r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 11:22:48 GMT
Does anyone know a platform which accept debit card transfer apart from these? -Ratesetter (Instant) -Funding Circle (Instant) -Fund Ourselves (within 48 hours) -Lendinvest (Instant) LendingCrowd (Instant) LendingWorks (up to 2 business days )Ablrate (Instant)
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 10:32:48 GMT
I would have asked the EU to continue with existing arrangements while changes are discussed, so that there would be minimum damage to the people and businesses in all the affected countries. They would have found it difficult to refuse and cause harm to their own. Sorry, I don't think I'm catching your drift here. Isn't that just basically what we actually did and are doing now?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 26, 2019 10:03:14 GMT
I just don't understand all this talk about a deal. All that is being offered is to be allowed to continue with the existing system for another 2 years while the future is discussed, in exchange for agreeing to pay the EU a vast amount of money. Yet another extension of uncertainty for businesses which can hardly be what they want. The real deal is not even being discussed and should have been the priority from the beginning. Even if a so-called deal is agreed now the arguing will probably go on for another 10 years. We should have just left and moved on 3 years ago. Was with you right up to the last sentence. How would leaving 3 years ago have been possible, unless without a deal? If you did mean we should have left without a deal, then would you have been content with what would presumably have been a much more severe version of the Governments Yellowhammer scenarios playing out, given there would have been no time for the Govt. to do whatever it claims to have done in the last 3 years to mitigate the worst effects? edit: pls. lets no go into Yellowhammer worst case/base case. Suffice to say, leaving without a deal minus 3 years of preparation would surely have had some pretty dramatic effects.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 25, 2019 19:52:27 GMT
Boris doubling down is an appalling sight to see. No contrition, but worse than that continual language designed to incite hatred. When asked to think first of the safety of MPs, he responds:
"The best way to ensure the safety of MPs is to deliver Brexit"
I mean, this is vile stuff.
Again, this isn't even about Leavers vs Remainers - At this point I'd even take Brexit if it meant that what appears to be a rapidly turning fascist Government would be ousted.
He's continually implicitly supporting those who might think violence is the answer to all of this.
How can anyone want this?
Edit: Another example (tweet not mine): People worried about their own safety (after several have received death threats) ask for a tiny favour from Johnson to use slightly less divisive language and the best response the sociopath can come up with "the best way to honour Jo Cox's memory is to get Brexit done”.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 25, 2019 16:35:32 GMT
r00lish67. Fair enough. I am 94% out, so I will leave the subject alone now, but I have never been complacent. I will leave others to make up their own minds, but I still say the response from FC leaves it wide open. Here's hoping common sense prevails..for once
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 25, 2019 16:11:25 GMT
Their written response leaves it wide open. Verbal responses can't be trusted. The wording 'temporarily pause' to the 120 day rule, could mean 122 days. FC need to be pushed to abolish the rule in writing. Trust no one at FC. Not wishing to disparage the seriously useful work you've done on this thread criston (I really mean that) but you're really starting to sound a bit paranoid about this aspect. a) They've already advised multiple people multiple times that they're not going to do this. b) It would be insane for them to do so, given the effects. c) Even if they chose to do it, they are within their rights to do so. d) The secondary market offering any liquidity at all is not guaranteed. Indeed given the circs it seems more likely they might just opt to pause it entirely. e) You're going to find out in 3 days anyway whether this is the case if/when people report their sales being cancelled. If that happens you can ping the Daily Fail, who have already reported the 100 day wait, and they would have a field day. Why would we want them to be bombarded now and slow down customer services even more than they seem to be already?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 25, 2019 15:58:29 GMT
"We are currently undergoing maintenance." I can't recall prior notification, is this normal? Working ok for me. Possibly related to ongoing tweaks being made?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 15:54:03 GMT
Not sure if this deserves the dignity of a response. a) Parliament voting against a General Election is a constitutional act that reflects Parliament's will. What the Supreme Court just got involved with was an affront to our democracy, whatever your beliefs about Brexit. b) Re: the court of Blairite Shoe-ins - honestly, grow up. Where does impartial authority reside for you if not the highest court in the land? What higher power would you respect the judgement of in this instance? Roolers, I tend to read a lot of your posts but as one of the few leavers around in a sea of remainers she piped up and made her point. It was not in any way aimed at any other poster. Telling her to grow up etc reflects badly IMO. I know you're better than that ! On the subject itself, it is indeed absolutely about democracy more than it is about leave/remain. I think I've been suggesting that for months (a year?) now. The problem is many on the remain side have been happy to suspend their democratic believes to prevent brexit being implemented. I don't often reach for such phrases. Sometimes, a zealous belief in a cause can cause people to make pretty much indefensible statements, and equating proroguing Parliament with voting within Parliament against a General Election, and implying that all 11 Supreme court judges are somehow biased just had to be called out for what it is. This said, given I criticised the person rather than the argument in the heat of the moment, I will apologise to travolta - sorry for saying that. Now - back to business - how exactly have the remain side been happy to suspend their democratic beliefs? Is this people's democracy vs parliamentary democracy round 46?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 11:39:27 GMT
PM to call for an election and if the bottom feeders refuse, he should appeal to the Supreme Court since they have set the precedent of being arbiters of parliamentary procedure. Or should it be renamed 'The Court of Blairite Shoe-Ins' Not sure if this deserves the dignity of a response. a) Parliament voting against a General Election is a constitutional act that reflects Parliament's will. What the Supreme Court just got involved with was an affront to our democracy, whatever your beliefs about Brexit. b) Re: the court of Blairite Shoe-ins - honestly, grow up. Where does impartial authority reside for you if not the highest court in the land? What higher power would you respect the judgement of in this instance?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 10:56:23 GMT
Cumming (pun intended) back to the title of this thread.... It would appear that Farage is concerned that Cummings is derailing his brexit project - he has just called for Johnson to sack his chief advisor. Farage has read the runes, that there is going to be an extension to A50 before the election. He has made too many statements about this to go back on them now, and so he is going into full attack mode on Boris for ruining Brexit. Expect a dog fight. Perhaps, but if BoJo immediately resigns, then another Conservative will spawn in his place as leader (but perhaps not PM) and with cold dead eyes say "No..Deal...is better than a bad Deal!". Then, if as I fear, it's a General Election first then they could again campaign on No-Deal and Farage might step aside (conceivably) still. It's still therefore horribly possible that that could win. At least it wouldn't be as undemocratic as No-Deal via prorogue, but still, jeez.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 10:36:04 GMT
Applying for an extension to A50 I would say, followed by an election. Unless government can bring itself to pass a withdrawal deal with Labour support which would mean a confirmatory referendum. Having seen this, I would rate the chances that the EU will compromise its Single Market standards enough to offer Boris a lifeline deal on the Irish border as 0. So Johnson will have to ask for an extension and stop the blather about Do or Die etc. That is over now. Parliament will now reassert control, and ensure that the EU is asked for a sufficient extension for the UK to do what is necessary, be it a General election or a referendum. This date is likely to be further in the future than 31st January 2020. I The Gvt should stop wasting money on No Deal nonsense STRAIGHT AWAY as there will never be a no-deal Brexit. We're at a very unpredictable moment. This could lead to a Govt. National Unity, election, referendum..and in what order? What I do currently think is that BoJo will go. His credibility even within his own party must surely now be expired. What I don't know is who then could carry the confidence of the commons given the minority Govt. So - a GNU?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 10:12:44 GMT
The important fact of the ruling is that the 11 Law Lords unanimously decided that this matter was justiciable. There is no higher body that can now reverse this, and it fills in a grey area of the unwritten constitution. The Supreme Court is competent to rule on the actions of the executive in Parliament. This removes all doubt about whether the government can do a legal wriggle and be free of the Benn Bill. An attempt to circumvent the will of Parliament as expressed in that bill will not stand. Governments will now have to look over their shoulders a little more in future. Well put. Where would we have been if ruled not justiciable? Beholden to any weak PM promoting any cause they wish, and it's not like the current Govt. and the opposition don't have plans that many of us are very concerned about.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 10:00:16 GMT
...so if Boris does do as he's threatened, and prorogue for a second time, wouldn't that open him up to a contempt of court prosecution? That would be in and out of court within a day and the government would not only lose, but lose whatever credibility they still have. Hoping that: a) No.10 don't attempt anything further in this area b) All media respect the ruling ("saboteurs?") c) Brexiters can (mostly) appreciate that this isn't even about Brexit. It's about upholding the very core of our democracy, it's way more important. This act crossed the line by a long way and would have set a dreadful precedent if allowed. edit: and yes, what a crisp clear delivery not holed up with legalese.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 24, 2019 8:29:47 GMT
Good summary Roolish67 The lower loan origination could be, lets say hopefully is, an attempt to write better quality loans, and tighten the lending criteria a little. The other factor at play could be they believe they are at the sorts of volume that can be profitable, just if they can get the lenders rates at the right point... One way to get rates down from lenders is to suppress the volume of loans written, just look at the April MR graph to see what a large difference between funds and demand will do. My only slight difference in opinion surrounds the cash element of the provision fund. Whilst it needs to be liquid to be able to pay out, I am not sure the actual movement specifically means a lot in isolation. With the changes to upfront fees being replaced by constant contributions you would need to see some fairly detailed historical data on loan defaults etc to know if the changes are following that trend or better or worse, and hence is the movment in cash predictable and what would it look like end state if no more loans were written today. (IE would it be expected to be in surplus still at the end, and at all points between now and the end) We do know that they say that beyond a certain point most loans do not go bad, and as such these will continue to pay into the fund, my suspicion is we probably haven't or have only just started to get loans at this point, as such the PF has taken the hit from the loans that go bad and take out more than they paid in, but we haven't yet had the contribution from the loans that go to term and only ever pay into the reserve. BUT I share your concerns on RS being open about this type of thing, its quite possible, in fact probable, they are taking these loans into effect in the calculations, and in normal circumstances probably correctly, but the risk to the PF is a cash one, and a shock to the system could change that rapidly. Personally I see the PF as a short term comfort blanket. If its starts to reduce significantly, and headwinds appear more strongly in the economy then the warning signs could start flashing. Thanks. Re: would it still be in surplus at the end, the answer according to RS is yes as PF cash (£11.9m) plus projected inflows (£26.9m) less expected future outflows (£29.4m) = £9.4m. The same numbers also tell us that we can expect to see the PF cash fall further in the near term (simply as outflows outweigh inflows) - unless origination gears up pretty quickly that is. You're right that it's not the only thing worth worrying about, but it is still important and the reason I often bang on about it is that I think it's a little too easy to just trust RS's headline ICR, a figure which would have one believe that RS's performance is absolutely sterling in recent months. What surprises me about RS's performance, in a positive way, is that their by-year expected vs actual loss rate isn't that far off. They seem to have done much better in keeping to their estimates than Zopa, FC, or LW somehow.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Sept 23, 2019 21:33:32 GMT
I understand your points, but they appear to be ambiguous with the reply to my email as follows - 'We’re reviewing the functionality of our secondary market to try to ensure the best possible outcomes for customers. Our terms and conditions state that loan parts put up for sale will be removed from the queue if they don't sell within 120 days, however, we will temporarily pause this condition while that process continues.' Suggests only delaying it & leaves it wide open. Ok, fair enough. Again though, what has been to date a fairly orderly (if ever-extending) queue, would promptly become chaos, and so they'd be 'Fudging Crazy' to do it. I am surprised they haven't come up with a solution to this yet, frankly. I suspect they are coding some delight up as we speak. A few things they can do: premiums/discounts (prob not) , notice accounts to vary demand ala Assetz, existing/new investor bonuses to increase demand and lock in funds..we will see..
|
|