iren
Member of DD Central
Posts: 302 
Likes: 300
|
Post by iren on Dec 10, 2015 1:26:19 GMT
I voted A too on MCH and am surprised this didn't go through. It's one thing to refuse to offer additional credit, but to refuse consent to a second charge where there are no performance problems with the loan or the project is just bad form. It doesn't reflect well on Assetz, let alone for this quality borrower coming to Assetz with new projects.
I'm guessing a lot of lenders may not understand what a second charge is legally, or that new money coming into the business from a second charge loan can improve the security for the first charge holders.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 10, 2015 3:59:19 GMT
I was stunned by the result as well. I suspect it illustrates how little AC's investors understand about what they're investing in and, in particular, how first and second charges work.
Perhaps my knowledge is a bit lacking as well, but I couldn't see any downside of Option A -- and plenty of upside, as others have already noted. Does anyone else see downsides that I'm missing?
I think part of the problem this time was that AC didn't explain the impact of the vote on those who were being asked to vote. If I were AC, I'd survey those who voted for Option B to see why they voted the way they did. And if the reasons given were the result of misunderstandings, I'd do a better job explaining and request another vote.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Dec 10, 2015 6:27:22 GMT
This vote result is madness and a sad reflection on the financial competence of many AC lenders. I still think the voting process on AC is a double-edged sword; we get a warm feeling that we're "involved" in making decisions on loans, until we discover that a lot of others are involved too that probably shouldn't be. I'd prefer that the professionals employed by AC to balance the pros and cons be trusted with the decision making, as on most other platforms, but that's just me.
It certainly highlights that there need to be clearer explanations for lenders where one path is the obvious one to advocate.
|
|
crabbyoldgit
Member of DD Central
Posts: 670
Likes: 583
Member is Online
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Dec 10, 2015 6:39:01 GMT
I am one of the more unknowing amateur investers on the mlia and at first was going to vote b but carefully reading ac email made it clear that my existing security was uneffected and therefore a was the only logical choise i could see.like everone else a bit stunned by the outcome, can not believe it was some kind of spite agaist this lender who seems to have kept to their side of the present deal ok.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,880
Likes: 6,964
|
Post by duck on Dec 10, 2015 6:45:19 GMT
Well i haven't even received the vote result email. I also voted to allow. Stunned. Neither did I nor did my business account (and come to that neither did my Mrs with the GBBA) .... voted yes, bit baffled.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Dec 10, 2015 7:06:09 GMT
I don't think there's been an email yet, but the result is posted on the loan update tab.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,880
Likes: 6,964
|
Post by duck on Dec 10, 2015 7:59:49 GMT
I don't think there's been an email yet, but the result is posted on the loan update tab. .....
Option A : 32.2979%
Option B: 45.2434%
No Vote : 22.4587%
......
I've noticed the 'No vote' % gaining over the months this one has again bucked the trend 
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Dec 10, 2015 8:21:56 GMT
I don't think there's been an email yet, but the result is posted on the loan update tab. .....
Option A : 32.2979%
Option B: 45.2434%
No Vote : 22.4587%
......
I've noticed the 'No vote' % gaining over the months this one has again bucked the trend
I'd love to see how the Option B votes broke down by lender size / lender numbers versus the Option A votes. Did a small number of large holdings sway the vote towards B, or was it a large number of small lenders suddenly deciding to use their vote this time?
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 10, 2015 8:24:59 GMT
This vote result is madness and a sad reflection on the financial competence of many AC lenders. I still think the voting process on AC is a double-edged sword; we get a warm feeling that we're "involved" in making decisions on loans, until we discover that a lot of others are involved too that probably shouldn't be. I'd prefer that the professionals employed by AC to balance the pros and cons be trusted with the decision making, as on most other platforms, but that's just me. It certainly highlights that there need to be clearer explanations for lenders where one path is the obvious one to advocate. It's a regulatory requirement for lenders to have a vote.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Dec 10, 2015 8:30:47 GMT
This vote result is madness and a sad reflection on the financial competence of many AC lenders. I still think the voting process on AC is a double-edged sword; we get a warm feeling that we're "involved" in making decisions on loans, until we discover that a lot of others are involved too that probably shouldn't be. I'd prefer that the professionals employed by AC to balance the pros and cons be trusted with the decision making, as on most other platforms, but that's just me. It certainly highlights that there need to be clearer explanations for lenders where one path is the obvious one to advocate. It's a regulatory requirement for lenders to have a vote. But not one that Funding Circle, Rebuilding Society and others appear to be tied by. Perhaps it's down to the way their loan terms and conditions are drafted (ceding decision-making rights to the platform?)
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 10, 2015 8:32:44 GMT
It's a regulatory requirement for lenders to have a vote. But not one that Funding Circle, Rebuilding Society and others appear to be tied by. Perhaps it's down to the way their loan terms and conditions are drafted (ceding decision-making rights to the platform?) Just because they're not doing it doesn't mean they're in the right. Many platforms don't insist on the borrower getting independent legal advice either yet I believe at least one platform has already fallen foul of that during recoveries. We have our interpretation of the regulations, particularly around collective investment schemes, and will continue to do things correctly as we see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Dec 10, 2015 8:40:54 GMT
votes are I think in general the right thing to do. But I do wish that AC would come off the fence more and give a clear steer as to which they think is the right course of action and why. Nonetheless, in this case, I just can't fathom how a large number of people could have voted for B. And its not good for AC either w.r.t. borrower relations.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 10, 2015 8:53:59 GMT
votes are I think in general the right thing to do. But I do wish that AC would come off the fence more and give a clear steer as to which they think is the right course of action and why. Nonetheless, in this case, I just can't fathom how a large number of people could have voted for B. And its not good for AC either w.r.t. borrower relations. I've made sure the exec are aware, I'm sure it'll be discussed and changes made to help make sure people are making informed choices.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,880
Likes: 6,964
|
Post by duck on Dec 10, 2015 9:00:11 GMT
votes are I think in general the right thing to do. But I do wish that AC would come off the fence more and give a clear steer as to which they think is the right course of action and why. Nonetheless, in this case, I just can't fathom how a large number of people could have voted for B. And its not good for AC either w.r.t. borrower relations. I've made sure the exec are aware, I'm sure it'll be discussed and changes made to help make sure people are making informed choices. Whilst a clear steer might not be sensible from AC's point of view (the votes are after all supposed to be independent) a series of Pro's/Con's that the lenders can base their decision on would (I believe) be helpful.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Dec 10, 2015 9:11:29 GMT
duck : which is essentially what I meant. The fine line between 'giving advice' and laying out rationale need not be that fine, esp. if some standard disclaimer is always attached.
|
|
