adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Apr 10, 2019 15:32:32 GMT
True but I would say rather "FC allowed themselves to be misled..." I checked out the borrowers and alarms bells starting ringing so why didn't FC hear them?
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Apr 10, 2019 19:19:19 GMT
True but I would say rather "FC allowed themselves to be misled..." I checked out the borrowers and alarms bells starting ringing so why didn't FC hear them? Possibly because computers have no ears.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 10, 2019 20:10:42 GMT
True but I would say rather "FC allowed themselves to be misled..." I checked out the borrowers and alarms bells starting ringing so why didn't FC hear them? Possibly because computers have no ears. FC didn't need ears..if they could read, then the comments section prior to all these STPL's being issued, must surely have rung alarm bells..the fact they were blind (and deaf) to investors opinions as well as dumb enough to relinquish the security (which investors were assured they had) speaks volumes.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Apr 11, 2019 11:25:32 GMT
I was meaning that FC's business model relies on a very low level of human supervision (and cost) until things go wrong. They tried to apply the model, developed for small SME loans, to larger property development loans, where a much higher level of assessment and supervision is required, even where the borrowers are honest decent people, as the vast majority are. But where the borrowers are not so, then the inadequate level of human supervision could not detect the nature of the borrower until it was too late. Rogerthat, I think you are just developing the nature and extent of the inadequate human supervision. They were like a variety act spinning plates on sticks.
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Apr 11, 2019 13:11:39 GMT
I might agree with your argumentation if FC had been entering into a new form of enterprise. However anyone even at a junior level in the mortgage business could have told them that a very cautious and systematic approach to lending/borrowers had to be adopted. instead they went charging forward and were very badly mauled by this series of loans in particular and others of less financial significance. The reputational damage was severe and the retreat from property lending followed. A pity because I think their overall intentions were honourable. Unfortunately lenders are having to stomach their mistakes which in my view is wrong.
|
|
sussexlender
Member of DD Central
Cheat seeking missile
Posts: 550
Likes: 916
|
Post by sussexlender on Apr 27, 2019 9:04:51 GMT
They might recover some of their lost honour if they repaid at least the Capital that was invested by all their previously very trusting investors.
I doubt they even think about this loan at all since amassing such vast wealth from the public floatation.
Many will doubt that the brilliant minds behind FC would ever put any of their own cash into such a sham loan as the London Hotel fiasco.
Eastbourne is still open and taking cash payments none of which can be claimed on investors behalf.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Apr 27, 2019 9:55:35 GMT
They might recover some of their lost honour if they repaid at least the Capital that was invested by all their previously very trusting investors. I doubt they even think about this loan at all since amassing such vast wealth from the public floatation. Many will doubt that the brilliant minds behind FC would ever put any of their own cash into such a sham loan as the London Hotel fiasco. Eastbourne is still open and taking cash payments none of which can be claimed on investors behalf. To encourage them to recover their lost honour, we would need the heir of Isildur to enter FC Towers brandishing the reforged Anduril. Otherwise it's just a trivial legacy issue for the new plc. I'm nearly out, apart from the lost, the late and the credit events.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 27, 2019 10:30:31 GMT
Of course a cynic, should that unlikely possibility exist on here, might suggest that the administration was FC's ploy in passing the parcel, thereby ducking responsibility for their naïve gaffe in relinquishing the security. I also agree that if they had any propriety or self respect, they should at the very least, reimburse the capital to those lenders who put them on the map. As this has now been running 3 years, the chances of any worthwhile recoveries are remote but then perhaps that was the preferred result. Incidentally, not that it matters much but each loan's interest rate was 'raised' from 10% to 12% on its original expiry date, so in the case of STPL 14978 that would have been 12% from April 2016. Oh well...dream on.
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Apr 27, 2019 15:46:18 GMT
What I find so irksome about this case is that no one seems to have any legal leverage against the borrowers. if they can get away with walking off with a lifetime of peoples savings others can and will certainly try. We have seen similar things on Lendy over their so-called London loan and on FS with their powerboats, Whitehaven and wind turbine loan etc etc. I am content to take risks over lending. Businesses do fail for all sorts of reasons but these brazen shenanigans are not normal business risks. The p to p industry needs to clean up its act. Legislators need to do more but without honesty, integrity and a will to do the right thing i.e. responsible due diligence, by those who operate the platforms I reckon p to p as we know it will not be around for much longer. I have been a p to p lender for around 5 years so have seen a fair few of the real duds of which this London loan is one of the more notorious.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 28, 2019 11:51:24 GMT
Id suggest that a change of directorship from a UK national to an Indian national (Sept 1st & 6th Sept 2016) followed by surprise surprise the appointment of the Administrator on 3rd March 2017 didn't help much either..the fact that FC were, to all intents and purposes aware of this underlines the level of naivety at Failing Catastrophically.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Apr 30, 2019 8:39:44 GMT
I would agree - especially as seemed to be a family member who funnily enough seemed to have no other directorships and hence virtually untouchable...
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on May 2, 2019 19:25:54 GMT
Anyone understand how a "Tomlin Order" is being used in this case? Absolute gibberish to me a non-lawyer.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on May 2, 2019 23:46:55 GMT
|
|
|
Post by danielbird193 on May 20, 2019 10:26:48 GMT
Eastbourne is still open and taking cash payments none of which can be claimed on investors behalf. Another Bank Holiday draws near and once again the Eastbourne hotel will be raking in the cash from happy seaside holidaymakers. Little do they know that their funds are supporting the lifestyle of the crafty, disingenuous borrowers of more than a million pounds of our hard-earned cash, with any prospect of a return snatched away from us by the incompetence and bungling of F*pping Cash top brass. This is a sad and shameful tale representing the dark side of the "fintech" revolution going on in the world out there. Still we wait, still we wail, yet still no one in Fat Cats HQ can offer a meaningful explanation (much less a meaningful apology!) for this mess.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Mousey on Jun 6, 2019 14:58:29 GMT
Apologies if this repeats an existing thread but I don't frequent the FC forums. Saw this on the radar though:
ROLLS BUILDING COURT 28 Before MR JUSTICE B****** Friday 7 June 2019 At 10:30 AM CL-2017-000*** Funding Circle Property Finance Limited v. ****
Info: Funding Circle, which lends to small and medium-size businesses, filed a claim over the provision of financial services in the Commercial Court against S****** T***.
|
|