|
|
Post by chris on Oct 24, 2014 18:38:40 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. Should auto correct tonight, if not I'll update it. Thanks for the heads up.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 24, 2014 19:48:19 GMT
chris, Not sure if this has been picked up already, but there is a rounding error bug on the manual investment transaction summary. The system has bought £9.30 (I think) of Yorkshire, but the statement is showing -£9.31 which I think is wrong and the tooltip -£9.30000000000000000000 which I think is correct  Purchase loan part 960183 (old id 960026) for 9.30 GBP - principal 9.30, annualised rate 13.500, loan: Yorkshire Leisure Business Loan (66)EDIT: There is also a rounding error on the cash balance right at the top of the dashboard (the barely visble light grey on white background one) which is rounding 0.005578 up to 0.01 not down to 0.00. 
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 24, 2014 22:08:05 GMT
I'll review the front end rounding with the team next week. As a general rule we should be rounding down everywhere. Will make sure it happens.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 25, 2014 3:30:55 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. Might the payments for 24 and 36 have come before the due date? If so, and the system is using the calendar to determine how many payments are left rather than looking at the payment record, this sort of behaviour might be expected. This seems to be what happened at CC Lei****. It is showing 24 months left out of 32, but only seven payments have been received -- the 28/Sep payment still is outstanding. Actually, all of this seems logical if you think of "Term Remaining: 24/32 months" to be referring to time rather than the number of payments received.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 25, 2014 3:37:22 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? You can't tell in advance, but you can see what you've bought. I bought some K+ recently, and the entry in my transaction statement includes... What I miss is an indication of the average rate for my total K+ holding.
|
|
|
|
Post by Come_on_Grandad on Oct 25, 2014 7:39:50 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. Might the payments for 24 and 36 have come before the due date? If so, and the system is using the calendar to determine how many payments are left rather than looking at the payment record, this sort of behaviour might be expected. This seems to be what happened at CC Lei****. It is showing 24 months left out of 32, but only seven payments have been received -- the 28/Sep payment still is outstanding. Actually, all of this seems logical if you think of "Term Remaining: 24/32 months" to be referring to time rather than the number of payments received. Thanks, Mike. You point up the difference between payments remaining (which was the information available to the loans extract on the previous system) and term remaining. Many payments had been held up for a day or two by the changeover, and term remaining had already decremented when I looked at the payments. Those loans that were due yesterday, and paid yesterday, decremented the term remaining at midnight. All's well.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 25, 2014 8:14:57 GMT
Might the payments for 24 and 36 have come before the due date? If so, and the system is using the calendar to determine how many payments are left rather than looking at the payment record, this sort of behaviour might be expected. This seems to be what happened at CC Lei****. It is showing 24 months left out of 32, but only seven payments have been received -- the 28/Sep payment still is outstanding. Actually, all of this seems logical if you think of "Term Remaining: 24/32 months" to be referring to time rather than the number of payments received. Thanks, Mike. You point up the difference between payments remaining (which was the information available to the loans extract on the previous system) and term remaining. Many payments had been held up for a day or two by the changeover, and term remaining had already decremented when I looked at the payments. Those loans that were due yesterday, and paid yesterday, decremented the term remaining at midnight. All's well. There is a question over what should be displayed there. At the moment it's showing number of months until the final payment is due. Should it factor in repayments that have yet to be settled and show the greatest of payments remaining or months remaining? I think I also need to make a small tweak to the calculation as it's out by 1 day.
|
|
|
|
Post by Come_on_Grandad on Oct 25, 2014 8:57:32 GMT
Thanks, Mike. You point up the difference between payments remaining (which was the information available to the loans extract on the previous system) and term remaining. Many payments had been held up for a day or two by the changeover, and term remaining had already decremented when I looked at the payments. Those loans that were due yesterday, and paid yesterday, decremented the term remaining at midnight. All's well. There is a question over what should be displayed there. At the moment it's showing number of months until the final payment is due. Should it factor in repayments that have yet to be settled and show the greatest of payments remaining or months remaining? I think I also need to make a small tweak to the calculation as it's out by 1 day. In the loans extract, I'm happy with the change to term remaining from payments remaining ... although you could easily give us both. A higher priority is to include auction_id (which was a victim of the switchover) and to give 5 dp on holding and on accrued interest. I don't have any firm preference for website display.
|
|
kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 691 
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Oct 25, 2014 8:59:14 GMT
There is a question over what should be displayed there. At the moment it's showing number of months until the final payment is due. Should it factor in repayments that have yet to be settled and show the greatest of payments remaining or months remaining? I think I also need to make a small tweak to the calculation as it's out by 1 day. I think it should ignore repayments, and just display number of months till final repayment is due (e.g., "3/12 months"). I consider the loan's "credit status" (i.e. late payments) to be a separate issue. A little thought needed on what to display if the final payment is at least a month late: "-1/12 months" is logical but isn't immediately obvious to the reader, although "0/12" is easily understood for those loans that are no more than a month past final payment.
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 897
|
Post by JamesFrance on Oct 25, 2014 9:08:50 GMT
When scrolling through the loans, with the mouse wheel set to 'One screen at a time', one loan is hidden each time, presumably under the header. This means you cannot quickly look through the lists. Firefox on Windows7.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Oct 25, 2014 9:11:48 GMT
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). I completely agree with this. It is not acceptable knowingly to increase the exposure of any lender to a loan without explicit authorization from the lender. The new system is complex behind the scenes, and AC cannot expect lenders to understand how to prevent increased exposure from occurring due to a behind-the-scenes change that they are unaware of (the fact that amortizing loans now have a fixed capital value for their targets, even if the lender never set up AI on the old system). I think this now must become a high priority for AC, given the legal risk. I also remain *extremely concerned* that defaulted loans remain tradable. We have discussed before AC's tendency to take a defaulted loan (the bridging loans) and repackage them as extension loans, thus making them tradable once more. We were told we would get a big red warning box. We now have a little purple line that appears right at the top of the browser window, and that I missed each time I looked at the loans in question until someone mentioned it further up this thread. I am also wondering why the E**i*g B*i**e loan, which earlier this week had several thousand pounds of units for sale, now only has £100 of units for sale. Are lenders that keen to invest in a bankrupt loan, or have new entrants to AC naively snapped it up because of the juicy interest rate on offer, or has the AI bought this loan on behalf of investors who have set an overall target? I really think AC is sailing close to the wind here and needs to look at these two (possibly related) issues as a matter of urgency.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 25, 2014 10:31:16 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? You can't tell in advance, but you can see what you've bought. I bought some K+ recently, and the entry in my transaction statement includes... Hmm. If I understood an earlier post by chris corrrectly, then your holding in K+ is split into multiple units, with each unit aggregating purchases at a given rate. If you have no other 12.7% parts (for example) you are unlikely to see a cash return on the 1p as the interest accruel calc will be working on just that 1p of capital.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Barlow on Oct 25, 2014 10:47:49 GMT
When scrolling through the loans, with the mouse wheel set to 'One screen at a time', one loan is hidden each time, presumably under the header. This means you cannot quickly look through the lists. Firefox on Windows7. If I'm understanding the issue you've raised, I think I'm seeing the same thing in Chrome on Windows 7 when using page up/page down. It seems to be caused by the overlap header (that appears once you start scrolling) not rendering correctly - it turns into a thick bar with wrapped text whereas before scrolling it's a thin header with single-line text (on my monitor anyway).
|
|
|
|
Post by Come_on_Grandad on Oct 25, 2014 10:57:58 GMT
You can't tell in advance, but you can see what you've bought. I bought some K+ recently, and the entry in my transaction statement includes... Hmm. If I understood an earlier post by chris corrrectly, then your holding in K+ is split into multiple units, with each unit aggregating purchases at a given rate. If you have no other 12.7% parts (for example) you are unlikely to see a cash return on the 1p as the interest accruel calc will be working on just that 1p of capital. I was able to set a target (on a loan I don't have) of £0.01p so it seems likely to me that chris is not taking any precautions against this. Maybe there should be a concept of a minimum holding (perhaps £5, or a calculation of the least amount that would produce a 1p return if held to the term of the loan), so that sales can continue to be distributed as shrapnel but only to those purchasers who do not run the risk of holding useless scraps. Similarly, a sale that left you with a useless holding should not be allowed.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Oct 25, 2014 11:00:43 GMT
Hmm. If I understood an earlier post by chris corrrectly, then your holding in K+ is split into multiple units, with each unit aggregating purchases at a given rate. If you have no other 12.7% parts (for example) you are unlikely to see a cash return on the 1p as the interest accruel calc will be working on just that 1p of capital. I was able to set a target (on a loan I don't have) of £0.01p so it seems likely to me that chris is not taking any precautions against this. Maybe there should be a concept of a minimum holding (perhaps £5, or a calculation of the least amount that would produce a 1p return if held to the term of the loan), so that sales can continue to be distributed as shrapnel but only to those purchasers who do not run the risk of holding useless scraps. Similarly, a sale that left you with a useless holding should not be allowed. Remember all balances are now to 20 decimal places, so a 1p holding can still generate a fraction of a penny return for you. Those fractions will add up over time across all investments on all loans until you have a whole penny.
|
|
