ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814 
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Jan 22, 2018 11:54:30 GMT
Next month's improvements will hopefully mean you get interest payments from the "PF", AIUI?
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jan 22, 2018 13:55:35 GMT
So in my GBBA 1..the losers and percentages held #389 5% Suspended #388 6% Suspended #227 10% Suspended #336 20.85% "monitoring event"..not looking hopeful ( I find it hard to believe the purpose of this loan was even considered but heyho ) 42% of my GBBA1 in trouble, not really acceptable Is this not another case of "alternative facts" I see here? #388 & #389 suspended pending result of a lender vote on loan term extension with good DSC coverage, a plan to reduce overall indebtedness, perfectly reasonable approach and loan should be tradable again in a few days. #336 not currently suspended and is tradable although it was suspended for a lender vote a while ago. Exit of loan has in truth been difficult but unlikely to result in much if any capital loss even if there more trouble ahead. #227 this is suspended but accruing interest. Exit route is still unclear here so it is a concern however likelihood of significant capital loss very small. Interest should be paid to holders via the GBBA once updates roll out in February. So only 10% of your GBBA will actually be suspended shortly after the 388/389 vote concludes tomorrow, then you could sell up to 90% of it, subject to market demand so you reduce your exposure to the GBBA by 90% pretty quickly. Not quite so bad a picture as you painted with your post.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Jan 22, 2018 14:34:54 GMT
if a loan has defaulted but not defined as bad debt yet, what is the implication on tax declaration? Okay - to be clear I'm no accountant so not offering advice and/or guidance here. I believe you can only offset against tax loans that have actually been formally defaulted by the platform. Hence the moans, myself included, of platforms endlessly kicking the obvious default can into the long grass so they can claim no lender has ever lost a penny or at least keep their default stats looking 'healthy'. It would be far more reasonable IMO to formally default a loan so that lenders could offset the loss against earnings for tax purposes. Any future pennies obtained could then be treated as income and declared accordingly. Some overdue loans are fully repaid eventually but there are obvious examples where any future recoveries are going to be minimal at best and just not cost effective to chase. But you know how platforms just love to 'safeguard' those default stats irrespective as to how ridiculous they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by misterp2p on Jan 22, 2018 14:44:55 GMT
So in my GBBA 1..the losers and percentages held #389 5% Suspended #388 6% Suspended #227 10% Suspended #336 20.85% "monitoring event"..not looking hopeful ( I find it hard to believe the purpose of this loan was even considered but heyho ) 42% of my GBBA1 in trouble, not really acceptable Is this not another case of "alternative facts" I see here? #388 & #389 suspended pending result of a lender vote on loan term extension with good DSC coverage, a plan to reduce overall indebtedness, perfectly reasonable approach and loan should be tradable again in a few days. #336 not currently suspended and is tradable although it was suspended for a lender vote a while ago. Exit of loan has in truth been difficult but unlikely to result in much if any capital loss even if there more trouble ahead. #227 this is suspended but accruing interest. Exit route is still unclear here so it is a concern however likelihood of significant capital loss very small. Interest should be paid to holders via the GBBA once updates roll out in February. So only 10% of your GBBA will actually be suspended shortly after the 388/389 vote concludes tomorrow, then you could sell up to 90% of it, subject to market demand so you reduce your exposure to the GBBA by 90% pretty quickly. Not quite so bad a picture as you painted with your post. I like your optimistic slant  I don't think there has been a good allocation in either the old or new GBBA .I hold my hands up that I went into this without having done enough of my own DD. I have already initiated a sell as I was rather peeved to see the lack of diversification and quality of loans in my holding having been alerted by the OP. The return over 12 months struggling to reach 5%. I will hang around the QAA and 30 Dayer for now, but will go back to RS as and when their 5 yr market is attractive.
|
|
happy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 397
Likes: 497
|
Post by happy on Jan 22, 2018 15:38:09 GMT
Is this not another case of "alternative facts" I see here? #388 & #389 suspended pending result of a lender vote on loan term extension with good DSC coverage, a plan to reduce overall indebtedness, perfectly reasonable approach and loan should be tradable again in a few days. #336 not currently suspended and is tradable although it was suspended for a lender vote a while ago. Exit of loan has in truth been difficult but unlikely to result in much if any capital loss even if there more trouble ahead. #227 this is suspended but accruing interest. Exit route is still unclear here so it is a concern however likelihood of significant capital loss very small. Interest should be paid to holders via the GBBA once updates roll out in February. So only 10% of your GBBA will actually be suspended shortly after the 388/389 vote concludes tomorrow, then you could sell up to 90% of it, subject to market demand so you reduce your exposure to the GBBA by 90% pretty quickly. Not quite so bad a picture as you painted with your post. I like your optimistic slant I don't think there has been a good allocation in either the old or new GBBA .I hold my hands up that I went into this without having done enough of my own DD. I have already initiated a sell as I was rather peeved to see the lack of diversification and quality of loans in my holding having been alerted by the OP. The return over 12 months struggling to reach 5%. I will hang around the QAA and 30 Dayer for now, but will go back to RS as and when their 5 yr market is attractive. Sounds fair enough, glad you appreciate my positive outlook on things though Personally I think investments in AC will out-perform the likes of RS and Zopa in the long run especially in the downward phase of the economic cycle when you factor in the assets backing of the loans and the 3x expected losses PF for GBBA etc. If you compare ACs asset backed loans and their PF to the current 115% expected debt coverage of the RS PF in relatively benign times that is covering mainly unsecured lending I feel that your chances of not taking a capital loss or at least a significant interest rate haircut over the next 5 years with RS are fairly small. BTW I also invest in RS, Zopa and other platforms as part of my platform diversification but only with a PF. Never went near Z+ and never will. Happy Hunting.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Jan 22, 2018 16:58:15 GMT
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 3,018
|
Post by IFISAcava on Jan 22, 2018 17:01:04 GMT
if a loan has defaulted but not defined as bad debt yet, what is the implication on tax declaration? Okay - to be clear I'm no accountant so not offering advice and/or guidance here. I believe you can only offset against tax loans that have actually been formally defaulted by the platform. Hence the moans, myself included, of platforms endlessly kicking the obvious default can into the long grass so they can claim no lender has ever lost a penny or at least keep their default stats looking 'healthy'. It would be far more reasonable IMO to formally default a loan so that lenders could offset the loss against earnings for tax purposes. Any future pennies obtained could then be treated as income and declared accordingly. Some overdue loans are fully repaid eventually but there are obvious examples where any future recoveries are going to be minimal at best and just not cost effective to chase. But you know how platforms just love to 'safeguard' those default stats irrespective as to how ridiculous they are. I am no expert either, but if it is like anything else due to you, I think if you have a reasonable argument that repayment is unlikely, you can default it yourself, and then recredit it if it later pays.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,878
Likes: 6,953
|
Post by duck on Jan 22, 2018 18:25:14 GMT
Okay - to be clear I'm no accountant so not offering advice and/or guidance here. I believe you can only offset against tax loans that have actually been formally defaulted by the platform. Hence the moans, myself included, of platforms endlessly kicking the obvious default can into the long grass so they can claim no lender has ever lost a penny or at least keep their default stats looking 'healthy'. It would be far more reasonable IMO to formally default a loan so that lenders could offset the loss against earnings for tax purposes. Any future pennies obtained could then be treated as income and declared accordingly. Some overdue loans are fully repaid eventually but there are obvious examples where any future recoveries are going to be minimal at best and just not cost effective to chase. But you know how platforms just love to 'safeguard' those default stats irrespective as to how ridiculous they are. I am no expert either, but if it is like anything else due to you, I think if you have a reasonable argument that repayment is unlikely, you can default it yourself, and then recredit it if it later pays. The information and conditions are available on this site p2pindependentforum.com/thread/4942/debt-relief-publication-final-guidanceThe relevant information is in SAIM 12050 and reads If the platform does not undertake this action, then the lender may still determine that the loan has
become irrecoverable. However it will be the responsibility of the lender to show that there is no
reasonable prospect of the recovery of the loan and it is NOT simply a case of late payment.
When is a peer to peer loan treated as irrecoverable?
Under the legislation for income tax relief for irrecoverable peer to peer loans in certain
circumstances a loan may be treated as irrecoverable for the purposes of the relief even if there may
be a prospect that the lender could recover some of the amount outstanding.
This is the case for the following situations:
Loans with security
When loans are made against security, a loan may be treated as becoming irrecoverable as if
the security did not exist.
Loans where legal recovery action is taken
When the borrower has entered legal recovery procedures such as liquidation, administration,
receivership or bankruptcy the loan may be treated as becoming irrecoverable as if such
action was not available.
Note there is no mention of PF 'protected' investments.
|
|
I don't think there has been a good allocation in either the old or new GBBA .I hold my hands up that I went into this without having done enough of my own DD. I have already initiated a sell as I was rather peeved to see the lack of diversification and quality of loans in my holding having been alerted by the OP. The return over 12 months struggling to reach 5%. I will hang around the QAA and 30 Dayer for now, but will go back to RS as and when their 5 yr market is attractive. 
