|
|
Post by pepperpot on Mar 18, 2015 11:51:33 GMT
One issue I could see is that you'd end up with a negative accrued interest if a payment is received and processed before the due date. I see andrewholgate mentioned looking into DD payments, which if processed like FC (DD date is something like 5 days prior to distribution date to make sure only cleared funds are paid), should combat that. If the payments continue to be manual from some borrowers then it could be argued that it's in AC's hands to only distribute them on the expected day. It's all too ad-hoc atm and needs cleaning up a bit, but I think that's the intention.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 18, 2015 12:02:48 GMT
I'm having a hard time trying to understand this. Surely the interest accrued is the interest which will be paid over the entire period divided by the fraction of that period that the units have been held for. As we can buy and sell units the interest has to be really calculated on a day-by-day basis, albeit that it only becomes cash when the interest is paid. So from a software perspective there should just be one value per day which is the interest due on a loan and if that loan gets repaid by the end of the month (as expected) then all the daily interest values add up to the monthly repayment. Then there's no inconsistency problem because there is only one method used to calculate interest - the right one. I think I agree. The only variance I can see is on a monthly basis, where identical monthly interest payments get divided by a slightly differing number of days, but the calc should be the same formula. Sorry if this seems like a waste of time chris, but could you spell out the two different calculations you mentioned? AFAICS one value should just be a % of the other. Both calculations are run as single recursive queries in the database so there's a couple of subtle differences. For the interest payment there's no cap for the period up to which the interest is calculated - it's calculated up to the point the repayment is due - and there are various additional locks in place within the SELECT statements to ensure that concurrency isn't an issue. The latter is probably unnecessary as that service should never run more than once and serialises requests but is there as a safety precaution. With the accrued interest we use an almost direct copy and paste of the calculation but without the locking and with a cap on the repayment period of the current date. The return format is also slightly different for the accrued interest as we calculate per loan unit rather than per lender as with the interest payment. They're not really different calculations just subtly different implementations of the same calculation.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 18, 2015 12:12:09 GMT
One issue I could see is that you'd end up with a negative accrued interest if a payment is received and processed before the due date. GREATEST(accured_interest, 0.0)
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 18, 2015 15:32:02 GMT
One issue I could see is that you'd end up with a negative accrued interest if a payment is received and processed before the due date. What seems to happen in practice is that all of the interest goes to whoever was holding the loan part at the time the payment was made, and no further interest accrues between then and the date the payment was due. This wouldn't be a problem if it weren't for people buying and selling parts. If a loan has been paid early and then a part is sold immediately, the seller ends up with interest the didn't earn, and the buyer ends up earning no interest until the payment due date. I'm not sure what, if anything, AC have done when a payment arrives a day or two early, but if it's significantly early they have to act. Look at Loan #123. A payment due on 30/Mar was credited on 12/Mar, and AC have stopped trading of parts for this loan until 31/Mar. (Though you can't know that without reading the updates and/or the Q&A, because the usual 'Investments Paused' flag is not showing.)
|
|
ianj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 656 
Likes: 520
|
Post by ianj on Mar 18, 2015 18:27:12 GMT
I've forced a recalculation of accrued interest on all loans. <snip> Wouldn't be surprised if I've missed something pertinent but Loan #103 appears not to have been affected!
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Mar 18, 2015 19:05:33 GMT
chris is it a good time to remind you that the bug we discovered in the handling of Loan #40[mod editing out name] loan parts (purchased on AM, amount spent != eventual holding, from around 12 months ago, detected around September last) has STILL not been resolved, last I heard it was waiting for "management signoff" on the correction. MW is aware of this one too, no answer there either. What happened there then?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 18, 2015 21:14:54 GMT
I've forced a recalculation of accrued interest on all loans. <snip> Wouldn't be surprised if I've missed something pertinent but Loan #103 appears not to have been affected! Inasmuch as that one has run past the end of its extension, and the interest rate shown is 0.0%, I'm not surprised that it's not accruing interest at the moment. I don't think it will until the extension is extended. So that's an input data problem rather than an AI calculation problem. Still, it does need fixing by somebody.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Mar 18, 2015 21:50:40 GMT
Inasmuch as that one has run past the end of its extension, and the interest rate shown is 0.0%, I'm not surprised that it's not accruing interest at the moment. I don't think it will until the extension is extended. So that's an input data problem rather than an AI calculation problem. Still, it does need fixing by somebody. It seems to me that the initial default interest rate needs to be routinely entered for ALL loans, in order to avoid this "0.0%" display issue. Of course, these would need to be entered in such a manner that it doesn't make the loan appear that it has more payments remaining than have been agreed with the borrower, and I'm sure chris will be able to remind the admins of how to do this in case they've forgotten.
|
|
ianj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 656
Likes: 520
|
Post by ianj on Mar 18, 2015 22:16:18 GMT
Wouldn't be surprised if I've missed something pertinent but Loan #103 appears not to have been affected! Inasmuch as that one has run past the end of its extension, and the interest rate shown is 0.0%, I'm not surprised that it's not accruing interest at the moment. I don't think it will until the extension is extended. So that's an input data problem rather than an AI calculation problem. Still, it does need fixing by somebody. There were, I believe, a number of other loans which were, when I last updated my spreadsheet, showing as 0%. The interest rate correction and increased accrued interest appeared to have occurred at the same point. I was wondering why B****n B****e had been excluded from the adjustments which were supposedly applied to all loans.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 18, 2015 22:35:08 GMT
Inasmuch as that one has run past the end of its extension, and the interest rate shown is 0.0%, I'm not surprised that it's not accruing interest at the moment. I don't think it will until the extension is extended. So that's an input data problem rather than an AI calculation problem. Still, it does need fixing by somebody. There were, I believe, a number of other loans which were, when I last updated my spreadsheet, showing as 0%. The interest rate correction and increased accrued interest appeared to have occurred at the same point. I was wondering why B****n B****e had been excluded from the adjustments which were supposedly applied to all loans. Its a different thing. The issue with BB is that the loan has passed its redemption date & this needs to be extended before it is able to calculate accruals again. I believe this is an operation that admin needs to do not IT. Sp***** B****** which was the other 0% loan had its period extended yesterday (cant remember other) & is now showing correct rate & accruals. What Chris did yesterday was fix an issue that had distorted accruals on loans where the info was correct. At least, that is my understanding. I think accruals on #69, #39 are also incorrect due to incorrect rates & #129 due to an incorrect end date
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Mar 19, 2015 20:05:57 GMT
I think I agree. The only variance I can see is on a monthly basis, where identical monthly interest payments get divided by a slightly differing number of days, but the calc should be the same formula. Sorry if this seems like a waste of time chris, but could you spell out the two different calculations you mentioned? AFAICS one value should just be a % of the other. Both calculations are run as single recursive queries in the database so there's a couple of subtle differences. For the interest payment there's no cap for the period up to which the interest is calculated - it's calculated up to the point the repayment is due - and there are various additional locks in place within the SELECT statements to ensure that concurrency isn't an issue. The latter is probably unnecessary as that service should never run more than once and serialises requests but is there as a safety precaution. With the accrued interest we use an almost direct copy and paste of the calculation but without the locking and with a cap on the repayment period of the current date. The return format is also slightly different for the accrued interest as we calculate per loan unit rather than per lender as with the interest payment. They're not really different calculations just subtly different implementations of the same calculation. I get worried when "copy and paste" is used to describe code but, putting that aside, the payment periods can't be the problem as the interest should just be the same as calling the accruals code with time period of the regular repayments. I assume the locks or lack of are a performance issue and it sounds like you can get that fixed. Today one of my loans repayed (#101) at 09:16 but as of now, 20:00, the accrued interest hasn't been adjusted to reflect the payment so it's way out. Perhaps most of the problem is as simple as making sure the accrued interest gets reset on every payment? If people have ~20 loans and it's reset a day late then that means the accrued interest is wrong most of the time.
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Mar 27, 2015 9:54:59 GMT
chris As per the Q&A on loan #78 Wr***am -- accrued interest has jumped back 10% overnight.Is this connected to the partial facility reduction (which would be wrong anyway), or just another random interest grab  1st Mar: £17.30, ... 25th Mar £18.06, 26th Mar £18.07, 27th Mar £16.21!
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Mar 27, 2015 10:05:27 GMT
chris As per the Q&A on loan #78 Wr***am -- accrued interest has jumped back 10% overnight.Is this connected to the partial facility reduction (which would be wrong anyway), or just another random interest grab 1st Mar: £17.30, ... 25th Mar £18.06, 26th Mar £18.07, 27th Mar £16.21!
If you have specific instances like this as a first port of call could you report them to either the lender admin team or Mark Wardrop on mark dot wardrop at assetzcapital.co.uk. A lot of these queries end up with me trying to co-ordinate firing them over to the admin team for initial investigation as they need to check all the parameters they've put into the loan model are correct before it's even possible for me to investigate the actual loan model. They can make changes to the data whenever they see fit so it's not something I can just assume is correct or hasn't changed. I'm also on holiday next week so won't be very active on the forum and am highly likely to miss posts like this. The first question that needs to be asked with this figure is if the £16.21 is correct or not and whether the £18.07 was either over reporting or simply out of date. If the £16.21 is incorrect then we can look at the figures entered into the loan model before finally checking the loan model itself.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 27, 2015 10:25:32 GMT
mikeb Term on W******* is showing 1/15 & there is an entry for repayment next month plus 2 for interest so it looks like admin are playing with it for some reason. Early redemption planned? Should have 4 months to run. We know from experience that changing repayment dates seems to affect accrued interest Edit: Yep, early repayment & some resultant fiddling - getting wise to it now 
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Mar 28, 2015 21:28:20 GMT
chris As per the Q&A on loan #78 Wr***am -- accrued interest has jumped back 10% overnight.Is this connected to the partial facility reduction (which would be wrong anyway), or just another random interest grab 1st Mar: £17.30, ... 25th Mar £18.06, 26th Mar £18.07, 27th Mar £16.21!
If you have specific instances like this as a first port of call could you report them to either the lender admin team or Mark Wardrop on mark dot wardrop at assetzcapital.co.uk. The first question that needs to be asked with this figure is if the £16.21 is correct or not and whether the £18.07 was either over reporting or simply out of date. If the £16.21 is incorrect then we can look at the figures entered into the loan model before finally checking the loan model itself. On point a): No. Sorry for being blunt but I am waiting on so many outstanding points from Mark Wardrop after andrewholgate said to send complaints/bug reports to him (and not post them here), that I don't think anything is happening at all. If there is any co-ordination of fault finding it's going on so far behind the scenes that is invisible. I'm talking about stuff being reported as far back as December last year with no substantive response. I don't find that acceptable, and have been mostly biting my tongue on that particular point but enough is enough. As emails sent to enquires@a.c in the past also go unacknowledged -- not even an auto response -- then I feel that reporting things HERE are the only way to get confirmation there is something wrong from other lenders, and maybe an outside chance that it gets fixed by you taking a look at it and nudging someone. I don't take the poor comms personally, as I've seen other people on the receiving end of it too. On b) Interest had been accruing correctly day to day on this loan given my holding and the declared rate. If it hadn't I'd have reported it at the time. I'm unclear how a potential future repayment can cancel out previously accrued interest, maybe it's just a display issue and it will all come back. Or maybe like Wo** Gre** #140 the loan will double in size overnight, increasing my holding. I've no idea what to expect next, to be honest.
|
|
