|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Jun 23, 2015 8:30:24 GMT
Let me know your thoughts.
|
|
unmadem
Member of DD Central
Posts: 377 
Likes: 181
|
Post by unmadem on Jun 23, 2015 9:03:55 GMT
andrewholgate could you give a few examples of what would be included in the "every possible outcome" but not in the recover or extend option please ?
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Jun 23, 2015 10:28:42 GMT
I would happily vote for the first option if it were accompanied with more robust loan management and communication.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,906
Likes: 11,128
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 23, 2015 10:33:00 GMT
For anyone else who like me reads posts in the recent post thread there is a poll attached to Andrews question. Thought it was just asking for views.
2 issues with voting
Availability of relevant info to inform the vote - AC slow to respond to questions in the preset timeframe
AC failure in some cases to act on vote outcomes, willingness to give borrower leniency/one more chance
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,843
Likes: 1,470
|
Post by bugs4me on Jun 23, 2015 11:18:32 GMT
<snip> AC failure in some cases to act on vote outcomes, willingness to give borrower leniency/one more chance IMO this is the one big failing with AC and their interpretation of the FCA TCF rules. There are a few examples where the borrower and/or introducer goes to ground - zero communication even though AC have no doubt moved heaven and earth to get a response. Lenders then vote and hey presto, at the 11th hour the borrower surfaces with a proposal and the vote becomes effectively null and void. Sorry AC, IMO, once you have made every effort to obtain a positive response from the borrower without success then taking further action is within the TCF interpretation irrespective as to the rabbit being pulled out of the hat - promising the earth, moon and stars - always tomorrow of course. Reminds me of the free beer tomorrow sign you see in pubs. A few more 24 hours passes and the promised proposal really amounts to nothing so everything is back at square one. In the meantime the interest is piling up which whilst looking tasty on the screen amounts to nothing if it is never going to be paid.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 23, 2015 11:48:57 GMT
"A few more 24 hours passes and the promised proposal really amounts to nothing so everything is back at square one. In the meantime the interest is piling up which whilst looking tasty on the screen amounts to nothing if it is never going to be paid."
Another reason why I want that all borrowers who are being shown "leniency"/extensions etc especially after a loan is due to be paid down must be instructed to pay at least lender interest due in order to continue any extension. It is no use allowing borrowers months and months of delay to fulfil their obligations when they default and don't even pay a penny!!
On a related subject, I really think rolled-up interest to be paid at the end of a (12 month loan) period is a thoroughly bad idea.... except maybe at 15%+.
|
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Jun 23, 2015 13:29:48 GMT
"... every possible practicable outcome ...", I think.
Also, if AC could move more rapidly once the vote is decided, and also be less credulous of borrowers' promises.Can't help feeling they would be more motivated with a receiver breathing down their neck.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,426
Likes: 1,211
|
Post by sqh on Jun 23, 2015 13:38:37 GMT
As a future shareholder I'm concerned at the inefficiencies of the platform. I believe that counting the votes from email replies must take hours. I strongly recommend an automated voting process.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jun 23, 2015 13:42:35 GMT
As a future shareholder I'm concerned at the inefficiencies of the platform. I believe that counting the votes from email replies must take hours. I strongly recommend an automated voting process. A spec for this has just been internally agreed and will be built over the next few weeks.
|
|
|
|
Post by phlitb on Jun 23, 2015 14:10:56 GMT
I'd like to see lender voting continued but for each user to have the option of giving their vote to AC by proxy either on a vote by vote basis, or for all future votes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jun 23, 2015 17:55:55 GMT
I've voted for no votes as AC should have all the expertise inhouse to decide the best route forward, and should have the flexibility to change their minds as things develop. Kent BL is a case in point where the new info in the last week or so might have influenced AC's desire to proceed with a LPA receiver.
|
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Jun 23, 2015 19:48:41 GMT
I've voted for no votes as AC should have all the expertise inhouse to decide the best route forward, and should have the flexibility to change their minds as things develop. Kent BL is a case in point where the new info in the last week or so might have influenced AC's desire to proceed with a LPA receiver. Additionally, AC are the only people who have all the information to make an informed decision. In most of the votes held so far there has been insufficient information to make a truly informed choice as a result a section of the voters appears to read an AC preference in the sequence that options are given which is hardly an informed vote. Better to have no vote than a result that is based on a assumption.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jun 23, 2015 20:03:54 GMT
Bearing in mind andrewholgate has stated publicly on several occasions that he will do his utmost to get our money back in all default situations (that doesn't mean he will succeed in every circumstance), I think the delay caused by most of these "what do you think, dear?" votes is detrimental to AC's temporal control of difficult situations. AC has the expertise, AC has the facts and figures (such as the borrower deigns to reveal), and sure as ripe bananas are yellow, AC will know exactly what it wants to do, and how in a given situation, and which external organisations it wants to hire to expedite any recovery from an errant (or unlucky) borrower. If we want quicker resolutions, stopping these lender votes will help. As a lender, I have voted that way.... ummm .. ahem!  Besides, we can still have a moan here from time to time.  |
|
unmadem
Member of DD Central
Posts: 377
Likes: 181
|
Post by unmadem on Jun 23, 2015 21:17:08 GMT
I think votes should continue. I'm not sure if FCA rules prevent this, but I think it would be helpful if AC put forward their recommendation on each vote. This would make good use of the experience of the AC team.
@philitb s suggestion of allowing users to give their proxy to AC would also seem to have merit.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jun 23, 2015 23:02:58 GMT
Agree with samford71. Much as I’d like AC to have a freer rein (& think it will be inevitable longer term) over the next couple of years the flow of new lender money will dwarf dealflow. It would be all too tempting for a platform to do just enough (rather than best possible) in recoveries, knowing there will always be plenty of fresh money ready to step in. Automated voting is a must, good to hear it’s on the way. As the loan book enlargens & votes become more frequent it may be that lender participation in votes (not to mention exposure per loan) diminishes. That could be the right time for AC to propose loosening the reins, if winning votes consistently carry say only 20% of lender support that in itself would suggest it’s time for a change. For the moment though I wouldn’t mind having a small say in loans on which I may have a large 4 or 5 fig exposure. I suspect larger lenders - & underwriters - might feel the same way.. |
|
