bloodycat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 182
Likes: 83
|
Post by bloodycat on Apr 17, 2020 10:40:59 GMT
Since they have already suspended the secondary market it means there will be no new funds invested at all.
I suspect that actually it makes very little difference since most retail investors seem to have given up anyway.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Apr 17, 2020 10:48:35 GMT
Since they have already suspended the secondary market it means there will be no new funds invested at all.
I suspect that actually it makes very little difference since most retail investors seem to have given up anyway.
Well, I'd have certainly been interested in CBIL lending with an 80% Government guarantee. I hope if any other platforms are accredited that they think of the investors who helped them to where they are, rather than immediately ditching them.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Apr 17, 2020 10:58:29 GMT
Since they have already suspended the secondary market it means there will be no new funds invested at all.
I suspect that actually it makes very little difference since most retail investors seem to have given up anyway.
Well, I'd have certainly been interested in CBIL lending with an 80% Government guarantee. I hope if any other platforms are accredited that they think of the investors who helped them to where they are, rather than immediately ditching them. Deep in the brown stuff. Having been pulled partly out of it by CBIL, they will not be going back with the same retail offering, imo. A new loan book and a new model, perhaps.
|
|
|
Post by donaldtux on Apr 17, 2020 11:11:56 GMT
Got it thanks. And broadly speaking, are those CBILS theoretically helping SMBs repay their existing debts at all? Or is the typical business owner incentivized to default on his pre-covid debt ?
|
|
|
Post by dogeared on Apr 17, 2020 16:44:33 GMT
Got it thanks. And broadly speaking, are those CBILS theoretically helping SMBs repay their existing debts at all? Or is the typical business owner incentivized to default on his pre-covid debt ? Seems to me it's better that the businesses are rescued and keep trading rather than going bankrupt.
|
|
|
Post by switchingcircle on Apr 18, 2020 20:26:57 GMT
I feel massively let down by Funding Circle. When I signed up there was a secondhand loan market and no warnings that your money could be stuck in the platform for literally years. I always knew there was a risk of some debtors not being able to pay or the return not being what I'd hoped, but not that the platform itself would be so badly managed and leave me locked in for years.
- unhealthy and badly managed platform (even prior to Covid), in my opinion FC management not using reasonable care and skill in managing a investor platform
- not being upfront about the risks on the platform itself at the point of sign up, no warning that the second hand loan market could be suspended or that money might be locked into the platform for up to 4 years.
- Retrospectively adding fees for loans already listed for sale and no way to avoid those fees if you want out.
- Just deciding to close the secondhand loan market leaving you with little to no access to funds what so ever
I have a complaint in the queue with the ombudsman which was raised in Oct / Nov time, the last I heard it the backlog was so large for P2P lending complaints that my case would hit somebody's desk around June and I was told that in Jan / Feb time.
I'm wondering about logging a small claim in the county court instead or looking for a law firm who takes on cases like this, ideally we want to get a group of claimants together. If there any law firms taking on clients for this please get in contact, if anyone has any recommendations I'd like to hear them.
|
|
|
Post by df on Apr 18, 2020 21:01:03 GMT
I feel massively let down by Funding Circle. When I signed up there was a secondhand loan market and no warnings that your money could be stuck in the platform for literally years. I always knew there was a risk of some debtors not being able to pay or the return not being what I'd hoped, but not that the platform itself would be so badly managed and leave me locked in for years. - unhealthy and badly managed platform (even prior to Covid), in my opinion FC management not using reasonable care and skill in managing a investor platform - not being upfront about the risks on the platform itself at the point of sign up, no warning that the second hand loan market could be suspended or that money might be locked into the platform for up to 4 years. - Retrospectively adding fees for loans already listed for sale and no way to avoid those fees if you want out. - Just deciding to close the secondhand loan market leaving you with little to no access to funds what so ever I have a complaint in the queue with the ombudsman which was raised in Oct / Nov time, the last I heard it the backlog was so large for P2P lending complaints that my case would hit somebody's desk around June and I was told that in Jan / Feb time. I'm wondering about logging a small claim in the county court instead or looking for a law firm who takes on cases like this, ideally we want to get a group of claimants together. If there any law firms taking on clients for this please get in contact, if anyone has any recommendations I'd like to hear them. It's in their T&C. 10.6. "There is no guarantee that any of your Loan Parts will be transferred, nor any assurance as to how long it may take to transfer Loan Parts to other Investors." I don't think you are likely to get very far with such complaints. I presume every change they do is run by and approved by FCA, so they have their backs covered. Also in current Covid-19 situation most legal procedures will take much longer than usual.
|
|
|
Post by switchingcircle on Apr 19, 2020 7:27:51 GMT
If the loans defaulted (as many have) I'd be okay with that, but in this case I feel the platform isn't being run with reasonable skill and care that you'd expect from a professional investment platform. Examples include retrospectively changing terms on loans already listed for sale and applying new fees once locked into the platform. When you decide to make an investment you decide based on a lot of factors, one of those is the platform itself and the fees. In my opinion they can't add new fees and then make them retrospective to requests already in progress. Closing down core functions of the platform which allow you to access funds just because they feel like it and retrospectively is not acceptable either, especially as it applies to existing not just new investors. The Unfair Terms Consumer Contract regulations state that key terms must be prominent, e.g. those terms to do with pricing. www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/2083/contents/made20. The CMA considers that prominence is not merely about highlighting terms visually in the contract document. In determining whether a term is sufficiently prominent, regard will need to be given to a number of factors – including whether the term itself is onerous, what a reasonable consumer would expect, how other contract terms are presented and what information has been given to the consumer before entering the contract. If a term could come as a surprise to the consumer, it will require more effort to ensure its prominence compared to other terms (and this applies not only in the contract but to all pre-contract information, for example brochures or webpages).Nowhere in the terms does it mention that they might entirely suspend the second-hand loan market which would mean it could take 4 years to receive your money back from the platform. It also doesn't mention retrospectively adding new fees to loans which are already listed for sale. I have had my case open with FIS since November, hopefully they will get to it over the next few months and we'll see. I am wondering whether to give up with the Ombudsman all together and look to go more down the legal route with a firm of solicitors who specialise in being mis-sold investments.
|
|
|
Post by rainydaze on Apr 25, 2020 8:35:32 GMT
You are entirely right of course. But, this particular T&C was written with loans going bad in mind. Not the platform going bad. Same thing? A sound no..
|
|
|
Post by switchingcircle on Apr 28, 2020 19:01:36 GMT
The problem is if I log a small claim against Funding Circle then the Financial Ombudsman won't want to look at my case, but the Ombudsman has such a huge backlog it is just wait wait wait.
I suppose I just have to wait 3-4 years to get some of my money back, despite the fact I've been trying to sell out since last summer. If anyone is starting any action or found any solicitors taking on these cases then let me know.
|
|
|
Post by rainydaze on May 19, 2020 16:25:50 GMT
Have FC even come out and said what they're waiting for in terms of switching selling back on? Whats the end game here, anyone? This is like going for a new suit only to be told Id have to have my arms chopped off for it to fit... Now If I knew this before I entered the store, would I have ?..
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 1,087
|
Post by ashtondav on May 21, 2020 8:28:28 GMT
If I had realised p2p was high risk, would I have...
|
|
sb123
New Member
Posts: 4
Likes: 1
|
Post by sb123 on May 31, 2020 21:13:42 GMT
See my recent new thread regarding reply from Ombudsman - it isn't good news.
|
|
supyk
Posts: 25
Likes: 22
|
Post by supyk on Jun 11, 2020 8:54:58 GMT
Have FC even come out and said what they're waiting for in terms of switching selling back on? Whats the end game here, anyone? This is like going for a new suit only to be told Id have to have my arms chopped off for it to fit... Now If I knew this before I entered the store, would I have ?.. Since around 25th April, I've seen a significantly higher level of Early Principal Repayments in my portfolio. Could be that some borrowers are able to use cheap CBILS cash to pay back FC loans. Whatever the case, I seem to have got back about 15% of portfolio in the last 7 weeks (early + scheduled repayments), whereas "typical" expected from FC site would be 3-5% per month: www.fundingcircle.com/blog/2020/04/update-on-the-secondary-market/ If that is FC's plan to get retail investors their money back, I don't see "selling" restarting at all.
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 365
Likes: 350
|
Post by scooter on Jun 11, 2020 9:53:56 GMT
The Ombudsman's opinion on the secondary market is:
"And you’ve had the benefit of having your loan parts on the secondary market - which ultimately is an optional facility that peer-to-peer lenders don’t have to provide."
I have accepted all changes to platforms since the current crisis started, but FC made changes as a result of their own mismanagement of the platform and that winds me up. I loathe FC. I am luckily sold out and just left with failed loans. Unless the Ombudsman comes through for investors (unlikely) we will have to just rely on the integrity of borrowers to repay what the can as FC recovery is terrible.
I noted a report recently that complaints about P2p were up but not high. Infact I think most of those complaints were from me as at least half of my defaults have/are being mismanaged by FC. I also send copies of all those complaints to the FCA. They won't do anything, but they do send an very nice reply saying that they welcome issues being sent to them as it helps them build a picture of the company.
|
|