|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Mar 11, 2019 11:22:08 GMT
So the FCA are only about 6-12 months behind the rest of us then?? Still, they do have a bigger hammer than we do ..
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 11:33:22 GMT
This is really a strange tale. It almost seems that LY has purposely been executing a go out of business strategy. They stopped issuing loans, which given their name is Lendy is absurd. I can’t imagine that there are no borrowers out there that meet their “rigorous lending criteria”. At the same time, knowing that investor sentiment is all important to their survival, they proceeded to double down on their efforts to treat investors with utter contempt and pretty much stuck 2 fingers up at worried investors at every given opportunity. Their communications got worse, the broken promises kept coming and their aloofness was very apparent. Brookes has no doubt secured his personal finances and has made a killing, but it seems he decided quite some time ago that he’d made his fortune and all this was too much like hard work. I think it’s right to suggest he should be replaced. If he’s not replaced things are only going one way.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598 
Likes: 6,768
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 11, 2019 11:35:35 GMT
Well you'd hope lessons have been learnt from Col going under. Ie securing the loan book etc.
It appears to my mousey brain that some of the claims they could make against third parties may well yield results so I'd hope that they can get a bumper crop of payouts. For instance if a loan was found to have contract deficiencies I'd hope the law firm drafting them would cover any losses. Cash-flow in the meantime is always the killer.
It's a real shame they are having problems as the business model could work provided the correct due dil was carried out in the first place.
The FCA involvement does explain why all the recovery was outsourced though.
|
|
|
|
Post by p2plender on Mar 11, 2019 12:09:55 GMT
It may work on PBLs but not at 12%.
I presume new loans stopped originating because Lendy knew investors appetite was shot. If they could have got some defaults pulled in then they may have had a chance of keeping investors half onside. It appears they made most effort in avoiding this hence why we are here.
|
|
|
|
Post by faraday815 on Mar 11, 2019 12:25:31 GMT
So, is this slightly positive news, neutral, or slightly negative?
|
|
|
|
Post by faraday815 on Mar 11, 2019 12:29:02 GMT
It appears to my mousey brain that some of the claims they could make against third parties may well yield results so I'd hope that they can get a bumper crop of payouts. The London Loan for instance seems to be the result of various contract deficiencies and as the legals were handled by a fairly well known law firm I'd hope they would cover any losses. Are you suggesting that perhaps, in your opinion, the legals FOR LENDY were conducted by a reputed law firm and so Lendy should expect a bumper payout from the borrower/property sale, or that Lendy should expect just losses to be covered? (Either way, it's more positive than a negative return).
|
|
mj
Posts: 37
Likes: 49
|
Post by mj on Mar 11, 2019 12:45:55 GMT
So, is this slightly positive news, neutral, or slightly negative? I'd say it's positive news because we're getting a little transparency and we may be put out of our misery soon. The final outcome may not be particularly positive but we've already figured that out.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 11, 2019 12:54:25 GMT
It appears to my mousey brain that some of the claims they could make against third parties may well yield results so I'd hope that they can get a bumper crop of payouts. The London Loan for instance seems to be the result of various contract deficiencies and as the legals were handled by a fairly well known law firm I'd hope they would cover any losses. Are you suggesting that perhaps, in your opinion, the legals FOR LENDY were conducted by a reputed law firm and so Lendy should expect a bumper payout from the borrower/property sale, or that Lendy should expect just losses to be covered? (Either way, it's more positive than a negative return). I don't think I'm qualified to speculate further unfortunately. I've edited my post as you may well now see. There are many issues claimed in that loan so in hindsight I don't think what I hope to be the case is justified to be said in public.
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 12:55:45 GMT
It may work on PBLs but not at 12%. I presume new loans stopped originating because Lendy knew investors appetite was shot. If they could have got some defaults pulled in then they may have had a chance of keeping investors half onside. It appears they made most effort in avoiding this hence why we are here. At the point investor sentiment had started to spiral downwards LY could have focussed on turning things around. They should have looked to focus on recoveries, improve communications and engage investors. Honesty goes a long way as does empathy. Most people, even facing losses, would keep their faith if they could see that Lendy were fighting tooth and nail to recovery our money and fighting for every penny of our money as if it were their own. Instead, they seemed to take the attitude that if investors want to complain let’s really give them something to complain about. It’s so sad as they could have had a really great business if they took a long term view of things rather than a get rich quick view.
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Mar 11, 2019 13:49:15 GMT
Comment by Lendy was that it is not responding to 'chatroom rumours' but instead focussing on loan recovery and business improvement activities
SHOULD READ: Comment by Lendy was that it is not responding to 'chatroom rumours' but instead focussing on taking down as many negative Trust pilot reviews as physically possible.. If Lendy actually engaged and communicated with their investors these “chatroom rumours” likely wouldn’t start or be neccesssry.
|
|
|
|
Post by p2plender on Mar 11, 2019 14:17:23 GMT
Much of this may have been prompted by the collapse of LCF. Investor's looking at possible huge losses there.
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 14:54:30 GMT
Much of this may have been prompted by the collapse of LCF. Investor's looking at possible huge losses there. I’ve just read about LCF on the BBC website, article from 2 days ago. Parallels with Lendy in that investors will lose millions but Directors have walked away with millions. You have to ask why when these companies are regulated is it so easy to fleece investors for millions. And why do Directors of failed companies always walk away with millions, if the company failed so badly why were they allowed to profit so handsomely.
|
|
mjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 342
Likes: 425
|
Post by mjc on Mar 11, 2019 15:08:04 GMT
How much did they pay (or will they pay?) to sponsor Cowes Week?
FCA say the FCA found that where a P2P platform offered investors a target rate of return for a discretionary portfolio which they assembled or managed, they were not always exposing investors to loans which met the risk parameters advertised at the time of investment.
In response, the FCA has proposed rules that, when choosing P2P agreements on behalf of the investor, platforms must only facilitate ones in line with the risk parameters advertised to the investor.
On top of this, P2P platforms offering a target rate of return must be able to determine, with reasonable confidence, that a portfolio will generate the advertised target rate.”
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Mar 11, 2019 15:34:16 GMT
Comment by Lendy was that it is not responding to 'chatroom rumours' but instead focussing on loan recovery and business improvement activities
SHOULD READ: Comment by Lendy was that it is not responding to 'chatroom rumours' but instead focussing on taking down as many negative Trust pilot reviews as physically possible.. If Lendy actually engaged and communicated with their investors these “chatroom rumours” likely wouldn’t start or be neccesssry. I've no problem with more scrutiny from FCA and everyone else. It can only be benefcial in short and long term.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Mar 11, 2019 15:34:24 GMT
Much of this may have been prompted by the collapse of LCF. Investor's looking at possible huge losses there. I’ve just read about LCF on the BBC website, article from 2 days ago. Parallels with Lendy in that investors will lose millions but Directors have walked away with millions. You have to ask why when these companies are regulated is it so easy to fleece investors for millions. And why do Directors of failed companies always walk away with millions, if the company failed so badly why were they allowed to profit so handsomely. No need to ask why. The ineffectual FCA is a symptom of a failed legislature which has a far too cosy relationship with City lobbyists. How often do we have to witness the nauseating spectacle of a Chancellor of the Exchequer attempting to ingratiate at the annual Lord mayor's banquet, looked on and reported by a sycophantic media. It makes Cowes week hobnobbing look positively genteel. The current generation of pension pot small investors are sitting ducks for every sort of malpractice.
|
|
