applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Aug 16, 2017 6:41:29 GMT
It will take me a day to digest all this information but I'm wondering if I have missed the elephant in the room here. A significant loan to Broadoak has effectively defaulted. The circumstances suggest a good probability of a decent recovery but I feel I need to find out how financially sound Broadoak is on the balance sheet side of things and how strong they are to withstand losses. What I want to avoid is being caught up in a dominoes effect of defaults on BO / MT projects given there are so many loans to Broadoak on MT and I am invested in a lot of them. In the absence of clarification from MT, we are still left wondering whether the loan has defaulted or not. Presumably, as the term date for the loan is 20/09 and MT have reconfirmed that the loan is to BO, there will only be a problem if BO do not repay MT lenders on that date. This would explain why MT allows the SM to continue for the loan. It is however unclear, and never has been clear, whether BO are not required to repay/ repay all the loan if the underlying borrower goes into administration and BO suffer a loss. If no such provision exists, and BO are on the hook, then the domino threat to other BO loans that georget mentions is very real.
As an aside, other than the prospect of a potential material loss, I wonder how MT is able to unilaterally decide not to continue paying interest monthly and switch to accrued interest. The information for this loan clearly states that MT will pay the interest monthly, collect the interest from the borrower (BO) at the term and accept the loss if the borrower does not pay the interest at term.
As lenders we have to decide on whether to lend based on the information that is presented to us, not on the basis of the terms of loan agreements that we do not see or the prospect of unilateral change to those that we do see.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Aug 15, 2017 16:59:01 GMT
I think we have to be realistic in our interest expectations for bling. It is a competitive market for borrowers and I doubt many will wish to pay a higher rate of interest than they need.
I fully appreciate that many will not wish to lend for less than the previous Collateral rate of 12%, but some will be prepared to accept a lower rate if the risk is commensurate. This new loan will be a good test of the demand.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Aug 12, 2017 15:50:22 GMT
What happens with the repayment of the loan now is what happens. However, I do think that there are questions to be answered by MoneyThing and potential implications for other loans on this platform and others.
From the Administrator's report it is clear that there was a default on the Broadoak loan acknowledged by the ultimate borrower on 11 November 2016. Strange therefore that this fact has, until now, never been disclosed to MoneyThing lenders. This means that when a further tranche of development finance was launched by MoneyThing on 22 November 2016, lenders were not in possession of a key fact that may well have influenced their decision on whether to lend. Similarly, all SM purchases since 11 November 2016 have been made in the absence of information about the default. Being charitable, MoneyThing's due diligence may not have discovered this information. An alternative view is that the information may have been deliberately withheld from lenders by one of the parties involved.
There also appears to have been no information provided to potential lenders about the effect of the deposits made by purchasers of the various properties available on the Broadoak charge as a result of the default.
Confidence is everything, and to be honest I am now left wondering whether there are other loans on MoneyThing where there may have been a previous default by the borrower that has not been disclosed to lenders. Similarly, is the comfort of the stated loan to value undermined by creditors who will have a prior claim over the first charge holder in the event of a default? Without clear information and assurances from MoneyThing there will continue to be concern about the status of some of the other loans on this platform.
The deposits by purchasers and their relationship to legal charges is of course a potential issue for some loans on other platforms. There may yet be further ramifications of this default.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Aug 10, 2017 18:27:10 GMT
If you look at the 3 smallest loans which renewed at £25, £32 and £100 respectively there is only 1 person that got a piece in more than 1 - W ******** P got £25 in the smallest and £7 in the second smallest, but nothing in the £100 renewal. A few of the same names are present in the £344 renewal, but that's to be expected, with up to 14 available pieces. This is even assuming all the investors listed have unique initials, which is obviously not going to be true for everyone on the site. I did relatively well today getting 2/4, but other days I have not managed to get any, even when bigger renewals have been available. So i definitely don't think the same people get a slice every single time. I really don't want to see loans limited any further than £25 - £1.5 interest over the loan term makes it just about worth a few minutes. I also think releasing loans in one fell swoop instead of staggered won't help anyone - further website congestion / time outs only helps people with the fastest internet, while also allowing people who may use bots to open multiple tabs and let the bot have at it for every loan anyway. As a side note, I'm grabbing these renewals from a work computer that effectively gets it's internet piped from America (although I'm physically located in the UK), so I refuse to believe that I'm near the top in any capacity when it comes to ping or internet speed accessing COL servers here in Britain. Interesting that you mention the account that I have been convinced for a while is running a bot!! Agreed.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Aug 10, 2017 9:26:07 GMT
The reported poor performance is probably just down to the frenzy that accompanies jewellery etc renewals. The fact that there have not been any new loans for a while and that bling is now a reducing part of the Collateral loan book, does not help when the demand for such loans is clearly there.
As has been mentioned before by others, it is perhaps inevitable that platforms move towards property as a means of increasing their profitability, reducing their workload and the need to deal with large numbers of small loans .... Collateral is unfortunately no longer the platform that encouraged many lenders to join. Others have already pointed out that platforms such as Unbolted offer borrowers a better deal for pawn and this may well explain why Collateral does not receive many/ any approaches. Of course, lower rates for borrowers are accompanied by lower rates for lenders and, if you want a say in your investments and a secondary market, Unbolted may not be the one for you. It does however have a steady stream of new loans almost every day for those using auto lend as well as a provision fund.
Collateral may well be (or become) one of the better property websites. It's loan book is still relatively small and young. There have also been questions asked by members of this platform that have led to loans being withdrawn or terms varied.
On balance, Collateral is probably a pretty good platform for platform diversity. Perhaps not so good anymore for asset diversification.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Aug 10, 2017 8:32:47 GMT
Staggered Renewals again today will no doubt mean that they were snapped up by the same few. Not the fairest way to distribute these snippets of bling loans. Agreed. I am sure that at least one person is using a bot, so they are guaranteed a slice of every renewal. As I mentioned in an earlier post, for small renewals a smaller limit (£10 or even £5) would give more people a bite of the loan and would seem a much fairer way to handle this. Often the same buyer name appears on these smaller renewals which makes you wonder how they can be so successful.
To be honest, unless there is a large sum up for renewal, I no longer bother. No doubt those who secure £25 with the prospect of £1.50 interest will disagree and consider it time well spent!
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 27, 2017 8:08:36 GMT
Renewals were very slow for me, acquired nothing Same here. Slower than ever. When there are such small sums available and such limited chance of being successful, it is not worth bothering particularly when you think of what 12% of £25 for 6 months gives you.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 25, 2017 12:47:21 GMT
Probably because of the worry over the Government's proposals for leasehold properties and whether they will apply to flats (as voiced elsewhere on here). Ha ha , no nothing to do with that, it's mostly me trying to free up 50k to get 3% cashback at another site Please don't turn P2P into a ridiculous speculative investment where people put their finger in the wind and come up with a ridiculous reason for everything that happens. Good news. I don't think the proposals will be a problem, but there are a number of these developments suddenly appearing on the secondary market of other sites. Perhaps the lenders have the same intention as you.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 25, 2017 12:25:04 GMT
Avaliability just went to £65k on SM for liverpool. LOL Probably because of the worry over the Government's proposals for leasehold properties and whether they will apply to flats (as voiced elsewhere on here).
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 19, 2017 18:35:45 GMT
I think there's a general issue here and some misunderstading of the complaint perhaps? As a non investor in the subject loans I don't expect to receive the detailed regular update reports by email. But .. Let me use LY as an example because LY is often criticised for poor information and communications. LY sends ALL investors on the platform a regular update in which they tell everybody on LY platform the state of play with the loans - including where a loan has been defaulted and what steps they are taking to deal, e.g. administrators appointed, putting in auction, court case for possession etc. I have NEVER been in a defaulted loan on LY (or anywhere else) but I have been kept up to date with the broad action plan and circumstances. e.g. here's 2 recent LY updates on default loans on the website in which I have no direct interest - Also, LY has a very clear 'Default Loans' tab on the website so everybody can see what loans have defaulted and the size of the default loans. It is important in assessing platform risk. None of that information is being made available to COL investors like me. There isn't even a Default Loans link on the website. Anyone new or who doesn't read this forum wouldn't even know they had this problem. I can't see how this can be FCA compliant, let alone fair and transparent. There isn't even a Latest News or Updates section on the website. On MT, there is a problem with loans and it is clearly stated on the website against the affected loans for all MT investors / prospective investors to read. I was liking COL and it was my fastest growing platform but all that has stopped because of this. I expect loans to default and when they do, as an active financier / supporter of the platform, I expect to be kept in the picture. Not to, seemingly, have the situation air brushed out of existence. I don't think it's a coincidence that the new 12% + CB loan is only 1.9% filled so far, on it's first day. People like me would normally have swooped on it like a seagull that has spotted some discarded chips, but I'm keeping my wallet shut as regards COL until they start communicating better and making me feel like I matter. Others may disagree, but that's my view on it.
I have no experience of LY, but you give the impression that they have had defaults previously. For Collateral, this is the first default and I am sure there are things that could have been done better. They have however acknowledged the need for a default tab and are working to deliver this (albeit not as quick as some investors may like). It may be that LY give updates within a day or two of a default arising, I don't know. But to me, if the priority is to get a handle on the default and to decide/ take action that protects the interests of investors in the defaulted loan, then that perhaps is the better way forward. Collateral did post here yesterday where they were up to with the loan which seems to meet the LY format.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 19, 2017 18:06:24 GMT
All platforms have significant investors. No platform gives public information on possible legal cases to non-investors. Have you used the secondary market? elliottm, You may be content to adopt the role of mushroom - but I'm not.
1. Thank you for informing me that all platforms have significant lenders - hadn't thought of that - highly astute of you.
2. I don't want information on this 'possible legal case' - I want to know that Col aren't in any way culpable.
3. My only motor loan is with Abl - last time I looked the bid/offer was 97.3%/98.6% (and good luck with their current new offering).
I can understand why almost everyone on Collateral is desperate for information in case it impacts their loans. However, if Collateral feel that confidentiality is needed in order to obtain the best outcome for those actually involved in the defaulted loans I would hope we can all respect that. If you really feel that you must have an answer immediately, then why not contact Collateral direct as they have suggested?
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 19, 2017 11:29:02 GMT
A busy morning for bling - particularly the grouped loans. Presumably the continued fall out from the car loans. Where are the items, are they as listed with Collateral, how long does it take for Collateral to find out when a borrower goes bust etc. It is of course the risk associated with chasing 12%! However, everything that went up for sale sold within minutes.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Collateral (COL) in Liquidation
Website down
Jul 17, 2017 7:32:48 GMT
Post by applets on Jul 17, 2017 7:32:48 GMT
same here
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 16, 2017 12:23:43 GMT
i would be more concerned about This company. The borrower owes them £123k... i would imagine they may well want a say in who actually owns the cars. If you don't mind me asking where can you see that? It is in the Statement of Affairs prepared by the liquidator on 14 June and posted at Companies House on 7 July. My understanding is that the Statement has to be sent to creditors (including Collateral) within 14 days of the 26 June (the date that the winding up resolution was passed). Assuming this was done, I am unclear why Collateral waited until 14 July to tell lenders the borrower was in default.
|
|
applets
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 227
|
Post by applets on Jul 16, 2017 10:46:06 GMT
Someone with more legal knowledge than me will no doubt be able to express a view on whether Collateral were entitled to facilitate the buying and selling of loans to a company in liquidation. Much presumably depends on whether Collateral were first contacted by the liquidator on Friday afternoon, some two and a half weeks after their appointment.
Given the ease with which members of this board have tracked down the company concerned and been able to take a photo of their premises, it is not inconceivable that some lenders may have had knowledge of the liquidation before 14 July and sold out of their position before Collateral suspended trading.
However, while many members here may ultimately suffer a loss in these loans, it is worth noting that a number of people are now out of work and owed wages.
|
|