adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920 
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on May 24, 2019 10:50:21 GMT
I think it is a question of liquidating these assets now for sale at 80% loss rather than waiting a year for 90% loss as I just don't believe this mysterious sponsor is going to come up with any money - there is the other boat loan (round the world) who is also waiting for a sponsor (was last time I looked) and of the 2 I would he have thought he has a much better chance- at least his boat is brand new and not nearly 5 years old!
I agree liquidating now is a risk whilst waiting for the sponsor to cough up but I would put more money on ChangeUK getting more votes than the Brexit party in the EU elections...just my opinion
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on May 24, 2019 10:57:36 GMT
I think it is a question of liquidating these assets now for sale at 80% loss rather than waiting a year for 90% loss as I just don't believe this mysterious sponsor is going to come up with any money - there is the other boat loan (round the world) who is also waiting for a sponsor (was last time I looked) and of the 2 I would he have thought he has a much better chance- at least his boat is brand new and not nearly 5 years old! I agree liquidating now is a risk whilst waiting for the sponsor to cough up but I would put more money on ChangeUK getting more votes than the Brexit party in the EU elections... Nowt so blind as those who will not see. Why not also just buy FS a vat of vaseline, whilst you insist on listening to & believing FS' oh so informative & encouraging updates. SELL the fornicating tub/s!! 
|
|
Doc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 196
Likes: 211
|
Post by Doc on May 24, 2019 11:06:57 GMT
I think it is a question of liquidating these assets now for sale at 80% loss rather than waiting a year for 90% loss as I just don't believe this mysterious sponsor is going to come up with any money.
I don't think there is much evidence to suggest that selling the boat now or in a years time will make any difference to the amount raised, both will result in substantial losses, this is why FS state that the best (and only) approach is to work with the borrower.
I think everyone is tired of the continual excuses and the delaying tactics from the borrower but given the alternative - 80/90% losses - What choice do FS or lenders really have?
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on May 24, 2019 11:16:52 GMT
I think it is a question of liquidating these assets now for sale at 80% loss rather than waiting a year for 90% loss as I just don't believe this mysterious sponsor is going to come up with any money.
I don't think there is much evidence to suggest that selling the boat now or in a years time will make any difference to the amount raised, both will result in substantial losses, this is why FS state that the best (and only) approach is to work with the borrower.
The continual excuses from the borrower now means lenders have zero trust in any promises the borrower makes, but given the alternative - 80/90% losses, what choice do FS or lenders really have.
Exactly. When an equity halves in value and is still dropping then maybe one would be better off selling quickly, but once its dropped 95%, most people will typically hold it as there is so little current value that just holding it and clinging to the hope of a recovery is worth keeping it for.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on May 24, 2019 11:22:01 GMT
I gave up on this P2P lender about 2 years ago and I am now out of patience. In all honesty I can't imagine why basic investors such as I am would consider risking any more money but perhaps much more sophisticated investors are prepared to risk their money. And good luck to them. I approve of taking risks but what I don't approve of is the dishonesty FS demonstrate in their dealings with small investors and I will punish them for this. As people like me who based their investments decisions on the information given by FS and where this information was misleading at best and at worst was fraudulent I am about to take action to recover my losses. Good luck to FS in explaining their decisions in open court. In all honesty I don't care if I make FS bankrupt. If they have been as dishonest as I believe them to have been they deserve to be exposed as such and if their assertions actually reflected the facts they will remain solvent. I have to totally agree with your assertions, and your actions 09dolphin. Examples need & must be made if P2P is to continue, it cannot carry on this way under the current "light touch" FCA BS.
|
|
|
|
Post by beepbeepimajeep on May 24, 2019 11:29:37 GMT
I am sure a strongly worded reply to the member survey will let Funding Secure know where they have gone wrong and all of these problems will soon be dealt with.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on May 24, 2019 12:11:43 GMT
Out of interest which T&C are you referring to here exactly?
|
|
petrichory
Member of DD Central
Posts: 59
Likes: 207
|
Post by petrichory on May 25, 2019 0:11:08 GMT
Speaking of T&Cs, does someone have a copy of the previous versions before the current 2.4 or better yet, a guide on what has been changed over the years? Aside from the ISA terms that were added, I would be curious to see if they retrospectively made changes based on user complaints. I feel like the terms I read back in 2016 were much more straight-forward.
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 638 
Likes: 866
|
Post by 09dolphin on May 25, 2019 8:23:56 GMT
09dolphin , Noticed many of your posts on the powerboat thread, pushing for a fire sale of these assets.
Could you explain how enforcing the powerboat loan would benefit lenders with expected losses of 80-90 % if these are placed in a fire sale.
Can you explain why the LTV was so inaccurate as, by your own admission, the asset is now worth only 10 - 20% of it's valuation? As it's a product that decreases in value month by month because of technological change can you give a rational reason why lenders should continue to hope FS can achieve an acceptable outcome when they haven't for the past year or so with laughable excuses given by FS. Sometimes in business it's better to take a loss on the chin because the money you are left with is still capable of generating a return although it may take several years before you are in the same position. Sadly you seem to believe that lenders should accept any and all losses in the rather obviously misguided hope that the promises made will be fulfilled despite the fact they haven't in the past 12 months. Can I sell you some of my Art loans at a serious discount ( ie 50%) as you so obviously believe everything all lenders say and the fact the borrower has sold these items, has been made bankrupt and faces criminal charges will not bother you.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on May 25, 2019 8:33:02 GMT
09dolphin , Noticed many of your posts on the powerboat thread, pushing for a fire sale of these assets.
Could you explain how enforcing the powerboat loan would benefit lenders with expected losses of 80-90 % if these are placed in a fire sale.
Can you explain why the LTV was so inaccurate as, by your own admission, the asset is now worth only 10 - 20% of it's valuation? As it's a product that decreases in value month by month because of technological change can you give a rational reason why lenders should continue to hope FS can achieve an acceptable outcome when they haven't for the past year or so with laughable excuses given by FS. Sometimes in business it's better to take a loss on the chin because the money you are left with is still capable of generating a return although it may take several years before you are in the same position. Sadly you seem to believe that lenders should accept any and all losses in the rather obviously misguided hope that the promises made will be fulfilled despite the fact they haven't in the past 12 months. Can I sell you some of my Art loans at a serious discount ( ie 50%) as you so obviously believe everything all lenders say and the fact the borrower has sold these items, has been made bankrupt and faces criminal charges will not bother you. That's a point that should have been considered by the investors from the outset. Lending against a new house at 60% LTV is generally fine, lending against a new car at 60% LTV is often a terrible idea- after 12-18 months there is no margin left. A powerboat clearly comes under the second category of depreciating assets. People see 13% interest and lose all reason. There are huge risks with these investments, everyone knew that, right?
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 638
Likes: 866
|
Post by 09dolphin on May 25, 2019 8:37:54 GMT
Out of interest which T&C are you referring to here exactly? The fact that FS should possess and have control of the asset. Shame they allowed the borrower to sell the asset people lent money on so leaving investors with nothing.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on May 25, 2019 9:04:05 GMT
Can you explain why the LTV was so inaccurate as, by your own admission, the asset is now worth only 10 - 20% of it's valuation? As it's a product that decreases in value month by month because of technological change can you give a rational reason why lenders should continue to hope FS can achieve an acceptable outcome when they haven't for the past year or so with laughable excuses given by FS. Sometimes in business it's better to take a loss on the chin because the money you are left with is still capable of generating a return although it may take several years before you are in the same position. Sadly you seem to believe that lenders should accept any and all losses in the rather obviously misguided hope that the promises made will be fulfilled despite the fact they haven't in the past 12 months. Can I sell you some of my Art loans at a serious discount ( ie 50%) as you so obviously believe everything all lenders say and the fact the borrower has sold these items, has been made bankrupt and faces criminal charges will not bother you. That's a point that should have been considered by the investors from the outset. Lending against a new house at 60% LTV is generally fine, lending against a new car at 60% LTV is often a terrible idea- after 12-18 months there is no margin left. A powerboat clearly comes under the second category of depreciating assets. People see 13% interest and lose all reason. There are huge risks with these investments, everyone knew that, right? That point was considered by me and should also have been considered by the platform when the loan first became distressed. Instead the matter has been allowed to drag on for so long that any chance of a meaningful recovery has been jeopardised. Masterful inactivity is sometimes a wise course of action during a recovery situation but I have seen no justification in the case of the powerboats where promises by the borrower have not been kept.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on May 25, 2019 10:44:40 GMT
Out of interest which T&C are you referring to here exactly? The fact that FS should possess and have control of the asset. Shame they allowed the borrower to sell the asset people lent money on so leaving investors with nothing. I have read the T&C’s, which number is that one specifically?
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on May 25, 2019 15:52:56 GMT
after the coll and now lendy failures many many small/medium investors will now be very cautious with this p2p business.with FS seemingly having the same attitude to recoveries as the failed LY and with the same useless updates year on year many of these new loans could struggle to fill.the ripple effect will now be felt across the entire p2p sector which is rapidly getting a reputation as a place to avoid.
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 638
Likes: 866
|
Post by 09dolphin on May 25, 2019 19:42:53 GMT
Out of interest which T&C are you referring to here exactly? I suggest you read the T&Cs in section 5 and section 6. How exactly can default procedures be enforced if the lender doesn't have control pf the asset? I'd love to know, How many pawn brokers do you know (and please be specific) who don't control a pawned asset. I have a large number of gold sovereigns would you please lend me money against them but sorry I am not prepared to allow you to take custody of them. You are being totally unreasonable in refusing to lend me money because you don't control the assets. You were comfortable lending money on various artworks what's different between sovereigns and art? Looking forward to your response but I'd guess there will be a huge silence.
|
|
