Times have changed at Funding Secure

Which two any why out of interest?

Yeah they already had 520 of them before the loan even opened.  They only needed 80 and £2000 which was absolutely nothing not so long ago but now appears to be a struggle.  You can try and fake news spin it but barely being able to get £2000 into a pawn loan shows investor confidence in Funding Secure has completely evaporated.

Hardly anyone trusts this platform with their money anymore, and quite rightly so.  It's entirely their own fault - they went for the short term who cares about the lenders attitude.

15th may 2019 another charge against FUNDING SECURE LTD.have asked questions on DD but it's all gone quiet.it seems to be in favour of an existing borrower whose directors are involved in both ltd cos. We know about the 1 charge with the new head man who in my opinion seems to be doing a bit of a LB from LY. This could just be all good business sense from FS but I don't trust them at all.my DD skills are vey ltd but would like to know about this new charge and how it would affect us in the future.

System Update

In order to improve our customer's experience we will be enhancing our communication process and upgrading our online chat as of 17 June 2019. The new system will provide a knowledge bank with auto replies along with the option to speak to an agent.

"We continue to be in discussions with the borrower"
"Interest continues to accrue"
"We continue to believe that the best approach is to work with the borrower."
...

Your reluctance to look at the larger picture has led me to actually look at the investor list; there are currently 370 investors with another 50 needed to compete the allocation.

So, not 80 as you keep saying, but hundreds as I have stated.

This renewal business and the numbers.

There are 371 "investments" in this loan so far.  Of those, there are 197 unique* usernames.  Of those, I'd expect the majority to operate ISA and non-ISA accounts.  And finally, of those, I'd expect a significant proportion to invest on behalf of spouses and other family members.  So, my guess is that there are around 100 "unique" investors in this one.

* usernames are not unique to an investors account, e.g. DAN1 will combine with DEB1.

Edit: What's the point in keeping tabs on the numbers?  For me, it's about how sustainable the business model is and my current view is that FS should give up on the retail investor side because it's just gone too far south and I can't see how they're going to recover with all the problem loans still to be resolved.  So, what would I do?  I'd run down the small pawn loans (perhaps they're doing this already with only renewals and new loans going to existing borrowers who would otherwise default on their existing loans), close the business to new retail investments, and grow the business via institutional investors concentrating on bridging and development, i.e. turn the P2P into a traditional bridging/development finance provider.  I can't really see the benefit of keeping this show on the current road.

6 seconds to fill once the limit was lifted.

As I've said before, I agree confidence in pawn will likely have taken a hit, but we've also had many threads in the last few months stating a slow renewal on a clearly riskier investment (which I class this one as) somehow definitively proves something while ignoring the almost instantly filled better loans