ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329 
Likes: 11,549
|
Defaults
May 5, 2019 16:01:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by ilmoro on May 5, 2019 16:01:48 GMT
Thanks ilmoro; I note most of 'Trading Suspended' loans have 'Activity' greyed out. If holding these loans, are you informed by email, as to what is happening. They may well appear greyed out to you if you have no holding in them. For investors, updates will be in Activity section and/or emails.
See this thread. E.g. this entry by pikeman Mar 16, 2019 at 7:44am "I asked chat line yesterday and they explained investors would no longer have access to ACTIVITY, DOCUMENT and Q&A tabs on suspended loans in which they had no monies invested." Actually it's somewhat arbitrary. If you've less than £1 invested via any account you don't generally have access on site but you will still get emails it seems with any MLA holding (possibly GBA/PSA/GEA). IIRC the nature of the suspension also determines access as I can see some info on default loans where I have insufficient holding (can't check for specifics)
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on May 13, 2019 20:26:45 GMT
I am trying to understand why funds in the 'Quick Access' account, have a fair proportion put into 'trading suspended' loans, immediately.
I know it is protected by the provision fund, but why are funds put straight into non performing loans ?
When needed to be swept out, into the MLA or withdrawn, it all moves out without a problem.
I assume if a loan becomes non performing in QAA after the funds go in, they become stuck.
Funds swept into the GBBA are only put into performing loans.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on May 13, 2019 20:46:55 GMT
I am trying to understand why funds in the 'Quick Access' account, have a fair proportion put into 'trading suspended' loans, immediately. I know it is protected by the provision fund, but why are funds put straight into non performing loans ? When needed to be swept out, into the MLA or withdrawn, it all moves out without a problem. I assume if a loan becomes non performing in QAA after the funds go in, they become stuck. Funds swept into the GBBA are only put into performing loans. Its been covered on the forums multiple times but basically any investment in the QAA or its subsiduaries 30DAA/90DAA is an investment in the entire portfolio of loans it holds, suspended or not, bit like a investment fund. So if you have 1% of the QAA, you will have 1% of its holding in all the loans its invested in. Suspended loans are effectively ring fenced by the PF, so only if the PF cant ring fence the loan will funds be stuck in suspended loans, and that is only really likely to happen if there is a spate of defaults and/or significant cash flows out of the accounts.
|
|
|
|
Post by investor01010101 on May 29, 2019 18:03:49 GMT
I get the feeling AC have a somewhat better record than other platforms. Proplend, Blendnetwork & Capitalstackers appear excellent, but unlike AC, availability is a problem with those. I know AC had a bad year 2016 with energy & bridging loans, but they appear to be on top of things now. The information they provide, pre & post loan offerings, are excellent. Their overall default %, after recoveries, appear on face value, to be quite acceptable if you are outside their protected funds. What is the general view ? I wouldn't say that at all, most of my loans are in trouble of some sort. Assetz latest trick is delete users questions on late payments saying its a duplicate question just to avoid committing to administration agreed by a lender vote, in other words delaying to help the bad borrowers and not respecting its not their money its ours.
|
|
|
|
Post by jdot on Jun 3, 2019 11:55:47 GMT
This is just really confusing and has put me off more investing in assetz capital
|
|
bigfoot12
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,817
Likes: 816
|
Post by bigfoot12 on Jun 3, 2019 15:23:32 GMT
This is just really confusing and has put me off more investing in assetz capital That is the best attitude for any investment. Do some research and if you don't fully understand, don't invest. Almost all P2P is high risk; so far, most people have had okay returns, but the economy has been pretty good. Things can easily change and returns can collapse with large losses.
|
|
|
|
Post by investor01010101 on Jun 16, 2019 10:55:12 GMT
I get the feeling AC have a somewhat better record than other platforms. Proplend, Blendnetwork & Capitalstackers appear excellent, but unlike AC, availability is a problem with those. I know AC had a bad year 2016 with energy & bridging loans, but they appear to be on top of things now. The information they provide, pre & post loan offerings, are excellent. Their overall default %, after recoveries, appear on face value, to be quite acceptable if you are outside their protected funds. What is the general view ? All in all AC are pretty poor, too many loans in recovery, no interest being paid, borrowers seem to get priority. Even when borrowers clearly miss the agreed payment deadlines against lender vote instructions AC do NOTHING.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Jun 16, 2019 11:24:43 GMT
I get the feeling AC have a somewhat better record than other platforms. Proplend, Blendnetwork & Capitalstackers appear excellent, but unlike AC, availability is a problem with those. I know AC had a bad year 2016 with energy & bridging loans, but they appear to be on top of things now. The information they provide, pre & post loan offerings, are excellent. Their overall default %, after recoveries, appear on face value, to be quite acceptable if you are outside their protected funds. What is the general view ? All in all AC are pretty poor, too many loans in recovery, no interest being paid, borrowers seem to get priority. Even when borrowers clearly miss the agreed payment deadlines against lender vote instructions AC do NOTHING. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What's the longest default loan you have been waiting for a resolution.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Jun 16, 2019 11:38:42 GMT
All in all AC are pretty poor, too many loans in recovery, no interest being paid, borrowers seem to get priority. Even when borrowers clearly miss the agreed payment deadlines against lender vote instructions AC do NOTHING. Not my experience at all. I have just under 100 loans in MLA. Of those, I reckon 7 are in distress (suspended and/or significantly late). 2 - probable write off (more or less) 2 - receiver appointed or in process (might have to take a hair cut, who knows) 3 - pending (too early to say what the outcome will be) Across my AC portfolio, which also includes some QAA and 30DAA, my current estimated XIRR (allowing for identified potential losses) is around 6.6%. There will be more issues, I presume, but the ratios seem good to me.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Jun 16, 2019 13:35:00 GMT
All in all AC are pretty poor, too many loans in recovery, no interest being paid, borrowers seem to get priority. Even when borrowers clearly miss the agreed payment deadlines against lender vote instructions AC do NOTHING. Not my experience at all. I have just under 100 loans in MLA. Of those, I reckon 7 are in distress (suspended and/or significantly late). 2 - probable write off (more or less) 2 - receiver appointed or in process (might have to take a hair cut, who knows) 3 - pending (too early to say what the outcome will be) Across my AC portfolio, which also includes some QAA and 30DAA, my current estimated XIRR (allowing for identified potential losses) is around 6.6%. There will be more issues, I presume, but the ratios seem good to me. Unlike some P2P platforms with no borrower security or just director guarantees; FC for instance with 40% value recovery, I would have thought recovery with AC should be approaching 100%, in terms of value.
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Jun 16, 2019 18:54:33 GMT
Unfortunately security is not all that it seems .
There are loans where the security has turned out to be virtually worthless.
Loans where security is worth significantly less than expected
Large loans where Assetz is seeking to support an indefinite delay because a loss could not be covered by the provision fund
Yes 227, I am looking at you. Two years of fobbing off and no nearer repayment.
I suspect the offer on the bad green loans has only come about because of the clear failure of Assetz duty of care, and the quality of the resultant protest,
even this issue seems to mired in delay.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Jun 16, 2019 19:50:54 GMT
Unfortunately security is not all that it seems . There are loans where the security has turned out to be virtually worthless. Loans where security is worth significantly less than expected Large loans where Assetz is seeking to support an indefinite delay because a loss could not be covered by the provision fund Yes 227, I am looking at you. Two years of fobbing off and no nearer repayment. I suspect the offer on the bad green loans has only come about because of the clear failure of Assetz duty of care, and the quality of the resultant protest, even this issue seems to mired in delay. I agree 227 does look bad, especially as it had 54% LTV, but I suppose you are in position to comment, whereas I cannot see the activity to know what it is all about. I still prefer loans with Security & PGs rather than say FC with PGs only (& some cases none). It's a fact of life with FC, that you start off with say 10% interest, 9% after 1% fees, & end up with around 3% and wait many years for 40% recovery to get back to say 5%. I suppose if you have say 100 loans, as 'ceejay' has with AC, you should be well diversified & should avoid having too many bad ones. Yes you have to be patient, but still I say close to 100% recovery is possible in most cases. I am trying to find out if ACs DD has improved over the years. For instance, how many loans have gone into default this year ?
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Jun 17, 2019 4:58:57 GMT
I agree 227 does look bad, especially as it had 54% LTV, but I suppose you are in position to comment, whereas I cannot see the activity to know what it is all about. I still prefer loans with Security & PGs rather than say FC with PGs only (& some cases none). It's a fact of life with FC, that you start off with say 10% interest, 9% after 1% fees, & end up with around 3% and wait many years for 40% recovery to get back to say 5%. I suppose if you have say 100 loans, as 'ceejay' has with AC, you should be well diversified & should avoid having too many bad ones. Yes you have to be patient, but still I say close to 100% recovery is possible in most cases. I am trying to find out if ACs DD has improved over the years. For instance, how many loans have gone into default this year ? Several points here: First, yes, of course a strong security-backed approach is a good thing. My FC experience (I'm out now except for a few bad loans) is that I'll be lucky if my return gets up as high as 3%. And, of course, being diversified is also a good thing, although it doesn't do much for you if the platform is Failing Completely at identifying poor quality borrowers. I think AC is mostly good at this, although they obviously do have a few unfortunate ones in their back catalogue! And even then, 100% recovery on defaulted secured loans won't always happen. Mostly, yes, but at these interest rates you don't need many bad results to take a big chunk out of your returns. AC have a few (only a few) loans where the return is likely to be very poor because of dodgy security (including two I'm in). But there are many more - I'm looking specifically at property development here - where if the developer fails half way through a build, at a time when the market maybe somewhat down on when the valuation was done, the recovered value could be somewhat less than the (say) 70% LTV. Finally - how many loans have gone into default? Ah, that's a hard one to call on AC, because it's not at all obvious. Loans just slide from being fine, to being a bit late, to being renegotiated, and then sliding a bit more, etc, etc. At none of these points will "Default" be attached. "Suspended", maybe, but that's not the same thing at all, not even close.
|
|
sapphire
Member of DD Central
Posts: 489
Likes: 413
|
Post by sapphire on Jun 20, 2019 18:43:07 GMT
All in all AC are pretty poor, too many loans in recovery, no interest being paid, borrowers seem to get priority. Even when borrowers clearly miss the agreed payment deadlines against lender vote instructions AC do NOTHING. Not my experience at all. I have just under 100 loans in MLA. Of those, I reckon 7 are in distress (suspended and/or significantly late). 2 - probable write off (more or less) 2 - receiver appointed or in process (might have to take a hair cut, who knows) 3 - pending (too early to say what the outcome will be) Across my AC portfolio, which also includes some QAA and 30DAA, my current estimated XIRR (allowing for identified potential losses) is around 6.6%. There will be more issues, I presume, but the ratios seem good to me. I am relatively new to investing via AC's MLA (I have invested in specific loans on other platforms), so would appreciate thoughts from someone who has invested in almost a 100 here. I would also welcome input from others. * What selection criteria do you use? Do you focus on particular categories (say Bridging, Commercial Mortgage?) or invest across all categories of loans? *Do you invest a similar amount across all loans or vary the amount considerably depending on your judgement of the attractiveness of the loan? Is there a max percentage limit of your overall AC MLA portfolio you invest in a single loan? *In another post you mentioned very poor returns on some AC loans due to "dodgy security". It would helpful if you could provide some examples of loan numbers so I can review and be more alert in the future! Thanks.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Jun 20, 2019 19:04:22 GMT
Not my experience at all. I have just under 100 loans in MLA. Of those, I reckon 7 are in distress (suspended and/or significantly late). 2 - probable write off (more or less) 2 - receiver appointed or in process (might have to take a hair cut, who knows) 3 - pending (too early to say what the outcome will be) Across my AC portfolio, which also includes some QAA and 30DAA, my current estimated XIRR (allowing for identified potential losses) is around 6.6%. There will be more issues, I presume, but the ratios seem good to me. I am relatively new to investing via AC's MLA (I have invested in specific loans on other platforms), so would appreciate thoughts from someone who has invested in almost a 100 here. I would also welcome input from others. * What selection criteria do you use? Do you focus on particular categories (say Bridging, Commercial Mortgage?) or invest across all categories of loans? *Do you invest a similar amount across all loans or vary the amount considerably depending on your judgement of the attractiveness of the loan? Is there a max percentage limit of your overall AC MLA portfolio you invest in a single loan? *In another post you mentioned very poor returns on some AC loans due to "dodgy security". It would helpful if you could provide some examples of loan numbers so I can review and be more alert in the future! Thanks. I'll reply as a courtesy but please note that I do not consider myself to be any kind of expert. Don't take advice from random people you find on an internet forum! 1 - personally I have a very specific set of criteria in terms of loan length and interest rate - if a loan doesn't match these then I look no further. If you can get 5+% on the Access accounts, with a degree of protection, I can't see why I would accept anything less than 7.5 in MLA (and I try not to go that low). Everyone has their own view on what markets are good and what aren't, and I won't bore you with mine. If you don't have a view, you probably shouldn't be investing in individual loans. I do read the documents (at least a good skim) and then form a view of the individual project risks. 2 - I have a max amount per borrower which is the same across all platforms. It's about 1% of the amount I have in individual loans. I think this gives me good enough diversification without drowning me in more loans than I can follow. Sometimes if a loan looks mostly ok but has one or two extra risk factors then I might go in for 50% or 25% of my usual. This is a bit arbitrary TBH, but it allows me to be selective about the loans I'm in which gives me at least the illusion that I am taking command of my own risk [there is a high chance that this is entirely self deception, but who cares?] 3 - not much point in sharing loan details as the interesting information is only available to participants in the loans. But you will see discussion on these pages of some of the loans that haven't gone well (wind turbines!!) HTH.
|
|
