arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Aug 31, 2019 10:38:54 GMT
(Adrian 77) I think you are being too charitable. FS ruthlessly pursued short term gains at the expense of good due diligence and duty of care. inexperienced and to a lesser extent experienced investors were badly let down with a plethora of underperforming loans. That lot then walked away. The new lot must know exactly what they have let themselves in for. If they don't then they cannot have asked the right questions nor read any postings on this website. It takes skill to run a platform successfully. A soothing investor report counts for zilch. It seems very possible the new lot were in very deep with loans that had defaulted or hideously late and that the only way to salvage something was to run it themselves as i cannot see anyone with any fiscal sense buying into this after doing proper DD. Keep going ( Adrian 77 ) see you have them off the bridle again. Off the bridle? Anyway, of course it gets a reaction from people when taken to what could be considered extreme lengths. He says he does it as a public service to warn others not to invest and that multiple people have thanked him for warding them off. As charitable as that may be, that is the very definition of talking a platform down. Yes, of course he's allowed to express an opinion and that shouldn't be restricted, but always ensuring a list of problem loans, without giving further insight, is near the top of the front page while ignoring any repaid loans or positive performance can naturally appear strange. It has been questioned before why I post so much; I have ~40 times more pounds invested than I have posts on this forum, so at least I have an incentive for daily checks on loan progress. Some other people have 5 times more posts than pounds invested. I just wonder how much people value their own time when it gets to that level.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Aug 31, 2019 13:05:10 GMT
true but I made my predictions when the loans were issued and not when they were late so this is not really fair is it.
That is a blatant untruth. This has been pointed out numerous times ( here and here). You take loans that are already in bad difficulties then 'predict' a potential loss. Bearing in mind your first 'Mega fails' list was started in July 2018, lets just take the first three from that list (from my post in Jan):- 1. Wimbledon. Third charge loan and the contractor died during the build. Clear in 2017 there is likely to be a wipe out of the FS loan - you 'predict' as much in July 2018 2. Knaresborough. Second charge loan where the main property sold for less than the first charge in April 2018. You predict in July 2018 a 100% loss...but did not spot that there were also two BTL's offered as security. One BTL has sold leading to a 12% recovery so far and the second is still in the process of being sold. All in a terrible prediction. 3. Whitehaven. One of the biggest problem loans FS has. Well flagged since 2017 that a big capital loss was forthcoming. Doesn't take mystic meg to predict as much in July 2018. I don't think it is helpful to investors, to borrowers or to FS to be unduly critical of individuals posting on this forum. I have no doubt in my mind that generally views expressed are honestly held and do reflect the concerns of many investors. In this case it is the failure of the platform to ensure the quality of their loan book. i.e. both to handle appropriately the backlog and by better due diligence to assure investors that future investments are properly assessed for risk. Personally I am sitting on the sidelines until my overdue loans have been progressed, I have some sense that loan quality has improved and I would welcome a system of development site monitoring.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920 
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Aug 31, 2019 13:37:41 GMT
thanks - I am very busy but will post how the top 40 pans out - very interesting exercise for me! Slagging me off is not going to change anything - the loan book is at least problematic - how on earth FS seem to have given away (choosing my words carefully) £3.2 in art loans alone just beggars belief, incredible losses with the Park Homes, Whitehaven, Wind Turbine etc - I think we have already had 7 loans with 100% losses (Wimbledon, Welsh hotel, Knaresborough, 2 x Park homes, 2 x Hells Bells), Granted I have made some incredibly bad mistakes with my property dealings but it was my money and I don't think even "moi" could manage to lose 100% as that must take a rare skill!
And how long would the current management last if working for an investment company in the City ?
And if FS goes under it will be my fault - yeah right!
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Aug 31, 2019 13:38:13 GMT
That is a blatant untruth. This has been pointed out numerous times ( here and here). You take loans that are already in bad difficulties then 'predict' a potential loss. Bearing in mind your first 'Mega fails' list was started in July 2018, lets just take the first three from that list (from my post in Jan):- 1. Wimbledon. Third charge loan and the contractor died during the build. Clear in 2017 there is likely to be a wipe out of the FS loan - you 'predict' as much in July 2018 2. Knaresborough. Second charge loan where the main property sold for less than the first charge in April 2018. You predict in July 2018 a 100% loss...but did not spot that there were also two BTL's offered as security. One BTL has sold leading to a 12% recovery so far and the second is still in the process of being sold. All in a terrible prediction. 3. Whitehaven. One of the biggest problem loans FS has. Well flagged since 2017 that a big capital loss was forthcoming. Doesn't take mystic meg to predict as much in July 2018. I don't think it is helpful to investors, to borrowers or to FS to be unduly critical of individuals posting on this forum. I have no doubt in my mind that generally views expressed are honestly held and do reflect the concerns of many investors. In this case it is the failure of the platform to ensure the quality of their loan book. i.e. both to handle appropriately the backlog and by better due diligence to assure investors that future investments are properly assessed for risk. Personally I am sitting on the sidelines until my overdue loans have been progressed, I have some sense that loan quality has improved and I would welcome a system of development site monitoring. But do you think blatant lies should be allowed to stand? I'm aware that some think that as long as a poster is critical of FS then anything goes true or untrue but I don't see how that is helpful to anyone. FS are guilty of many things and its right they should be called out on them, but to constantly accuse them of misrepresenting the truth, lying and following an agenda (true or untrue and I'm not arguing that point) and then do exactly the same thing certainly grates with many. It also undermines any legitimate criticisms that are being made.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Aug 31, 2019 14:24:45 GMT
to the calab of 3 who keep trying to belittle me- whatever- don't care as you are boring me - if you don't like my posts don't read them. Also there is often a gap before I jotted a mega loss and when I posted it...end of conversation.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Aug 31, 2019 15:09:20 GMT
to the calab of 3 who keep trying to belittle me- whatever- don't care as you are boring me - if you don't like my posts don't read them. Also there is often a gap before I jotted a mega loss and when I posted it...end of conversation. This is not intended to be belittling, insulting disparaging or similar so please read accordingly: Please try and understand, you have openly stated that your ambition is to stop other people making the mistake of investing in FS. You also state you are proud of the part you have played when individuals have given you credit for not investing in FS, despite you yourself continuing to invest in some offerings. Given that you have not lost any money with FS and continue to use it yourself, can you understand why the active and constant demonifying, to the extent where you believe it adversely impacts the company, can be galling for those who do use it for the intended purpose? Again, this is not an insult, rather an attempt to explain a different perspective.
|
|
|
|
Post by peer2fear on Sept 5, 2019 9:11:55 GMT
It seems very possible the new lot were in very deep with loans that had defaulted or hideously late and that the only way to salvage something was to run it themselves as i cannot see anyone with any fiscal sense buying into this after doing proper DD. Keep going ( Adrian 77 ) see you have them off the bridle again. Off the bridle? Anyway, of course it gets a reaction from people when taken to what could be considered extreme lengths. He says he does it as a public service to warn others not to invest and that multiple people have thanked him for warding them off. As charitable as that may be, that is the very definition of talking a platform down. Yes, of course he's allowed to express an opinion and that shouldn't be restricted, but always ensuring a list of problem loans, without giving further insight, is near the top of the front page while ignoring any repaid loans or positive performance can naturally appear strange. It has been questioned before why I post so much; I have ~40 times more pounds invested than I have posts on this forum, so at least I have an incentive for daily checks on loan progress. Some other people have 5 times more posts than pounds invested. I just wonder how much people value their own time when it gets to that level. I am happy to be transparent and admit that I have ~1000 times more pounds invested than I have posts on this forum - but I'm not sure what your point is? I'm sure many people have much much more invested than I do and I really feel for them. I think Adrian is entitled to his opinion (which I largely share) that the platform has failed investors in a number of critical ways which for me can be summarised as: 1) Poor/lazy valuations 2) Loanbook woefully overdue and obfuscating default statistics (for me, there should be a simple 'overdue' status against loans at the very least and I would like to see automatic default status if >3 months overdue) 3) Lack of due diligence - e.g. around the borrower/failure to capture the security/ensure material progress is being made - this only has to happen once across the entire loanbook for it to knock investor confidence completely (and FS should know this) 4) No updates (despite continued promises) - this still seems to plague the 'new' management but I will admit I have seen an improvement 5) Inaction by management (can kicking behaviour etc.) - they don't seem to realise that a crystalised loss often provides more peace of mind than endless false promises of repayment I for one, wish I had read the sentiment expressed on this forum by the likes of Adrian et al. before I had invested as I wouldn't have touched FS with a barge pole. As it is, I am expecting a four figure loss on FS, not least because I have £1700 across the various car loans which I foolishly believed was diversified because there was no indication that this was the same borrower. I am expecting a 100% loss here and I expect a considerable loss across the other loans in my 'portfolio'. I think those warning of their experiences are doing two good things for the P2P community: 1) Warning people of the potential dangers/pitfalls peculiar to the platform (again I have to reiterate that I wish I'd checked this forum before I'd invested - I took their statistics too much on face value, for example). 2) Providing fluid feedback to the platform to change its ways for the better - I'm sure that FS are more than aware of the sentiments expressed online (this was evident enough during the time they were trying to purge the negative reviews on TrustPilot). By posting online and engaging with new and prospective users, this is a powerful tool we have to influence FS's online reputation and thus (I hope) its behaviour.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Sept 5, 2019 9:34:42 GMT
Off the bridle? Anyway, of course it gets a reaction from people when taken to what could be considered extreme lengths. He says he does it as a public service to warn others not to invest and that multiple people have thanked him for warding them off. As charitable as that may be, that is the very definition of talking a platform down. Yes, of course he's allowed to express an opinion and that shouldn't be restricted, but always ensuring a list of problem loans, without giving further insight, is near the top of the front page while ignoring any repaid loans or positive performance can naturally appear strange. It has been questioned before why I post so much; I have ~40 times more pounds invested than I have posts on this forum, so at least I have an incentive for daily checks on loan progress. Some other people have 5 times more posts than pounds invested. I just wonder how much people value their own time when it gets to that level. I am happy to be transparent and admit that I have ~1000 times more pounds invested than I have posts on this forum - but I'm not sure what your point is? I'm sure many people have much much more invested than I do and I really feel for them. I think Adrian is entitled to his opinion (which I largely share) that the platform has failed investors in a number of critical ways which for me can be summarised as: 1) Poor/lazy valuations 2) Loanbook woefully overdue and obfuscating default statistics (for me, there should be a simple 'overdue' status against loans at the very least and I would like to see automatic default status if >3 months overdue) 3) Lack of due diligence - e.g. around the borrower/failure to capture the security/ensure material progress is being made - this only has to happen once across the entire loanbook for it to knock investor confidence completely (and FS should know this) 4) No updates (despite continued promises) - this still seems to plague the 'new' management but I will admit I have seen an improvement 5) Inaction by management (can kicking behaviour etc.) - they don't seem to realise that a crystalised loss often provides more peace of mind than endless false promises of repayment I for one, wish I had read the sentiment expressed on this forum by the likes of Adrian et al. before I had invested as I wouldn't have touched FS with a barge pole. As it is, I am expecting a four figure loss on FS, not least because I have £1700 across the various car loans which I foolishly believed was diversified because there was no indication that this was the same borrower. I am expecting a 100% loss here and I expect a considerable loss across the other loans in my 'portfolio'. I think those warning of their experiences are doing two good things for the P2P community: 1) Warning people of the potential dangers/pitfalls peculiar to the platform (again I have to reiterate that I wish I'd checked this forum before I'd invested - I took their statistics too much on face value, for example). 2) Providing fluid feedback to the platform to change its ways for the better - I'm sure that FS are more than aware of the sentiments expressed online (this was evident enough during the time they were trying to purge the negative reviews on TrustPilot). By posting online and engaging with new and prospective users, this is a powerful tool we have to influence FS's online reputation and thus (I hope) its behaviour. The risks are not necessarily specific to a platform (although I do agree with your summary of FS concerns). These forums are a terrible indicator of which platforms are the riskiest. A few years in a row the winner in the poll for the best/favourite platform was subsequently followed by the respective platform failure in the following year. I totally agree that the risks of p2p in general are not appreciated by a large number of people. A lot of investors have only ever known guaranteed returns.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Sept 5, 2019 11:53:00 GMT
"1) Poor/lazy valuations" is being too ridiculously kind and too generous. I think many are criminal. And so do most on here. We just like being shafted. Regularly and thoroughly. 
|
|
|
|
Post by ron on Sept 5, 2019 13:03:04 GMT
"4) No updates (despite continued promises) - this still seems to plague the 'new' management but I will admit I have seen an improvement"
I haven't seen any noticeable improvement in updates, even for newly-originated loans. For example, the Edinburgh flats are a month late and investors still don't know what's going on. Ironically they had posted a useless update in May, over 2 months before the expected end of the loan: "We are chasing the Borrower for an update on the progress of the renovations. Once we have been advised of the progress a further update will be posted." Obviously, no follow-up...
|
|
