State of the nation - the wheels are secure!

I was one of the (slightly-more-than-a) handful of lenders that I think chris is referring to. We were given a preview back in July mid-development. I'm not at liberty to divulge any secrets, but I can confirm that the new site did get a positive response as chris has indicated (and not just because we were promised a free buffet lunch).

I hate change for change’s sake, especially where software is concerned, and so approached the preview with some scepticism. However, I was easily won over. My personal view was that aesthetically and ergonomically it was still recognisably AC, but with a more professional feel. Of course, you’ll be able to make your own assessment next week, although I notice AC have already sent out a taster screenshot in a recent marketing e-mail to AC users.

Given that this is such a huge upgrade and (as I understand from chris’s previous posts) there hasn’t been time to do the beta-testing that AC had originally planned, I think it’s inevitable that we’ll be hassling AC over the next few weeks with queries and grumbles. But I’m confident that they’ll quickly sort out whatever might need sorting out, and we’ll all benefit from it.

Yes, on a scale of 1-50, what shade of purple is it? 

andrewholgate, thanks for replying.

Surely it depends on the actual wording used in the legal documents.  The PGs I've read for loans made via a different p2b platform (copies of originals signed by borrower) unambiguously allow for the recovery of interest and fees over and above the guarantee limitation (which has been set at the capital amount borrowed). So unless you are saying this wouldn't be legally enforceable for some reason, it would appear to contradict your statement.

However, you've made it clear how AC's PGs are structured, which is what I was asking about, and that helps to explain AC's previous statements on FF. But it will make me a touch more cautious about investing in future AC loans (especially those that are interest-only) where there's a chance that virtually all of the business security value could evaporate e.g. where secured on debtors book, stock or specialist machinery. In such cases, eventual recovery could end up well below 100% of capital and interest owed (or even below 100% of capital owed) even if the enforcement of the PG is successful, especially if it involves lengthy legal proceedings. 

Jack

merlin, you're talking about average stats, I'm talking about a specific scenario where the guarantor has the money and the PG enforcement is successful (in the sense that the maximum legally possible is recovered via the PG). In that scenario, I'd be extremely unhappy if AC only managed to recover 40% of capital because (by implication) 60% of the PG was eaten up in legal fees.


 

With respect to FF...  Haven't we been told that £250k of the one £350k PG that still is believed to have some value is supported by a share portfolio, and that the said portfolio has restrictions on it that would prevent it being used for another purpose?  IIRC, we've also been told that the portfolio is -- or was -- worth more than £250k.  There's always the chance the some of the shares have performed as well as Tesco's recently, of course, and the value might have diminished by the time the PG is called in, so the actual value won't be known until then.  But it's never been clear to me whether, if the portfolio were to be worth £350k or more when the PG is called in, AC could obtain more than £250k from the portfolio, or whether £250k is the limit of what could be recovered from the portfolio and that any further recovery would have to come from the guarantor's other assets -- if they have any.  Might andrewholgate be able to clarify that point?

I wondered about that, but decided it wasn't necessary because although my question was inspired by the FF situation it really was a general question regarding how PGs work.  Since that info should be of interest to all P2P investors considering lending on the strength of PGs, I thought it ought to be on the forum where everyone could follow the discussion.

If the moderation team feels it belongs behind closed doors, then I wouldn't mind if they moved the discussion to the private board.

Hi Jack. Any idea when they are going to light the blue touch paper? It has been rumoured for getting on for three months now!