locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Oct 29, 2020 8:45:28 GMT
I have lost touch. If the interest comes in tomorrow, how far is the interest up to date. If tomorrow's payment arrives, it will effectively be the interest payment due on 24/03/20.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on May 20, 2020 18:39:05 GMT
Having struggled through it Im assuming the 5% question (as I read it) has been settled..i.e. NOT in our favour..? Definitely not settled. A group of lenders are currently organising a legal challenge and will shortly be seeking donations to get a court decision. Watch this space.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Apr 20, 2020 17:33:07 GMT
Whats happened to that Raj Kumar guy who bought a stake in FS a couple of years ago? I mean, what due diligence did he do before he bought in? He must have been completely hosed? (I'm not following this closely so could be completely wrong!!)
He has debentures and the new 5% fee will see him suffer no loss. A legal challenge is currently being worked up.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Apr 20, 2020 11:33:19 GMT
Thanks picnicman but I have already tried that without success. Perhaps the system has changed in the interim. They have raised a ticket for me but I manage a number of accounts and it is the same for all of them.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Apr 20, 2020 7:10:00 GMT
If you have a <0.01 balance, if you request a withdrawal for 1p it will withdraw the fractional balance - I've done this in the past to tidy up accounts (eg to take 30day to true zero) but never closed, but hopefully this gets you a step closer! When trying this, the UI spits out the following paradoxical error:
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Apr 20, 2020 6:53:42 GMT
I have an AC account with a QAA and a 30DAA. Both have balances of < £0.01 (due to the way AC calculates its interest to twenty decimal places or whatever). I have tried to close this account but customer services tells me I must first withdraw my balance so that zero funds remain. Obviously this is impossible and the UI doesn't permit it as the minimum account withdrawal is £0.01. Customer services won't relent despite going round in circles on what is clearly a catch-22 of their own creation. So my question is - has anyone ever successfully closed an AC account and if so, what are the magic words I need to use to do this.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Mar 28, 2020 9:17:14 GMT
D) Inflation
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Mar 14, 2020 10:54:58 GMT
Can we get an update JamesFrance as I'm genuinely curious how things have fared given recent events.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Mar 11, 2020 15:05:50 GMT
3 times cheaper to invest direct with vanguard. Wow! Did not know the difference was that much Depending on your investment amount, it might be cheaper to invest in Vanguard funds on Interactive Investor than it is on Vanguard.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Feb 27, 2020 10:08:21 GMT
Looks at a quick glance that interest has been paid at 14% and not the 17% current rate. Has anybody got a different view? Mine is correct at 17%.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Jan 30, 2020 12:15:48 GMT
I'm in. I have money at stake but the principle alone is worth fighting for.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Jan 29, 2020 14:55:36 GMT
Fund raising probably deserves its own thread.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Dec 20, 2019 11:07:36 GMT
Yes. If the 90DAA withdrawal is due to be processed and a QAA withdrawal is requested 1 second later, and there's an insufficient liquidity buffer to process the withdrawals at that point in time, then as loan repayments are made or new investment comes into the accounts to replenish the liquidity buffer then that 90DAA withdrawal would be processed in full before that QAA withdrawal. Now I'm confused. Does this not contradict what Stuart said above: In your example chris , who gets their money first? Hopefully, it is the QAA withdrawal.
Here is my worked example so please correct me if I'm wrong:
Liquidity event happens @ 01/01/20. Timing of withdrawals follows order below.
Lender 1:QAA withdrawal is requested on 01/01/20 Lender 2:90DAA withdrawal is requested on 01/01/20 Lender 3:QAA withdrawal is requested on 01/01/20 Lender 4:QAA withdrawal is requested on 31/03/20 (i.e. 90 days later)
Priority of payments is Lender 1, Lender 3, Lender 2, Lender 4. Is that right? i.e. if all QAA lenders requested their money before 90 days, they would always get their money first. If they request after 90 days, then their position depends on exactly when the 90DAA made their original request for withdrawal?
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Dec 19, 2019 19:35:14 GMT
We can only hope that 'Lendy's Contractual Entitlement' is declared unenforceable as it incentivises Lendy to drag out and delay administrative action for its own benefit at the cost of its customers. The conflict of interest could not be clearer. Brilliant business model, mind you, if it's not illegal. It clearly is illegal and will be found as such by any judge that views this case. The fact that RSM are keeping up this charade when they know full well that lender T&Cs will trump the borrower contracts is immoral. There's countless reasons why lenders cannot be bound by terms in a contract they never had sight of, especially one written by a trusted agent to favour themselves. RSM are effectively dragging things out at lender expense until forced to do the right thing. This behaviour by Phillip Sykes, Damian Webb and Mark Wilson is nothing short of shameful.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Nov 29, 2019 22:11:39 GMT
Does this mean that the administrators are enforcing lendy's Ts & Cs change that most of us rejected? No it means the administrators are attempting to enforce fees owed to Lendy Ltd that were allegedly written directly into the loan security documents/debentures by Lendy when the loans were originated. Essentially the loan/borrower agreements have apparently superseded the platform terms. "The security documents set out an order of priority of payment"This has nothing to do with the platform terms and conditions or any variation of them. The real relevant parts of the terms are: "9.1 The Loan Contract governs the terms of repayment of principal and payment of interest by the borrower." "9.11 Details of the fees which Lendy charges borrowers are set out in the relevant Loan Contract, and these are, typically, an arrangement fee, an exit fee, and a loan monitoring fee."
Investors have never seen these security documents so won't have had any idea what fees would be contractually due to Lendy Ltd or indeed what their priority would be in the waterfall in this type of scenario although I do believe that one loan agreement may be out there in the public domain somewhere due to a well-publicised court battle to give you an idea. From the way I'm reading it the 3% "fixed" SLA will only be enforced if RSM run out of money from the Lendy Ltd pot to fund the administration having burnt through all the waterfall distributions cash.
Are the CC going to legally challenge this as it is clearly unethical and to me seems illegal. Do we need to chip in for some legal fees as per FS?
|
|