oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Apr 14, 2016 17:06:29 GMT
If any bank or BS had made a change like this (which they probably wouldn't) they'd have placed a pop-up notification on the login page a month or more before implementation with a tick box to confirm it had been read.
With Ratesetter, lenders suddenly find a potentially significant term has been changed without any notification and with no apparent explanation of what the change means, if anything, or its implications. To find out you need to waste time phoning them or hope for some info from a third-party forum. For a monthly, or is it rolling rate, that barely matches most bank current accounts I could do without the hassle.
Yes, I know they're a small company and all that, though I'm not sure what excuse that provides, but they seem to be the most chaotic outfit I've ever come across with the communication skills of a goldfish. I only hope they've more competence for managing my money.
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Apr 14, 2016 17:09:13 GMT
.... they seem to be the most chaotic outfit I've ever come across with the communication skills of a goldfish. I only hope they've more competence for managing my money. I'm actually quite surprised you lend with RateSetter, you don't seem to like much of what we do.......
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Apr 14, 2016 17:16:22 GMT
Nothing has changed really, My post above coughed out before yours appeared. Thanks for the re-assurance but could you clarify what "really" means? And do they realise at Ratesetter Towers that their lack of basic communication skills do more damage than a few canapés can repair?
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Apr 14, 2016 17:19:10 GMT
I'm actually quite surprised you lend with RateSetter, you don't seem to like much of what we do....... A very accurate assumption Kev.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 1,087
|
Post by ashtondav on Apr 14, 2016 17:26:33 GMT
Nothing significant at all (no impact on returns). My BS accounts constantly open and close accounts, or make them dormant, and give them various spurious names ("Super Saver" = 1.5% for eg).
No need for explanation, therefore.
Oik, why not just withdraw your money and retreat to the comfort zone of a BS and enjoy your 1.5%.
It's so much more enjoyable, especially if you prefer a pint of Mild to a bottle of Moet...
The reality is that RS and ZOPA deliver, near as dammit, FTSE100 equity returns with the risk and volatility of less than a bond fund and no one's ever made a loss (yet). I can assure you from my time in the City that there are many Hedge Funds who would lurve the returns ZOPA and RS have delivered over the last 5 - 10 years.
That's why they're all investing in this asset class!
But you go ahead, Oik. Salivate over the 1.5%you're going to get in that High Street BS. And don't quote Santander 123, Lloyds etc. You can't invest chicken sh*t in those accounts at 3% to 5%.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 957
Likes: 647
|
Post by alender on Apr 14, 2016 17:42:26 GMT
But you go ahead, Oik. Salivate over the 1.5%you're going to get in that High Street BS. And don't quote Santander 123, Lloyds etc. You can't invest chicken sh*t in those accounts at 3% to 5%. I have managed to get in excess of £48,000 and rising in 3% to 5% in a single name (no joint acounts) all protected by the FSCS, all not time limited and all can be accesed in a few minites to two hours via faster payments, you must be very rich if this is chicken sh*t.
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Apr 14, 2016 17:46:34 GMT
Nothing has changed really, My post above coughed out before yours appeared. Thanks for the re-assurance but could you clarify what "really" means? And do they realise at Ratesetter Towers that their lack of basic communication skills do more damage than a few canapés can repair? I said really because the changes to terms and conditions happened when we made the product instant access with no fees. We blogged, emailed and changed the web site to make this clearly obvious, and included the caveats about liquidity. This was what the regulators would call " a positive customer outcome", so why would we have a " yes I've read this" tick box. We prefer not to nanny state our generally financially sophisticated lenders, especially when a good thing happens. The recent brand name change didn't impact the terms. Although it did highlight the fact we could use the rolling money for up to 5-yrs. Although this has always been true, we are just more open about this now. The actual strategy and use hasn't changed though, and in the majority is still only used up to 2 years. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by misotu on Apr 14, 2016 17:50:10 GMT
I've just logged in to find this change. The problem for me is that there is no indication when the money will be returned, assuming funds are available. Which seems like a big hole in the information. Where does it say "In the rolling market, your invested funds plus interest are generally returned after one month subject to there being sufficient replacement funds from other investors" ?
If it's there somewhere, then fine but for the life of me I can't see it on the relevant (ie rolling lending) page. It needs to be right at the top and very obvious.
A courtesy email to lenders regarding the change would have been polite. Those new to RS have no memory of what has gone before so the fact that it used to be called "Rolling" is irrelevant. A change like this is concerning - perhaps needlessly, but it's not good for RS and that's why companies usually try to engage in professional, informative and timely communications with their customers.
Cynically, I assume that RS think there won't be sufficient funds shortly, because there's a lot of money piling into the monthly market waiting for the advent of the P2P ISA. They reckon, probably correctly, that a lot of that monthly market money will disappear when those ISAs are finally available.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Apr 14, 2016 17:59:58 GMT
Nothing significant at all (no impact on returns). My BS accounts constantly open and close accounts, or make them dormant, and give them various spurious names ("Super Saver" = 1.5% for eg). No need for explanation, therefore. Oik, why not just withdraw your money and retreat to the comfort zone of a BS and enjoy your 1.5%. It's so much more enjoyable, especially if you prefer a pint of Mild to a bottle of Moet... The reality is that RS and ZOPA deliver, near as dammit, FTSE100 equity returns with the risk and volatility of less than a bond fund and no one's ever made a loss (yet). I can assure you from my time in the City that there are many Hedge Funds who would lurve the returns ZOPA and RS have delivered over the last 5 - 10 years. That's why they're all investing in this asset class! But you go ahead, Oik. Salivate over the 1.5%you're going to get in that High Street BS. And don't quote Santander 123, Lloyds etc. You can't invest chicken sh*t in those accounts at 3% to 5%. All that's required is a notification and explanation of what the change does or doesn't mean. If you really use a BS that changed the name of an account you had funds in or closed it without ever bothering to clearly inform you then I'd be pleased to learn the details. If they did such a thing then you should certainly have had an explanation. Would you like any help to complain? I'm unclear why anyone sensible would invest solely in the FTSE100. If you do then I'd suggest you need the help of an adviser. If that's how you invest it would explain why you find Zopa and Ratesetter so attractive. As for assessing risk on the basis that no-one has lost money yet that's something else you need assistance with. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by chicken sh*t. If you with a partner haven't been able to place £150k in interest paying current accounts and heading towards a further £100k in regular saving accounts (if you really want that much in cash) then you haven't been paying attention. Another reason to have a word with someone who can help you.
|
|
|
Post by misotu on Apr 14, 2016 17:59:59 GMT
I have managed to get in excess of £48,000 and rising in 3% to 5% in a single name (no joint acounts) all protected by the FSCS, all not time limited and all can be accesed in a few minites to two hours via faster payments, you must be very rich if this is chicken sh*t. Impressive. Where is this marvellous account alender? The best I've managed is 3% with Santander so I would be very happy indeed to find an additional provider at decent rates!
|
|
|
Post by westonkevRS on Apr 14, 2016 18:08:25 GMT
I've just logged in to find this change. The problem for me is that there is no indication when the money will be returned, assuming funds are available. Which seems like a big hole in the information. Where does it say "In the rolling market, your invested funds plus interest are generally returned after one month subject to there being sufficient replacement funds from other investors" ? If it's there somewhere, then fine but for the life of me I can't see it on the relevant (ie rolling lending) page. It needs to be right at the top and very obvious. This has always been in the lender T&Cs and available for anyone to read in the FAQs legal section: " What happens if there are insufficient funds to finance existing loan contracts
If a situation occurred where there are insufficient funds on the market to finance existing loans, the Lender would be 'locked-in' to the contract until the Borrower had repaid their loan.
This situation has never occurred before, nor do we envisage it happening in the future, but we feel it is necessary to clarify the procedure should this scenario arise.
If your loan contract is locked in for a longer term, the entire contract rate would be at the rate of the original contract. So if you had a 1 month loan at 3.5% which was locked in for 12 months, the entire contract rate would remain at 3.5%. " This isn't a new thing and has always been the case. But some lenders seem annoyed that we are making it more obvious now with the easy access change. Of course we could have kept it obscure, then perhaps my life would have been easier! The change certainly wasn't highlighted because we were worried about liquidity. Kevin.
|
|
|
Post by misotu on Apr 14, 2016 18:15:31 GMT
Actually, re-reading the rolling market information, I have another question and I hope westonkev will have something to say on the matter.
If I'm right in thinking that there may be a bit of a cashflow problem in the newly-named "Rolling" market when P2P ISAs arrive then I would like to be very clear about what will happen. I would have thought that the funds would remain on loan pending funds being available and that a repayment "queue" (effectively) would be formed which would gradually be dealt with as new money arrives. But the information seems to suggest that if there aren't sufficient funds then that's it ... you have to lend that money until the loan is repaid which might be 5 years!
So just the one shot - and if the timing isn't right you're stuffed? Surely that can't be right.
I can understand that there might be a delay. But I don't understand why someone lending in Rolling *after* me might get their funds out on time while I languish for up to five years. If that's the case then I'm first out the door and off to the BS until P2P ISAs appear.
Clarification please?
|
|
|
Post by misotu on Apr 14, 2016 18:19:36 GMT
Cross-post with westonkev I was aware that this might happen, but assumed it was a fairly remote possibility historically and thought the risk was worth it. But I'm not convinced that's the case now, because of liquidity pressure as a result of the new ISA. OK, so basically I might end up lending for five years at 3-3.5% at recent rates. However, you haven't addressed my main point which is that the web site information on the rolling lending page does not say when you get your money back if there's no issue.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Apr 14, 2016 18:37:00 GMT
I have managed to get in excess of £48,000 and rising in 3% to 5% in a single name (no joint acounts) all protected by the FSCS, all not time limited and all can be accesed in a few minites to two hours via faster payments, you must be very rich if this is chicken sh*t. Impressive. Where is this marvellous account alender? The best I've managed is 3% with Santander so I would be very happy indeed to find an additional provider at decent rates! alender points out he's got £48k in current accounts and rising and if he wants them he's probably still got plenty of options. With Mrs Oik I'm currently holding exactly £150k in current accounts paying from 3-5%. I've had them a while so you may not be able to open quite so many multiple accounts with some banks now. Look at Nationwide, Lloyds, TSB, BOS, Santander, Tesco... all pay between 3-5% and some pay decent cashback for opening an account. Nationwide pay £100 to both the new account holder and the account holder who introduces them. Halifax are happy to pay you a few quid a month even if you don't keep a penny with them. Plenty of suggestions from the helpful folk at MSE if you want them. That said, unless you aren't in a position to take any risk, then diversified investments in equities, property etc are likely to be a better option over the longer term. Maybe even a few quid in the likes of Ratesetter if you can stand the hassle. The the advantage of current accounts is they give you instant access to decent amounts of cash when opportunities arise and somewhere decent to park your profits. There are plenty of regular savers also still paying 3-5% such as Lloyds, TSB, Nationwide, Leeds etc. but obviously less flexible and more suited to simple saving. If anyone has put seriously money into Ratesetter before maxing out the better options then they're probably missing a trick.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2016 18:49:00 GMT
The fact that people seem to think anything significant has changed just goes to show how much misunderstanding there was about the old wording
At least this should make the potential liquidity issues much clearer up front
|
|