oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 4, 2018 15:03:41 GMT
If considering a platform, then read current forum threads and go back in time when necessary... MT, to tell the truth, I am considering. In that case, some here might suggest that all that reading and those 3904 posts may have been in vain.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 2, 2018 20:34:55 GMT
The full thing in their blog looks as if it was writen for the benefit of 5 year olds by a 4 year old - a liittle chap called Mario Lupori apparently. He's still calling the whole mess an "improvement", an "upgrade" and a "simplification", and still no apology for the hassle they've caused their customers. Surely if they want to be taken seriously they could find a grown up to write their stuff.
He also claims "Now, following the upgrade, your investments remain matched for the full term of the loans which gives you certainty of rate for longer." Master Lupori should be told that, in reality, lenders may find their loan repaid at any time and currently automatically relent at whatever RS decide is the "market rate". There is no certainty of loans remaining matched for the original term of the loan nor is there likely to be.
Instead of this infantile nonsense, can't Ratesetter employ a few grown-ups who understand what an apology is and could give the impression of being able to look after other people's money?
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 2, 2018 19:47:01 GMT
Check your reinvestment settings. Remember that reinvesting in Rolling is not a bad default setting for them to have created, since you can take that back out at any time without penalty. Tend to agree with dombert. I was content to have quite large sums in Rolling (top end of five figures) because previously I knew that every week I had sums maturing that were available to either to renew or use to top up my current account for equity and other investments. I'd never in all the years using RS ever needed to request "release" of my funds. Like dombert I've found the new system to be an unpredictable and time-consuming pain and have now pulled out everything, bar a tiny amount still in 1 year. Most has gone to Assetz who seem to to be more competent in every respect than the pillocks at RS. I found I had tiny parts of loans and early repayments that were getting smaller and smaller now spread across almost every day of the week and being automatically re-invested at rates lower than paid on several current accounts. Trying to continually reject loans every day, provided I spotted them in time, was a serious waste of time. Even more so when RS ignored their own rules and cunningly returned earlier higher interest loans rather than the most recent loans.
With the tiny premium paid for the substantial added risk, Ratesetter rolling was barely worth it at the best of times. It's now effectively just the 5 year market at half the rate without the exit fee and not much use to me. Other than for someone who wants a full-time hobby it's now a nonsense, just not worth the hassle. There are way more rewarding ways to use my time.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 2, 2018 18:18:40 GMT
Original offer was returning an initial 70% of capital, new offer is supposed to be returning an initial 74%. Was an exact sum ever given on final sums for either offer? I thought the wording was "in the region of" for the first offer and "circa" for the second. I have haven't noticed firm figures for either but would be interested if they exist.
The update of 12/01/2018 said:
"During November and December we received a number of offers for the property; all of which were lower than expected. We have accepted the best offer and the sales process is underway. The offer is not sufficient to provide a full capital recovery to lenders.
It is our intention to provide lenders with a partial capital repayment following the completion of the sale of the property which will be in the region of 70% of capital. The exact amounts will be provided once the full costs of recovery have been received from the recovery agents and legal advisors."
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 2, 2018 17:46:53 GMT
As for the MT complaints procedure, there's not much they can do beyond explain what controls exist to stop it happening again, and unless there is evidence that a freehold sale of the property would have taken place by now then no loss has been suffered Was there not evidence of sorts in the updates from January concerning the delay after an offer had been received and accepted some weeks before? "31/01/2018.There is a delay with the sale because the Administrator is awaiting a consent from the freeholder to sell the property. Unfortunately, the freeholder is deceased and both the Administrator and purchaser are trying to make contact with the Estate of the Freeholder."
And then three months later
"27/04/2018 Unfortunately, due to the delay caused in obtaining the necessary consents from the estate of the freeholder, we have been informed that the buyer has pulled out of the purchase. The property is now back on the market."
A new offer was accepted in June, six months after the original offer, as a result of not owning the freehold. (The property had first been put on the market in September 2017 but it's not known what effect the lack of the freehold had on the subsequent lack of offers until January.)
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 2, 2018 10:36:56 GMT
I'm heavily invested in this one because I thought it would be a very solid and safe loan based of the figure and updates. I could't think the figures could just be a list of made up numbers. How likely it is to recover 100% of the money? And what's the most likely scenario? I expect your guess is as good as anyone's. Depends whether there are potential buyers out there with an idea for putting to use an old listed building in an insalubrious part of a small town that's been empty for many years. I doubt anyone is likely to place much value on the PP for student accomodation. It will have a value but could be on the market for a while. Hope it goes well for you.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Aug 2, 2018 9:56:05 GMT
On this particular loan, Ed was well warned and ignored us, collecting some negative kudos along the way, imo.
Indeed. Incompetent or non-existent DD by the platform is one thing, but in this case DD was done by the platform's clients themselves, clearly presented to the platform, and still they ignored it. Having read it, did MT expect a loan based on PP for student accomodation for non-existent students of a non-existent language school to a group with such a colourful trail of failure to go well? I don't understand the MT business plan. Selling any loan they can get as hard as they can might be tempting, but for how long did they expect to have lenders?
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jul 20, 2018 14:54:30 GMT
Is that possible, I thought the only way that could happen was if the owner of the underlying loan repaid it That's right, or if RS offer to restructure the loan for the borrower. Whichever, maintaining the term isn't within the control of the lender unfortunately. You may get 3.7% for 47 weeks, 1 day, or anything in-between, but not till "whenever" you like. I have similar loans.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jul 20, 2018 13:05:28 GMT
Surely it' a bit more complicated than that, as they now have to run 2 systems for "Rolling" over the next 5 years for example I've money invested at 3.7% for the next 47 months, which I can take iout penalty free whenever I like. I'm happy with that and I can't see how they can change it without my OK. Always assuming it runs for the 47 months. I invested money at 3.7% on the 15th this week that was repaid two days later on the 17th (and so becoming available for them to invest at whatever silly rate they chose).
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jul 20, 2018 12:12:39 GMT
Together with their previous track record, none of this does too much to increase my confidence in these characters of being capable of looking after my pennies.
Despite the the low rates it suited us to have quite large figures with them until not long ago. Mrs Oik has now made a full withdrawal using RYI (for the first time in the x years we've used them) and regardless of what happens from here I'll be severely curtailing my usage. If it wasn't clear enough already, ~3% is way below a sensible return for the risk of dealing with them.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jul 2, 2018 19:18:49 GMT
The idea seems to be getting increasingly wacky.
When I looked in the early hours, new orders were being matched at up to 3.5%, which is relatively high by recent comparisons: end of month, and perhaps because so much money has been pulled. When they eventually released my repayments a few hours later they auto-placed it at 3.3%, a level that by then looked unlikely to be achieved and still there tonight. So how long will it sit there uninvested, a day, a week, next month. What will those simple souls that Ratesetter told us were confused by the old system make of that?
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jun 18, 2018 11:22:33 GMT
Odd you should think I am burdened by principles. Like most of the World I sometimes give something away if there is something I want enough in exchange (would be more than one or two loans I fancied though, I have no trouble passing on loans these days) I've come to appreciate the advantages of being on the naughty step Moneything uses against it's non-compliant customers. Stops me accidentally investing in another dodgy loan because nothing better is available. The way I stumbled into the Lytham loan.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jun 16, 2018 16:39:28 GMT
For me the questions are premature let's get the recovery completed at present this is still not a done deal. We will have a better understanding of what is outstanding and what is possible to recover. Then I expect a full explanation on the Moneything site of the points raised. That's a point of view but the error creates a wider concern around platform competance not specific to this loan. We've been told to expect recovery to be around half the original valuation given on the basis of being a freehold but the precise extent of the recovery is irrelevant whatever it may be.
The loan was offered more than a year ago and the discrepancy became apparent when the loan defaulted very soon after, but there has yet to be an explantion or any assurance that steps have been taken to prevent a repetition. The only response I recall was around last August suggesting that the mistake didn't matter. I think it does. An explanation would be welcome well before we're required to rely on further DD by Moneything.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jun 16, 2018 15:03:52 GMT
Surely it is the lawyers job to pick up the leasehold/freehold, not Moneything. Can't they claim against the law company that failed to spot it? I'm still not clear what was told to Moneything, or by whom. Perhaps they could clarify?
Moneything published the VR saying: "MARKET VALUE FREEHOLD SITE WITH VACANT POSSESSION. We are of the opinion that the Market Value of the Freehold interest in the site on vacant possession basis is the sum of £650,000." Yet, they registered their charge at Companies House as: Persons entitled. Moneything (Security Trustee) Limited (Co No 09933277) Brief description. The leasehold land registered at the land registry with title number.....
Were they aware that the security was leasehold but failed to read the VR before offering the loan to potential lenders? Were they unaware of the discrepancy until it was pointed out to them? They subsequently maintained that it made no difference, but at the very least it resulted in the first buyer withdrawing and months of delay. If the freehold has no value then presumably it could have been acquired for a nominal sum.
I think they'll have to show they can get these things right if they're going to restore some confidence in their DD.
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jun 12, 2018 16:04:47 GMT
In essence they have created a product similar to the old Zopa Access account albeit a variable rate one where you don't know the rate you will get on any given day And if you find you don't like the rate they've decided to hand you and have the temerity to ask for your money back, then you'll be banned from giving them your money again for two weeks. If you didn't know they were going to change the rules on your existing loan contract because you weren't notified and reading their 'blog' isn't one of your pastimes, then tough. What did you expect from an ex-RBS banker and a bookmaker?
|
|