happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Aug 7, 2018 6:58:22 GMT
Anyone having the same issue now? Yip. Likewise
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 20, 2018 13:18:55 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). Spot on oik. This was always one of my underlying concerns when RS set the rate. They can simply "wash out" any Rolling loans made during any higher rate peaks by swapping it to a new contract when the market rate is low. Hence why I will always want to choose my investment rate.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 20, 2018 8:06:17 GMT
I would have thought the FCA may have something to say about Ratesetter giving sensitive information on how the rolling market will work in the future to only a subset of investors.... Entirely agree. Still no official Notice of this reversal on the Ratesetter website, and no announcement to the press it seems.
I have been with RS from very nearly the start and still no e mail to me. Could this all be a hoax?
Some might begin to think that their is something going wrong with the management at RS especially after the initial decision to remove the ability to set our own rates - the reason many joined in the first place.
Wake up RS. Come on this forum and tell us all and put up an official Notice immediately. You had better tell the P2P press or it will appear that you are hiding vital information from the majority of your investors.
Maybe only "Special Investors" will get to set their rates on Rolling. Please send your favourite theory on what is happening at RateSetter Towers on a postcard to.......... Please RateSetter will you respond here or on your site soon before the conspiracy theories consume us all.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 20, 2018 7:59:44 GMT
I think you may have mis-read or maybe mis-thought! Chris did not say their increase in retail deposits was as a result of 2FA he simply pointed out they had a record week, it is you that has made that connection yourself. I thought Chris's last paragraph was crystal clear. Why else did he suggest that lenders approve of the new security measures in the same sentence as 'record week for retail deposits'? Yes, he uses the word 'indicators' meaning he's not sure but what else could that sentence mean except to imply there is a link? You still seem to misunderstand even what you wrote in response to Chris's original statement. Chris stated that retail deposits hit a record high last week, in my view he was indicating that the 2FA process on sign-up/sign-in has not affected in-flow of investors and their money. I see no indication that Chris tried in any way to suggest the "morally wrong" notion, as you put it, that new money is flooding in to AC directly as a direct result of 2FA being implemented.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 19, 2018 14:20:52 GMT
Still no announcement on the Ratesetter's notice board and no mention of it in the daily P2P News.
No e mail to me either. All very odd. you only get the email if you've lent on rolling and reinvested at your chosen rate. Not so it seems. As an ex 6 figure lender with RS and still at 5 figures with 50% in Rolling I did not get the email and I have never used Market Rate, ever! Edit: except since they stopped me setting the rate for reinvestment on Rolling thst I didn't manage to get to before they matched
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 19, 2018 8:59:01 GMT
I actually agree with the 14 day ban. Perhaps lessen it to 7 days but a ban I'm in agreement with. I also agree there should be a way to stop people rate hopping in Rolling. Rather than a total investment ban another option would be to implement a 1% or so investment fee on new money investments (Not interest/repayments reinvested) for a 7-14 day period after a withdrawal. That way you don't penalise the people who want to do a genuine withdrawal but you stop the rate hoppers. Just a thought....
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 19, 2018 8:04:52 GMT
I'm confused if you've left why the need to comment. Surely just move on with your life? <redacted personal insult> Unfair comment I feel, just because someone chooses to move their investment somewhere else due to changes made by a platform it does not preclude them from an opinion on the changes nor does it stop them wanting to return to that platform/product in the future should things change for the better. Perhaps a bit more live and let live all round would be nice but in the post-Trump world this seems somewhat lacking in how we all choose to communicate here in social media.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 19, 2018 6:33:18 GMT
So we can get things changed if enough of us stick together. Now which platform is next on the list? Yes it is amazing the power a mere 7% of Rate Setters has when push comes to shove, I did suggest at the time of the change that the 7% were probably contributing a significant percentage of the market liquidity and if they left this would not go RS's way. Now if you are listening still RS, how about reducing the 14 day ban to something more sensible like 24 or 48 hours? That would still have the effect of stopping rate hopping without being so unnecessarily punitive on those that simply want to release some of their investment every so often (aka regular drawdown of funds perhaps). Please think about it some more RS.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 19, 2018 6:24:49 GMT
travolta - I make no apologies for trying to keep your funds secure. If we lose your business then that's a shame but my priority is the protection of all lender funds. We've made a concession after the discussion on this forum to allow logins to the platform without requiring 2FA (unless you log in from a new device or block cookies). That should make most day to day interaction less onerous than now whilst maintaining suitable security on the higher risk operations such as selling loans at a discount or making a withdrawal. The other pending change is to enable push authorisation, which allows the app or browser plugin to send the PIN to our servers instead the lender having to type it in again in an effort to make it a less onerous process. As I say it would be a shame to lose your business over proactive moves to keep your money safe and secure but that is your choice. We carefully monitor conversion rates and lender engagement and thankfully last week was a record week for retail deposits with the website conversion rate holding steady so the indicators are the wider lender base do not share your sentiment or even approve of our efforts. The soaring retail deposits are due to Ratesetter destroying themselves, money is pouring out of every orifice and quite a lot is heading to AC. Suggesting that retail deposits have increased because AC has introduced 2FA is just completely (and morally) WRONG. Please carry on listening to common sense but don't start making things up. That is what is destroying RS right now. I think you may have mis-read or maybe mis-thought! Chris did not say their increase in retail deposits was as a result of 2FA he simply pointed out they had a record week, it is you that has made that connection yourself.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 13, 2018 5:04:01 GMT
In answer to the topic title NO, and I'm not intending to! Whilst I was unhappy with the way the changes were (not) publicised, and the misleading way they were implemented, they have improved my overall Rolling market return by removing cash drag between contracts, and locking me in to higher-paying contracts. I have so far "managed out" all my repayment reinvestments without penalty, although am currently serving my second investment ban after selling out low-rate contracts bought during trials. That doesn't matter because I'll take the opportunity to put those funds into the one and/or five year schemes!
Oh, just noticed a chunk gone into 1 year at 4.9% - much better than 3+% on Rolling if leaving for more than 2 months! Glad it's working for you. Before the change, I very actively managed my account and almost always got matched same day at a rate I was happy with. If it was too low, I'd just wait another day or maybe tweak the rate again knowing that the longest I'd have that low rate would be a month. I've not been following so closely any more, I just pop in every few days out of curiosity, but apart from a short while when I saw rates in the region of 3.3 (which interestingly was at the weekend, when rates used to be at their lowest), they have been more often under 3% (and sometimes well under) than over it. And I realise that you can take your money off the market before it's matched if you are quick enough but the thought of missing it and being left with sub 3% investments and then having to cash out and be banned for 2 weeks, over and over again, ..... nah, that's too much for me! exactlyExactly lara . Overall rates have not been too bad since the changes but this hides some fairly low lows amongst the highs. It is totally wrong to force investors to accept whatever the rate happens to be at the time on what is potentially now a 5 year contract rate and then you get a sharp slap round the backside by way of a 14 day ban if you have the cheek to not like the rate they happened to dish out for you and want to sell out, feels like being treated like a child to be honest. It's my money RS, still not happy with how you did this, still heading towards the exit..
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jul 2, 2018 5:40:33 GMT
Logged in this morning and RS account balance a 5 figure amount short. Seems no 3 a nd 5 year market repayments have been processed yet and my 5 figure Rolling repayment has been repaid but is showing as "locked" with only a few hunderd quid of associated lend orders. So the RS system decides to just wipe over £10k off my balance until the hamsters get back on their wheels.
Anyone else with similar issues?
On the up side though, it is sunny outside again and the market rate is 3.3% today....Hurrah!
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jun 29, 2018 9:31:46 GMT
The reduction in RM is simply a reflection of the fact that RM money is no longer repaid/relent every 30 days. So this does not reflect any reduction in funds/liquidity/popularity at RS. I don't think that can be correct as we see a pretty much steady reduction in lender cash after the point at which the new rules started. If it was a result of the new rules alone then the hit would happen immediately the new rules came into effect not progressively as we are seeing. Based on the fact that we had a poster here admitting to removing £400,000 from the market as a result of the changes, it seems many people who set their rate before are not happy at having reinvestment at a rate they cannot control and this is having a direct impact on the amount of cash available to RS. There is hardly any money now below 3.5% and we have not seen this situation for a long time.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jun 28, 2018 16:48:04 GMT
Are we entering an interesting phase of this new Rolling experiment by RS. Summary of my market observations so far
Date, £ in Rolling, market rate. 6th jun 8.7m mr ?? 7th Jun 9.8m mr 3.0% 9th jun 7.9m mr 2.5% 12 th jun 7.7m mr 2.5% 13th Jun 7.2m mr 2.4% 14th June 5.9m mr 2.4% 20th June 4.3m mr 2.4% 24th June 3.6m mr 2.7% 27th June 4.4m mr 2.5% 28th June 2.4m mr 2.7%
Amount on market usually taken late afternoon.
So on the offchance of getting the odd match I was just putting everything repaid at 3.0%, 3.1% and 3.2% on Rolling until I had a round £1000 to withdraw and would you believe it, it all got taken today with matching at 3.3% when I looked. So while my data is not complete it shows a spectacular departure of funds from Rolling since the changes and the net result after 3 weeks or so is the best matching rate I have manage in a fair while
The 7% who still like the idea of being their own rate setters are speaking RS, maybe 4% on Rolling round the corner if this goes on for much longer.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jun 28, 2018 6:43:07 GMT
This was exactly the point I made to the creator of this thread a while back. The bottom line is these accounts did pretty much what they said they would do. Also to compare RS or Zopa diversification where they have tens of thousands of loans compared to ACs few hundred I feel shows a lack of understanding of the different platforms in the P2P marketplace. That's BS. These accounts have never stated clearly that their diversification was only 20%. It is cited as an example on the website but nowhere does it actually state that this was typical level of diversification or even that 20% was a worst case. Hence why so many are pissed that they've had their investments grabbed by suspended loans within weeks of the loans being formed - if that isn't neglected due diligence by the loan assessors, I don't know what is. AC have weasled their way around how these accounts worked to the point where damage limitation required that they withdraw the GEIA and GBBA. Likewise, the provision funds and how they work is a constant source of misunderstanding and it's detailed workings communicated via reaction to flack they receive on this forum - a situation that offers no real confidence or legal standing of the explanations. AC are a joke and I very much doubt they have a long term future. Considering the tone and content of your post I feel obliged to counter this for the sake of other forum readers, your points in order: 1, Yes 20% was cited as a possible example of how diversification could work and it was clearly explained this could well happen. And you are surprised that it actually did this when you knew this information existed at the time you invested (or should have) So here you are trying to discredit AC when their product did what the example said, now that is BS in my book. I , like many on this forum, invested in the GBBA and GEA, but having an understanding of how it could invest our money limited our investment to amounts we were comfortable being invested in individual loans and also added smaller amounts over a period of time to maximise diversification. Not difficult to do if you take a little time to understand what you are investing in. 2, GBBA1 and GEA were withdrawn for totally different reasons to what you infer in your post, and yet again you are trying to paint a picture of deceit and dubious motives by AC that simply do not exist , again total BS on your part. To be clear here, GBBA1 was withdrawn as the interest rates on offer were too low to support the 7% yield of GBBA1, GBBA2 was launched and at launch worked exactly how the old GBBA1 did, GEA was withdrawn due to the limited future supply of green energy loans. Both these discontinued accounts have since benefited from the improved diversification process which operated across all the automated accounts however the limited supply of new loans to these accounts prior to closure did adversly affect their diversification potential. The provision fund is perfectly well understood and documented. To be totally clear for you again here is how it works: - The PF only protects the automated accounts
- With the exception of the QAA and 30 Day access account defaulted loans are not tradeable.
- With the exception of paying late interest on non-defaulted loans for the automated accounts the AC PF only provides discretionary protection for capital loss AFTER all recovery options have been concluded. So there is no protection provided at the point of default and no protection for loss of interest during this recovery process which may take years, typically 2-3 years is not uncommon. Yes this means you have to wait for your money back, it's not like RateSetter!
- The PF is discretionary for legal reasons and has to be operated in this manner. If AC provided a guarantee of protection from loss through the PF this would constitute an insurance product potentially requiring AC to register as an insurance provider and requiring different legal oversight.
- If you think AC is operating it's PF in a dubious or non-standard way I suggest you go and take a look at the other secured loan SME/Property platforms like Lendy and you will see similar arrangments exist there. It is not the same as the personal loans world of RS or Zopa and everyone has to accept that.
AC are not a joke however your statements here are.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jun 25, 2018 16:21:48 GMT
Is it sensible for someone to lose 60% of their money minus whatever recovery is scraped together and keep with the same company. I don't think so. This may sound harsh, but it wasn’t sensible to invest that sort of sum in a high risk automated lending product without understanding how it worked. The GEA functioned as it always had, constrained only by a dwindling flow of green energy loans, which led to its closure soon after. I’m afraid you arrived very late to the party, after all the decent drinks were gone. Ps. I rather doubt you’ll end up losing anything close to that figure, if at all, but you’re probably going to have to be patient. This was exactly the point I made to the creator of this thread a while back. The bottom line is these accounts did pretty much what they said they would do. Also to compare RS or Zopa diversification where they have tens of thousands of loans compared to ACs few hundred I feel shows a lack of understanding of the different platforms in the P2P marketplace.
|
|