Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,961 
Likes: 1,680
|
Post by Steerpike on Oct 16, 2016 11:53:51 GMT
I have noticed more emails informing me about the status of overdue loans.
So far, all of these have related to loans in which I have no position and none have had a happy ending.
I am largely indifferent to these changes as I united with many lenders around here and sold most of my holdings earlier this year.
I have heard nothing recently about the loans in which I am still invested, however I am not overly concerned as the sums are relatively small and I was fortunate enough to be able to extract my money without making a loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgeydave on Oct 16, 2016 12:17:13 GMT
I have not invested for a while now. Just waiting for my loans payments to come in. I have written off a number as bad debt if they pay up it will be a bonus.
I agree. The emails are forthcoming.
But they all tell the same story . Negativity or pussy footing about .
When are we going to see some recoveries ?
When tricky question get asked on here. REBS just disappear.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,742
Likes: 3,137
|
Post by jonno on Oct 16, 2016 13:12:50 GMT
I'm still totally negative on Rebs but clearly others aren't. I've had all of my saleable loans on the SM for a while now at a small premium but after selling a few I hadn't sold any for a while. Decided to try a clear out so put them all up at par and sold most of them. I am now close to an exit showing a small profit assuming all my toxics recover nil. In reality I just want out, and if I don't lose money it's an unexpected bonus; sad but true  |
|
|
|
Post by dodgeydave on Oct 17, 2016 4:00:10 GMT
danraj Could you please update us on your default figures. As those published on you website are wrong. I will start with 2013 According to your figures you made 26 loans , default rate 7.8% , bad debt rate 0.15 But you currently have 5 loans in default as classified by you. Loan numbers 19 , 31 , 61 , 102 and 114. M******y and sons loan 19 Last payment 6/11/2014 Pl***** m W****h llp loan 31 none shown C***s B***er Liv****ck loan 61 25/02/2014 Sa***a loan 102 20/04/2015 E W B****r and s**s loan 114 18/07/2016 Regards Dave
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2016 13:33:18 GMT
danraj , please could you answer my outstanding question copied & pasted from the Forum threads of the current Public House funding request running at Rebuilding Society, I would like to understand your rationale for instituting this change and for doing so without providing your lenders with any written communication?: October 16, 2016 at 12:1
@*****,
Why has the following wording change been instituted to the ‘Profile Tab’?
What’s the significance of this change?
Wording in use [prior to?] and since I joined in February 2014?:
“Why are we Safe to Lend to?”
To this today?:
“Why consider Investing?”
Hope you or a member of the Borrower team can assist with understanding?
With best regards, James.
|
|
|
|
Post by es2013david on Oct 17, 2016 15:28:58 GMT
@magenta14
More interesting to me is in the P** B******* case where the ultimate professional valuations of the residential securities * magically matched the values given under "why consider investing" (as it is now headed), despite being in excess of the highest (best scenario) values given (then and now) by on-line sites. Incidentally, did anyone take a screen grab of the original values quoted at the outset in this case, that I questioned at the time?
(* only obtained on the discussion tab upon my request AFTER the case had completed)
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgeydave on Oct 18, 2016 4:36:21 GMT
danraj Could you please update us on your default figures. As those published on you website are wrong. I will start with 2013 According to your figures you made 26 loans , default rate 7.8% , bad debt rate 0.15 But you currently have 5 loans in default as classified by you. Loan numbers 19 , 31 , 61 , 102 and 114. M******y and sons loan 19 Last payment 6/11/2014 Pl***** m W****h llp loan 31 none shown C***s B***er Liv****ck loan 61 25/02/2014 Sa***a loan 102 20/04/2015 E W B****r and s**s loan 114 18/07/2016 Regards Dave Loan 19 borrowed 50000 at 14.99 % for a term of 60 months . made 17 full payments and 3 interest only payments Loan 31 borrowed 34000 at 17.64% for a term of 36 months . No figures Loan 61 borrowed 48000 at 16.86 % for a term of 60 months . made 8 full payments Loan 102 borrowed 35000 at 11% for a term of 60 months . made 17 full payments Loan 114 borrowed 25000 at 19.52 for a term of 60 months . made 30 full payments and 1 interest only not one penny of this debt has been collected on our behalf. I am still working on 2014 /15 and 16. danraj rebsrep could you please confirm or deny
|
|
|
|
Post by rebsrep on Oct 18, 2016 9:28:19 GMT
rebsrep , danraj , please can you answer my outstanding question copied & pasted from the Forum threads of the current Public House funding request running at Rebuilding Society, I would like to understand your rationale for instituting this change and for doing so without providing your lenders with any written communication?: October 16, 2016 at 12:1
@*****,
Why has the following wording change been instituted to the ‘Profile Tab’?
What’s the significance of this change?
Wording in use [prior to?] and since I joined in February 2014?:
“Why are we Safe to Lend to?”
To this today?:
“Why consider Investing?”
Hope you or a member of the Borrower team can assist with understanding?
With best regards, James. 'This change was made in line with consultation with our compliance team following an ongoing review of our site copy and marketing communication. It was felt that the change in wording would sit more comfortably with the regulatory rules on clear client communication. We felt that the phrase 'Why are we safe to lend to?', which has been used since our inception, was no longer suitable for the site, as it could cause some confusion or lead lenders to potentially infer the investments were risk free. As you are aware, the regulation around the P2P industry is still relatively new and is continually evolving as the regulator (FCA) familiarises themselves with the industry, as a result you may notice similar changes across a number of other platforms in regard to their communications and processes. Whilst we carry out thorough checks and analysis of the businesses we list, the final lending decision is with our lenders
|
|
seb8072
Member of DD Central
Posts: 177
Likes: 99
|
Post by seb8072 on Oct 18, 2016 11:23:58 GMT
I was saddened to read of James' (Magenta14) perceptions of his experiences of lending at Rebuildingsociety. They would seem to be very different to mine.
I started lending at Rebs just over a year ago and have invested with about 100 companies. 13 of those went into default, one has been fully recovered and the other 12 are pending. Assuming no further recovery, this represents a loss of about 12%. Rebs publish a default rate of 10.9%. With a potential 18-20% return, a 10-12% default/loss rate is inevitable. There is no reason to think that some of the losses will not be recovered.
“Do I trust what Rebuildingsociety has become?” Perhaps the question should be: Do I trust myself to make sensible lending investments on the Rebuildingsociety platform. Yes I do.
“Do I trust Rebuildingsociety's publicly presented figures?” Yes I do, within reason. They are not very different to my own in terms of defaults/losses and overall return. Any publicly presented figures are always going to show the publisher in the best light.
“Do I trust in the T&C changes?” No reason not to. Any financial organisation's T&Cs continually change if for no other reason that the law continues to change.
“Is there a cause for optimism?” I'm optimistic.
“Would I recommend Rebuildingsociety as a safe investment destination?” Absolutely not. P2X lending is not a safe form of investment. If you want a safe form of investment use a bank!
“Would I be comfortable recommending certain other Portals to people I know?” Yes I would but I'd also be comfortable recommending Rebuildingsociety.
“Your 6500 registered Members does not accurately reflect the Membership numbers actively lending new funds.” The 6500 registered members is just that: registered members. No-one said it was the number of members lending new funds.
“Could do better? Yes, we can all do better.” - I agree.
Some people have a half empty glass. Mine's half full!
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgeydave on Oct 18, 2016 11:52:02 GMT
I was saddened to read of James' (Magenta14) perceptions of his experiences of lending at Rebuildingsociety. They would seem to be very different to mine. I started lending at Rebs just over a year ago and have invested with about 100 companies. 13 of those went into default, one has been fully recovered and the other 12 are pending. Assuming no further recovery, this represents a loss of about 12%. Rebs publish a default rate of 10.9%. With a potential 18-20% return, a 10-12% default/loss rate is inevitable. There is no reason to think that some of the losses will not be recovered. “Do I trust what Rebuildingsociety has become?” Perhaps the question should be: Do I trust myself to make sensible lending investments on the Rebuildingsociety platform. Yes I do. “Do I trust Rebuildingsociety's publicly presented figures?” Yes I do, within reason. They are not very different to my own in terms of defaults/losses and overall return. Any publicly presented figures are always going to show the publisher in the best light. “Do I trust in the T&C changes?” No reason not to. Any financial organisation's T&Cs continually change if for no other reason that the law continues to change. “Is there a cause for optimism?” I'm optimistic. “Would I recommend Rebuildingsociety as a safe investment destination?” Absolutely not. P2X lending is not a safe form of investment. If you want a safe form of investment use a bank! “Would I be comfortable recommending certain other Portals to people I know?” Yes I would but I'd also be comfortable recommending Rebuildingsociety. “Your 6500 registered Members does not accurately reflect the Membership numbers actively lending new funds.” The 6500 registered members is just that: registered members. No-one said it was the number of members lending new funds. “Could do better? Yes, we can all do better.” - I agree. Some people have a half empty glass. Mine's half full! You are correct the default rate is published at 10.9% . Of 179 loans again a figure released by REBS that makes 19 loans in default. Please feel free to correct me. As it is very important that we agree on this figure over the coming days.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,742
Likes: 3,137
|
Post by jonno on Oct 18, 2016 13:20:24 GMT
I was saddened to read of James' (Magenta14) perceptions of his experiences of lending at Rebuildingsociety. They would seem to be very different to mine. I started lending at Rebs just over a year ago and have invested with about 100 companies. 13 of those went into default, one has been fully recovered and the other 12 are pending. Assuming no further recovery, this represents a loss of about 12%. Rebs publish a default rate of 10.9%. With a potential 18-20% return, a 10-12% default/loss rate is inevitable. There is no reason to think that some of the losses will not be recovered. “Do I trust what Rebuildingsociety has become?” Perhaps the question should be: Do I trust myself to make sensible lending investments on the Rebuildingsociety platform. Yes I do. “Do I trust Rebuildingsociety's publicly presented figures?” Yes I do, within reason. They are not very different to my own in terms of defaults/losses and overall return. Any publicly presented figures are always going to show the publisher in the best light. “Do I trust in the T&C changes?” No reason not to. Any financial organisation's T&Cs continually change if for no other reason that the law continues to change. “Is there a cause for optimism?” I'm optimistic. “Would I recommend Rebuildingsociety as a safe investment destination?” Absolutely not. P2X lending is not a safe form of investment. If you want a safe form of investment use a bank! “Would I be comfortable recommending certain other Portals to people I know?” Yes I would but I'd also be comfortable recommending Rebuildingsociety. “Your 6500 registered Members does not accurately reflect the Membership numbers actively lending new funds.” The 6500 registered members is just that: registered members. No-one said it was the number of members lending new funds. “Could do better? Yes, we can all do better.” - I agree. Some people have a half empty glass. Mine's half full! Ah yes I remember those heady days. God you've made me feel so nostalgic for that "12 month-in" feeling.
The 36 month feeling is a "House of Pain" 
|
|
binkle
Member of DD Central
Posts: 57
Likes: 29
|
Post by binkle on Oct 18, 2016 13:55:55 GMT
I am waiting and seeing, in terms of any bigger loans, just popping small amounts on at present.
I still really like the idea of Rebs as a community, but unless q and a tone is healthy it will scare off many, and without some bigger lender to attract the right borrowers, it will be a long journey to health.
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgeydave on Oct 19, 2016 5:50:56 GMT
Loans from 2013 that are in default Loan 19 borrowed 50000 at 14.99 % for a term of 60 months . made 17 full payments and 3 interest only payments Loan 31 borrowed 34000 at 17.64% for a term of 36 months . No figures Loan 61 borrowed 48000 at 16.86 % for a term of 60 months . made 8 full payments Loan 102 borrowed 35000 at 11% for a term of 60 months . made 17 full payments Loan 114 borrowed 25000 at 19.52 for a term of 60 months . made 30 full payments and 1 interest only not one penny of this debt has been collected on our behalf. I am still working on 2014 /15 and 16. danraj rebsrep could you please confirm or deny Loan 122 borrowed 54000 at 16.84 % for a term of 60 months . made 21 full payments and 6 interest only payments Loan 126 borrowed 38000 at 16.52% for a term of 60 months . made 16 full payments Loan 167 borrowed 61000 at 13.74 % for a term of 60 months . made 23 full payments Loan 194 borrowed 25000 at 19.09 for a term of 60 months . made 9 full payments 3 interest only payments Loan 197 borrowed 35000 at 16.32 for a term of 48 months . made 23 full payments Loan 221 borrowed 50000 at 19.59 % for a term of 48 months . made 10 full payments Loan 276 borrowed 50000 at 16.27 % for a term of 48 months . made 21 full payments Loan 296 borrowed 40000 at 13.53 % for a term of 36 months . made 20 full payments Loan 302 borrowed 30000 at 13.68 % for a term of 36 months . made 12 full payments Loan 307 borrowed 50000 at 19.72 % for a term of 60 months . made 8 full payments Loan 404 borrowed 50000 at 17.18 % for a term of 60 months . made 14 full payments I am still working on 2015 and 2016 rebsrep danraj could you please confirm or deny
|
|
mnm
Posts: 65
Likes: 16
|
Post by mnm on Oct 19, 2016 9:36:44 GMT
dodgeydave. How do I find the Loan number on mine.
|
|
|
|
Post by dodgeydave on Oct 19, 2016 9:45:01 GMT
dodgeydave . How do I find the Loan number on mine. Loan numbers were only used on loans till about feb 2015 then they used the company name. But if you go to your bad debts , click on the company and it will either show a company name or loan number on your search page at the top. Edit had to delete the link as it named the borrowerMost of the bad debts , i will list tomorrow only have company names.
|
|
