|
Post by bikeman on Sept 29, 2017 18:12:06 GMT
I have suspended loans in the GEIA. The borrow hasn't missed any payments but the loan is suspended. The notes explain that the business case isn't panning out as expected and the loan was suspended from almost the very first month which seems a little quick.
Despite that the borrower has met all their payments so why suspend the loan?
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 22, 2017 21:37:59 GMT
Re 1 some defaults are handled quickly and its only a special case that would drag out that long. We have posted on this in great detail a few minutes ago on other threads. Re 2 this is indeed how it works as even if an investor currently has a substantial exposure to a single defaulted loan (soon to be improved though) the provision fund fully covers that at present for example so no unfairness. The Defaults and losses webpage shows coverage and coverage is a multiple (>1) of known and expected losses on that investment accounts' holdings as of today and indeed ever since launch. Is the provision fund going to payout on the suspended loan that I am now substantially invested in? Can I sell my holding in that suspended loan that I had no choice in 'investing' in? Will AC diversify my holding in that suspended loan? No? Thought not. As to your answer to 2, It is BS that all GEIA investors equally share the exposure to suspended loans. I know of other investors in the GEIA that are not invested in the suspended loans I have. I am fed up with hearing about a provision fund which never pays out and a system that locks my money into bad loans with no means of exiting from them.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 15, 2017 16:57:10 GMT
For the 'black box' accounts (GEIA etc) I think you should seriously consider:
1. Publishing time limits for when the PF pays out. It is unreasonable to expect investors to wait years for recovery - you could fob investors off indefinitely.
2. Spread losses across all the accounts investors. It is patently unfair that unlucky investors take the hits when they have no influence over where they invest.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 15, 2017 16:41:45 GMT
The problem with the green energy account is that there is a severe shortage of qualifying loans, so getting invested (and diversified) is a struggle. I assume that when more qualifying loans appear your diversification will improve towards the 20% target. And that's part of the problem, I had no choice in who the money was lent to and now it's stuck in suspended loans with no chance of diversification or withdrawal. I don't think this is a fair way for AC to leave my investment. For a laugh they sent me an email today explaining how wonderful their automated diversification is - what a bunch of jokers
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 9, 2017 22:15:10 GMT
I was horrified to log in one day several weeks ago and find £13k+ sitting in my "waiting to be invested" column with the GBBA, the day before it was all fully invested. That money had been in one loan it seemed. Needless to say the money was still sitting in the "waiting" column for a very long time after that, moving by a few pennies here and there every week which didn't impress me much, especially as they had several loans joining the system. (I appreciate they had issues with supply and demand). Am I reading this thread correct in that had this one loan not re-paid that £13k of my money would be tied up in just one loan and not diversified as more loans came on the system? If so, could the rest of my money be in just a couple of loans rather than spread across their platform? I assumed there was a constant split taking place, a constant movement of funds so my money was as diversified as possible. The only reason I use the 7% account is because I can't be bothered to do things manually and incorrectly assumed the loan diversification would be greater on that and more efficient. I also assumed the fund kicked in immediately the second any problem was encountered. Serves me right to assume, but again I can't be bothered to keep up to speed with all the T&C's as they change like the wind in this sector with so many new platforms, products, rules, ideas, mistakes etc. (Not just talking about AC with my last point, it's one of the reasons I am winding down several of my P2P investments). I will continue to work with AC for the time being, but I don't like to be surprised like this and maybe I need to re-focus my attention again as it isn't all as simple as I thought it was or should be. I wanted diversity, protection and quick access, I thoughts that's why I was taking the hit on the percentage. I could have written this, my thoughts exactly. I wish I had read this before chucking away my money into the GEIA.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 9, 2017 21:43:42 GMT
I am somewhat peeved that my investment in one of the black box account (GEIA) resulted in it being 'diversified' across only 3 loans. One of which almost immediately had trading suspended and has remained so now for several months.
I invested in the GEIA believing that as I had no say in which loans I was invested in AC would diversity my money somewhat more than 30%. I also thought the provision fund would provide some sort of redress - probably naive of me.
- Please can someone point me to where on the website AC explain their diversification rate.
- How long have you had funds tied up in suspended loans?
- Has AC ever paid out to you from their provision fund?
-
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 3, 2017 18:28:13 GMT
I also had funds moved out of the 30D promotional rate account prior to 90days. Got no response from AC when I emailed querying it which is par for the course and why my faith on AC has dropped to the point where I am moving on.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 1, 2017 19:00:01 GMT
I haven't received any email from RS and I have no idea what this thread is about. Anybody care to enlighten me as to what this 'bombshell' is? Me neither
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Sept 1, 2017 18:57:24 GMT
Why the sell out from RS?
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Aug 18, 2017 17:31:29 GMT
I am noticing more and more loans in my QAA and 30DAA accounts with trading suspended.
Are these accounts really 'quick access'?
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Aug 12, 2017 16:48:07 GMT
Surely it matters in that without full transparency of suspended loans, AC can claim indefinitely that recovery is possible, refuse withdrawals and never payout from the discretionary fund? There is also the possibility that less desirable loans are not invested in by MLIA investors and get picked up by the funds leading to them becoming disproportionately full of bad loans. Agreed with both your points The AC disrcretionary provision fund certainly pays out later than both the RS and Growthstreet funds for example. I don't think we'll find many lenders that like that but it is what it is based on how AC works which I accept. AC refuses to give any advanced guidance on whether a specific loan will be covered by the provision fund, for example when lenders have asked the question when being asked to vote on a problem loan. It may be many months/years before we see the provision fund pay out on a loan so we can see how much of a loss it will cover. As for your second point. Yep there are certainly some less desirable loans in the GBBA for example based on some lenders experience of trying to withdraw their GBBA money which has taken some time. That is a feature of AC again. You say the the AC discretionary fund pays out later... how would you know that if it has never paid out? I think the operation of AC's discretionary fund is vague to the point of being worthless. Judging by the lack of repayments being made on the loans AC have invested my money in I expect withdrawal to be a long drawn out process. Live and learn.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Aug 8, 2017 18:02:09 GMT
Surely if the GBBA/GEIA/PSIA accounts are supposed to be 'black box' and all three come with a Provision fund then it shouldn't really matter if a loan is suspended or defaults? Barring a wider economic meltdown or a situation where there is a run on AC and everyone is trying to flee for the exit at the same time, the PF 'should' compensate you. If it doesn't, then what on earth is the point of it being there? Has there ever been a situation where the PF has refused to pay out on any of the black box accounts? Fair question 1. I can't withdraw my money invested in loans in the GBBA that are suspended which i accept. I couldn't see how much money this was in the past. I can now. 2. As far as I am aware the provision fund has never paid out yet. 3. The provision fund is discretionary so may not always pay out in the future. I find it useful to know my worst case exposure based on currently suspended loans. Surely it matters in that without full transparency of suspended loans, AC can claim indefinitely that recovery is possible, refuse withdrawals and never payout from the discretionary fund? There is also the possibility that less desirable loans are not invested in by MLIA investors and get picked up by the funds leading to them becoming disproportionately full of bad loans.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Aug 7, 2017 15:41:29 GMT
Hi I'm sorry that is not true. The QAA is as perfectly diversified as possible. The drill down report shows this. It is impossible for the bulk of your QAA investment to be in a single suspended loan - I encourage you to contact customer services on the phone immediately and provide your account details as I know the technical implementation and know this is not possible. In my case it was in the GEIA. I contacted customer services questioning why over 2/3's of my investment was made into 3 loans, one of which had trading suspended and it was explained to me that investments are spread across the available loans. So if there's just one loan then that where all the investment goes. I asked how I can withdrawn funds from a loan in which trading was suspended and was told I can't. Effectively AC has grabbed my investment and wont be giving it back.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Aug 5, 2017 12:54:10 GMT
I've just responded to SteveT in the other thread. I think the issue has been explained and it sounds like stuartassetzcapital agrees that the interface could be improved.
Thanks for the prompt and informative replies.
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Aug 5, 2017 12:48:22 GMT
Thanks for your response. Yes that is the process I followed (I was trying to reduce my exposure in specific GEIA loans) though I definitely didn't enter a negative number.
I am surprised though that the AC system let me do this. They should probably fix stuff like this as it must be generating unnecessary support requests for them.
|
|