|
Post by portlandbill on Oct 1, 2019 12:50:06 GMT
I'm getting concerned again. My recovery and watchlists totals are now over 3 times my total net returns. Why the (relatively) sudden change just as the lights are going out?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Sept 30, 2019 19:11:36 GMT
Just been surprised to read that I'm unlikely to get any money back on loan 2444968958 as it's a "supplemental" loan and the proceeds don't cover the original loans.
Is that right? Surely the proceeds should be shared equally amongst all loans unless clearly labelled as a 2nd charge? The loan description states "This is a 6-month loan secured by a first legal charge against a property in N*w B****on, W*****y"
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Sept 7, 2019 6:31:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 16, 2019 20:49:34 GMT
Does AML mean "avoid money leaving" so we can keep it for our fees? How much longer can they drag this out?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 13, 2019 12:15:49 GMT
so were those July payments, or August payments?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 5, 2019 16:48:41 GMT
FS's whole reason for being is to check out borrowers and put the good ones forward with a recommendation to lend. That they did that appallingly badly, losing their own credibility in the process and subsequently costing them tiny amounts of money compared to the money lost by investors I don't think deserves them any sympathy whatsoever. In fact they didn't lose any money, they just didn't make as much as they would have if they'd done their job right. They left the window open when it was their responsibility to keep it closed and locked. " put the good ones forward with a recommendation to lend. " <-FS are prohibited from recommending any investment under their FCA licence as they do not have an asset management licence. From FS home page - "Our tax efficient Innovative ISA programmes and peer-to-peer lending opportunities are carefully selected, appraised in detail, robustly structured and professionally managed by teams of proven sector specialists." what's that if not a recommendation?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 5, 2019 12:12:44 GMT
Really? FS are the victims here? How? Reputation and finances involved in rectifying the matter. I think you've missed the point
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 5, 2019 11:51:42 GMT
Aren't FS the ones that are supposed to checkout the credibility of the borrowers before putting loans to the lenders? Sure, FS but lost credibility and subsequently business & time, but whose fault was that? If you leave a window open and are subsequently burgled, are you still a victim? Maybe you brought it upon yourself, but you are still a victim. I haven't denied the real victims are the investors, but stating FS aren't also victims of what is now demonstrably a crime implies an inability to look at a larger picture from other angles. FS's whole reason for being is to check out borrowers and put the good ones forward with a recommendation to lend. That they did that appallingly badly, losing their own credibility in the process and subsequently costing them tiny amounts of money compared to the money lost by investors I don't think deserves them any sympathy whatsoever. In fact they didn't lose any money, they just didn't make as much as they would have if they'd done their job right. They left the window open when it was their responsibility to keep it closed and locked.
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 5, 2019 11:34:05 GMT
Really? FS are the victims here? How? Of course the investors are the most critical victims, but denying FS are also victims is a very strange perspective. As a result of fraud, FS have; - lost credibility - lost income from successful loans - paid/paying legal fees - spent excessive time on these cases Investors have likely lost their money. The ultimate cost to FS and their other investors could possibly be even higher. Time will tell. Aren't FS the ones that are supposed to checkout the credibility of the borrowers before putting loans to the lenders? Sure, FS but lost credibility and subsequently business & time, but whose fault was that?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 5, 2019 10:51:04 GMT
....compounded by FS being a victim of fraudulent intent by some borrowers..... Really? FS are the victims here? How?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Aug 1, 2019 16:12:45 GMT
Puzzled, why does today's email show the % return for August? Is this a prediction? And my cash returned today is approx 2 x expected (2 x cash shown in my account earlier today)?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Jul 25, 2019 6:31:57 GMT
".... the demise of Lendy is a new take on an old story – one of mispriced risk, misleading marketing and complacent regulation".
Sums it up nicely.
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Jul 19, 2019 11:06:41 GMT
Have I missed any discussion on this? Looking at my beta "your performance" graphs, i'm a bit worried? What's it all about?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on Jul 17, 2019 12:48:29 GMT
I've a few questions if anyone knows the answers, answers as opposed to opinion, cheers. Are we as investors in loans offered through Lendy being treated as creditors of Lendy or the owners of those Loans under the Loan terms (as the FCA rules for P2P entities stipulate, that is complete separation of vehicle and loans offered through vehicle, a condition intended to protect us in these very circumstances)? Does Lendys provisions under the FCA rules for P2P companies in ensuring 'such funds are available to exercise loans to completion in the event of the vehicle company failing' (as Lendy has done) cover the 1.025 million plus VAT which the administrators have set as the upper limit of costs they will bill in the first year? With reference to previous comments on this thread: If loans are separate entities to the vehicle, i.e. Lendy, then how can any interest due on loans after Lendy going into administration be used to first service 'creditors' rather than 'investors', if those loans, after the vehicle has failed, are separate legal entities? On the same point, if it is the case that some portion of interest, monthly or otherwise, was 'Lendys share' for services, rather than 'all' just servicing the loan itself, then why is it so many comments on here suggest Lendy took all of their interest up front? Has anyone been able to access the website - https:llrsm.insolvencypoint.com, and if so, is there anything there worth reading which wasn't in the PDF associated with today's email? As of writing this post I'm still getting 'website can't be reached'. Thanks, Getting back to this post, does anyone have the answers?
|
|
|
Post by portlandbill on May 25, 2019 18:19:42 GMT
And me. I questioned their impartiality, they argued but left my post up.
|
|