|
|
Post by pepperpot on Jul 3, 2015 14:40:01 GMT
The sale was not one person but 16 individual lenders, none of them work at AC. With respect, that neither answers the question that Chielamangus asked, nor the more fundamental question of whether those particular lenders were aware that the buffer was being used to make the payments to lenders. IIRC there was a small amount put up for sale, which slowly grew over the course of a few days. I remember because when it got to >50k I remember felling relieved that my small amount (couple of hundred or so) sold on the first day when the amount available was <10k. So (I stress, from fading memory) it didn't seem to be one large lender dumping in a panic but, as a guess, smaller lenders 'temporarily' holding (like I was) and seeing demand for sales increase joining the sales queue - not wanting to get locked into a temporary position.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jul 3, 2015 14:43:04 GMT
The sale was not one person but 16 individual lenders, none of them work at AC. With respect, that neither answers the question that Chielamangus asked, nor the more fundamental question of whether those particular lenders were aware that the buffer was being used to make the payments to lenders. Further to Andy's response, I'm still sat here with £5k invested in that loan showing that board directors weren't aware of the loan buffer being used or that there was any change in credit on the loan. No lenders would have been given preferential information.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jul 3, 2015 14:47:26 GMT
With respect, that neither answers the question that Chielamangus asked, nor the more fundamental question of whether those particular lenders were aware that the buffer was being used to make the payments to lenders. IIRC there was a small amount put up for sale, which slowly grew over the course of a few days. I remember because when it got to >50k I remember felling relieved that my small amount (couple of hundred or so) sold on the first day when the amount available was <10k. So (I stress, from fading memory) it didn't seem to be one large lender dumping in a panic but, as a guess, smaller lenders 'temporarily' holding (like I was) and seeing demand for sales increase joining the sales queue - not wanting to get locked into a temporary position. My initial calculation shows around £30k sold on the first day rather than the higher figures being quoted and that it was mostly underwriters presumably freeing up cash to fund another loan. I've used a pretty quick and dirty calculation to come up with that though. I'll be producing a more in depth report for Andy over the next couple of days tracking all lender holdings over time so if there are any anomalies or suspicious transactions then we'll thoroughly investigate them. As a businesses we are committed to treating all lenders equally and fairly.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Jul 3, 2015 14:56:11 GMT
IIRC there was a small amount put up for sale, which slowly grew over the course of a few days. I remember because when it got to >50k I remember felling relieved that my small amount (couple of hundred or so) sold on the first day when the amount available was <10k. So (I stress, from fading memory) it didn't seem to be one large lender dumping in a panic but, as a guess, smaller lenders 'temporarily' holding (like I was) and seeing demand for sales increase joining the sales queue - not wanting to get locked into a temporary position. My initial calculation shows around £30k sold on the first day rather than the higher figures being quoted and that it was mostly underwriters presumably freeing up cash to fund another loan. I've used a pretty quick and dirty calculation to come up with that though. I'll be producing a more in depth report for Andy over the next couple of days tracking all lender holdings over time so if there are any anomalies or suspicious transactions then we'll thoroughly investigate them. As a businesses we are committed to treating all lenders equally and fairly. I'm sure the audit trail is far more reliable than my flaky memory (or at least hope it is  ). The underwriters initially selling probably gave the market (including me) a slight spook seeing that demand no longer outstripped supply, having the knock on effect of additional trading.
|
|
kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 691 
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Jul 3, 2015 15:20:37 GMT
... when so many of my existing loans are now "suspended" (11 out of 89), 19% of my cash frozen. Your figure obliged me to go and look at my own AC loan book more closely: <gulp> - I'm at 41% cash frozen. I'll have to give myself a talking to, I think. Whilst most of it is fairly well secured, I am still sleeping well enough...but only just.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Jul 3, 2015 15:33:31 GMT
... when so many of my existing loans are now "suspended" (11 out of 89), 19% of my cash frozen. Your figure obliged me to go and look at my own AC loan book more closely: <gulp> - I'm at 41% cash frozen. I'll have to give myself a talking to, I think. Whilst most of it is fairly well secured, I am still sleeping well enough...but only just. Don't feel too bad. I'm a dirty rotten rate chaser and have 64% of my funds frozen. Think I'll be a little more balanced in my approach in future.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jul 3, 2015 16:28:45 GMT
My numbers seem to concur with chris (who will have a more complete picture as I can only see what is visible). Which FWIW in the interests of transparency are: 13 Feb – 6k available (last time anything was visible until 1st April) 1st Apr – 72k 2nd Apr – 52k (ie 20k sold in prior 24 hours), then a small trickle down till 11th Apr – 34k (11k sold in the prior 24 hours) Then up again to 41k on 15/4 & trickle down thereafter till 29/4 – just 1.5k (20k sold in the prior 24 hours) 29/5 – 15k (put on the market & sold out on 4/6) 8/6 – 26k (put on the market & sold out on 13/6) 15/6 – 30k (put on the market & sold out on 19/6) 25/6 – 39k (put on the market, only 8k visible next day, 17k on 27/6, 10k on 29/6, 17k on 30/6) When I say sold/put on the market that’s an assumption ofcourse, it could be large lenders simply adding/removing units from the market. Without any of this I make it 180k sold of this loan from 1st Apr to end of June. Real numbers could well be higher ofcourse (my figs are just once a day random snapshots which might well miss the peaks, & don’t track non visible volumes traded.) Chris will have a better idea on whether the trading volumes are anomalous. The dates marked in red presumably those worth focusing on first. I’m confident AC will clear this question. My personal concern is more on how the loan could have got to where it is, & why ACTCL were dozing on watch. Not to mention what do AC propose to do now? |
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Jul 3, 2015 17:47:05 GMT
The March 30th payment was paid early on March 12th and AC disabled the loan until April 1st. There would have been some lenders who reduced their holding between Mar12th-31st but it wouldn't show until the "Investment Disabled" flag was removed. I'm not surprised that there was 42k available on April 1st.
I would like to know why the March payment was early?
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Jul 3, 2015 19:59:45 GMT
I would like to know whether the entity/person who sold £72k of the loan in April has any connection with AC or AC personnel. It sounds suspiciously like insider trading but I would like to be told I am wrong. From what andrewholgate and chris have written, I am glad to learn I was wrong.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jul 3, 2015 20:46:53 GMT
I still want to know why the information presented to me in late April / early May when I opened my AC account and bought into this loan stated that it was up to date with payments, with the added assurance of a 3 month interest buffer, when AC already knew both to be untrue. I'm not (currently) worried about getting my money back given the stated security, but I do take exception to being misled by a supposedly professional organisation.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnick on Jul 4, 2015 8:47:41 GMT
Coincidentally I sold my holding in this loan early in May. I had no reason other than that I was having a clearout of higher LTV loans. So no knowledge asymmetry here, other than my recent change in attitude towards higher LTVs.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Jul 4, 2015 13:26:05 GMT
Your figure obliged me to go and look at my own AC loan book more closely: <gulp> - I'm at 41% cash frozen. I'll have to give myself a talking to, I think. Whilst most of it is fairly well secured, I am still sleeping well enough...but only just. Don't feel too bad. I'm a dirty rotten rate chaser and have 64% of my funds frozen. Think I'll be a little more balanced in my approach in future. Just checked all loans and the amount frozen across the whole portfolio is at least 35 per cent - its 35 per cent on the original loan but some principal would have been paid back. I am around 8 per cent frozen. I was always wary of North London and avoided it except for fairly recently when I noted the early payment in March, the up to date payment history (!), and the high liquidity (!!) of loan parts, and thought it would be useful as a short term repository for funds pending other investments becoming available. So I walked in without seeing the jaws closing around me. Hopefully, AC can prise them open again.
|
|
|
|
Post by drstarter33 on Jul 9, 2015 23:56:43 GMT
Still waiting for AC's internal review to come up with a solution. Terribly unimpressed, I must admit. This loan was clearly mis-sold to a number of investors.
|
|
). The underwriters initially selling probably gave the market (including me) a slight spook seeing that demand no longer outstripped supply, having the knock on effect of additional trading.
