|
Post by Ace on Dec 23, 2023 16:12:52 GMT
It does seem to be pretty explicit: 'New financial promotions made from 31 January 2024, even if made to individuals already promoted to under the current exemptions, will need to be made in accordance with the updated exemptions.' I was hoping there would be some sort of Grandfather rights, but can't see anything like that. I would be interested in a precise definition of what comprises 'net assets' - I had planned to move some funds out of P2P to an Octopus Inheritance ISA which I would guess this would diminish what might be counted as my 'net assets'. I have no doubt the FCA are determined to stamp out the P2P industry altogether, which will greatly hurt the economy, especially the housing sector if they are allowed to get away with it. The industry has had a painful shake-out of most of the bad boys, no thanks to FCA. FCA threats (or do they call them consultations?) have already bounced some high quality platforms to move to institutional funding only. I deeply regret that Archover (which I rated highly) has recently ceased to accept private funding, and there are others.
I'm no expert, but funds in the octopus inheritance ISA are still accessible by you, so would surely count towards your net wealth. At the end of the day no one will check the value of your assets, so you're free to tick the HNW box if you're happy to accept the investment risk.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Dec 23, 2023 17:58:24 GMT
I couldn't find anything in the document linked by ilmoro above that would allow them to certify you based on your previous questionnaire. It's also not clear to me that being "able to navigate the site as before" includes being able to invest in new loans. It seems, from para 4.4, that they can follow-up on promotions that they first made before 31st Jan 2024 for up to another year. However, it seems that they won't be able to promote any new investments to non-certified members after that date. The old definition of being sophisticated if you had made more than 1 unlisted investment previously was clearly bonkers, but removing that without a more sensible definition is equally bonkers. It effectively means that only rich people can invest in P2P in future. This has the potential to ruin many decent platforms. It will be very interesting to hear how other platforms address this. As I read it, the average investor will no longer be able to bung a tenner in the likes of a very low risk platform like Loanpad, but will still be able to put their whole wealth in a single listed share! It seems that the regulators have decided to effectively kill the industry rather than bothering to regulate it. I really hope that I've got the wrong end of the stick. I did find some coverage of the changes which indicated that SOMOs approach was allowed (don't have it to hand). It will also I think depend on the type of investment with regulated P2P possibly being less rigourous than unregulated lending like SOMO. I haven't been able to dig around in FCA handbook for clarity as yet. FCA have only just implemented their own rule changes, consumer duty etc, more tweaks due in Feb, so picture is very contradictory currently. It's possible that COBS 10.1 might allow a firm to decide that a retail client is sufficiently experienced to be able to invest. However, COBS 10.1.4 states that " A firm that is carrying on a regulated activity on a non-advised basis, whether or not the rules in this chapter apply to its activities, should also consider whether other rules in COBS apply". It's not clear to me, whether the new rules in the "Financial promotion exemptions for high net worth individuals and sophisticated investors" would take precedence over COBS 10.1 when they contradict each other.
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Dec 27, 2023 20:34:00 GMT
There was a consultation which I believe comes into effect Jan/Feb 2024(?) the main upshot being that there will be no "easy" self-cert option any more The easy or simply self-cert option being something on the lines of, "I have invested in two or more unlisted business in the last two years" or similar
Ed.
Link to FCA site showing their thinking and the results of the consultation mentioned above
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Dec 27, 2023 21:30:38 GMT
Here's their reply to me on hitting "none of the above"
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Dec 28, 2023 12:42:34 GMT
There was a consultation which I believe comes into effect Jan/Feb 2024(?) the main upshot being that there will be no "easy" self-cert option any more The easy or simply self-cert option being something on the lines of, "I have invested in two or more unlisted business in the last two years" or similar
Does this mean we will have to provide proof of earnings/wealth to every P2P company in order to invest ?
Just one more source of personal data to be leaked or targeted by criminals. Looks like my P2P portfolio might be reducing rather than increasing next year.
We should be grateful to the government / FCA for trying to protect the hapless, witless or financially inept before they invest anything in P2P as beyond that point they are frigging clueless and impotent regarding protecting anybody.
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Dec 28, 2023 13:49:41 GMT
There was a consultation which I believe comes into effect Jan/Feb 2024(?) the main upshot being that there will be no "easy" self-cert option any more The easy or simply self-cert option being something on the lines of, "I have invested in two or more unlisted business in the last two years" or similar
Does this mean we will have to provide proof of earnings/wealth to every P2P company in order to invest ?
Just one more source of personal data to be leaked or targeted by criminals. Looks like my P2P portfolio might be reducing rather than increasing next year.
We should be grateful to the government / FCA for trying to protect the hapless, witless or financially inept before they invest anything in P2P as beyond that point they are frigging clueless and impotent regarding protecting anybody. I've never had to provide any proof. Just state any net worth figure above their threshold. It's another ar*e covering exercise, rather than providing any proper protection.
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Dec 28, 2023 14:13:40 GMT
Does this mean we will have to provide proof of earnings/wealth to every P2P company in order to invest ?
Just one more source of personal data to be leaked or targeted by criminals. Looks like my P2P portfolio might be reducing rather than increasing next year.
We should be grateful to the government / FCA for trying to protect the hapless, witless or financially inept before they invest anything in P2P as beyond that point they are frigging clueless and impotent regarding protecting anybody. I've never had to provide any proof. Just state any net worth figure above their threshold. It's another ar*e covering exercise, rather than providing any proper protection.
Good to know, I can delete the photo of my suitcase of $100 notes, that's all they were going to get.
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Dec 31, 2023 14:42:44 GMT
There was a consultation which I believe comes into effect Jan/Feb 2024(?) the main upshot being that there will be no "easy" self-cert option any more The easy or simply self-cert option being something on the lines of, "I have invested in two or more unlisted business in the last two years" or similar Does this mean we will have to provide proof of earnings/wealth to every P2P company in order to invest ? Just one more source of personal data to be leaked or targeted by criminals. Looks like my P2P portfolio might be reducing rather than increasing next year.
We should be grateful to the government / FCA for trying to protect the hapless, witless or financially inept before they invest anything in P2P as beyond that point they are frigging clueless and impotent regarding protecting anybody. When I tried to sign into SoMo a few days ago, a screen came up that looked like the Appropriateness Test screen but, none of the options seemed to apply to me. I half checked out the business Angels option, there was a box where you inputted the name of the Angels you belong to. I'm not a member of any Angels so it doesn't apply. Something like this might be how it works with HNW-ers I ended up clicking the option, "None of these Options Apply to me" it also implied that I would have to leave the site. So I thought I might be leaving p2p altogether, but the next screen (which I've pasted a few posts above) said that I had already gone through the Appropriateness test with SoMo and I just had to sign the form at the bottom. And where it said SoMo this was a box where "Social Money Ltd" had been typed in. So perhaps if I'd been a Biz Angel their name would've been in that box When I originally went through the New Appropriateness Test questions they tended to circle around the basic idea that I would not be covered by FCA, FOS, FSCS. This is true as most (if not all?) are unregulated mortgages/bridging loans to biz not individuals on SoMo. Please correct me here, I might be wrong The appropriate test I went through was about a month ago or more, so this is as best as I can remember
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,251
Likes: 2,694
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Dec 31, 2023 14:59:00 GMT
Does this mean we will have to provide proof of earnings/wealth to every P2P company in order to invest ? Just one more source of personal data to be leaked or targeted by criminals. Looks like my P2P portfolio might be reducing rather than increasing next year.
We should be grateful to the government / FCA for trying to protect the hapless, witless or financially inept before they invest anything in P2P as beyond that point they are frigging clueless and impotent regarding protecting anybody. When I tried to sign into SoMo a few days ago, a screen came up that looked like the Appropriateness Test screen but, none of the options seemed to apply to me. I half checked out the business Angels option, there was a box where you inputted the name of the Angels you belong to. I'm not a member of any Angels so it doesn't apply. Something like this might be how it works with HNW-ers I ended up clicking the option, "None of these Options Apply to me" it also implied that I would have to leave the site. So I thought I might be leaving p2p altogether, but the next screen (which I've pasted a few posts above) said that I had already gone through the Appropriateness test with SoMo and I just had to sign the form at the bottom. And where it said SoMo this was a box where "Social Money Ltd" had been typed in. So perhaps if I'd been a Biz Angel their name would've been in that box When I originally went through the New Appropriateness Test questions they tended to circle around the basic idea that I would not be covered by FCA, FOS, FSCS. This is true as most (if not all?) are unregulated mortgages/bridging loans to biz not individuals on SoMo. Please correct me here, I might be wrong The appropriate test I went through was about a month ago or more, so this is as best as I can remember I wonder if the 12 months is significant, in that they can authorise for another 12 months currently, but maybe not be able to after the rule changes coming in. Hence getting people to resign up now.
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Dec 31, 2023 16:12:52 GMT
When I tried to sign into SoMo a few days ago, a screen came up that looked like the Appropriateness Test screen but, none of the options seemed to apply to me. I half checked out the business Angels option, there was a box where you inputted the name of the Angels you belong to. I'm not a member of any Angels so it doesn't apply. Something like this might be how it works with HNW-ers I ended up clicking the option, "None of these Options Apply to me" it also implied that I would have to leave the site. So I thought I might be leaving p2p altogether, but the next screen (which I've pasted a few posts above) said that I had already gone through the Appropriateness test with SoMo and I just had to sign the form at the bottom. And where it said SoMo this was a box where "Social Money Ltd" had been typed in. So perhaps if I'd been a Biz Angel their name would've been in that box When I originally went through the New Appropriateness Test questions they tended to circle around the basic idea that I would not be covered by FCA, FOS, FSCS. This is true as most (if not all?) are unregulated mortgages/bridging loans to biz not individuals on SoMo. Please correct me here, I might be wrong The appropriate test I went through was about a month ago or more, so this is as best as I can remember I wonder if the 12 months is significant, in that they can authorise for another 12 months currently, but maybe not be able to after the rule changes coming in. Hence getting people to resign up now. For a few years now it's been annual I'm sure that will continue. I don't think there's any grandfathering
My understanding is that the platforms now have to satisfy themselves that p2p lending etc is appropriate for us, whereas previously they had to check that we'd said it was appropriate - pretty much. This is based on some of the commentary I've seen about this change - so just one opinion
I guess you're referring to this (the bold bits) in my post:-
My written cert wouldn't been within the last two months or so
On read that quote, I think they can authorise for me to lend with them for as long as is appropriate i.e. many years - may be I can just sign the form again for 2years after that I have to go through the Appropriateness Test again perhaps on the 4th(?) anniversary
When I click around on these FCA link below, there's no mention of these time limits, each firm has to work out how to comply
The links on the left delve deeper but not into the new rules themselves, I'll leave that for wiser forum members than I
|
|