GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Feb 28, 2018 21:25:38 GMT
What concerns me most of all is that if the Collateral chiefs or some other party acting on their behalf or with the authority to do that was able to email us this morning then they could have emailed us this morning and told us what was going on.
It would appear to me there is a serious regulatory issue with the FCA and or law,and that the silence is due to legal reasons.
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 990
Likes: 1,196
|
Post by james100 on Feb 28, 2018 21:26:07 GMT
It can't be a stretch to say they misrepresented their status with the FCA to investors? Gaining money by deception. Well, when it expired, the FCA was removed from mail footers, T&Cs were amended and even the FAQs were updated to reflect the company was not authorised or regulated by the FCA. What's still both important and unclear to me, though, is 1) the protection/authority of the FCA (if any) whilst loans were contracted during the period of valid FCA membership and 2) how legally permissible it is to vary such a fundamental issue without formally notifying lenders in advance of the T&C change and/or giving them an opt out. If my part funding notice confirmations state they are sold by a company that is authorized & regulated by FCA (which 100% of them do) what exactly does this mean now? In any case, I like Collateral; they've historically been a reliable and trustworthy platform (pulling dodgy loans before drawdown, dealing efficiently with their few defaults). They have not exhibited what I'd describe as deceptive tendencies compared to many other platforms IMHO, until this point. Because of this I am...still!... hoping that this is just a godalmighty cock up and they are going to send an email explaining (e.g.) they had to suspend operations until they became fully compliant with FCA regulations before month end, just threw everything they had at it for what has been 2 working days so far, totally stuffed up the communications around the whole mess, and are very very sorry. So, naive as it may be, I'm going to suspend my judgement until Thursday 5pm before breaking out the pitchfork.
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 28, 2018 21:28:39 GMT
IF money is held in a designated client's account it is separate from Collateral's and would not go into a general pot. There may be issues over which particular client, but again this is speculation about event(s) we don't know havehappened so may not need to be considered.
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Feb 28, 2018 21:32:02 GMT
IF money is held in a designated client's account it is separate from Collateral's and would not go into a general pot. There may be issues over which particular client, but again this is speculation about event(s) we don't know havehappened so may not need to be considered. Even though their new terms and conditions from Feb 1st say this? “In particular you should note that if Collateral was to become insolvent then any money held by it would not be held in accordance with the FCA’s client money rules, which require in particular that client money is held separately from a firm’s own money, and it is likely you would rank as an ordinary unsecured creditor. Ordinary unsecured creditors rarely make any recovery on insolvency."
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Feb 28, 2018 21:32:57 GMT
IF money is held in a designated client's account it is separate from Collateral's and would not go into a general pot. There may be issues over which particular client, but again this is speculation about event(s) we don't know havehappened so may not need to be considered. Yes let's all remain positive because we have no evidence of any fraud or wrongdoing or bad news as of yet. After all it's only money and you can't take it with you. However if it does transpire that we have all been victims of a big fraud then I suggest we all get together through private message and go straight to the bar and group fund a top barrister in financial law to pursue our money in a mutual action.
|
|
slush
Member of DD Central
Here to learn. Please be gentle.
Posts: 79
Likes: 38
|
Post by slush on Feb 28, 2018 21:34:06 GMT
... I think the current image being displayed on the website is a default error page, as in, they have turned the servers off and thats what gets shown by default. If you look elsewhere in this thread you will find that the image (a jpg) was created on the day that they took the website off line, i.e. it was not a generic image that was waiting to be used in the unlikely event of a server going down. It was created just prior to pulling the plug.
|
|
|
Post by beepbeepimajeep on Feb 28, 2018 21:36:15 GMT
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Feb 28, 2018 21:38:08 GMT
One thing that does worry me the most is the client money segregation and I am interested to see how that plays out. Being interim FCA approved means they must have had client money processes and segregation in January, therefore to undo this segregation they would have had to do work. I can not see them doing that in a month. What will be interesting is if it is in a segregated account will it be considered client money or will it just go into the insolvency pot? The terms and conditions posted seem to be clear it will go in the insolvency pot... if it does I think you have a good case to argue the toss on that one. Interim permissions were issued by the FCA when they took over regulation in April 2014 to firms who were previously operating under a consumer credit licence issued by the OFT. This was only meant as a bridge so that these firms could continue trading while they apply for full authorisation and await a decision regarding authorisation. The following bulletin might be of interest: Source 1: www.securedloandirectory.co.uk/2013/04/12/fca-regulation-of-consumer-credit-the-interim-permissions-regime/Source 2: lightfoots.co.uk/fca-regulation-of-consumer-credit-the-interim-permissions-regime/Some highlights: "During the interim permissions regime, the FCA will supervise consumer credit firms through event driven, or issues-based. Firms will therefore not have to provide the FCA with regulatory information. During this time, the FCA will be investigating the market and will familiarise itself with some of the largest firms." "Interim permissions and interim variations of permissions will last until: (1) A firm applies to cancel it; (2) A firm applies for full authorisation and this is approved or a decision notice is issued refusing the same; (3) Where the future application date (the latest date on which a firm must apply for authorisation if it wants to continue with the regulated activities in its interim permission) specified by the FCA has passed; or (4) 1 April 2016."
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Feb 28, 2018 21:39:50 GMT
One thing that does worry me the most is the client money segregation and I am interested to see how that plays out. Being interim FCA approved means they must have had client money processes and segregation in January, therefore to undo this segregation they would have had to do work. I can not see them doing that in a month. What will be interesting is if it is in a segregated account will it be considered client money or will it just go into the insolvency pot? The terms and conditions posted seem to be clear it will go in the insolvency pot... if it does I think you have a good case to argue the toss on that one. Interim permissions were issued by the FCA when they took over regulation in April 2014 to firms who were previously operating under a consumer credit licence issued by the OFT. This was only meant as a bridge so that these firms could continue trading while they apply for full authorisation and await a decision regarding authorisation. The following bulletin might be of interest: Source 1: www.securedloandirectory.co.uk/2013/04/12/fca-regulation-of-consumer-credit-the-interim-permissions-regime/Source 2: lightfoots.co.uk/fca-regulation-of-consumer-credit-the-interim-permissions-regime/Some highlights: "During the interim permissions regime, the FCA will supervise consumer credit firms through event driven, or issues-based. Firms will therefore not have to provide the FCA with regulatory information. During this time, the FCA will be investigating the market and will familiarise itself with some of the largest firms." "Interim permissions and interim variations of permissions will last until: (1) A firm applies to cancel it; (2) A firm applies for full authorisation and this is approved or a decision notice is issued refusing the same; (3) Where the future application date (the latest date on which a firm must apply for authorisation if it wants to continue with the regulated activities in its interim permission) specified by the FCA has passed; or (4) 1 April 2016." Does the fact that their interim FCA authorisation lapsed potentially mean that they hadn’t actually applied for full permission at all?
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Feb 28, 2018 21:41:55 GMT
... I think the current image being displayed on the website is a default error page, as in, they have turned the servers off and thats what gets shown by default. If you look elsewhere in this thread you will find that the image (a jpg) was created on the day that they took the website off line, i.e. it was not a generic image that was waiting to be used in the unlikely event of a server going down. It was created just prior to pulling the plug. Surely the server can't be down or we wouldn't be getting anything at all from the domain.
|
|
jcb208
Member of DD Central
Posts: 820
Likes: 606
|
Post by jcb208 on Feb 28, 2018 21:45:03 GMT
Surely all money already loaned out should be safe and as and If it is repaid this should be returned to investors
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Feb 28, 2018 21:46:26 GMT
So here's a crazy theory to throw in to the mix to distract from the panic. William Hill were finned £6 mill for lacking money lauding checks last week, i have noticed several (i invest across a large number of platforms) platforms pointing out their own anti lauding process on sign up. Considering money lauding is in the spot light with regulators right now, maybe Collateral have fallen foul, and trading has been halted. Of course entirely speculation, but if its the case i'm hopeful trading could continue, with changes, in due corse, or maybe i'm just clutching at straws.. .
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Feb 28, 2018 21:48:17 GMT
I didn't get an email, tried to phone earlier too wouldn't connect but just found out my landline is now down, the weather could be a factor with communication issues I use gmail and i found it in my "Promotions" folder for some reason Yea found it in search now not in my main folder though
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Feb 28, 2018 21:49:26 GMT
Does the fact that their interim FCA authorisation lapsed potentially mean that they hadn’t actually applied for full permission at all? Potentially. But I note all interim permissions were set to lapse on 1 April 2016 originally. There were clearly a number of firms who only gained full authorisation well after that date.
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Feb 28, 2018 21:50:16 GMT
IF money is held in a designated client's account it is separate from Collateral's and would not go into a general pot. There may be issues over which particular client, but again this is speculation about event(s) we don't know havehappened so may not need to be considered. Even though their new terms and conditions from Feb 1st say this? “In particular you should note that if Collateral was to become insolvent then any money held by it would not be held in accordance with the FCA’s client money rules, which require in particular that client money is held separately from a firm’s own money, and it is likely you would rank as an ordinary unsecured creditor. Ordinary unsecured creditors rarely make any recovery on insolvency." I have invested no new money in P2P this month as far as I can recall and therefore all my investment in Collateral was made before 1st of February and was on the basis that the platform had interim FCA authority. I was never informed buy collateral that this has lapsed which is clearly a major and material change in circumstances and I do not think it is reasonable to expect investors to read All the small print at the bottom of emails. Therefore when I invested my money it was on an FCA authorised basis and I believe this should make the FCA carry some responsibility for overseeing the wind down of The Platform in the event that this is what is going to be necessary. In my opinion to say to investors who invested money when the platform was FCA authorised that the FCA is washing their hands of it all would be an insult and an aberration and dereliction of Duty because if you invest through something that has interim FCA approval then the FCA must pursue their duties in regard to those monies.
|
|