|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Oct 24, 2014 11:06:59 GMT
We're going to be adding the third option in there of setting your target to x so hopefully both methodologies will be catered for. That sounds like common sense to me.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563 
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on Oct 24, 2014 11:11:25 GMT
We're going to be adding the third option in there of setting your target to x so hopefully both methodologies will be catered for. That sounds like common sense to me. Can I suggest you display both figures, for preference changing dynamically. So as you type (starting from a target of 200) Increase by 5 to 205 Increase by 50 to 250 Increase by 500 to 700 or change target to 7 decrease by 193 change target to 70 decrease by 130 change target to 700 increase by 500 and definitely display both on the confirmation dialog
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Oct 24, 2014 11:17:49 GMT
We had a fair few lenders complain about the old way of doing things, particularly new lenders who found having to enter the total they wanted to hold to be counter intuitive. Several wanted to increase their holdings but ended up selling loan units after being caught out by that. We're going to be adding the third option in there of setting your target to x so hopefully both methodologies will be catered for. What I found counter initiative was why it was changed after we all go used to how it was on the old site. I eventually got my head round to think the AI way only to find this week.... I was just about to start hitting the computer with a baseball bat then but I just stopped in time!
|
|
unmadem
Member of DD Central
Posts: 377
Likes: 181
|
Post by unmadem on Oct 24, 2014 11:19:21 GMT
However, there seem to me far more urgent issues to deal with before these kinds of tweaks, such as fixing the bug causing the account totals to be wrong, for example by showing a temporary subtotal for "Reserved for bids from old site" within the cash account... or at the very least having a banner on the main screen acknowledging the problem! It is unacceptable that the bid money simply appears to have vanished into a black hole. I agree. I'd imagine the admin team at AC would too, they must be getting calls about this.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 24, 2014 11:39:15 GMT
Out of interest(!), has anyone received any interest or principal since the update? I have one loan (107) which was due 22nd and doesn't seem to have been paid. Is that loan late or is there a more general problem ..... or am I looking in the wrong place? Just one, on 21st Oct 2014 at 16:14 - interest £0.77, principal £0.27, total £1.05 As designed, the system immediately re-invested this in a different loan that was short of my target. Payments that were due yesterday do have money in our account but will be distributed to lenders later today once I'm happy with the accrued interest calculation. Whilst I'm confident in the calculation method used repayments I've taken the precaution as I wanted to make sure nothing else was unearthed when pulling apart the front end calculation. The calculation is finished and the display coded so we should be going live shortly after a final couple of checks. Once that's done I'll give it an hour or so for the community to pick up on any discrepancies before I let the admin team process those payments.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Oct 24, 2014 11:44:47 GMT
Payments that were due yesterday do have money in our account but will be distributed to lenders later today once I'm happy with the accrued interest calculation. Presumably you'll also need to ensure that no unauthorised purchases will be made as a result of those payments, by ensuring that the system only attempts to restore the original capital exposure for those who have actually set a target (whether on the old system or the new).
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 24, 2014 11:48:22 GMT
Payments that were due yesterday do have money in our account but will be distributed to lenders later today once I'm happy with the accrued interest calculation. Presumably you'll also need to ensure that no unauthorised purchases will be made as a result of those payments, by ensuring that the system only attempts to restore the original capital exposure for those who have actually set a target (whether on the old system or the new). I'm not making any other changes to the system as part of this. The targets as currently set are those that will remaining, there have been too many user made changes to be able to work out which should be left and which should be changed. Once this change is live and sorted I'll be turning my attention to the manual invest system and reading through all the feedback both on the forum and off.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Oct 24, 2014 12:05:27 GMT
I'm not making any other changes to the system as part of this. The targets as currently set are those that will remaining, there have been too many user made changes to be able to work out which should be left and which should be changed. As I don't know your database schema, I can't readily put the following into SQL, but you're looking for any target which: 1. was created by the system during the migration 2. for a user who had auto-invest switched off on that loan 3. has not subsequently been modified by that user Note that: - for users who set an AI target, they gave Assetz authorisation to maintain that target, even if the old system's granularity didn't allow Assetz to immediately act on that instruction. - for users who have subsequently set or modified the target on the new system, this can be taken as authorisation to maintain THAT target. - for users in neither of those categories, no authorisation has ever been received from the user to buy further loan parts. Whilst mistakes occur, it seems to me that knowingly spending a user's money on loan units that the user has never given authorisation to purchase could be illegal. I would suggest that you consult with your legal team on this matter, as it is not merely a tech problem. A short-term workaround whilst you work on a long-term fix could be to suspend trading in any loan that has had a repayment since the migration. The legitimately-set targets can do their thing when the problem has been fixed and trading resumed.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 24, 2014 12:09:14 GMT
I'm not making any other changes to the system as part of this. The targets as currently set are those that will remaining, there have been too many user made changes to be able to work out which should be left and which should be changed. As I don't know your database schema, I can't readily put the following into SQL, but you're looking for any target which: 1. was created by the system during the migration 2. for a user who had auto-invest switched off on that loan 3. has not subsequently been modified by that user Note that: - for users who set an AI target, they gave Assetz authorisation to maintain that target, even if the old system's granularity didn't allow Assetz to immediately act on that instruction. - for users who have subsequently set or modified the target on the new system, this can be taken as authorisation to maintain THAT target. - for users in neither of those categories, no authorisation has ever been received from the user to buy further loan parts. Whilst mistakes occur, it seems to me that knowingly spending a user's money on loan units that the user has never given authorisation to purchase could be illegal. I would suggest that you consult with your legal team on this matter, as it is not merely a tech problem. A short-term workaround whilst you work on a long-term fix could be to suspend trading in any loan that has had a repayment since the migration. The legitimately-set targets can do their thing when the problem has been fixed and trading resumed. That doesn't cover those that have reviewed their figure and even though it wasn't what they expected they are happy with how it is set. As I've said I do not plan to make any further changes to the target but I do intend to improve the tools provided to lenders to manage that target and how it is used.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Oct 24, 2014 12:40:38 GMT
That doesn't cover those that have reviewed their figure and even though it wasn't what they expected they are happy with how it is set. As I've said I do not plan to make any further changes to the target but I do intend to improve the tools provided to lenders to manage that target and how it is used. I would tend to think that "failing to immediately act on an authorisation to purchase loan units the moment such units become available" would not present the same kind of legal issues as "purchasing loan units despite no authorisation to do so having been given". As I say, I'd think your safest short-term option will be to suspend trading in loan units which have received a repayment, to give some breathing space to consult with your legal team about what you are and are not legally permitted to do (and indeed what you will be required to do to correct any unauthorised activity that may have already occurred). Once the "correct" action for each circumstance has been established, you can apply the appropriate corrections and re-enable trading in these loan units. Whilst any initial unauthorised purchases that may have occurred (following repayments that happened on the first day may) be reasonably be explained as a legitimate mistake, the same cannot be said for intentionally proceeding to allow a system to be triggered that you have been informed may give rise to (further?) unauthorised purchases.
|
|
andy2001
Member of DD Central
Posts: 361
Likes: 34
|
Post by andy2001 on Oct 24, 2014 16:28:00 GMT
It seems no longer possible to sell or buy at a discount. Also how do you see what rate your buying on reverse auctioned loans?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 24, 2014 16:34:05 GMT
It seems no longer possible to sell or buy at a discount. Also how do you say what rate your buying on reverse auctioned loans? The reverse auctioned loans aren't really supported any more as support for that type of auction has been removed from the rest of the site. They're still there and repayments have been made to work with them, but it was felt it was counter productive to clutter the user interface or build additional controls just to support those two historic loans. Loan units can still be bought and sold but allocation will be random rather than targeting the loan units with the highest or lowest rates when buying or selling. Selling at a discount will be making a return next week. It was consciously removed for launch to reduce complexity and confusion in the interface with all the other changes being made.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,880
Likes: 6,965
|
Post by duck on Oct 24, 2014 16:37:26 GMT
In the old site the corresponding box had Personal Name of Company Ltd displayed which made identifying which account you were in easy ............... can similar be re-instated?
What can I say, now showing, my grey cells say thanks very much!
|
|
|
|
Post by Come_on_Grandad on Oct 24, 2014 18:26:51 GMT
chris 8 loans have made repayments on the new website, the "term remaining" was correctly updated in 6. But auction ids 24 and 36 have failed to take one month off the remaining term.
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Oct 24, 2014 18:37:32 GMT
Out of interest(!), has anyone received any interest or principal since the update? I have one loan (107) which was due 22nd and doesn't seem to have been paid. Is that loan late or is there a more general problem ..... or am I looking in the wrong place? Yes, some on 21st/22nd, more today, although I think there has been some pauses while fixes go through.
|
|
