jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Feb 15, 2018 18:06:01 GMT
I've just discovered this the hard way. An initial investment in the GBBA2 was highly diversified amongst 130 loans. I then made another investment that was 50% larger than my initial investment, and 66% of that went to one loan. It was not a small amount. Sell out and start again! If I were you I would sell out and put the money in the qaa for the time being. Then have a good read of the features and potential short comings of the gbba2 like diversification etc.
|
|
Esmeralda
Member of DD Central
Posts: 107 
Likes: 36
|
Post by Esmeralda on Feb 15, 2018 18:28:37 GMT
Re loan #437...as far as it being on your tax statement.... ”We have reserved our rights and we are working with the borrower and their wider team. At this stage, we do not propose to charge default interest or look to enforce the security held whilst we continue our work to seek to minimise lender risk. All options will remain open during this investigation period and beyond.” At this point the loan is in default but is not in the recovery stage, therefore doesn’t show in the “Loans in Recoveries” section of the tax statement.” The other 3 loans are also suspended, so they must be in default too, but PF interest was paid out on those, so why not #437?
|
|
|
|
Post by vaelin on Feb 15, 2018 18:36:03 GMT
I've just discovered this the hard way. An initial investment in the GBBA2 was highly diversified amongst 130 loans. I then made another investment that was 50% larger than my initial investment, and 66% of that went to one loan. It was not a small amount. Sell out and start again! That's my plan. How long do loans typically sit on the secondary market?
|
|
|
|
Post by vaelin on Feb 15, 2018 18:36:30 GMT
I've just discovered this the hard way. An initial investment in the GBBA2 was highly diversified amongst 130 loans. I then made another investment that was 50% larger than my initial investment, and 66% of that went to one loan. It was not a small amount. Re the 66% - did it go into loan 441, as I see it has £930K available for investment in GBBA2 ? Indeed it did!
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528 
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Feb 15, 2018 20:03:55 GMT
Re the 66% - did it go into loan 441, as I see it has £930K available for investment in GBBA2 ? Indeed it did! Recently I've delayed putting money into GBBA2 if my top holdings (by %) have any significant availability
|
|
|
|
Post by mike1963 on Feb 15, 2018 22:58:09 GMT
Re loan #437...as far as it being on your tax statement.... ”We have reserved our rights and we are working with the borrower and their wider team. At this stage, we do not propose to charge default interest or look to enforce the security held whilst we continue our work to seek to minimise lender risk. All options will remain open during this investigation period and beyond.” At this point the loan is in default but is not in the recovery stage, therefore doesn’t show in the “Loans in Recoveries” section of the tax statement.” The other 3 loans are also suspended, so they must be in default too, but PF interest was paid out on those, so why not #437? I received... ”The ******** loan has not been missed by the provision fund payments, this loan is in default (recovery stage) and therefore the interest is not covered by the provision fund at this point.” ...if that helps 🤨
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 3,018
|
Post by IFISAcava on Feb 15, 2018 23:00:39 GMT
Sell out and start again! That's my plan. How long do loans typically sit on the secondary market? If no availability on the loan will be gone pretty quickly in my experience - a day or two. If availability, will drop more slowly. I think I was pretty much sold out of everything bar accrued interest and microportions within a week when I left GBBA1. GEIA was/is another story...
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,814
Likes: 1,092
|
Post by ashtondav on Feb 16, 2018 9:15:14 GMT
I was looking forward to a fit for purpose account from AC, but it looks as though they’ve still got a distance to travel. I will remain in QAA, but shift longer term funds into RS where life is much simpler and I can still get 6%. Personally I think AC ought to ditch the packaged accounts and focus on the 'lender chooses' segment of the market.
|
|
Brainer
Member of DD Central
Posts: 186
Likes: 323
|
Post by Brainer on Feb 16, 2018 15:04:10 GMT
The other 3 loans are also suspended, so they must be in default too, but PF interest was paid out on those, so why not #437? I received... ”The ******** loan has not been missed by the provision fund payments, this loan is in default (recovery stage) and therefore the interest is not covered by the provision fund at this point.” ...if that helps 🤨 Having just scanned the updates, I can't see an official default notice, and as such don't see that this loan is any different to the other 3 turbines, as others have said. Also, assuming it was in fact defaulted, at what exact date? If it was after the start of the missing interest payments then had the provision fund algorithm been 'working properly' at the time then some of these missed payments would've been covered (up to the point of official default).
|
|
snowmobile
Member of DD Central
Posts: 230
Likes: 448
|
Post by snowmobile on Feb 16, 2018 15:27:48 GMT
I received... ”The ******** loan has not been missed by the provision fund payments, this loan is in default (recovery stage) and therefore the interest is not covered by the provision fund at this point.” ...if that helps 🤨 Having just scanned the updates, I can't see an official default notice, and as such don't see that this loan is any different to the other 3 turbines, as others have said. Also, assuming it was in fact defaulted, at what exact date? If it was after the start of the missing interest payments then had the provision fund algorithm been 'working properly' at the time then some of these missed payments would've been covered (up to the point of official default). The fact that many of us were expecting to receive missed interest payments on 437 suggests that AC have not made it sufficiently clear. They need to spell out what is or is not considered a default for the provision fund to pay the interest. I would have thought that if default interest is not being charged and enforcement of security has not commenced then it is not in default and the PF should pay the interest. Neither of these apply for this loan. Loans can be suspended for many reasons but it doesn't automatically mean that they are in default. Judging by the varied responses people are receiving from AC support it appears they can't work it out either 
|
|
Esmeralda
Member of DD Central
Posts: 107
Likes: 36
|
Post by Esmeralda on Feb 16, 2018 18:56:29 GMT
Having just scanned the updates, I can't see an official default notice, and as such don't see that this loan is any different to the other 3 turbines, as others have said. Also, assuming it was in fact defaulted, at what exact date? If it was after the start of the missing interest payments then had the provision fund algorithm been 'working properly' at the time then some of these missed payments would've been covered (up to the point of official default). The fact that many of us were expecting to receive missed interest payments on 437 suggests that AC have not made it sufficiently clear. They need to spell out what is or is not considered a default for the provision fund to pay the interest. I would have thought that if default interest is not being charged and enforcement of security has not commenced then it is not in default and the PF should pay the interest. Neither of these apply for this loan. Loans can be suspended for many reasons but it doesn't automatically mean that they are in default. Judging by the varied responses people are receiving from AC support it appears they can't work it out either So, I received an email today telling me that all four are in default but #437 went into default earlier than the other three and there were no missed interest payments at that date so there's no PF interest due. As (supposedly) tThe other three didn't go into default until a later date and they had missed interest payments when they went into default that's why the PF paid out on those. If all four are in default why does the header on each of their pages say "monitoring event" rather than "credit event"? I cannot see a sentence anywhere that says that any of them are in default and that's the question I asked AC - show me the sentence - but they didn't or maybe they can't.
|
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Feb 17, 2018 19:22:47 GMT
Exactly what happened to me. Lack of diversification, over exposure, poor due diligence in assessing borrowers etc etc It's all going in my complaint to the FOA. It's far too easy for AC to suspend a loan even before it goes into default. Lenders get no interest, the PF doesn't payout and there's little incentive for them to recover our losses. The GEIA and GBBA are an incompetent failure which Assetz Capital are attempting to step away from. I hope they are enjoying the bad publicity they are getting. I am in the same boat with loan 437 in the GEIA....I sold the rest of my holding and was left with this one. I have been in email conversation with AC about 437 and am hopeful that they will eventually pay out any capital shortfall from the PF but reckon it will take about 3 to 5 years to go through attempted recovery process. I have some money invested via the manual account but am resigned to loosing this.
If the PF is designed to cover capital then I see no reason why it can't payout on request to lenders who want to walk and AC replenish the PF if or when they recover. Then they might have some incentive to pull their finger out.
|
|
|
|
Post by bikeman on Feb 17, 2018 19:28:52 GMT
The fact that many of us were expecting to receive missed interest payments on 437 suggests that AC have not made it sufficiently clear. They need to spell out what is or is not considered a default for the provision fund to pay the interest. I would have thought that if default interest is not being charged and enforcement of security has not commenced then it is not in default and the PF should pay the interest. Neither of these apply for this loan. Loans can be suspended for many reasons but it doesn't automatically mean that they are in default. Judging by the varied responses people are receiving from AC support it appears they can't work it out either So, I received an email today telling me that all four are in default but #437 went into default earlier than the other three and there were no missed interest payments at that date so there's no PF interest due. As (supposedly) tThe other three didn't go into default until a later date and they had missed interest payments when they went into default that's why the PF paid out on those. If all four are in default why does the header on each of their pages say "monitoring event" rather than "credit event"? I cannot see a sentence anywhere that says that any of them are in default and that's the question I asked AC - show me the sentence - but they didn't or maybe they can't. I'm pretty sure the GEIA turbine loan I am in was suspended several months before the borrower went into arrears. I'm also pretty sure that during that time AC kept the payments and never passed on any interest to me. Nor did the PF pay me anything. Meanwhile my capital gets lost indefinitely despite being covered by the PF. Seems pretty bloody convenient that loans not in default can be suspended with no cover from the PF.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 17, 2018 22:14:25 GMT
There still seems to be a fair amount of confusion regarding the PF. Some instances it seems to have paid out and in others not so. chris - is there anyway, in straightforward terms, you could fully explain the PF workings with possibly a couple of examples when it would pay out and when it wouldn't. I fully appreciate the PF must remain discretionary but feel your input would be appreciated. If this is not your area perhaps one of your colleagues could contribute but please keep it simple. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Feb 17, 2018 22:15:55 GMT
There still seems to be a fair amount of confusion regarding the PF. Some instances it seems to have paid out and in others not so. chris - is there anyway, in straightforward terms, fully explain the PF with possibly a couple of examples when it would pay out and when it wouldn't. I fully appreciate the PF must remain discretionary but feel your input would be appreciated. If this is not your area perhaps one of your colleagues could contribute but please keep it simple. Thanks. Certainly not my area so I wouldn't be able to explain it to you. I can raise it internally though and see if someone else wants to pick up the baton.
|
|
