|
|
Post by dan1 on Jun 19, 2018 13:57:39 GMT
fundingsecure - from the latest New Loan email... Please can you list the numbers of the previous 35 loans on the loan listing? You should be listing this information as standard on every loan you offer, it's the only way to allow lenders to assess and manage their risk to a particular borrower.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048 
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jun 19, 2018 14:53:16 GMT
fundingsecure - from the latest New Loan email... Please can you list the numbers of the previous 35 loans on the loan listing? You should be listing this information as standard on every loan you offer, it's the only way to allow lenders to assess and manage their risk to a particular borrower. Which of course is true but as you've no doubt read on other threads i.e. Norfolk Clarification & Art for Art's sake..FS have lent one borrower (they belatedly admitted) FOUR 'masterpieces' without informing potential lenders of any increase in risk on any of the loans. It beggars belief. Although the principle still applies the capital for this jewellery loan is chicken feed to the total amount lent on the art works and investors like myself are now seriously concerned as to how FS are going to resolve the situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Jun 19, 2018 14:57:46 GMT
fundingsecure - from the latest New Loan email... Please can you list the numbers of the previous 35 loans on the loan listing? You should be listing this information as standard on every loan you offer, it's the only way to allow lenders to assess and manage their risk to a particular borrower. Which of course is true but as you've no doubt read on other threads i.e. Norfolk Clarification & Art for Art's sake..FS have lent one borrower (they belatedly admitted) FOUR 'masterpieces' without informing potential lenders of any increase in risk on any of the loans. It beggars belief. Although the principle still applies the capital for this jewellery loan is chicken feed to the total amount lent on the art works and investors like myself are now seriously concerned as to how FS are going to resolve the situation. Agreed. I raised it at this juncture because it was information released directly from fundingsecure. They have all this information at their fingertips but choose to omit it from the loan details but every now and again we get a hint of the underlying connected loans.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jun 19, 2018 15:09:33 GMT
Which of course is true but as you've no doubt read on other threads i.e. Norfolk Clarification & Art for Art's sake..FS have lent one borrower (they belatedly admitted) FOUR 'masterpieces' without informing potential lenders of any increase in risk on any of the loans. It beggars belief. Although the principle still applies the capital for this jewellery loan is chicken feed to the total amount lent on the art works and investors like myself are now seriously concerned as to how FS are going to resolve the situation. Agreed. I raised it at this juncture because it was information released directly from fundingsecure . They have all this information at their fingertips but choose to omit it from the loan details but every now and again we get a hint of the underlying connected loans. I understand. Im sorry to repeat myself but I am so annoyed at not being informed fully prior to investing. There is absolutely no way on earth I would have invested the total amount I have in those loans, had I known they were all to the same borrower.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 19, 2018 15:55:36 GMT
exactly the same for me- I regard myself as having been duped...
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Jun 19, 2018 15:57:26 GMT
Agreed. I raised it at this juncture because it was information released directly from fundingsecure . They have all this information at their fingertips but choose to omit it from the loan details but every now and again we get a hint of the underlying connected loans. I understand. Im sorry to repeat myself but I am so annoyed at not being informed fully prior to investing. There is absolutely no way on earth I would have invested the total amount I have in those loans, had I known they were all to the same borrower. The same here. I ended up investing in 5 loans (Collection of Vases, 3 paintings and etching) to the same borrower. There is no way to check this, as the loans are to an individual, unless FS displays this information. I'm glad they started doing it now.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Jun 19, 2018 16:05:59 GMT
I understand. Im sorry to repeat myself but I am so annoyed at not being informed fully prior to investing. There is absolutely no way on earth I would have invested the total amount I have in those loans, had I known they were all to the same borrower. The same here. I ended up investing in 5 loans (Collection of Vases, 3 paintings and etching) to the same borrower. There is no way to check this, as the loans are to an individual, unless FS displays this information. I'm glad they started doing it now. What difference does it make though? It's a pawn loan...you are lending against the asset. There is no recourse back to the individual if they default.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 19, 2018 16:27:37 GMT
To me it makes a lot - simply as it indicates (not proves as everybody is different) the borrower is very short of funds and desperate to raise a lot of money. The more they borrow the greater the number and size of interest payments they have to make and hence the less likely they are to repay all loans. And we all have our opinions as to how valid FS valuations are...
I may be wrong but this one is hardly going well is it!
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Jun 19, 2018 16:33:17 GMT
To me it makes a lot - simply as it indicates (not proves as everybody is different) the borrower is very short of funds and desperate to raise a lot of money. The more they borrow the greater the number and size of interest payments they have to make and hence the less likely they are to repay all loans. And we all have our opinions as to how valid FS valuations are... I may be wrong but this one is hardly going well is it! Yes but thats the whole point of pawn loans.....all you are doing is borrowing against the value of the security you've provided.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Jun 19, 2018 16:36:29 GMT
The same here. I ended up investing in 5 loans (Collection of Vases, 3 paintings and etching) to the same borrower. There is no way to check this, as the loans are to an individual, unless FS displays this information. I'm glad they started doing it now. What difference does it make though? It's a pawn loan...you are lending against the asset. There is no recourse back to the individual if they default. With pawn loans you're exposed to the risk of default and the risk that sale upon default isn't sufficient to cover fees, capital & accrued interest. You expect a high default rate with pawn loans, in the region of 10-30% I'd guess, but if your default risk is highly correlated it'll tend towards either 0% or 100% in the limit (one borrower). For that reason I'd much rather loan to 100 uncorrelated borrowers, so, yes, it does make a difference.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Jun 19, 2018 16:38:35 GMT
It certainly raises the risk of correlated / connected defaults, which makes a mockery of attempts at sensible diversification. (Crossed with dan1) |
|
|
|
Post by df on Jun 19, 2018 17:26:25 GMT
The same here. I ended up investing in 5 loans (Collection of Vases, 3 paintings and etching) to the same borrower. There is no way to check this, as the loans are to an individual, unless FS displays this information. I'm glad they started doing it now. What difference does it make though? It's a pawn loan...you are lending against the asset. There is no recourse back to the individual if they default. This is exactly what I thought when lending to train memorabilia collector. It taught me a lesson 
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Jun 19, 2018 17:44:22 GMT
To me it makes a lot - simply as it indicates (not proves as everybody is different) the borrower is very short of funds and desperate to raise a lot of money. The more they borrow the greater the number and size of interest payments they have to make and hence the less likely they are to repay all loans. And we all have our opinions as to how valid FS valuations are... I may be wrong but this one is hardly going well is it! Yes but thats the whole point of pawn loans.....all you are doing is borrowing against the value of the security you've provided. The problem is (at least in my experience) multiple loans by the same borrower secured on different items tend to fail as a package. Therefore I prefer to treat the multiples as a single loan.
|
|
upland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 479
Likes: 175
|
Post by upland on Jun 19, 2018 18:16:02 GMT
Yes but thats the whole point of pawn loans.....all you are doing is borrowing against the value of the security you've provided. The problem is (at least in my experience) multiple loans by the same borrower secured on different items tend to fail as a package. Therefore I prefer to treat the multiples as a single loan. Agree , I dont think that it is in many p2p websites 'interests' to offer this sort of info easily and I feel that it is often obscured. A 'single' failure could easily cost your annual return 3 or 4 % which would probably render the whole process pointless.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Jun 19, 2018 19:07:55 GMT
The problem is (at least in my experience) multiple loans by the same borrower secured on different items tend to fail as a package. Therefore I prefer to treat the multiples as a single loan. Agree , I dont think that it is in many p2p websites 'interests' to offer this sort of info easily and I feel that it is often obscured. A 'single' failure could easily cost your annual return 3 or 4 % which would probably render the whole process pointless. Yes, in theory, but in reality there is never a problem to fill any small pawn loan in minutes (sometimes in milliseconds). Larger loans can take a bit longer, but generally there is no need for withholding this information. MT, Unbolted and perished Col manage/d to be transparent and fill pawn loans without any difficulties.
|
|
