|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Apr 16, 2018 13:24:15 GMT
There are agony aunts and other places to get self help . Speculation only increases the fears of those who have that type of personality. This is a serious forum to assist those who invest or wish to invest in P2P. Only verified or at least correct information should be posted. I have 10's of thousands in Coll and 100s of thousands in P2P and don't have to worry that Aliens will come and steal it (probably listed here as a possibility). As with all investments only invest what you can risk loosing. I say risk rather than afford as the two are not the same for everyone. Again I repeat the greater the risk the greater the reward. The greater the effort ie. DD and diversification the less the Risk. A good combination of both results in a healthy return. P2P is not for the feckless or fearful. . Those posts are obviously causing you a great deal of unhappiness. A trick I learned was that if I don't want to read something, I don't look. Works for me.  If I recall correctly the ancient Egyptian God Anubis was what could be termed a bit of a Mummies boy. May, or may not explain things. I can however 'confirm and verify' that your trick does work just fine.
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150 
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Apr 16, 2018 19:23:14 GMT
Oh oh, if we really are creditors of Collateral, then that really is very bad news. It strikes me as just the card to play, to rip us all off.
Get rid of RR asap.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Apr 17, 2018 1:46:02 GMT
Those of you that have a copy of the active loans could perhaps tell us exactly how many were due or are due to repay by date of the court hearing ? . This could give a guide to how much is outstanding . Given that not many loans redeem on the due date I would wager the amount of actual capital that would be available to lenders would not be very significant at this time.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Apr 17, 2018 2:02:39 GMT
There are agony aunts and other places to get self help . Speculation only increases the fears of those who have that type of personality. This is a serious forum to assist those who invest or wish to invest in P2P. Only verified or at least correct information should be posted. I have 10's of thousands in Coll and 100s of thousands in P2P and don't have to worry that Aliens will come and steal it (probably listed here as a possibility). As with all investments only invest what you can risk loosing. I say risk rather than afford as the two are not the same for everyone. Again I repeat the greater the risk the greater the reward. The greater the effort ie. DD and diversification the less the Risk. A good combination of both results in a healthy return. P2P is not for the feckless or fearful. . Those posts are obviously causing you a great deal of unhappiness. A trick I learned was that if I don't want to read something, I don't look. Works for me. Unfortunately in my role in the judging of a person’s soul there is a requirement for me to scrutinise what they are contributing. Once I have impartially evaluated what they have to say I either allow them to continue to eternal happiness or throw their Tainted heart to the beast forever condemning them to an eternity of everlasting torment so we careful what you say 
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 17, 2018 10:01:01 GMT
This situation is unique in that from what I understand the platform was operating without the correct regulatory authorization which could add a number of legal complications Kinda, but you're forgetting the other level of complexity - everybody, including the FCA, thought they were operating under a valid interim permission. But the FCA had done what the FCA say can't be done, and transferred somebody else's registration (from a related-but-different business which was then closed down) to COL. Then the FCA remembered they couldn't/shouldn't have done that, transferred it back, then said "But you don't have permission". It's a mess. It's a mess from every direction, except for one... Agreed. Nobody has ever suggested COL was not solvent and trading properly, permission confusion excepted.
|
|
TenKay
Member of DD Central
Posts: 144
Likes: 117
|
Post by TenKay on Apr 17, 2018 16:19:30 GMT
Not involved in this in anyway, by the skin of my teeth, but if the loan book is not properly managed until close. In particular if borrowers are allowed to walk away by the company now managing it, due to lack of return for them. Peer to peer is finished, every lender out there is watching this with great interest, the results confirm platform security in failure or destroys it utterly.c If the authorities want an alternative financial loan market they better keep a very close eye on this one. I dont know if that is the case. This situation is unique in that from what I understand the platform was operating without the correct regulatory authorization which could add a number of legal complications - if they had just had to go into insolvency because they were making a loss and couldnt continue the operation it would be alot simpler (and preferable from the perspective of the lenders) to deal with whether its the case or not, how lenders are treated will have an impact on P2P platforms and the willingness of individuals to take the risk in the future
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 789
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Apr 17, 2018 18:46:50 GMT
I dont know if that is the case. This situation is unique in that from what I understand the platform was operating without the correct regulatory authorization which could add a number of legal complications - if they had just had to go into insolvency because they were making a loss and couldnt continue the operation it would be alot simpler (and preferable from the perspective of the lenders) to deal with whether its the case or not, how lenders are treated will have an impact on P2P platforms and the willingness of individuals to take the risk in the future I think the main impact will be on smaller less established platforms. If it turns out to be a very messy situation it would not discourage me from investing in P2P but I would definitely stay away from new/less established/smaller platforms. In the worst case scenario, which is probably some kind of legal sh** storm about the loans they have issued, you might well see people withdrawing funds from smaller platforms which in itself will cause problems.
|
|
TenKay
Member of DD Central
Posts: 144
Likes: 117
|
Post by TenKay on Apr 18, 2018 12:44:48 GMT
but unless you do further research into each platform, you don't know how big a company is, so for someone like me that doesn't want the extra hassle involved in this , i will just withdraw form p2p lending all together
i want to be assured that the risks im taking are in property investment, not in the foibles of some system that hasn't caught up yet
|
|
archie
Posts: 1,866
Likes: 1,861
|
Post by archie on Apr 18, 2018 13:18:54 GMT
but unless you do further research into each platform, you don't know how big a company is, so for someone like me that doesn't want the extra hassle involved in this , i will just withdraw form p2p lending all together i want to be assured that the risks im taking are in property investment, not in the foibles of some system that hasn't caught up yet Stick to companies with full FCA authorisation if you're worried. FCA would have accepted their living will plans. Article that may be of interest here.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 18, 2018 13:35:57 GMT
but unless you do further research into each platform, you don't know how big a company is, so for someone like me that doesn't want the extra hassle involved in this , i will just withdraw form p2p lending all together i want to be assured that the risks im taking are in property investment, not in the foibles of some system that hasn't caught up yet FCA would have accepted their living will plans. Article that may be of interest here. I wish it was that simple. I've tried here and elsewhere to gain a better understanding but there are still fundamental things that are not clear to me. For example, FCA authorization seems to come with certain permissions and you need to know which ones are relevant to you. Also I know of at least one platform that carries out two kinds of lending - one requires FCA auth and the other doesn't. Is there an FCA protected client account in the part that doesn't ? I've no idea. Another example is taking cash from "sophisticated" or HNW investors. DOes that require FCA permission? I suspect not and I susepct that is the reason why some platforms make you answer a questionaiite before you join. So in that case, being "sophisticated" means using a platform that doesn't have an FCA approved client bank account which doesn't sound very sophisticated at all. There are also permission around having an online platform and also the nature of the lending. Bridging loans don't require FCA authorization at all. All I want to know is a given platform regulated to the fullest extent it could be by the FCA? I never seem to get the answer.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Apr 18, 2018 18:46:45 GMT
There's a very interesting revelation that has been raised on DDC that hasn't been mentioned here yet: www.fca.org.uk/firms/interim-permission-consumer-creditThe above link deals with what to do when there are changes to a firms details. It describes an online system where firms register one or more contacts who can then "amend basic details such as a firm name, address or telephone number". Other changes require the FCA to be notified using a relevant form. The implication would seem to be that firm name, for example, can be amended without notifying the FCA. |
|
guff
Posts: 730
Likes: 707
|
Post by guff on Apr 18, 2018 19:05:53 GMT
There's a very interesting revelation that has been raised on DDC that hasn't been mentioned here yet: www.fca.org.uk/firms/interim-permission-consumer-creditThe above link deals with what to do when there are changes to a firms details. It describes an online system where firms register one or more contacts who can then "amend basic details such as a firm name, address or telephone number". Other changes require the FCA to be notified using a relevant form. The implication would seem to be that firm name, for example, can be amended without notifying the FCA. I came across that some time ago, but CUK are not Regal and IMHO the FCA should not have updated their website without first checking the company numbers.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 666
Likes: 641
|
Post by mason on Apr 18, 2018 19:10:26 GMT
There's a very interesting revelation that has been raised on DDC that hasn't been mentioned here yet: www.fca.org.uk/firms/interim-permission-consumer-creditThe above link deals with what to do when there are changes to a firms details. It describes an online system where firms register one or more contacts who can then "amend basic details such as a firm name, address or telephone number". Other changes require the FCA to be notified using a relevant form. The implication would seem to be that firm name, for example, can be amended without notifying the FCA. I came across that some time ago, but CUK are not Regal and IMHO the FCA should not have updated their website without first checking the company numbers. Does it not suggest that a registered representative of Regal could have changed the register without the FCA even knowing about it? I agree such a thing should not be possible as it would be a massive security hole, but the text suggests it could be possible for a firm to edit its own entry on the register without FCA review. If someone connected to Regal made the change, then someone connected to COL started dealing with the FCA quoting the IP reference number (which at that time would show the firm name as Collateral (UK) Limited), then it's easy to see how there could have been confusion over the status of COL at the FCA for an extended period of time. It's even entirely within the realms of possibility that the person connected to Regal and the person connected to COL are one and the same. Basic checks would, of course, prevent such errors.
|
|
angrysaveruk
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S
Posts: 1,334
Likes: 789
|
Post by angrysaveruk on Apr 18, 2018 20:10:45 GMT
but unless you do further research into each platform, you don't know how big a company is, so for someone like me that doesn't want the extra hassle involved in this , i will just withdraw form p2p lending all together i want to be assured that the risks im taking are in property investment, not in the foibles of some system that hasn't caught up yet I would be pretty confident the larger P2P platforms (Assetz Capital, Rate Setter, Zopa, Funding Circle) are not going to have legal/regulatory problems. If you invest in new/smaller platforms then this is a risk in my opinion
|
|
guff
Posts: 730
Likes: 707
|
Post by guff on Apr 18, 2018 21:12:05 GMT
I came across that some time ago, but CUK are not Regal and IMHO the FCA should not have updated their website without first checking the company numbers. Does it not suggest that a registered representative of Regal could have changed the register without the FCA even knowing about it? I agree such a thing should not be possible as it would be a massive security hole, but the text suggests it could be possible for a firm to edit its own entry on the register without FCA review. If someone connected to Regal made the change, then someone connected to COL started dealing with the FCA quoting the IP reference number (which at that time would show the firm name as Collateral (UK) Limited), then it's easy to see how there could have been confusion over the status of COL at the FCA for an extended period of time. It's even entirely within the realms of possibility that the person connected to Regal and the person connected to COL are one and the same. Basic checks would, of course, prevent such errors. Either CUK could make unaudited changes to the FCA database [wholly unsatisfactory FCA process and system not fit for purpose] or changes were made by the FCA [unsatisfactory FCA checks borne out by them (presumably) adding the last (incorrect) name of a non-existent company to the approval]. www.fca.org.uk/about/complain-about-regulators/form
|
|
