mikeymike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 76
Likes: 77
|
Post by mikeymike on Apr 17, 2018 21:56:07 GMT
The question still outstanding for me is:
At any point was it possible for Regal to edit/update/alter/any of its own details on the interim register or to misinform the FCA regarding these?
The reference to Coll on Regal's entry on the FCA interim register came from somewhere and has only served to confuse and distract from the fact that:
"The Collateral Companies operated a peer-to-peer lending platform through a website (collateraluk.com) and Collateral UK Ltd purported to hold an interim permission from the FCA to carry on regulated activities. In fact, none of the Collateral Companies held any valid authorisation or permission to carry on regulated activities." www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/information-investors-collateral-companies To paraphrase Marx: To ask the question presupposes an answer."Significant changes within a firm You need to tell us if there are any significant changes within a firm that has interim permission. You can use the Consumer Credit Interim Permission (link is external) (CCI) system to amend basic details such as a firm name, address or telephone number. See our CCI user guide (PDF, 71KB, 10 pages) for further information." (https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/interim-permission-consumer-credit)
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 716
Likes: 825
|
Post by 11025 on Apr 18, 2018 6:25:08 GMT
The question still outstanding for me is:
At any point was it possible for Regal to edit/update/alter/any of its own details on the interim register or to misinform the FCA regarding these?
The reference to Coll on Regal's entry on the FCA interim register came from somewhere and has only served to confuse and distract from the fact that:
"The Collateral Companies operated a peer-to-peer lending platform through a website (collateraluk.com) and Collateral UK Ltd purported to hold an interim permission from the FCA to carry on regulated activities. In fact, none of the Collateral Companies held any valid authorisation or permission to carry on regulated activities." www.fca.org.uk/news/news-stories/information-investors-collateral-companies To paraphrase Marx: To ask the question presupposes an answer."Significant changes within a firm You need to tell us if there are any significant changes within a firm that has interim permission. You can use the Consumer Credit Interim Permission (link is external) (CCI) system to amend basic details such as a firm name, address or telephone number. See our CCI user guide (PDF, 71KB, 10 pages) for further information." (https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/interim-permission-consumer-credit) I probably like some others thought that Collateral was a trading name of Regal
|
|
mickj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 432
Likes: 191
|
Post by mickj on Apr 18, 2018 7:41:41 GMT
I probably like some others thought that Collateral was a trading name of Regal I just assumed they had IP and that was that, just like the other platforms I have invested in, some have moved to full, some are still IP. I certainly had the impression CUK had IP and had people on the case. Not turned out to well for any of us, lenders, borrowers or collateral.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 662
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Apr 18, 2018 18:38:06 GMT
"Significant changes within a firm You need to tell us if there are any significant changes within a firm that has interim permission. You can use the Consumer Credit Interim Permission (link is external) (CCI) system to amend basic details such as a firm name, address or telephone number. See our CCI user guide (PDF, 71KB, 10 pages) for further information." (https://www.fca.org.uk/firms/interim-permission-consumer-credit) Well that's extremely interesting. So, once a firm representative has registered on the system, they can amend details such as the firm name, address and telephone number... raising the question are these changes checked by someone at the FCA? I guess not. So, individuals at potentially every company who holds unexpired Interim Permissions have the ability to edit their entry on the register and could make it appear as if it belongs to a different company. That's an extremely worrying lapse in security if true.
|
|
mikeymike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 76
Likes: 77
|
Post by mikeymike on Apr 19, 2018 0:37:56 GMT
You got it in one!
However, not so much a lack of security but an assumption of legal and honest behaviour.
e.g. The wonderful understatement (taken from direct correspondence) by FCA: "In most cases firms are not trading before they are authorised."
|
|
DDCentral
Member of DD Central
Posts: 32
Likes: 14
|
Post by DDCentral on Apr 22, 2018 17:37:38 GMT
This thread has been moved from DD Central as it contains no information that identifies borrowers or their assets. Several posts have been edited to remove the attchments to avoid wasting the limited storage space thats is left for the forum's continued use. Please see this thread for how to link to externally hosted images / files.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,788
Likes: 2,735
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 28, 2018 13:31:32 GMT
So is the final analysis that the FCA has done nothing wrong? (other than perhaps should have better/more secure processes around registered name/details)
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,560
Likes: 1,169
|
Post by shimself on Apr 28, 2018 13:53:14 GMT
So is the final analysis that the FCA has done nothing wrong? (other than perhaps should have better/more secure processes around registered name/details) We are told - if you have doubts about a firm look it up on the FCA register which we are now told cannot be relied upon I would say that the FCA are culpable
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Apr 28, 2018 14:06:59 GMT
So is the final analysis that the FCA has done nothing wrong? (other than perhaps should have better/more secure processes around registered name/details) I would say they have a mechanism that is not checked in real time for allowed editions - these should be flagged for review/authorisation. I would also suggest their remit to re-authorise the whole of consumer refinance was not met with adequate government resources to review bit-part players in a sufficiently timely manner to avoid jeapordising several million retail investments. I hope that may be positively viewed if their nascent regime might be considered to have contributed to any directors that felt they may take advantage of any regulatory gaps appearing at the minsicule end of the market.
|
|
mouse
Posts: 55
Likes: 29
|
Post by mouse on Apr 29, 2018 15:21:17 GMT
Lendy are still IP - Interim Permission and I expect working toward full. Ablrate have full and I expect that must include P2P (but I am not an expert) I am pretty confused about exactly which permissions (interim or full) that p2p platforms, must have. Lendy do have 'Peer to peer lending platform activity' interim permission, whereas Collateral just had (by relation to Regal Pawnbrokers) the credit agreement permission shown above. I've looked at a few of the other sites and there are lots of permutations of permissions, which ones are essential, or just desirable I am not at all sure, but I suspect the p2p platform one is pretty important. I have also been trying to work out from other posts in other threads what are the minimum legal requirements for a p2p platform to operate. It does seem to depend on their business model but unless I have missed something, this is what I have come up with. Perhaps easteregg, pikestaff, mason, ilmoro, elliotm or anyone who knows more then me can update where necessary. My sources are linked at the end of the post. FCA permission includes interim permissions. 1) For a p2p platform to hold client money, either ISA or non ISA, it is statutory for it to have the FCA permission, relating to this, often known as Protected Client Money Credentials. Basically the platform would have presented to the FCA a standard legally binding letter - signed by a director/approved person of the platforms bank and the platform’s directors. Also a link to public website detailing said content and obligations. www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/CASS/7/Annex2.html?date=2016-03-21#DES5922) Some relevant FCA permissions required if the platform can be construed of involvement in credit or debt administration-Schedule 2 of the FISMA Act 2000. 3) Full FCA permissions are statutory for P2P when the "electronic platform" matches borrowers directly with lenders automatically (i.e in the absence of self selection). Such loans are deemed FCA regulated activities. So RS, Zopa the pl’s on ABL, the automatic loans on AC, would come into this category. 4) If an electronic platform trades in self select loans only, no specific FCA permission(s), eg Article 36H, are mandatory, since these type of loans are considered to be a non FCA regulated activity. 5) If a platform does both self select and automatic loans e,g AC, then presumably it will need full FCA permissions. 6) Many platforms have gone for full FCA permissions, though not legally required to (at the moment), - presumably to boost investor confidence and or to be future proof. 7) A platform must have FCA Article 36H permission in order for investors to claim HMRC tax relief against capital losses. 8) If a platform operates an IFISA . then full FCA ep2p permissions are mandatory Sources for the above:-from the reps of Justus and BC in these links, p2pindependentforum.com/post/256174/threadp2pindependentforum.com/post/259023/thread
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Apr 29, 2018 16:04:07 GMT
ilmoro , what’s your take on 4? I’d have thought restricted retail clients would require fca oversight on an electronic loan market place even if it is self-select only ie MT/Ly (although there's nothing to stop such a platform excluding them such as LI and then not requiring full authorisation).
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,789
Likes: 11,008
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 29, 2018 16:36:45 GMT
www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/glossary/G3218.htmlPretty sure true P2P is required to be regulated, IRC the only unregulated loans are B2B. Not entirely sure how platforms without P2P permissions offering P2P loans fit within permissions. Not on BC & post collateral would need much clear explanation to consider as I can't see where their explanation differs from Collateral model, or ABL, MT who all offer self select only & spent time getting the permissions. Not a lawyer or financial professional.
|
|
mouse
Posts: 55
Likes: 29
|
Post by mouse on Apr 29, 2018 17:07:16 GMT
www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/glossary/G3218.htmlPretty sure true P2P is required to be regulated, IRC the only unregulated loans are B2B. Not entirely sure how platforms without P2P permissions offering P2P loans fit within permissions. Not on BC & post collateral would need much clear explanation to consider as I can't see where their explanation differs from Collateral model, or ABL, MT who all offer self select only & spent time getting the permissions. Not a lawyer or financial professional. err B2B ? and true p2p compared to untrue p2p ? thnx
|
|
investibod
Member of DD Central
Posts: 288
Likes: 152
|
Post by investibod on Apr 29, 2018 17:23:41 GMT
www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/glossary/G3218.htmlPretty sure true P2P is required to be regulated, IRC the only unregulated loans are B2B. Not entirely sure how platforms without P2P permissions offering P2P loans fit within permissions. Not on BC & post collateral would need much clear explanation to consider as I can't see where their explanation differs from Collateral model, or ABL, MT who all offer self select only & spent time getting the permissions. Not a lawyer or financial professional. err B2B ? and true p2p compared to untrue p2p ? thnx B2B = Business to business. ie not individuals investing.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,789
Likes: 11,008
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 29, 2018 17:26:15 GMT
www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/glossary/G3218.htmlPretty sure true P2P is required to be regulated, IRC the only unregulated loans are B2B. Not entirely sure how platforms without P2P permissions offering P2P loans fit within permissions. Not on BC & post collateral would need much clear explanation to consider as I can't see where their explanation differs from Collateral model, or ABL, MT who all offer self select only & spent time getting the permissions. Not a lawyer or financial professional. err B2B ? and true p2p compared to untrue p2p ? thnx B2B - business to business ie companies lending through a P2P platform. True P2P - Lenders providing loans direct to borrowers as opposed to any other kind of lending ... mini bonds, debentures, other debt instruments, invoice financing all of which is referred to by the catch all peer to peer term.
|
|