james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Nov 29, 2016 18:17:58 GMT
Yes, Ablrate continue to act entirely properly in this and to diligently and assertively work to obtain full recovery. Nice work. Defaults will happen and demonstrated ability to deal well with them is a very good thing for a platform to show, as Ablrate has been doing aside from some lack of updates when there just wasn't much to say anyway.
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Nov 30, 2016 9:40:22 GMT
Any insight who the other creditor is?
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,017
Likes: 1,835
|
Post by littleoldlady on Dec 2, 2016 22:39:51 GMT
Yes, Ablrate continue to act entirely properly in this and to diligently and assertively work to obtain full recovery. Nice work. Defaults will happen and demonstrated ability to deal well with them is a very good thing for a platform to show, as Ablrate has been doing aside from some lack of updates when there just wasn't much to say anyway. Maybe a little too positive IMO. AFAIK there are still the unanswered questions as to who owns the containers and who is responsible for repaying the debt, and how the containers manged to disappear without Abl having any information whatsoever as to their identity or whereabouts. They may have done a good job since the loan defaulted but they appear to have been negligent up to that point.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Dec 2, 2016 23:01:34 GMT
there are still the unanswered questions Anyone involved in this loan should read the communications from Ablrate for many of the answers to your questions. I can't respond to your other points for essentially the same reasons that Ablrate can't do it either. Regrettably Ablrate simply has to accept mistaken criticism that they aren't able to correct at the moment.
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,017
Likes: 1,835
|
Post by littleoldlady on Dec 3, 2016 8:00:48 GMT
there are still the unanswered questions Anyone involved in this loan should read the communications from Ablrate for many of the answers to your questions. I can't respond to your other points for essentially the same reasons that Ablrate can't do it either. Regrettably Ablrate simply has to accept mistaken criticism that they aren't able to correct at the moment. I am aware of Abl's assertions but I do not regard them as satisfactory answers since they give no justification and fly in the face of the other information previously given to us. You imply that you have information not in the public domain which you cannot reveal. Can you at least say how you came by this? PM me if you prefer.
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Dec 3, 2016 9:47:41 GMT
I agree - in terms of the questions that were being asked at the beginning of this thread we have had very little information so far. I assume Ablrate would still suggest that this is for legal reasons so as not to prejudice the case.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Dec 3, 2016 10:04:08 GMT
Ablrate's posts don't contradict information already given to us and nor do the court decisions that confirm Ablrate's statements. Simply believe the court, not the wrong guesses here, and all is clear.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Dec 3, 2016 10:43:40 GMT
I agree - in terms of the questions that were being asked at the beginning of this thread we have had very little information so far. I assume Ablrate would still suggest that this is for legal reasons so as not to prejudice the case. Any lenders on those loans can find Ablrate answering those questions in the emails on 29 July, 19 August, 31 August, 5 September and 25 November. In the first of those the court told us what happened to the containers. Regrettably, if you can't work out from the court order what happened I can't explain it here.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Dec 3, 2016 12:43:12 GMT
This is tricky and there seems to be some unhappiness developing with Ablrate's responsiveness to lenders on this. As a non-participant I am keen to understand how Ablrate is getting on generally and what lenders think of Abrate's progress and performance in its first default. I think It would be a big mistake for Ablrate to enter this discussion about the detail of this case on a public independent forum, and it would be good to consider when posting that they would have difficulty replying here. But I would like to think that Ablrate does have an effective way of communicating with and responding to the concerns of the lenders whose money is currently all lost - and we hope will be all recovered. If not getting answers to reasonable lenders' requests or if a lender considers Ablrate has behaved wrongly, then the primary route is the Ablrate complaints procedure, and I think a parallel but less detailed general discussion here among lenders.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Dec 3, 2016 13:12:44 GMT
Firstly, the Court has never told us what has happened to the January Loan containers. Not directly, but point (3) of the discussion of the order in the 29th July update gives a strong indication of what was known to the court about the location of the security at that time, and point (2) of the discussion of the extended order in the 4th August update is the most recent information we have as to how that order is progressing. It has yet to be complied with, unless I have missed something.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Dec 3, 2016 16:26:21 GMT
I'm satisfied with ablrate handling of this default. I only have 750 pounds in this one though so not too worried. Would like to see "justice" being served as the borrower comes across as being particularly devious
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Dec 3, 2016 17:04:27 GMT
I think there are two issues here:
1) - the legal process and the likelihood of recovery of the debt. 2) - the fact pattern as it relates to the containers from the time when Ablrate placed the purchase order and how it affected the security of the loan
As regards the first there seems to be no question that Ablrate is doing everything it can and hopefully we will see a good result. But the emails we have received, for instance those dated 29th July and 4th August that have been mentioned, only highlight the fact that the location of the assets were not known and merely reinforce the need for the second issue to be addressed. I am trusting Ablrate will do this once the legal process allows.
And in terms of the second it is more a question of building confidence in asset based lending, particularly in the case of enforcing security where mobile assets are concerned, and looking to identify where things could be improved.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Dec 4, 2016 18:25:35 GMT
Firstly, the Court has never told us what has happened to the January Loan containers. Secondly, ablrate have never given any adequate answers to the points raised in this thread. Courts don't make orders against parties for no reason. The money was borrowed by a company. What happened to cause the court to freeze the assets of an individual as well as the company? Why were the individual and company ordered to disclose the things they were ordered to disclose? It's not exactly hard to work out why containers are missing and a company and individual are having assets frozen and being ordered to say where they are. The emails by Ablrate address the vast majority of the questions, though perhaps not some of your wildly wrong guesses.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Dec 4, 2016 23:52:20 GMT
Firstly, the Court has never told us what has happened to the January Loan containers. Secondly, ablrate have never given any adequate answers to the points raised in this thread. Courts don't make orders against parties for no reason. The money was borrowed by a company. What happened to cause the court to freeze the assets of an individual as well as the company? Why were the individual and company ordered to disclose the things they were ordered to disclose? It's not exactly hard to work out why containers are missing and a company and individual are having assets frozen and being ordered to say where they are. The emails by Ablrate address the vast majority of the questions, though perhaps not some of your wildly wrong guesses. James, your post is very relevant to my general interest. It seems that the Ablrate loans involve relationships with a small number of people associated with borrower companies, and that these relationships are important. Nothing wrong with that because good relationships and trust are valuable in business. As long as that is seen as a bonus on top of sound due diligence on the borrower and security, and good systems. The problem with this loan is that the individual does not seem to be what he was thought to be, and that both the security and the systems are under question. You do wonder how important are interpersonal relationships to the other loans - the ones I am lending heavily to (for me). 532 passed the test and came out well - but the security was rock solid. Some other operators are basically a computer god supported by its priests, which is right for a large consumer-lender business running on statistics. As a niche low-cost operator, Ablrate relies on a few (overworked?) good people, high expertise, and industry contacts to generate loan opportunities. I am still increasing the stake, but wish to see how this pans out. Hoping of course that all is recovered.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Dec 5, 2016 22:43:21 GMT
It seems that the Ablrate loans involve relationships with a small number of people associated with borrower companies, and that these relationships are important. Nothing wrong with that because good relationships and trust are valuable in business. I think that you'll find similar relationship aspects in most of the business loans were offered across all platforms that lend to businesses on identified deals (not say Zopa and RateSetter). Most borrowers are smallish businesses and that inevitably means lots of personal relationship and individual person issues come up, in part because they tend not to have ample resources to just carry on if there are hiccups of any sort along the way. Whether there are any conclusions to be drawn about movable assets that can go missing is an interesting question. That could affect things like pawn or car HP, say. Plenty of risks in property development but often buildings are of a type that doesn't go missing, though mistakes causing inadvertent demolition and just failure to complete are part of the potential picture for those. Not that property is immune from misappropriation, there are those scams where tenants have sold their landlord's property and similar can happen in commercial deals.
|
|