oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Jul 31, 2014 16:08:30 GMT
This is scary as I was looking at similar businesses that had failed in the past, and the most memorable one in the past 10 years (2007 it was) is now owned by this company. I was going to add a few links and add a few stars here and there but I don't want to have them that must be obeyed on my case. I'll pass on this one but I'll have to be quick, save my cash for another.  4311 is previous loan - been downgraded as new one supposed to pay off old. Note: 4311 is not connected to the £200K loan (see Yorkshire man's post which baz replied to).
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Jul 31, 2014 17:37:35 GMT
Why the hell are FC staff so bloody minded when questions are asked about this former £150K limited on secured? It's simple -- they don't want to openly acknowledge that, for all the trumpeting about how carefully they select and monitor businesses, they have had to chuck that out the window to deal with the volume of loans they are shoving through. What else could it be? "We only lend to strong, credit worthy businesses" is quite clearly not true. They then added "well, but we take that into consideration along side many other factors". One of which is the pressure to list more loans, weighted high. "We monitor our loans on an ongoing basis" seems to mean "When we see people bitching about XYZ Ltd having a Gazette notice/being front page news that we didn't spot, we pretend we're on top of it". Their monitoring seems very delayed from event happening to action taken. It takes long enough that savvy lenders get to realise, react, and offload clearly distressed loans to mug punters, and walk away happy. Kerching. "We take security on loans over £150k" has gone out of the window due to them "allowing themselves more discretion" "We will refund lenders if a loan turns out to be fraudulent" was almost thrown out of the window too, @wiseworker, I, and others chucked it back in ... but only after FC tried to pretend they'd never committed to any such thing ... Secured loans are almost non existent now. Endangered species! In summary: There are too many balls to keep the eyes on, and things have been getting sloppier for a long time. No sign of it being fixed, either by choice, or by FCA intervention to clean things up.
|
|
wysiati
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 86
|
Post by wysiati on Jul 31, 2014 21:37:03 GMT
Why the hell are FC staff so bloody minded when questions are asked about this former £150K limited on secured? "We will refund lenders if a loan turns out to be fraudulent" was almost thrown out of the window too, @wiseworker, I, and others chucked it back in ... but only after FC tried to pretend they'd never committed to any such thing ... Can you remember which loan(s) this involved? Was there some public statement(s) from FC (if so where)? If I can check the details/evidence it may be of use with another current situation of which I am aware and I can report back. Thanks.
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 234
Likes: 42
|
Post by jimbo on Jul 31, 2014 22:14:37 GMT
I wouldn't pin too much hope on the FCA to sort things out either. If you look at the history of the various banking scandals in the UK - miss-selling of financial products, etc, they usually seem to act well after the fact...
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Aug 1, 2014 6:48:22 GMT
And it always helped if politicians were among those burned .. E.g Equitable Life. That was sorted out in under 20 years!! Wonder if were have any politicians involved in P2P lending, or even on the forums?
|
|
|
|
Post by goldservice on Aug 1, 2014 8:41:44 GMT
"We will refund lenders if a loan turns out to be fraudulent" was almost thrown out of the window too, @wiseworker, I, and others chucked it back in ... but only after FC tried to pretend they'd never committed to any such thing ... Can you remember which loan(s) this involved? Was there some public statement(s) from FC (if so where)? If I can check the details/evidence it may be of use with another current situation of which I am aware and I can report back. Thanks. From FC 17/1/14: "Today we have classified loan ID 3696 (MOD: BB: COMPANY NAME DELETED) as ‘defaulted’ as we have received notice that the company is insolvent and will enter Creditor's Voluntary Liquidation on 6th February. As you have £20.00 currently lent to this business, which represents 0.11% of your current lending, we wanted to give you a full update on how it affects your investment. Loan ID 3696: a credit payment will be made to your account today Today we will credit your account with £20.00, which is equal to your principal outstanding in this loan. We have made the discretionary decision to do this before the recoveries process is complete due to the unusual circumstances with this case, where the business borrowed for working capital but failed to make any repayments." [my underlining] When I got the above, I assumed that FC felt they had been had ie defrauded and they felt morally obliged to reimburse the lenders.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Aug 1, 2014 9:26:14 GMT
Goldservice,
Please remove the borrower name from your quote asap. Have reported to moderators who must be asleep. I am sure it is an honest mistake in not noticing the name in a cut and paste, but it must be removed.
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Aug 1, 2014 17:22:20 GMT
Can you remember which loan(s) this involved? Was there some public statement(s) from FC (if so where)? If I can check the details/evidence it may be of use with another current situation of which I am aware and I can report back. Thanks. Most recently :- 5034: Made less than one payment (!). FC refunded capital in full due to "special circumstances". The public statement was on the official FC forum, first quibbling over whether FC would cover a refund due to fr**d, then secondly along the lines of "That's just something in the FAQ it is not part of the terms and conditions". Unimpressed. Read the whole thread, and save for posterity  forum.fundingcircle.com/forum/talk-to-fellow-members/all-about-lending/586-improved-communication-on-defaultsThere was a previous one, company took two loans (110/922), 922 was repaid in full by FC -- which they proudly boasted about on Radio 4, that every investor got their money back on this company --, but 110 was not refunded. Still outstanding with ZERO recovery. It seems that only one loan was considered "fr**dul*nt". I was not aware loans could commit fr**d, I thought it was companies and their directors that did that.
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Aug 1, 2014 17:24:22 GMT
mikebCan you remember which loan(s) this involved? Was there some public statement(s) from FC (if so where)? If I can check the details/evidence it may be of use with another current situation of which I am aware and I can report back. Thanks. From FC 17/1/14: "Today we have classified loan ID 3696.... We have made the discretionary decision to do this before the recoveries process is complete due to the unusual circumstances with this case, where the business borrowed for working capital but failed to make any repayments." [my underlining] When I got the above, I assumed that FC felt they had been had ie defrauded and they felt morally obliged to reimburse the lenders. That wasn't the ones I was thinking of, but I'm sure other lenders will have example numbers that they can quote (no names as per Moderator comments)
|
|
min
Member of DD Central
Posts: 615
Likes: 182
|
Post by min on Aug 29, 2014 7:10:04 GMT
Noticed an A+ loan finishing today for purchase of land in Scotland. In Q & A is question why loan not secured on land. The answer given is "....The company is based in Scotland and Funding Circle does not take security against Scottish property"
Why the **** not?
|
|
|
|
Post by mogzi on Aug 29, 2014 7:27:10 GMT
Also, FC don't take NI property as security where other platforms do.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Sept 2, 2014 12:00:33 GMT
Noticed an A+ loan finishing today for purchase of land in Scotland. In Q & A is question why loan not secured on land. The answer given is "....The company is based in Scotland and Funding Circle does not take security against Scottish property" Why the **** not? Maybe in a few weeks time they will?
|
|
