the Lloyds or Virgin entities on that register.... are they up to no good, too? (Rhetorical question ) As for the IoM-connected Charge registered against Social Money Ltd at Companies House, I note that is with specific regard to 'Social Money Ltd (T/A Payl8r)'. My best guess - based on my understanding that Payl8r is a B2B / B2C consumer credit company - is that this charge secures a variable / floating overdraft arrangement between the IoM bank and SML / Payl8r so that SML can be confident it can cover funding demands made by consumer requests for loans (either directly or indirectly via its' B2B agents) without having to hold significant cash reserves. I doubt there is anything to be read into the Chargor being registered in the IoM other than it suits the Chargor for tax reasons. (Those tax benefits may extend to the Chargee, I don't know.) I really enjoy discussing this matter with you, and I must admit I have a lot to learn from you! On the other hand, rebranding is a topic I'm quite familiar with, given my background as a digital media designer with an MSc in UX Design. There are various reasons for rebranding, all of which should be valid and transparent. The aim is to provide customers and clients with up-to-date, efficient, and effective services and products in our ever-changing consumer landscape. (Not that intend to extent the discussion, though) Please see the reviews on this link: uk.trustpilot.com/review/thebridgecrowd.comDoes it resemble the rebranding efforts of companies like Lloyds, Apple, IBM, or others? Regarding your other points I am making my own reasearch and would love to share my findings along the time. However, There is an interesting discussion on this link: p2pfrank.com/showthread.php?tid=475All the best
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,247
Likes: 2,692
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 22, 2024 20:18:12 GMT
Plenty of organisations re-brand and/or have multiple trading names. Checkout some the Lloyds or Virgin entities on that register.... are they up to no good, too? (Rhetorical question ) As for the IoM-connected Charge registered against Social Money Ltd at Companies House, I note that is with specific regard to 'Social Money Ltd (T/A Payl8r)'. My best guess - based on my understanding that Payl8r is a B2B / B2C consumer credit company - is that this charge secures a variable / floating overdraft arrangement between the IoM bank and SML / Payl8r so that SML can be confident it can cover funding demands made by consumer requests for loans (either directly or indirectly via its' B2B agents) without having to hold significant cash reserves. I doubt there is anything to be read into the Chargor being registered in the IoM other than it suits the Chargor for tax reasons. (Those tax benefits may extend to the Chargee, I don't know.) just a bit curious about this charge and the others find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12616352and this company find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/12616352/filing-historyThey have some fixed assests and Social Money has charges on almost all of them. I wonder where did they purchase all those asssets in a year just after resigning from Somo directorship. Who knows? Questions, questions.. more questions Seems like companies who borrow money owe money to the companies they borrowed from.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 23, 2024 17:01:58 GMT
Not sure what the point is here. Somo are lending business, they lend money, some of this lending they move on via assignment to lenders via the platform, some is their own book (No regulatory issues as they aren't P2P) Yes, these are related party loans but is there any evidence they aren't on commercial terms ( they are not director loans) if that actually matters. Have these loans been assigned to lenders without full disclosure?
I note that some of the lending is by related parties to or through the platform.
I note another, fully regulated, platform has also made related party loans (declared in the accounts) so not unique to Somo.
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Mar 23, 2024 19:13:53 GMT
Not sure what the point is here. Somo are lending business, they lend money, some of this lending they move on via assignment to lenders via the platform, some is their own book (No regulatory issues as they aren't P2P) Yes, these are related party loans but is there any evidence they aren't on commercial terms ( they are not director loans) if that actually matters. Have these loans been assigned to lenders without full disclosure? I note that some of the lending is by related parties to or through the platform. I note another, fully regulated, platform has also made related party loans (declared in the accounts) so not unique to Somo. Maybe one day soon zaff will set out the point?! Cryptic offerings are made Responses are offered But, as of yet, there is no point. Is there?
Good point.
Not been following this search for a point thread but I had a look at the full loan book, their transparency is to be commended, but I don't like the ratio of overdue loans quite possibly in part due to the security being given a higher priority than the borrower. In order to be objective I would have to read every one and I'm not doing that. I've decided the minimum is too high anyway.
|
|