benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610 
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Mar 10, 2019 17:53:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by elephantrosie on Mar 10, 2019 19:45:30 GMT
read about this on bbc today!
it is estimated that investors would only get 20% of their capital back. i wonder if the same amount applies to collateral!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Mar 10, 2019 20:09:22 GMT
read about this on bbc today! it is estimated that investors would only get 20% of their capital back. i wonder if the same amount applies to collateral!!! Some investors in COL will get a (fairly) high % of their capital back, others will get a low % back depending on the specific mix of loans / cash they held.
With a good number of my loans in COL already having redeemed in full and the funds held by BDO, and with generally good vibes regarding the recovery of the Col DB allowing per loan payments by BDO, I remain hopeful of an acceptable outcome for myself. (Remember that loans that redeem in full are paying BDO interest since their maturity date, which will go a long way to cover the BDO charges that will be allocated evenly across the loanbook.) AIUI this is essentially the same message BM have relayed to their investors.
As I understand it however, LCF losses will uniform across all investors.
|
|
mjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 342
Likes: 425
|
Post by mjc on Mar 11, 2019 8:55:59 GMT
No, the average guy on the Clapham omnibus would not think that unreasonable,
The average man (on the Clapham Omnibus or elsewhere) shouldn't be going near P2P, let alone the sort of investment that LC&F were offering.
Those that have surplus cash that they can risk, and who decide to have a punt on P2P will probably tell you that diversification is key if you don't have the where-with-all to carry out sufficient DD on specified loans. This wasn't possible with LC&F, it was all eggs in one basket (and a pretty poor class basket at that). Anyone that invested without taking any notice of the disclaimer on their web site (that capital and interest was at risk) only deserve limited sympathy. As with any form of investment you need to follow a few simple rules (these courtesey of Masonic on MSE):
- If you don't understand the investment, don't invest.
- If it looks too good to be true it probably is.
- Don't get ideas for financial products from social media or search engines.
- Stick to comparison sites you know to be trustworthy.
- Learn what you can reasonably expect from different types of savings and investments.
- Use resources like this forum as a sounding board if you really want to move into unfamiliar territory. That is a rather cynical view imv, as every site (bar fscs backed ones) say capital at risk, as every stock market etc investments, yet having FCA regulation and ISA approval, plus the skewed marketing claims of the cronies behind crooked scams are intended to sucker in unsophisticated ordinary folks. Masonic’s sage warning should be on the front page, in large text, and every advert for these schemes. When it is obvious to those with a modicum of financial understanding LIKE THE FCA??? it is impossible to give the 44% underlying return needed to be viable they should investigate and ban them immediately. (Ed) One of the safest p2p say “To become authorised by the FCA, there have to be robust safety and risk management mechanisms in place. Like all peer-to-peer lending platforms, we’re not covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).” I think FCA talk big, but are tardy in taking action. So I have immense sympathy for those caught by these rogues.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Mar 12, 2019 7:19:11 GMT
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 12, 2019 8:42:47 GMT
So basically that the ISA wasn’t tranferrable and some of the small print was too small. Unfortunately not being transferable means the bonds weren't ISA eligible. A small 'mistake' with big consequences to investors, not tax free as promised.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Mar 12, 2019 10:28:08 GMT
So basically that the ISA wasn’t tranferrable and some of the small print was too small. Unfortunately not being transferable means the bonds weren't ISA eligible. A small 'mistake' with big consequences to investors, not tax free as promised. Puzzled. In what way are most IFISA investments "transferable"? Sure, all our favourite IFISA providers have a mechanism for transferring out loose cash, but not the underlying loans. You have to sell them or wait for them to end - was this not the same with the LC&F bonds?
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 12, 2019 10:53:14 GMT
Unfortunately not being transferable means the bonds weren't ISA eligible. A small 'mistake' with big consequences to investors, not tax free as promised. Puzzled. In what way are most IFISA investments "transferable"? Sure, all our favourite IFISA providers have a mechanism for transferring out loose cash, but not the underlying loans. You have to sell them or wait for them to end - was this not the same with the LC&F bonds? I don't know, maybe you couldn't sell to get your funds back? There was also a lot more to it: www.londoncapitalandfinance.co.uk/Bondholder%20communication%2021.02.19.pdf
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Mar 12, 2019 11:23:10 GMT
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Mar 12, 2019 12:49:27 GMT
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
N/A
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 1,739
|
Post by benaj on Mar 12, 2019 16:37:23 GMT
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,044
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Mar 12, 2019 23:34:30 GMT
The average man (on the Clapham Omnibus or elsewhere) shouldn't be going near P2P, let alone the sort of investment that LC&F were offering.
Unfortunatley it is clear that it is going to take regulatory intervention to stop fools being parted from their money. Alas, I think it will take far more.
It would be a harsh man that could find no sympathy for the fool who became parted from his money, but unfortunately opportunities for the gulible are all too frequent. Another clasic (which is often mentioned on the MSE site) is Los Pandos Vineyard. Lots of people cashed in their pensions to fund the construction of a new vineyard offering (enter any ludicrously optimistic figre here) % guaranteed returns. Many years later the money has all gone and not a grapevine in site.
It is sad, but there are lots of people out there that fall for it every time. Subtle it aint.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Mar 12, 2019 23:55:00 GMT
The average man (on the Clapham Omnibus or elsewhere) shouldn't be going near P2P, let alone the sort of investment that LC&F were offering.
agent69 I agree. The average man (on the Clapham Omnibus or elsewhere) is a greedy fool, attracted like a fly to excrement to the high headline rates and like a deluded idiot thinks P2P is some viable alternative to a savings account at a bank, or they buy into the P2P platform's bull that P2P is less risky than the stockmarket.
People who pile into P2P and then get burnt deserve no sympathy. They know full well what they're getting themselves into (or at least they should do).
Unfortunatley it is clear that it is going to take regulatory intervention to stop fools being parted from their money. Sure that regulatory aspect should have been there from day one, but IMHO that day cannot come too soon. Enough is enough with this P2P Wild West.
There have been instances of blatant, proven lies from one or more Platforms, and that is Fraud. IMHO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Mar 13, 2019 1:15:09 GMT
The average man (on the Clapham Omnibus or elsewhere) shouldn't be going near P2P, let alone the sort of investment that LC&F were offering.
agent69 I agree. The average man (on the Clapham Omnibus or elsewhere) is a greedy fool, attracted like a fly to excrement to the high headline rates and like a deluded idiot thinks P2P is some viable alternative to a savings account at a bank, or they buy into the P2P platform's bull that P2P is less risky than the stockmarket.
People who pile into P2P and then get burnt deserve no sympathy. They know full well what they're getting themselves into (or at least they should do).
Unfortunatley it is clear that it is going to take regulatory intervention to stop fools being parted from their money. Sure that regulatory aspect should have been there from day one, but IMHO that day cannot come too soon. Enough is enough with this P2P Wild West.
@wallstreet , is there a particular reason that someone with such a dislike of P2P would frequent this forum? You are clearly well informed on the vagaries of stock markets, but, IMO, implying that those investing in P2P are without sense is a little strong. This particular greedy, foolish and deluded idiot quite enjoys the P2P experience, for which I get an acceptable return. I also take some, admittedly secondary, pleasure from being able to help businesses and individuals with finance that they might not otherwise be able to obtain. I'll agree with you that P2P is under regulated and very poorly policed, and there are definitely some P2P cowboys out there, but I'm happy to use P2P as a middle-ground between my cash savings and stockmarket investments. I'm not looking for a fight here, just wanted to put an alternative viewpoint, as many of your similar posts have gone unchallenged.
|
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Mar 14, 2019 12:04:48 GMT
This specific case has just been raised in parliament, they may table a debate on it in the coming weeks. I'll keep my eyes open if it happens ....
|
|
