dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Nov 6, 2016 13:03:51 GMT
Positioned at safer end of property p2p lending - full fca auth, consumer btl, 20% skin, 5-7%. www.kuflink.co.uk/I don't think they have full FCA auth for P2P. Their lending company have full auth for consumer lending. Their online platform is not fully authorised from what I can see. I could be wrong.
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Nov 3, 2016 17:08:49 GMT
You write in a very similar style to another regular poster who has a very similar name ... Surprised you are still getting taken seriously
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Nov 2, 2016 18:04:42 GMT
Much of what AC does is not transparent in the slightest - same with ratesetter - that is the reason investors want transparency and draw obvious conclusions from lack of it FC may not engage here. But their model is easy enough for a 10 year old to understand and where what you see is indeed what you get. I fundamentally disagree with AC being less transparent as a whole than FC. I am referring to the business model not individual loan due diligence - i.e. QAA/30DAA - so I am not sure how you can disagree with something that isn't an opinion but a fact
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Nov 2, 2016 14:36:51 GMT
Much of what AC does is not transparent in the slightest - same with ratesetter - that is the reason investors want transparency and draw obvious conclusions from lack of it FC may not engage here. But their model is easy enough for a 10 year old to understand and where what you see is indeed what you get.
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 31, 2016 13:59:06 GMT
from my very limited understanding, Zopa recently sold securitised about £150m of loans at rates of ~ 2% (1.5% plus libor) - so there must be huge money out there for super prime loans
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 27, 2016 16:40:41 GMT
give them a chance guys, you cant expect a platform to launch and have a huge pipeline immediately
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
General P2x Discussion
P2P ISA
Oct 26, 2016 19:44:54 GMT
Post by dandy on Oct 26, 2016 19:44:54 GMT
Lending works recently got approval and their model is almost identical to RS as far as I can see. With LW you invest your funds, select 3/5 year and let them get on with it. If their provision fund is exhausted all lenders are pooled - a la resolution event at RS. So if LW got fully authorised then the fire and forget/hands off model is clearly acceptable in itself On FCA website, Lending works does not have P2P specified as one of its permissions. In the interim permissions register they had P2P specifically mentioned, which is now inactive as are the other interim permissions. I suppose this is because they now have full authorisation. Can someone else double check this please? The regulatory stuff is way above my pay grade - I thought they had p2p permissions but I could be wrong, apologies if so
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
General P2x Discussion
P2P ISA
Oct 26, 2016 18:31:27 GMT
james likes this
Post by dandy on Oct 26, 2016 18:31:27 GMT
Lending works recently got approval and their model is almost identical to RS as far as I can see. With LW you invest your funds, select 3/5 year and let them get on with it. If their provision fund is exhausted all lenders are pooled - a la resolution event at RS.
So if LW got fully authorised then the fire and forget/hands off model is clearly acceptable in itself
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 26, 2016 12:42:02 GMT
Hi all, first post on on here by a lurker (no troll shouts pleas) I have just set my pre funding on this to zero. Reason : look at the photos at the back of the valuation. The house looks occupied To me. Look at the kitchen and bathroom photos. Maybe the tenant did leave behind all their spices and kitchen goodies, maybe they did leave behind the soap dispenser in the bathroom, maybe they did a runner. Maybe, maybe....... or the house is occupied......... hi keith it is fine if the property is occupied but we need to be clear that it is not the borrower himself occupying it as his main residence
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 26, 2016 12:39:48 GMT
Hi vanessaiman - could you please clarify if I invest (eg) £1000 and this gets spread over (eg) 10 loans - do you continue to diversify these funds to get me into 40 loans? so am i reduced on some initial loans and subsequently put into others? and does it always stop at 40 loans?
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 26, 2016 9:40:20 GMT
the following from the valuation report is what has made me assume there was another lender before lendy got involved and for some reason did not proceed. "The property was inspected on 29th September 2016 following instructions from another lender"I read that as being an agent introducing the borrower to Lendy. the inspection was on 29 September and receipt of Lendy's instructions was 07 October. if they were only instructed by Lendy on 07 October they must have been valuing for another lender originally, who pulled out - could be because of the owner/occupier issue as LTV for this type of asset (very liquid) seems ok
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 26, 2016 9:29:04 GMT
I do love this forum but all these comments re 9% seem like hyperbole. what else are SS expected to do to gain more/better borrowers?? ISTM that if this loan was perceived by forum contributors as being a lowe risk than previous SS loans, then the comments about the9% would be minimal. ... be nice to know why the other lender didn't proceed dandy : Do we know that the other lender didn't proceed? I tend to agree with the suggestion that the existing lender might have been in place for some time but now wishes to exit the loan. Or perhaps it was another bridging loan and the lender does not wish to extend it. It could be as simple as the loan having been taken out as an ordinary mortgage and the lender doesn't want to do a BtL mortgage. hi mikes1531the following from the valuation report is what has made me assume there was another lender before lendy got involved and for some reason did not proceed. "The property was inspected on 29th September 2016 following instructions from another
lender"
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 25, 2016 19:30:54 GMT
I do love this forum but all these comments re 9% seem like hyperbole. what else are SS expected to do to gain more/better borrowers??
much more concerned about the possibility of owner/occupied on this loan which would make the loan unenforceable - be nice to know why the other lender didn't proceed
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 21, 2016 10:56:29 GMT
both are total disasters but i predict a Trump win for pretty much the same underlying reasons brexit won
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Oct 13, 2016 14:02:02 GMT
I have already started my wind down along with many others. You can blindly accept all the bull that they throw out but some of us do read between the lines. I doubt very much if SS will change their criteria for loans. we will continue to see the same rubbish with the good. I agree. Instead of getting a basket of different risk loans, we will now be left with just the worst loans for our 12%. I also think that during barron times SS can just drop the rate, they will say they won't but i'm not buying it. You will end up with loans priced on liquidity and not risk. If it isn't broke then fixing it may end up breaking it. Now we just need FS to wake up, start paying monthly interest and adopt a SS style SM and they will nick a load of investors from this change. Hi I am new to this site but invested in P2P for about 2 years. I do not understand the uproar over this. On Octopus for example the rate is sub 5% for similar type loans and also Lendinvest where it is 6-8% - both perhaps slightly lower LTV. Surely SS can drop rates to 10% and it would still be a no brainer as opposed to many other platforms. I know there is slightly higher risk on some loans but most seem to be fine.
|
|