bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368 
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Aug 13, 2018 18:53:00 GMT
I personally feel that sometimes FS post updates that are based on what the borrower tell them and this may have no basis in fact (see powerboat as an example). Is it unreasonable to expect FS to verify some of the information they provide to lenders (see Whitehaven as an example)?
Yes but if the borrower tells them they expect to pay the funds next week and FS state "The borrower expects to pay the funds next week" (and this is quoting from the powerboat loan) then what exactly do you expect FS to do to verify this? What they are reporting is a fact - it's exactly what the borrower has said (unless you are claiming FS are just making stuff up?). I just feel that FS is stuck between a rock and a hard place. They get continuously pushed for updates and when they give an update they get slammed for it. What really annoys me is that there are many hundreds of loans that have successfully completed but the answer to everything is "but look at Whitehaven". Yes this loan is a mess, fraud has been committed and hopefully there will be a decent recovery but show me a platform where there hasn't been problem loans. Continuously bringing up the same 8-10 loans while not mentioning the hundreds of successful ones completely misrepresents the situation. What people don't seem to realise, or just won't take on board is that there are legal actions happening in the background of a few of these loans that are sensitive and the details can't be divulged as it will potentially negatively impact the recovery action. Giving confidential, sensitive information to lenders may make them feel a bit better but I personally would rather a higher recovery. I agree that FS were lax in letting a number of loans drag on before getting firm with the borrowers but they are aware of this and have really stepped things up recently so why not just let them get on with it and see how they get on with recovery?
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Aug 13, 2018 19:16:46 GMT
I don't think we can state fraud has been commited at this stage - suspected yes.
Fraud is bound to happen if pro-active steps are not taken to prevent it - e.g. not releasing money to the lender rather than taking security on this mystical timber frame.
A decent recovery - considering there was not even a single opening bid of £1000 at the last auction I am puzzled to see how £530K is going to be recovered?
Myself and others have never said FS is worse than others - personally I have ditched 2 other p2p platforms.
True some FS loans go well but I think the main concern that FS don't know the property market etc, don't do enough DD and fail to update us on default progress is fully justified and reasonable - just look how many people have asked and asked and asked about these damn boats!
This platform is called Funding Secure so maybe FS can't complain when some of their loans don't appear very secure!
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Aug 13, 2018 19:23:51 GMT
Myself and others have never said FS is worse than others - personally I have ditched 2 other p2p platforms. Out of interest, if you think FS is no worse than others which other platforms are you posting dozens of disparaging posts about every day? How about the other two you have ditched? This is especially pertinent as you openly admit you have next to no investment in FS.
|
|
greenslime
Member of DD Central
Posts: 111
Likes: 144
|
Post by greenslime on Aug 13, 2018 19:45:53 GMT
I personally feel that sometimes FS post updates that are based on what the borrower tell them and this may have no basis in fact (see powerboat as an example). Is it unreasonable to expect FS to verify some of the information they provide to lenders (see Whitehaven as an example)?
Yes but if the borrower tells them they expect to pay the funds next week and FS state "The borrower expects to pay the funds next week" (and this is quoting from the powerboat loan) then what exactly do you expect FS to do to verify this? What they are reporting is a fact - it's exactly what the borrower has said (unless you are claiming FS are just making stuff up?). I just feel that FS is stuck between a rock and a hard place. They get continuously pushed for updates and when they give an update they get slammed for it. What really annoys me is that there are many hundreds of loans that have successfully completed but the answer to everything is "but look at Whitehaven". Yes this loan is a mess, fraud has been committed and hopefully there will be a decent recovery but show me a platform where there hasn't been problem loans. Continuously bringing up the same 8-10 loans while not mentioning the hundreds of successful ones completely misrepresents the situation. What people don't seem to realise, or just won't take on board is that there are legal actions happening in the background of a few of these loans that are sensitive and the details can't be divulged as it will potentially negatively impact the recovery action. Giving confidential, sensitive information to lenders may make them feel a bit better but I personally would rather a higher recovery. I agree that FS were lax in letting a number of loans drag on before getting firm with the borrowers but they are aware of this and have really stepped things up recently so why not just let them get on with it and see how they get on with recovery? Fair points - and I admit I do not have an objective view of FS. But from the perspective of 'confidence' rather than a rigorous analysis of the loanbook, the problem is not borrowers promising there's a cheque in the post, it's that some borrowers have been allowed to repeat that promise ad infinitum and without any apparent sanction - it has left FS looking weak, or unwilling to default loans, or both. This may be a reflection of P2P at the minnow end - for professional lenders allowing the 'feel' of the platform to influence decisions probably seems akin to your granny sticking that week's pension on a complete donkey at Aintree because it shares a name with her late budgie. But not liking the 'feel' got me out of Lendy without loss, so I don't knock it that much. Still, if FS's newly invigorated efforts start to get (some of) my money back then I will be a happy chappie.
|
|
empirica
Member of DD Central
Posts: 326
Likes: 235
|
Post by empirica on Aug 13, 2018 19:50:25 GMT
This platform is called Funding Secure so maybe FS can't complain when some of their loans don't appear very secure! And there I was thinking their name reflected the two word message they sent in response to borrowers' initial loan applications ...
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 638 
Likes: 866
|
Post by 09dolphin on Aug 13, 2018 20:01:31 GMT
BG.
If you have evidence to back up your assertion that fraud has been committed in the Whitehaven loan you have a duty to give that evidence to the police. If you don't have evidence I suggest that saying fraud occurred is totally unacceptable.
I agree that there have been very many successful loans paid up on time but I suggest this has little to do with FS but is more likely to be because the borrowers paid their debt with little or no prompting thus demonstrating that most people are both businesslike and honourable.
FS do report what the borrower says on their updates - how many times will FS accept the assertion that money will be paid within a short time frame before their credulity is stretched. It obviously stretches the credulity of some of the people on this forum to breaking point.
I do hope that FS are improving their recovery process as you suggest but it will take some time before the people (like me) who have withdrawn money decide to invest again. A couple of improved recovery processes aren't enough - perhaps in 6 months or a year I would reconsider.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Aug 13, 2018 20:35:12 GMT
All I want is for FS to take action against the borrowers for the 5 grossly overdue (18 months or more) loans that I retain 12 months on from the time I decided that FS were not chasing failed loans properly and that no further business would be done via such a platform. I do not anticipate that the loans will be fully repaid. If FS want me off their back all they have to do is something meaningful which in most people's book is to put the loans into Administration. I don't wish to give the borrowers more time. They have not been remotely honourable having provided useless undertaking after undertaking. I know that with higher risk there is a greater chance of losing some if not all of my investment. What I don't welcome is that these debts have not been managed and continue not to be managed effectively by the platform.
Rishton, Powerboat, Knaresborough, Formby and Llandudno. A real role of honour! The sums of money involved are actually small but who but a gullible fool would invest further. I had already written off a significant 67% invested in the Northern Ireland wind turbine loan. So for me there has been a crisis of confidence in this platform for a good 12 months. Partly the descriptors of the quality of loans on offer, partly concerns about valuations but mostly about the failure to effectively challenge delinquent borrowers sending a clear signal that FS lenders can be taken for a very long ride with dubious assets of questionable value as security.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Aug 13, 2018 21:09:15 GMT
... I just feel that FS is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If only the same could be said of the Powerboat. It would probably be insured for that tragic occurrence.....
|
|
mjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 342
Likes: 425
|
Post by mjc on Aug 14, 2018 1:33:06 GMT
I personally feel that sometimes FS post updates that are based on what the borrower tell them and this may have no basis in fact (see powerboat as an example). Is it unreasonable to expect FS to verify some of the information they provide to lenders (see Whitehaven as an example)?
Any investor would be expected to know that at 10%+ interest you can expect some loans to fail but, as loans are advertised as being for 6 months, it seems reasonable that when loans extend over 2 years investors become disgruntled and they are entitled to accurate information about what FS are doing to remedy the situation (RbS are a sterling example of how to manage loans and keep investors informed when borrowers are unable to meet their obligations). The quality of accurate information in the Loan Updates leaves a lot to be desired and long term is not helping FS as it enables investors to speculate about the loan situation.
Exactly. The information provided should be checked whenever reasonable to do so. The cheque’s in the post will do once for a few days. But we get the same fairy tales month after month. After ANY loan repayment is overdue almost everything possible should be verified. They are in default. Pay the interest. Start the renewal process. Prove they are in a position to repay “end of next week” or whatever their current excuse is. RBS GRU didn’t wait for 2 or more years, then not bother anymore. if #fundingsecure claim 13% return, yes some losses are expected by any ordinary reasonable investor, but when it falls MUCH below this, or negative even with large diversity over all available loans, as it appears is the case, then I doubt I am alone in feeling very misled. How about some factual information FS on AVERAGE return each year or each quarter? Say 3 months after the published end date?
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Aug 14, 2018 6:26:13 GMT
All I want is for FS to take action against the borrowers for the 5 grossly overdue (18 months or more) loans that I retain 12 months on from the time I decided that FS were not chasing failed loans properly and that no further business would be done via such a platform. I do not anticipate that the loans will be fully repaid. If FS want me off their back all they have to do is something meaningful which in most people's book is to put the loans into Administration. I don't wish to give the borrowers more time. They have not been remotely honourable having provided useless undertaking after undertaking. I know that with higher risk there is a greater chance of losing some if not all of my investment. What I don't welcome is that these debts have not been managed and continue not to be managed effectively by the platform. Rishton, Powerboat, Knaresborough, Formby and Llandudno. A real role of honour! The sums of money involved are actually small but who but a gullible fool would invest further. I had already written off a significant 67% invested in the Northern Ireland wind turbine loan. So for me there has been a crisis of confidence in this platform for a good 12 months. Partly the descriptors of the quality of loans on offer, partly concerns about valuations but mostly about the failure to effectively challenge delinquent borrowers sending a clear signal that FS lenders can be taken for a very long ride with dubious assets of questionable value as security. Of course if you have several hundred loans there are bound to be a few problems....it's the nature of the beast and is why these borrowers aren't borrowing from a mainstream lender at a much reduced rate. Again I would say, show me any P2P lender that doesn't have loans that drag on and on...it's how the business works. Take AC for example...they have massive loans that are over 4 years overdue now and they are still working through the process on them. Sometimes it's best to work through things with the borrower but in the loans you have mentioned this is not the typical case:- Lladundo - The security is being sold. I have received a number of partial repayments in this loan. There were 9 apartments, 7 of which have completed and repaid. One of the final 2 have exchanged and we await completion. I'm not sure exactly what additional action FS should be taking here? It's also only 6 months late (not 18) which is to be expected. Knaresborough - one of the BTL properties has been sold by the receivers and money received. The other one is in the process of being sold. The main property was sold by the first charge holder for less than the first charge (which is why i don't invest in 2nd charge loans). A bad outcome yes but its unfair to say no action has been taken...there's little more that could have been done. Formby - around a year late...developments that run into problems and drag on with problems finding a seller are fairly typical (look at any platform). Conducting a fire sale usually results in the worst possible outcome for lenders (see the Birkenhead loan on MT which is going to result in a 100% wipe out for many lenders) Powerboat - agree this has been a bit of a mess but selling to the best buyer on the open market would result in a catastrophic loss to lenders. I would rather they explored every available option before they sold at a huge loss......but I'm not in it. I don't invest in loans secured on boats as I expect situations like this to arise. It's just not a liquid market. Rishton - not in it and not really following it but I imagine it's a case of not being able to find a buyer.
|
|
rookey123
Member of DD Central
Posts: 75
Likes: 130
|
Post by rookey123 on Aug 14, 2018 8:16:38 GMT
It is buyer beware and you are being paid for the risk, how you choose to pick loans is up to you. There are clearly teething problems with perfecting security and disposal of assets for bad loans but these are issues all platforms are working through and all are at different stages.
The majority of loans have repaid or rolled. Using a few outliers which are still being worked through (and its perfectly reasonable to question this process) to suggest that the platform is going to fail is ridiculous and the people who comment like this need to grow up.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Aug 14, 2018 10:33:04 GMT
It is buyer beware and you are being paid for the risk, how you choose to pick loans is up to you. There are clearly teething problems with perfecting security and disposal of assets for bad loans but these are issues all platforms are working through and all are at different stages. The majority of loans have repaid or rolled. Using a few outliers which are still being worked through (and its perfectly reasonable to question this process) to suggest that the platform is going to fail is ridiculous and the people who comment like this need to grow up. I have invested in p to p for 4 years and currently have around £40K mostly now on one platform - not FS I would add. During the 5 years I have seen loans and platforms come and go and heard every possible excuse as to why loans cannot and perhaps will not be repaid. Masterly inactivity has a role in the recovery process but in my view FS has overdone that approach. Borrowers should be given a reasonable amount of time (weeks not months) to sort things out and reasons for non-repayments should be given due credence. After that the asset should be repossessed and its value realised by whatever means are deemed appropriate by the platform. This is the grown-up approach to repossessions. The alternative is what we have now i.e. a failure to act expeditiously, which is in the interests of neither the platform nor the lenders though it may suit borrowers.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Aug 14, 2018 11:01:05 GMT
All I want is for FS to take action against the borrowers for the 5 grossly overdue (18 months or more) loans that I retain 12 months on from the time I decided that FS were not chasing failed loans properly and that no further business would be done via such a platform. I do not anticipate that the loans will be fully repaid. If FS want me off their back all they have to do is something meaningful which in most people's book is to put the loans into Administration. I don't wish to give the borrowers more time. They have not been remotely honourable having provided useless undertaking after undertaking. I know that with higher risk there is a greater chance of losing some if not all of my investment. What I don't welcome is that these debts have not been managed and continue not to be managed effectively by the platform. Rishton, Powerboat, Knaresborough, Formby and Llandudno. A real role of honour! The sums of money involved are actually small but who but a gullible fool would invest further. I had already written off a significant 67% invested in the Northern Ireland wind turbine loan. So for me there has been a crisis of confidence in this platform for a good 12 months. Partly the descriptors of the quality of loans on offer, partly concerns about valuations but mostly about the failure to effectively challenge delinquent borrowers sending a clear signal that FS lenders can be taken for a very long ride with dubious assets of questionable value as security. Of course if you have several hundred loans there are bound to be a few problems....it's the nature of the beast and is why these borrowers aren't borrowing from a mainstream lender at a much reduced rate. Again I would say, show me any P2P lender that doesn't have loans that drag on and on...it's how the business works. Take AC for example...they have massive loans that are over 4 years overdue now and they are still working through the process on them. Sometimes it's best to work through things with the borrower but in the loans you have mentioned this is not the typical case:- Lladundo - The security is being sold. I have received a number of partial repayments in this loan. There were 9 apartments, 7 of which have completed and repaid. One of the final 2 have exchanged and we await completion. I'm not sure exactly what additional action FS should be taking here? It's also only 6 months late (not 18) which is to be expected. Knaresborough - one of the BTL properties has been sold by the receivers and money received. The other one is in the process of being sold. The main property was sold by the first charge holder for less than the first charge (which is why i don't invest in 2nd charge loans). A bad outcome yes but its unfair to say no action has been taken...there's little more that could have been done. Formby - around a year late...developments that run into problems and drag on with problems finding a seller are fairly typical (look at any platform). Conducting a fire sale usually results in the worst possible outcome for lenders (see the Birkenhead loan on MT which is going to result in a 100% wipe out for many lenders) Powerboat - agree this has been a bit of a mess but selling to the best buyer on the open market would result in a catastrophic loss to lenders. I would rather they explored every available option before they sold at a huge loss......but I'm not in it. I don't invest in loans secured on boats as I expect situations like this to arise. It's just not a liquid market. Rishton - not in it and not really following it but I imagine it's a case of not being able to find a buyer. Llandudno -Loan has been active for 370 days with updates of excuses stretching back to September 2017. Maximising the sale price can take forever or nearly so. Knaresborough -Loan has now been active for 825 days - reasonable time frame in the circumstances for the whole shooting match? I don't think so. Formby Loan has now been active for 524 days - reasonable time frame? Well past time this borrower had more than a gentle nudge. Powerboat Loan has now been active for 851 days - reasonable? I think it has all been said before on this forum. Rishton Loan has now been active for 900 days - reasonable? The borrower has by actions demonstrated that they are unable to repay the loan. There has for a long time been no realistic alternative to repossession. The cost of further procrastination falls on investors.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Aug 14, 2018 11:07:40 GMT
sorry to hear this - hope it wasn't too disastrous for you...
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Aug 14, 2018 11:11:52 GMT
Of course if you have several hundred loans there are bound to be a few problems....it's the nature of the beast and is why these borrowers aren't borrowing from a mainstream lender at a much reduced rate. Again I would say, show me any P2P lender that doesn't have loans that drag on and on...it's how the business works. Take AC for example...they have massive loans that are over 4 years overdue now and they are still working through the process on them. Sometimes it's best to work through things with the borrower but in the loans you have mentioned this is not the typical case:- Lladundo - The security is being sold. I have received a number of partial repayments in this loan. There were 9 apartments, 7 of which have completed and repaid. One of the final 2 have exchanged and we await completion. I'm not sure exactly what additional action FS should be taking here? It's also only 6 months late (not 18) which is to be expected. Knaresborough - one of the BTL properties has been sold by the receivers and money received. The other one is in the process of being sold. The main property was sold by the first charge holder for less than the first charge (which is why i don't invest in 2nd charge loans). A bad outcome yes but its unfair to say no action has been taken...there's little more that could have been done. Formby - around a year late...developments that run into problems and drag on with problems finding a seller are fairly typical (look at any platform). Conducting a fire sale usually results in the worst possible outcome for lenders (see the Birkenhead loan on MT which is going to result in a 100% wipe out for many lenders) Powerboat - agree this has been a bit of a mess but selling to the best buyer on the open market would result in a catastrophic loss to lenders. I would rather they explored every available option before they sold at a huge loss......but I'm not in it. I don't invest in loans secured on boats as I expect situations like this to arise. It's just not a liquid market. Rishton - not in it and not really following it but I imagine it's a case of not being able to find a buyer. Llandudno -Loan has been active for 370 days with updates of excuses stretching back to September 2017. Maximising the sale price can take forever or nearly so. Knaresborough -Loan has now been active for 825 days - reasonable time frame in the circumstances for the whole shooting match? I don't think so. Formby Loan has now been active for 524 days - reasonable time frame? Well past time this borrower had more than a gentle nudge. Powerboat Loan has now been active for 851 days - reasonable? I think it has all been said before on this forum. Rishton Loan has now been active for 900 days - reasonable? The borrower has by actions demonstrated that they are unable to repay the loan. There has for a long time been no realistic alternative to repossession. The cost of further procrastination falls on investors. You made two main points:- First that the 5 listed loans are all overdue by over 18 months. That is factually incorrect as I have demonstrated. Loans are not overdue the day they drawdown as you well know, they are overdue when they run past the due date. Llandudno is overdue 6 months and Formby is overdue by 1 year. I know you don't want to admit it but they are facts. The second point you made was that FS are doing nothing to effect recovery. Llandudno has sold 7 of the 9 properties, with another exchanged. Money has been repaid and they are 6 months overdue on the last 2 properties. I'm happy with that. Knaresborough - 2 of the 3 properties have been sold, the main property was in the hands of the first chargeholder so there was nothing FS could do to speed the process. What else would you have FS do? FS have made over 2,000 loans and you complain about the same 5. Again, show me a platform without any problem loans.
|
|
