Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jul 5, 2024 11:00:55 GMT
"No investments found that are suitable for sale"
I see none of my investments are suitable for sale. Is the bulletin board still active or just a prop ?
Probably suspended the SM until everyone is informed.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jul 5, 2024 13:12:34 GMT
Fenchurch legal who (seem to have) brought in the Administrators are featuring on another thread under General. They have defaulted on loans on Bondster, (that I had never heard of) dominoes falling?
Edit: Assuming it's the same company.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610 
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Jul 5, 2024 13:16:39 GMT
Fenchurch legal who (seem to have) brought in the Administrators are featuring on another thread under General. They have defaulted on loans on Bondster, (that I had never heard of) dominoes falling? Edit: Assuming it's the same company.  Axia got involved with Miss K et al?
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jul 5, 2024 13:45:58 GMT
Fenchurch legal who (seem to have) brought in the Administrators are featuring on another thread under General. They have defaulted on loans on Bondster, (that I had never heard of) dominoes falling? Edit: Assuming it's the same company. Axia got involved with Miss K et al? Only indirectly, a firm they are involved with appear to have also been involved with...
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Jul 5, 2024 14:08:43 GMT
Fenchurch legal are a litigation funder to the law firm just like Axiafunder.
The law firm is based in Liverpool, a sinkhole for lost P2P money as evidenced in this forum.
Yet another case of follow the money to see where it disappeared.
|
|
p2pfan
Member of DD Central
Full-Time Investor
Posts: 781 
Likes: 889
|
Post by p2pfan on Jul 6, 2024 19:53:07 GMT
The first law firm for the housing disrepair claims has been put into administration. Axiafunder have undertaken to repay investors' loss of capital, subject to regulatory approval. HDR loans to other law firms are unaffected. How does this law firm going into administration affect your confidence in investing like you were previously in Axiafunder? Personally, I'm considering investing as before because I understand that, this being the first law firm that Axiafunder took on board, the protections were not in place to the same degree as they were with latter law firms and also Axiafunder has been very noble in saying they will fund all the lost capital to investors. But, at the same time, I am wondering if I should be more careful about investing larger sums. Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 6, 2024 22:44:55 GMT
The first law firm for the housing disrepair claims has been put into administration. Axiafunder have undertaken to repay investors' loss of capital, subject to regulatory approval. HDR loans to other law firms are unaffected. How does this law firm going into administration affect your confidence in investing like you were previously in Axiafunder? Personally, I'm considering investing as before because I understand that, this being the first law firm that Axiafunder took on board, the protections were not in place to the same degree as they were with latter law firms and also Axiafunder has been very noble in saying they will fund all the lost capital to investors. But, at the same time, I am wondering if I should be more careful about investing larger sums. Thoughts? I'm in agreement with your comments, so I'll continue to invest similar amounts. I can often fund new investments from repaid capital and profits anyway. I'm near my exposure limit for the platform, so I'd also be cautious about investing larger sums.
|
|
firedog
Member of DD Central
Posts: 367
Likes: 462
|
Post by firedog on Jul 7, 2024 8:21:05 GMT
Ace, is your exposure limit a fixed figure or a proportion of your P2P investments etc? I don't think this will unduly change my investment approach to Axia. I've been investing a small amount in pretty much every offering over the last two years, so my thinking was that more and more of my investments would be funded out of investment returns. I suppose that's how I'll reach my limit. To me it's just a reminder that 20+% returns carries risk; if it didn't investment opportunities would be increasingly limited!
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Jul 7, 2024 9:04:28 GMT
axiafunder need and deserve some time to respond to what I suspect many investors thought were 'safe|safer' investments.
I haven't checked how many loans this law firm received but I'm wondering how Axiafunder will be able to refund investors, unless it is insurance based.
I learnt my lesson with Fundingsecure, no multiple investments or additional exposure with the same borrower, especially in P2P.
|
|
|
|
Post by frank121 on Jul 7, 2024 9:49:01 GMT
I might be recalling poorly, but wasn't the plan, for most of these HDR cases, that if the law firm failed, the cases would be transferred to another? Perhaps Axia felt that given that the 1st law firm had been performing relatively poorly, the cases weren't worth being transferred? There are different ways of firms failing, this one is all in the hands of the Administrators now. I guess the Administrators might decide selling on the claims it's the best way to recoup funds, but it probably wouldn't be at full price and the money might not come back to us.
I note that in the offer document of the other law firms that I have invested in, there is a section describing what may happen if a firm is insolvent.
It says that claims will be transferred to another law firm but of course this is not a guarantee. I also wonder how this might work in practice since the law firms receive the funding up front; I assume that the claim & it's associated funding would need to be transferred before they go insolvent? Else the claim could be transferred but the funding would be lost? (that is if the administrators cannot pay the new law firm) But yes, I appreciate there are different ways that a firm can declare insolvency which may dictate which claims can be transferred.
It goes on to say that some claims which were settled while the firm was insolvent but before transfer may result in loss of principal & income which I think matches my thoughts above.
I have not invested in the original law firm so don't know how the offer document differs or what Axia Funder have explained to investors so far. Did it not have the section on insolvency (risks section in the offer document) or it did but it could not be implemented for this law firm because there were some differences in the way the early firm was set up. (p2pfan saying that protections were not in place)
I hope that Axia Funder will explain a bit more to all investors not the just ones who had invested in this law firm. It's good to understand what mechanisms are in place and how likely claims can be transferred. It’s very good of Axia Funder to bail out the investors in this case, but it’s not something we can rely on either. Of course, we hope no other firms enter administration but we can't rule it out either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 7, 2024 13:51:21 GMT
Ace , is your exposure limit a fixed figure or a proportion of your P2P investments etc? I don't think this will unduly change my investment approach to Axia. I've been investing a small amount in pretty much every offering over the last two years, so my thinking was that more and more of my investments would be funded out of investment returns. I suppose that's how I'll reach my limit. To me it's just a reminder that 20+% returns carries risk; if it didn't investment opportunities would be increasingly limited! I have pretty much the same opinion. My exposure limits are a percentage of my P2P portfolio. I used to have an exposure limit of 20% of my portfolio in any 1 platform. Having recently significantly increased the size of my P2P portfolio, and learning from my overexposure to ABLrate, I decided to reduce this to 15% (which was pretty close in absolute terms to 20% before the increase). However, my 1 exception to this was to allow my AxiaFunder limit to remain at 20%. I considered the AF Portfolio loans to be particularly good value, so wanted to be able to continue to invest in any new loans, especially if new borrowers or portfolio types were introduced. My current exposure to AF is 15.5%. As well as having hard(ish) limits, as above, I also maintain a target exposure percentage for each platform. This is the percentage I would ideally like to have invested in each platform. I report on this in the 3rd quarter update of my portfolio each year (the latest one is here). These targets are fairly fluid as platforms fall in and out of favour or become harder or easier to get funds deployed. My AF target exposure is currently 17%. I've decided not to make any immediate changes to this target exposure, but it's possible that I might reduce it a little if some of my larger commercial loans conclude as there haven't been any new commercial loans for some time. I realise now, in answering your question, that I'm probably effectively considering the AF commercial loans and AF Portfolio loans as 2 seperate platforms, but without formally defining seperate exposure limits/targets for them. No other platform has a target or actual exposure percentage of over 10%. If CP and CP Capital were counted as a single platform its target would be 12%, but the actual would currently be 8.5% due to some recent sizeable repayments.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 9, 2024 13:56:35 GMT
The 50th HDR loan tranche repayment has been made today. It is from the second law firm.
It was the 5th tranche repayment for #4452. This tranche had a profit of 30.70%. The average profit for repaid cases in this loan is 22.0% (21.84% XIRR ).
CAVEAT: the following info relating to the HDR cases in general does not yet take account of the fact that all profits from the first law firm will be nullified by its administration. AF have undertaken to repay the capital from those loans. The exact effect it will have on the overall HDR XIRRs won't be known until the capital repayment dates are determined, but it will obviously lower them significantly. 35 of the 50 profit tranches paid so far have been for the failed law firm, so my very unscientific guess is that it would reduce the following XIRR figures by roughly two-thirds. The XIRRs will then climb again as tranches from other law firms repay.
The overall XIRR for the repaid portions of my HDR case investments is now 22.55%.
Assuming an equal amount was invested in each of the 14 HDR cases that have received at least 1 tranche repayment so far, the XIRR is 22.51%. For each £1k equal investment (£14k across the 14 loans), £5,387.50 of capital and £1,253.08 profit (£6,640.58 total) would have been paid so far. |
|
dave4
Member of DD Central
Cynical is a hobby not a lifestyle
Posts: 1,057
Likes: 617
|
Post by dave4 on Jul 10, 2024 9:16:02 GMT
The 50th HDR loan tranche repayment has been made today. It is from the second law firm.
It was the 5th tranche repayment for #4452. This tranche had a profit of 30.70%. The average profit for repaid cases in this loan is 22.0% (21.84% XIRR ).
CAVEAT: the following info relating to the HDR cases in general does not yet take account of the fact that all profits from the first law firm will be nullified by its administration. AF have undertaken to repay the capital from those loans. The exact effect it will have on the overall HDR XIRRs won't be known until the capital repayment dates are determined, but it will obviously lower them significantly. 35 of the 50 profit tranches paid so far have been for the failed law firm, so my very unscientific guess is that it would reduce the following XIRR figures by roughly two-thirds. The XIRRs will then climb again as tranches from other law firms repay.
The overall XIRR for the repaid portions of my HDR case investments is now 22.55%.
Assuming an equal amount was invested in each of the 14 HDR cases that have received at least 1 tranche repayment so far, the XIRR is 22.51%. For each £1k equal investment (£14k across the 14 loans), £5,387.50 of capital and £1,253.08 profit (£6,640.58 total) would have been paid so far. Funds paid and available
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 10, 2024 11:23:30 GMT
The 51st HDR loan tranche repayment has been made today. It is from the second law firm.
It was the 3rd tranche repayment for #4968. This tranche had a profit of 20.11%. The average profit for repaid cases in this loan is 16.2% (22.55% XIRR ).
CAVEAT: the following info relating to the HDR cases in general does not yet take account of the fact that all profits from the first law firm will be nullified by its administration. AF have undertaken to repay the capital from those loans. The exact effect it will have on the overall HDR XIRRs won't be known until the capital repayment dates are determined, but it will obviously lower them significantly. 35 of the 51 profit tranches paid so far have been for the failed law firm, so my very unscientific guess is that it would reduce the following XIRR figures by roughly two-thirds. The XIRRs will then climb again as tranches from other law firms repay.
The overall XIRR for the repaid portions of my HDR case investments is now 22.57%.
Assuming an equal amount was invested in each of the 14 HDR cases that have received at least 1 tranche repayment so far, the XIRR is 22.55%. For each £1k equal investment (£14k across the 14 loans), £5,487.50 of capital and £1,273.19 profit (£6,760.69 total) would have been paid so far. |
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jul 10, 2024 11:55:22 GMT
|
|
