am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on May 30, 2016 10:22:09 GMT
I got out of the GC in March when I cleared out overrunning loans - on the grounds that an overrun is an indication that there might be problems with the exit strategy, and hence we might be dependent on the security. (If I had still been in it it would have trebled my total level of P2P defaults.)
The mildly worrying point (which I why I voted for slightly concerned) is that at the point of issue this looked like one of the safer loans on SS.
|
|
|
Post by magoo68 on May 30, 2016 10:28:32 GMT
All fine, personally I never expected 12% to come without some risks.
The response from SS above though, that has me more concerned than anything else that's happened in the last 48 hours, this really doesn't seem the moment to get confrontational with your investors imho.
|
|
|
Post by meledor on May 30, 2016 11:20:26 GMT
So SS, did you send us all a message about the failure of PBL101/102 to go live on Saturday that we all missed by any chance? This is an example of what some members mean about "communications breaking down". "communications breaking down". All it needed sometime on Saturday when you decided that these loans would not take off as expected is to just tell us why and when the revised go live was planned. LW Did you not get the email?
It said "N.B. We reserve the right to cancel or extend this go live date if required."
In my book that it is perfectly sufficient communication and not at all the example of "communications breaking down" that you imagine.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on May 30, 2016 11:34:30 GMT
So SS, did you send us all a message about the failure of PBL101/102 to go live on Saturday that we all missed by any chance? This is an example of what some members mean about "communications breaking down". "communications breaking down". All it needed sometime on Saturday when you decided that these loans would not take off as expected is to just tell us why and when the revised go live was planned. LW Did you not get the email?
It said "N.B. We reserve the right to cancel or extend this go live date if required."
In my book that it is perfectly sufficient communication and not at all the example of "communications breaking down" that you imagine.
I totally agree. Loans often get slightly delayed, it's not an issue. Just wait a few days and the loan will go live.
|
|
|
Post by magoo68 on May 30, 2016 11:51:27 GMT
The response from SS above though, that has me more concerned than anything else that's happened in the last 48 hours, this really doesn't seem the moment to get confrontational with your investors imho. Personally, I'm not surprised at savingstream 's 'straight', not 'confrontational' response, following the amount of speculation that has been thrown around in numerous posts in the past 48hours, and even talk of suing them?! In 2.5 years the platform has had ONE loan default, which every penny of capital AND interest was returned to investors, and exceedingly promptly. Yes, they have now made the decision to default a second loan, which contrary to what some claim, has been communicated - we now have a 'latest activity' section to every loan; that's what everyone wanted, remember? Or would the team's valuable time be better spent here, on a bank holiday weekend, patting people's backs, whilst saying "there there". Some people really should stick with putting their hard-earned money into FSCS protected accounts, and stop whining. But that wouldn't provide an income would it - so we'd have to whine about that, too. +++++ I'm concerned about one thing, would you mind not attaching my name to all the other bits, I haven't said a word about any of the things you list. I also very clearly stated I personally expect risks with a 12% return.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on May 30, 2016 12:41:50 GMT
[mod hat off]
No concerns at all.
Assetz Capital are saying they expect around 6 out of every 100 loans to default (see bottom of this page). SS's switch into PBL/DFL from marine finance is simply too recent for expected default rates of the current loan book to have reached steady state.
Whilst the discussion regarding new & old T&C's and the provision fund is of interest to those individuals holding the defaulted loan, it would be very surprising if SS are not continually stress testing the exposure of the platform to such defaults. And stating the obvious, this is just one default ... statistically you can expect several more of the current loan book will default.
I'm not in the defaulted loan having exited at some point before it reached its notional maturity date. I felt the security was too complex for me to be able to establish my own worst case firesale valuation. (And given the complexity and specialist nature of the security lenders should assume the recovery is very likely to take around 2 years to complete ... which means those currently buying into the loan may not receive their interest even if it is covered by the recovery or PF until 2018 )
From a purely selfish personal point of view, if one default scares a few people away from SS, then fine, slightly bigger slices of loans will available to those of us that expect after capital losses a long term average return of around 6 to 7% pa from SS. (The suggestion of 8 to 9% pa on another thread discussing this default is still IMO too optimistic)
Where I do think savingstream could help deflect some of the criticism is in how they report the financial health of a loan, by which I mean the extent to which accruing interest is being covered by the borrower. I'm assuming some ( many ? most ? all ? none ?) of the SS negative day loans are being serviced by monthly interest payments by the borrower and are no different to say AC's Spondon PBL which is over 12 months overdue but has its on screen end date repeatedly extended. But equally some ( many ? most ? all ? none ?) of the SS negative day loans may be receiving no interest payments from the borrower and are being serviced by SS (which degrades cashflow as noted by the FCA in the context of formally defaulted loans). I'm assuming that loan extensions on SS reflect pre-paid interest/fees upto the new maturity date.
Its also worth noting that on AC the equivalent of the SS negative day loans accrue default interest (typically 3% pa but 6% pa on some PBLs) on top of the headline rate as a reflection of the increased risk of capital losses.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on May 30, 2016 13:26:25 GMT
Its also worth noting that on AC the equivalent of the SS negative day loans accrue default interest (typically 3% pa but 6% pa on some PBLs) on top of the headline rate as a reflection of the increased risk of capital losses. SS/Lendy also may have penalty clauses in their loan agreements, and we just don't know about them because any penalties aren't passed through to investors. Have SS ever supplied anyone with a copy of a loan agreement? IIRC, they said they would make them available.
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on May 30, 2016 13:57:47 GMT
Some people really should stick with putting their hard-earned money into FSCS protected accounts, and stop whining. But that wouldn't provide an income would it - so we'd have to whine about that, too. That smacks of the "no platforming" nonsense going around certain Universities at the moment, "I don't like what you say so you shouldn't be able to say it"
|
|
|
Post by meledor on May 30, 2016 14:50:11 GMT
Some people really should stick with putting their hard-earned money into FSCS protected accounts, and stop whining. But that wouldn't provide an income would it - so we'd have to whine about that, too. That smacks of the "no platforming" nonsense going around certain Universities at the moment, "I don't like what you say so you shouldn't be able to say it" Not at all. In fact your comparison completely misses the point. There is no desire to suppress the ability of people to voice opinions. However whingeing on this board does seem at times to be so infectious that it is good to hear a robust contrary view. That is especially true in the last few days when a fresh outbreak has been provoked by all sorts of scaremongering - including Lendy Ltd being potentially insolvent .
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on May 30, 2016 15:09:33 GMT
The response from SS above though, that has me more concerned than anything else that's happened in the last 48 hours, this really doesn't seem the moment to get confrontational with your investors imho. Personally, I'm not surprised at savingstream 's 'straight', not 'confrontational' response, following the amount of speculation that has been thrown around in numerous posts in the past 48hours, and even talk of suing them?! ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ In 2.5 years the platform has had ONE loan default, which every penny of capital AND interest was returned to investors, and exceedingly promptly. Yes, they have now made the decision to default a second loan, which contrary to what some claim, has been communicated - we now have a 'latest activity' section to every loan; that's what everyone wanted, remember? Or would the team's valuable time be better spent here, on a bank holiday weekend, patting people's backs, whilst saying "there there". Some people really should stick with putting their hard-earned money into FSCS protected accounts, and stop whining. But that wouldn't provide an income would it - so we'd have to whine about that, too. I think most on this forum aren't whining, just making observations (although there are indeed exceptions) Posts from members that suggest that Lendy Ltd might be going insolvent and potential legal action if interest isn't paid, all within the last 48 hours is bridging on the ludicrous, and I haven't gotten involved in those lines of conversations because I perceive them as pointless and unnecessary scaremongering. The problem is SS aren't helping matters by their silence; they did post, but that was to question a member's observation about lack of communication... then went silent again! I really couldn't care less about this default; I'm not invested in it, and I do believe that SS will handle it and the PF will do its job if required. I'm happy with SS the Platform, but I do believe that they need to be seen engaging with their investors; not just on a one2one basis (which I'll be the first to admit they are very good at) but as a group. The best place to do that is on this forum.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,011
Likes: 4,821
|
Post by adrianc on May 30, 2016 15:58:29 GMT
The response from SS above though, that has me more concerned than anything else that's happened in the last 48 hours, this really doesn't seem the moment to get confrontational with your investors imho. Personally, I'm not surprised at savingstream 's 'straight', not 'confrontational' response, following the amount of speculation that has been thrown around in numerous posts in the past 48hours, and even talk of suing them?! In 2.5 years the platform has had ONE loan default, which every penny of capital AND interest was returned to investors, and exceedingly promptly. Yes, they have now made the decision to default a second loan, which contrary to what some claim, has been communicated - we now have a 'latest activity' section to every loan; that's what everyone wanted, remember? Or would the team's valuable time be better spent here, on a bank holiday weekend, patting people's backs, whilst saying "there there". Some people really should stick with putting their hard-earned money into FSCS protected accounts, and stop whining. But that wouldn't provide an income would it - so we'd have to whine about that, too. I'm concerned about one thing, would you mind not attaching my name to all the other bits, I haven't said a word about any of the things you list. I also very clearly stated I personally expect risks with a 12% return. Seems fairly clear that he's replying to your post, so quoting you is the done thing. I'm not sure what the problem is. You don't have to agree with everything, or even anything, people say while replying to a post of yours - but you can't insist people don't reply to you, or don't quote you in replies.
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on May 30, 2016 17:55:18 GMT
That smacks of the "no platforming" nonsense going around certain Universities at the moment, "I don't like what you say so you shouldn't be able to say it" Not at all. In fact your comparison completely misses the point. There is no desire to suppress the ability of people to voice opinions. However whingeing on this board does seem at times to be so infectious that it is good to hear a robust contrary view. That is especially true in the last few days when a fresh outbreak has been provoked by all sorts of scaremongering - including Lendy Ltd being potentially insolvent . I believe it is you that misses the point. A robust rebuttal is of course a valid opinion but to tell people at the end to stop whining and go away is "no platforming" Since you brought up the subject of solvency what evidence do you have that a company whose last published financial information gives net assets of less than £400k and now has a defaulted debt of £1.7million does have net (positive) assets?
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on May 30, 2016 18:03:13 GMT
Not at all. In fact your comparison completely misses the point. There is no desire to suppress the ability of people to voice opinions. However whingeing on this board does seem at times to be so infectious that it is good to hear a robust contrary view. That is especially true in the last few days when a fresh outbreak has been provoked by all sorts of scaremongering - including Lendy Ltd being potentially insolvent . I believe it is you that misses the point. A robust rebuttal is of course a valid opinion but to tell people at the end to stop whining and go away is "no platforming" Since you brought up the subject of solvency what evidence do you have that a company whose last published financial information gives net assets of less than £400k and now has a defaulted debt of £1.7million does have net (positive) assets? All this talk of being insolvent is ridiculous. SS are incredibly profitable. Business model explained here:http://www.forum.p2pmoney.co.uk/thread/2639/convinced?page=1&scrollTo=47776 From every loan, SS deduct 6% up front for their own interest fee cut (on top of the 12% for investors) as well as a 4% arrangement fee. On £100 million worth of loans, they're doing very well for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on May 30, 2016 18:27:44 GMT
dualinvestor, no one has told anyone to 'go away'. The initial, far-reached comparison you used in your comment was actually an accurate comparison with your comment. Perhaps whilst getting wrapped up in the naysaying, you have overlooked the first charge Saving Stream hold against property valued at £2,430,000 - an asset. If by property you mean freehold premises the OMV of that is £2.06million. That property will be sold under forced sale conditions and subject to the costs of realisation If stop whining does not mean go away,or at least stop posting negative comments, what does it mean?
|
|
|
Post by Admin on May 30, 2016 18:33:37 GMT
Come on guys & gals, a bit of self restraint wouldn't come amiss this evening.
|
|