poppyland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 237
Likes: 243
|
Post by poppyland on Mar 3, 2017 20:31:07 GMT
Sorry if someone else has already pointed this out, but the SS site used to show how much was in the provision fund, and it doesn't seem to anymore. Judging by the discussion about loan#20 (garden centre) the provision fund must have been considerably run down by reimbursing all capital and paying all interest to investors. So it would be interesting to be able to see the current size of the provision fund. It seems a bit suspicious that this info is no longer as readily available as it used to be.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853 
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Mar 3, 2017 20:36:38 GMT
Sorry if someone else has already pointed this out, but the SS site used to show how much was in the provision fund, and it doesn't seem to anymore. Judging by the discussion about loan#20 (garden centre) the provision fund must have been considerably run down by reimbursing all capital and paying all interest to investors. So it would be interesting to be able to see the current size of the provision fund. It seems a bit suspicious that this info is no longer as readily available as it used to be. Yep - Gone AWOL  Some discussion here.... p2pindependentforum.com/thread/8095/change-provision-fund-wording
|
|
MONEY
Posts: 63
Likes: 831
|
Post by MONEY on Feb 14, 2018 19:21:50 GMT
Revised details of the PF, coverage and the pot are again available on the How It Works page. EDIT: Some terminology has been revised but, as pointed out by @new2p2p privately, the figures replicate those of August 2017, so expect either further alterations or another disappearing act. In which case - snapshot included - revisions highlighted:-  |
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Feb 14, 2018 21:00:05 GMT
Thank you, I did not realise that this level of detail had been published.
Unfortunately, we all know that the shortfall on the Castle, Exeter, etc, will be substantially more than the £2.2m current cash value of the fund. Therefore it will be interesting to see if/when this is updated based on the auctions tomorrow (Obviously Exeter is being kicked down the road at this time).
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 14, 2018 21:42:38 GMT
Thank you, I did not realise that this level of detail had been published. Unfortunately, we all know that the shortfall on the Castle, Exeter, etc, will be substantially more than the £2.2m current cash value of the fund. Therefore it will be interesting to see if/when this is updated based on the auctions tomorrow (Obviously Exeter is being kicked down the road at this time). Apparently these are exactly the same figures as were on the site inn August 2017. The company that holds the provision fund Lendy Provision Reserve Ltd has also failed to deliver its January 2017 accounts and is more than three months late, whilst the main company is four.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Feb 14, 2018 21:53:35 GMT
Thank you, I did not realise that this level of detail had been published. Unfortunately, we all know that the shortfall on the Castle, Exeter, etc, will be substantially more than the £2.2m current cash value of the fund. Therefore it will be interesting to see if/when this is updated based on the auctions tomorrow (Obviously Exeter is being kicked down the road at this time). Yep. The PF is insolvent.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 15, 2018 6:43:35 GMT
Thank you, I did not realise that this level of detail had been published. Unfortunately, we all know that the shortfall on the Castle, Exeter, etc, will be substantially more than the £2.2m current cash value of the fund. Therefore it will be interesting to see if/when this is updated based on the auctions tomorrow (Obviously Exeter is being kicked down the road at this time). Yep. The PF is insolvent. Technically not insolvent in the legal sense of the word because as it is discretionary it doen't have liabilities, but the extent of known defaults does seem to exceed what it has in it so it is no longer fit for purpose and has ceased too be a provision fund in any meaningful sense of that phrase for future defaults. It is something I have always regarded as a gimmick (primarily, but not only, because of the arbitary nature of the 2%) and have staed on many occassiions it should be ignored by investors.
|
|
daveb4
Member of DD Central
Posts: 220
Likes: 116
|
Post by daveb4 on Feb 15, 2018 8:01:56 GMT
PF should be a nice to have and IMHO should certainly not paid out as much as it did recently. I know L were trying to look good BUT this is P2P sometimes you loose money whether it be bad luck or fraud (and everything in between).
Personaly I think generally it should be there for the the 'strange-' situations such as 70% LTV quoted but they only get back 60% so in this case PF pays out 10% plus the interest equivalent and possibly a small 5% bonus to say sorry to investors. If used like this the PF debateably would not need to be as much or will have money in the pot for next time.
Structuring something like this may in the hope of hopes make the LTV''s a little more accurate? 😂
|
|
ric
Member of DD Central
Posts: 61
Likes: 35
|
Post by ric on Feb 15, 2018 8:41:11 GMT
Lendy continues to surprise me with poor trasparency and shady marketing moves. How they can include the Future Contracted Income on the Provision Fund is beyond understable. I assume that this poor level of transparency is contributing to the fact that they are not getting full FCA authorisation.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Feb 15, 2018 8:54:11 GMT
Is the "Historic provision fund usage" table on that page new information? I thought that previously we had merely presumed when Lendy had used it and guessed at the shortfalls it might have covered...
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Feb 15, 2018 11:28:28 GMT
Lendy continues to surprise me with poor trasparency and shady marketing moves. How they can include the Future Contracted Income on the Provision Fund is beyond understable. I assume that this poor level of transparency is contributing to the fact that they are not getting full FCA authorisation. RS use future contracted income alongside FCA authorisation.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 19, 2018 10:15:38 GMT
On 31 December 2016 the Provision Fund (PF) had £1,894,833 in its bank account (p.13 of the 2016 accounts). At that time the PF balance was published on the web site and was always 2%, to the nearest pound, of the live loan book and when questioned Lendy stated that it was held in a separate bank account. Indeed some time earlier mikes1531 had seen a bank statement with a corresponding amount to he then extant PF. In March/April 2017 the loss was crystallised on PBL020 he PF was used to fund some or all of the shortfall and a short time thereafter the figure disappeared from the web site. Loans outstanding at 31 December 2016, again according to the accounts were £158million, therefore one wuld expect the PF balance to have been 2% of that figure or £3.16million, snapshots from archive.org show November 2016 £2.94 milion and February 2017 £3.35million, both 2% of the then extant loan book not 1.2% it actually was. |
|
MONEY
Posts: 63
Likes: 831
|
Post by MONEY on Feb 23, 2018 13:57:52 GMT
PBL123's draw on funds added - figures adjusted - revisions highlighted:-  |
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Feb 23, 2018 14:51:06 GMT
So I'm confused, there is still money in the PF, yet it has not been used against PLB056?
I know its discretionary, but it also seems illogical. Is there a specific reason to not use it?
|
|
Jeepers
Member of DD Central
Posts: 818
Likes: 721
|
Post by Jeepers on Feb 23, 2018 14:52:55 GMT
I think they only use the PF as a last resort once they know for sure there's absolutely no other options.
|
|
