sl75
Posts: 2,092 
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jun 27, 2019 9:50:26 GMT
I'm not a LAG admin and had no hand in creating it, I'm a regular user who signed up a few days ago. I can see it's worth as already documents are being archived, emails being collated for RSM, a general flow of good ideas and already some very specific questions LB needs to answer for are surfacing. This is a very good thing. Attacking the resource itself, not so clever, definitely not constructive in any reality. To be clear, there are two main issues I see. Neither an attack on the concept of a group of motivated investors organising themselves however they wish.
1. However many people it attracts, it simply won't be representative of the lender base, but lazy reporters seeking investors' opinions may well take whatever a spokeman for LAG says as representive of what "lendy investors" think. Many investors are relatively passive, and their investment is worth just as much pound for pound. Some investors may need additional re-assurance that they will be treated fairly even if they don't participate in the "action group", and some may be joining out of fear that if they don't they'll not be treated fairly. In particular, I'd anticipate that "Lendy Wealth" customers' representation in the group will be rather different to those customers' £ involvement - the qualifying question in the "entrance exam" wouldn't even make sense to Wealth customers, but if anything they're in even more need of having their voices heard.
2. Given the semi-open nature of the group, it seems quite likely that anyone with an interest in actively interfering with or undermining the activities of the group may have shills as members of the group. Assume, for example, that LB, and our "favourite" borrowers all have access to the group. As long as all members are aware of this and conduct themselves accordingly (sharing with "the group" only documents that they would be happy to copy to LB and to various borrowers, but passing more sensitive information directly to RSM), that's not a problem in itself, but the "security theatre" on the sign-up page seems intended to convince most members that they're in a safe area which only legitimate lenders can access, which to me seems to create a risk of some members sharing things that they shouldn't. In particular, how much time will LB's team now have to prepare for the "very specific questions" before anyone with authority to demand an answer will have an opportunity to ask them?
To my mind, the more effective "action" is to pass on any information that may help RSM with their investigations or "sensitive" questions directly to RSM, letting their "front line" staff determine which queries need only a simple response with a link to the relevant FAQ, and which should be reviewed by the team specialising in that area (as I mentioned before, one of the queries had was in the latter category). They seem to have their own front-line staff capable of collating emails without a third-party group doing it for them. Regarding creating an archive of documents intended for lenders, but to which anyone with enough motivation can gain access, if the archive of documents simply serves the same purpose as the "common queries dealt with by RSM front-line staff / FAQs", and contains nothing that could be used against lenders later, that's no problem, and actually of a slight benefit as it reduces the workload on front-line RSM staff, but if even a single document is available even briefly that has the potential to undermine (or allow a counter-party the opportunity to obstruct) the entire case against someone, this creates a risk that the relevant entity will have obtained a copy via the group; a risk that exists whether or not I'm a member of the group.
There already seems to be a bit too much info being freely discussed even on this public forum (and I'm sure I've been guilty at various times of getting involved in discussions that shouldn't have happened), so I dread to think what is being discussed (probably with LB and our "favourite" borrowers closely watching) in a group whose members believe they're having a private discussion. The only real mitigation is that unlike this forum the contents of the group won't be publicly indexed by google etc., but any leaks might not be found until a court case or enforcement action collapses because of them - this isn't a call to start some kind of "mole hunt" within the group, but simply advice to assume that any and all information within the group will be leaked to persons who intend to use it against you, and conduct yourself accordingly... (treat it as though you're carbon-copying LB and any relevant borrowers on anything you post to the group - if it turns out the group hadn't been infiltrated after all, then no harm done...).
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Jun 27, 2019 10:43:32 GMT
Dear SL75, the point is
LAG does not claim to represent anybody else but its members (and the more the better), the aims are set out below and surely not controversial.
LAG does feel it's better for lenders not to remain isolated, we know the power of social groups, this process does have a political dmension. To facilitate lenders finding others in a similar position as themselves is going to be useful for them in all sorts of ways as things go forward...
LAG does not care if LB or borrowers read our site, and we would like FCA, Administrator , FOS , FSCS etc read it and we are / have invited them.
LAG Mission Statement:
1. To act as a point of support and provide co-ordination, news and information to Lendy investors affected by their collapse.
2. To work collectively to recover our investment. We are many but dispersed – together we become strong.
3. To be a voice for investors to the administrators, regulators and press.
4. To explore potential opportunities for further actions (if they become necessary and legal basis can be defined for such).
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Jun 27, 2019 11:06:52 GMT
I believe the topic of security questions is being addressed, to cataegorize members by interest rather than make it exclusive.
It should be appreciated the website is freshly launched but maturing nicely,
and I have great appreciation for Monetus who has created a platform with the functionality to accumulate information and documents in a structured way which is going to be of great benefit moving forwards
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Jun 27, 2019 11:19:54 GMT
It should be appreciated the website is freshly launched but maturing nicely, As Bruce has mentioned we welcome anyone with an interest in the Lendy Administration to join the LAG. We have also made it clear to people inside that this is a public website and that they shouldn't libel or post legally privileged information. To quote the words of Paul Riddell in Lendy's newsletter dated July 21st 2017, we also adopt a "fail fast and pivot" strategy when it comes to the website which is only a few days old and will be an ongoing process. "Fail fast and pivot
What I have enjoyed the most over recent years, however, has been working with a great many start-ups, and companies like Google and Facebook, who work at the cutting edge of technology and who adopt what is known as a "fail fast”, or "pivot", approach to innovation.
"Fail fast" or "pivoting" are about looking at ways to fix the short term. The smaller things. Of trying something, getting fast feedback, and then honing it. Many entrepreneurial businesses, whether in the UK's world-beating fintech centre, operating out of innovation hubs like wework, or the start-up capital of the world, Silicon Valley, operate in this way.
Not sure how to improve your service? One way would be to talk to a lot of people, get all their different views, assess their merits, decide what to do, schedule it on the development roadmap, evolve and test it, dot all the i's and cross all the t's and then maybe release it, if the person in charge of the project is still around.
Or you could just get something out there and if it doesn’t work, fail fast, pivot, and try something else.
The latter has been our approach. And one we'll be sticking to as we navigate our path, in a sector that is still very young, but learning fast from its past successes and mistakes.We took this approach when we built the platform over four years ago. And we've stuck with it, as new players have joined the market, and the FCA has taken more interest in the models that are operating."Some thoughts:
We are currently approaching 700 members which considering we've only been around for a month I think is pretty good. To put this in perspective the London Capital and Finance Action Group with 11,000 investors has a group of around 1100 and has been running for more than six months. While Lendy claimed to have 22,000 investors on their website my feeling is that this is more likely to be the total number of investor website accounts and that the true number of "active" investors is likely significantly lower (perhaps even just a few thousand). I guess we may find out when the administrators proposals come out. The public exposure for LAG in the media has resulted in many people with useful information reaching out to us (including former Lendy employees) who would have otherwise stayed silent so I think there is definitely a benefit to a public pressure group such as LAG. We have also received support and advice from other Action Group leaders in regards to strategy which has been very useful and opened our eyes to various options for later down the line that we otherwise wouldn't have known about. We will never claim to represent or speak for all investors. Some people will want to follow their own path and won't agree with the route we're taking and that's totally fine. Anyone is free to sign up/leave if they don't agree with our proposals, or indeed write directly to RSM with their own concerns regarding the administration just as we have done. From the various messages of support we have received thus far many Lendy investors seem to be very pleased to have somewhere like LAG .
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jun 27, 2019 13:44:14 GMT
LAG does not care if LB or borrowers read our site, ... As mentioned in the previous discussion, the site was sending a confusing mixed message about this with its "security questions", which appeared intended to restrict access but in fact did no such thing, so thanks for confirming this is under review.
As long as members recognise this and are as careful in what they post as they would be in any other publicly accessible forum, I see no problem at all.
LAG Mission Statement:
1. To act as a point of support and provide co-ordination, news and information to Lendy investors affected by their collapse.
2. To work collectively to recover our investment. We are many but dispersed – together we become strong.
3. To be a voice for investors to the administrators, regulators and press.
4. To explore potential opportunities for further actions (if they become necessary and legal basis can be defined for such).
I still think that there's a risk that point 3 may be misunderstood by other parties (and especially the press) as (in effect) "To provide a spokesman who can be contacted to express the collective view of all investors ...", and in any case the administrators have provided contact details that all investors can use without the need for someone else to "be a voice" for them, but accept that this is not LAG's intent.
Point 2 currently appears to be part of RSM's job.
Point 1 seems adequately covered by the existing forum.
Which just leaves point 4 - if further actions prove necessary in the future I'll consider my options further (e.g. the 8 week deadline isn't too far away now!)
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 14:52:56 GMT
LAG does not care if LB or borrowers read our site, ... As mentioned in the previous discussion, the site was sending a confusing mixed message about this with its "security questions", which appeared intended to restrict access but in fact did no such thing, so thanks for confirming this is under review.
As long as members recognise this and are as careful in what they post as they would be in any other publicly accessible forum, I see no problem at all.
LAG Mission Statement:
1. To act as a point of support and provide co-ordination, news and information to Lendy investors affected by their collapse.
2. To work collectively to recover our investment. We are many but dispersed – together we become strong.
3. To be a voice for investors to the administrators, regulators and press.
4. To explore potential opportunities for further actions (if they become necessary and legal basis can be defined for such).
I still think that there's a risk that point 3 may be misunderstood by other parties (and especially the press) as (in effect) "To provide a spokesman who can be contacted to express the collective view of all investors ...", and in any case the administrators have provided contact details that all investors can use without the need for someone else to "be a voice" for them, but accept that this is not LAG's intent.
Point 2 currently appears to be part of RSM's job.
Point 1 seems adequately covered by the existing forum.
Which just leaves point 4 - if further actions prove necessary in the future I'll consider my options further (e.g. the 8 week deadline isn't too far away now!)
The action group itself, rather than this site is the best way to communicate with others on the subject so everyone can debate the matters you raise. If you choose not to do so and prefer to speak with other investors here only, that is of course your choice entirely, but there's only so much time your fellow investors can devote to you here if you have no intention of joining other investors in the action group. This thread was made when only the facebook group was implemented. Now that the site is running with a growing number of forum topics, it makes no sense to continue splitting time and the ongoing debate re LAG here.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jun 27, 2019 15:02:49 GMT
The action group itself, rather than this site is the best way to communicate with others on the subject so everyone can debate the matters you raise. If you choose not to do so and prefer to speak with other investors here only, that is of course your choice entirely, but there's only so much time your fellow investors can devote to you here if you have no intention of joining other investors in the action group. This thread was made when only the facebook group was implemented. Now that the site is running with a growing number of forum topics, it makes no sense to continue splitting time and the ongoing debate re LAG here. This independent forum was already existing when the "action group" was created. There are other pre-existing forums too.
If LAG choose to further split the debate away from the existing resources, that is of course up to them, but it is the LAG that created the split, and not users of the existing forums.
As you say splitting time between multiple discussion sites makes no sense. Here I can discuss all my P2P investments in one place, and I don't feel a need for creating a new account in another place just to discuss one of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 15:25:11 GMT
The action group itself, rather than this site is the best way to communicate with others on the subject so everyone can debate the matters you raise. If you choose not to do so and prefer to speak with other investors here only, that is of course your choice entirely, but there's only so much time your fellow investors can devote to you here if you have no intention of joining other investors in the action group. This thread was made when only the facebook group was implemented. Now that the site is running with a growing number of forum topics, it makes no sense to continue splitting time and the ongoing debate re LAG here. This independent forum was already existing when the "action group" was created. There are other pre-existing forums too.
If LAG choose to further split the debate away from the existing resources, that is of course up to them, but it is the LAG that created the split, and not users of the existing forums.
As you say splitting time between multiple discussion sites makes no sense. Here I can discuss all my P2P investments in one place, and I don't feel a need for creating a new account in another place just to discuss one of them.
LAG is exclusively for Lendy investors.
|
|
bramhall17
Member of DD Central
Posts: 88
Likes: 148
|
Post by bramhall17 on Jun 27, 2019 15:32:46 GMT
Personally I think these guys should be commended for their efforts. They are facilitating a streamlining process to unearth and provide extra factual information to RSM ( FCA ?) . As a dedicated conduit for such information, I can see that they also need to be careful about the perceived positioning of the LAG in terms of acting as an overall pressure group. I also agree that care has to be taken not to divulge or discuss potentially sensitive information that is part of existing legal privilege. But if RSM were to pro-actively open up a dialogue will all Lendy investors, then surely this could lead to significant duplication and for them to collate,manage and assess would add extra fees and thus less ultimately available for distribution.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 15:37:47 GMT
Personally I think these guys should be commended for their efforts. They are facilitating a streamlining process to unearth and provide extra factual information to RSM ( FCA ?) . As a dedicated conduit for such information, I can see that they also need to be careful about the perceived positioning of the LAG in terms of acting as an overall pressure group. I also agree that care has to be taken not to divulge or discuss potentially sensitive information that is part of existing legal privilege. But if RSM were to pro-actively open up a dialogue will all Lendy investors, then surely this could lead to significant duplication and for them to collate,manage and assess would add extra fees and thus less ultimately available for distribution. On the contrary, investors have access to documents that Lendy may have removed, such as previous versions of terms, email shots, advertising banners etc. No one is suggesting they spend days on LAG content, rather an afternoon to flick through issues raised and available documents. Once their final report is out we'll be in a much better position to determine if there were any gaps in their reconciliation which investors may be able to provide clarity on, and indeed any issues they may have missed entirely. The administrator's fees compared to a £192m loan book in recovery will be almost insignificant, and much better to help them do their job by researching and collating info as a whole, rather than thousands of investors sending letters and emails to the administrator which will certainly increase the amount of time we're being billed for.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Jun 27, 2019 15:58:36 GMT
This independent forum was already existing when the "action group" was created. There are other pre-existing forums too.
If LAG choose to further split the debate away from the existing resources, that is of course up to them, but it is the LAG that created the split, and not users of the existing forums. As you say splitting time between multiple discussion sites makes no sense. Here I can discuss all my P2P investments in one place, and I don't feel a need for creating a new account in another place just to discuss one of them.
LAG is exclusively for Lendy investors. Errr... sorry to be pedantic, and I appreciate that you are not the official voice of LAG nor part of its' administration so may be forgiven for not being up to date with stated policy, but Monetus has already confirmed that: " we welcome anyone with an interest in the Lendy Administration to join the LAG"
|
|
bramhall17
Member of DD Central
Posts: 88
Likes: 148
|
Post by bramhall17 on Jun 27, 2019 16:08:54 GMT
Personally I think these guys should be commended for their efforts. They are facilitating a streamlining process to unearth and provide extra factual information to RSM ( FCA ?) . As a dedicated conduit for such information, I can see that they also need to be careful about the perceived positioning of the LAG in terms of acting as an overall pressure group. I also agree that care has to be taken not to divulge or discuss potentially sensitive information that is part of existing legal privilege. But if RSM were to pro-actively open up a dialogue will all Lendy investors, then surely this could lead to significant duplication and for them to collate,manage and assess would add extra fees and thus less ultimately available for distribution. On the contrary, investors have access to documents that Lendy may have removed, such as previous versions of terms, email shots, advertising banners etc. No one is suggesting they spend days on LAG content, rather an afternoon to flick through issues raised and available documents. Once their final report is out we'll be in a much better position to determine if there were any gaps in their reconciliation which investors may be able to provide clarity on, and indeed any issues they may have missed entirely. The administrator's fees compared to a £192m loan book in recovery will be almost insignificant, and much better to help them do their job by researching and collating info as a whole, rather than thousands of investors sending letters and emails to the administrator which will certainly increase the amount of time we're being billed for.
|
|
bramhall17
Member of DD Central
Posts: 88
Likes: 148
|
Post by bramhall17 on Jun 27, 2019 16:11:32 GMT
I agree -- not sure how what I said was contrary to this ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 16:31:16 GMT
There is an ongoing discussion regarding restricting parts of the site to investors only, and the verification method to achieve that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2019 16:32:32 GMT
I agree -- not sure how what I said was contrary to this ?
"But if RSM were to pro-actively open up a dialogue will all Lendy investors, then surely this could lead to significant duplication and for them to collate,manage and assess would add extra fees and thus less ultimately available for distribution."
You suggested that LAG will incur additional fees from the administrators by increasing their workload. I disagree for the reasons set out in my reply.
|
|
