webwiz
Posts: 1,133
Likes: 210
|
Post by webwiz on Oct 4, 2014 11:07:36 GMT
Can I bring the thread back to my original question and leave the matter of copying T&C's for another thread. Whatever the T&C's are and wherever they came from surely the ones that should apply to a particular investment are the ones in force at the time it is made. If they can be amended retrospectively then they can be changed to the detriment of one party - in theory in extremis they could just keep the money and not repay it. And there is no obvious way of recording the T&C's in force at any moment in time when everything is web based. I am not a lawyer but this seems to me to make a mockery of basic contract law.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Oct 4, 2014 12:24:17 GMT
Can I bring the thread back to my original question and leave the matter of copying T&C's for another thread. Whatever the T&C's are and wherever they came from surely the ones that should apply to a particular investment are the ones in force at the time it is made. If they can be amended retrospectively then they can be changed to the detriment of one party - in theory in extremis they could just keep the money and not repay it. And there is no obvious way of recording the T&C's in force at any moment in time when everything is web based. I am not a lawyer but this seems to me to make a mockery of basic contract law. Yes it does make a mockery of contract law. I would suggest though you are going to get more than a couple of opinions irrespective as to whether your question is being responded to by a qualified contract lawyer or not. It may be an idea if you just reported direct to the FCA for their input. They are after all the ultimate authority regarding financial companies.
|
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Oct 4, 2014 13:51:15 GMT
Can I bring the thread back to my original question and leave the matter of copying T&C's for another thread. Whatever the T&C's are and wherever they came from surely the ones that should apply to a particular investment are the ones in force at the time it is made. If they can be amended retrospectively then they can be changed to the detriment of one party - in theory in extremis they could just keep the money and not repay it. And there is no obvious way of recording the T&C's in force at any moment in time when everything is web based. I am not a lawyer but this seems to me to make a mockery of basic contract law.. This is where there is a marked difference between Bondora and the majority of other platforms I use, with Bondora you get an individual electronically signed contract for each loan purchase and each SM listing so there is no question of the terms changing for particular loan. Platform terms are another matter because it can work both ways, yes the company could change them to the detriment of the lender but they could also change them to their advantage. For example a platform could decide to go change form a fee to both seller and buyer on the SM to completely fee free. Whilst such a change would seen a beneficial to lenders if the Ts&Cs were locked to the loan then lenders with those loans could find themselves locked into holding the loans to term because they were unsaleable on the SM due to historic fee structures. To my mind, best practice has to be that operated by Bondora, namely to split the loan contracts from the platform Ts&Cs. Have the loan contract and sales offer signed and available for all parties the situation abundantly clear should the platform fail and to changes to the platform Ts&Cs clearly flagged to users in advance. An example of good practice in this case is Pay-pal who notify by email and require that you login, view and agree to the revisions with any failure to do so leading to the temporary suspension of the account.
|
|
james
Posts: 2,205
Likes: 955
|
Post by james on Oct 5, 2014 1:21:57 GMT
Whatever the T&C's are and wherever they came from surely the ones that should apply to a particular investment are the ones in force at the time it is made. Of course. You can expect that the FOS and FCA will insist on this if it ever costs you money. It isn't only contracts that get changed. I know of one platform that changed annual statements to borrowers long after they were originally issued, removing evidence that they had originally provided statements that didn't add up correctly, so told borrowers that they still owed more than they really did owe.
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,189 
Likes: 1,546
|
Post by pikestaff on Oct 7, 2014 8:04:10 GMT
Can I bring the thread back to my original question and leave the matter of copying T&C's for another thread. Whatever the T&C's are and wherever they came from surely the ones that should apply to a particular investment are the ones in force at the time it is made. If they can be amended retrospectively then they can be changed to the detriment of one party - in theory in extremis they could just keep the money and not repay it. And there is no obvious way of recording the T&C's in force at any moment in time when everything is web based. I am not a lawyer but this seems to me to make a mockery of basic contract law. My view is that the right to change T&Cs is not, of itself, impermissible or unfair. But inappropriate changes would be. Also, if we are talking about true p2p (and not the hybrids such as SS) the T&Cs relate to the use of the platform, not to your investments. Your investments are yours and repayment is an obligation of the borrowers, not of the platform. The platform holds any funds received from borrowers on trust for the lenders. It's your money and they cannot keep it. The platform could vary their admin charges and procedures but any change therein would need to be fair.
|
|
