|
Post by Mr Smith on Oct 3, 2019 17:21:08 GMT
I was just looking through my numerous defaulted loans and 1 stood out.
They borrrowed circa £336K, first payment made end of October 2018.
Then defaulted.
If I google the company they basically went into liquidation in Nov 2018.
Are we meant to believe that these people didnt borrow money knowing there business was in serious trouble ?
Are such cases being referred to the police ?
Edited to protect the innocent( guilty ).
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Oct 3, 2019 20:28:04 GMT
I've no idea of the legalities of discussing loans etc so happy to have this thread deleted. I was just looking through my numerous defaulted loans now and P** M***** stood out. They borrrowed circa £336K, first payment made end of October 2018. Then defaulted. Now I see this.... www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions/ <link containing borrower's name part redacted> "P** Ch**** Ltd T/a P** M**** v Commissioners for Revenue and Customs HMRC Solicitors Office Commercial and Employment Team (NMW): 25***05/2018 Employment Tribunal decision. Published 20 November 2018" Are we meant to believe that these people didnt borrow money knowing there business was in serious trouble ? Are such cases being referred to the police ? I think you need to understand FCs business model better. They NEVER take assets as security, even when they are available. They only ever take a director's personal guarantee. Therefore the last thing they want to do is to sue a director because then it makes the guarantee harder to enforce. That's why you will rarely, if ever, see FC suing even obvious scammers. Normally by then the scammer will have secreted away the money and the chances of getting anything back versus the cost of the action are remote. Don't forget, FC charges are capped at 40% of any amounts recovered when it enforces security to cover the cost of a bunch of activities that are, from its point of view, a waste of time because losses don't fall on them, they only fall on investors. So there is only really downside risk to them in pursuing recoveries, they don't stand to gain much as any gains would accrue to investors and their costs are capped. They'd much rather focus on the growth which is the story they told in the IPO, trying to maximise the recoveries for investors on bad loans isn't a priority for them.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 3, 2019 20:31:49 GMT
The FC computer does not do much desk research, and even less visiting of the borrower's work premises to check them out and ask questions.
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Oct 3, 2019 20:45:14 GMT
The FC computer does not do much desk research, and even less visiting of the borrower's work premises to check them out and ask questions. They don't even use google street view to see if the company exists at the premises it says it occupies. I have a 350k loan to a tv repair (? amazing anyone still does this - assuming that they ever did do this, that is) operating out of literally a lean-to shack in the countryside. What a surprise they went into voluntary liquidation after 4 months and the cash all disappeared.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Smith on Oct 4, 2019 6:08:03 GMT
I think you need to understand FCs business model better. They NEVER take assets as security, even when they are available. They only ever take a director's personal guarantee. Therefore the last thing they want to do is to sue a director because then it makes the guarantee harder to enforce. That's why you will rarely, if ever, see FC suing even obvious scammers. Normally by then the scammer will have secreted away the money and the chances of getting anything back versus the cost of the action are remote. Don't forget, FC charges are capped at 40% of any amounts recovered when it enforces security to cover the cost of a bunch of activities that are, from its point of view, a waste of time because losses don't fall on them, they only fall on investors. So there is only really downside risk to them in pursuing recoveries, they don't stand to gain much as any gains would accrue to investors and their costs are capped. They'd much rather focus on the growth which is the story they told in the IPO, trying to maximise the recoveries for investors on bad loans isn't a priority for them. I've edit the original post to remove any information that shouldnt be there, can you or the moderators remove your quoted text please. Thanks
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 4, 2019 10:34:51 GMT
Security is for wimps; FC go Fully Commando.
54439 was/is a used car sales co in Wales. Took out £53k on 10 Apr 18 for 60 months and could not make a repayment of £1165 on 10 May. Has never paid a penny, FC still chasing the guarantor. Indication of some' difficult circumstances' - possibly their dragon died. Profit in accounts Feb 17 was 23K, net worth about the same, but they had already borrowed £35k elsewhere (probably secured on the stock) when applying to FC and net worth would be negative. Computer says yes! Band C 11.5%. Word gets round that you when you are in trouble you can take an FC loan with no security, based on old figures with no questions asked, and repayments are optional, and FC do not have the resources of motivation to be tough on the guarantor = 'underperforming cohort'. £90 I will never see again.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Smith on Oct 4, 2019 10:52:45 GMT
Security is for wimps; FC go Fully Commando.
54439 was/is a used car sales co in Wales. Took out £53k on 10 Apr 18 for 60 months and could not make a repayment of £1165 on 10 May. Has never paid a penny, FC still chasing the guarantor. Indication of some' difficult circumstances' - possibly their dragon died. Profit in accounts Feb 17 was 23K, net worth about the same, but they had already borrowed £35k elsewhere (probably secured on the stock) when applying to FC and net worth would be negative. Computer says yes! Band C 11.5%. Word gets round that you when you are in trouble you can take an FC loan with no security, based on old figures with no questions asked, and repayments are optional, and FC do not have the resources of motivation to be tough on the guarantor = 'underperforming cohort'. £90 I will never see again. Crazy. It sounds like fraud to me.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 4, 2019 12:55:27 GMT
I was not suggesting that, and have no information. But I remember 'crappy scrappy' where there was a subsequent criminal conviction directly connected to the loan use. Sometimes FC's lending offers look a bit like a garage leaving a customer's car unattended with the doors open, the keys in the ignition, and the engine running. Of course it is all much better in 2019 - perhaps I should re-invest.
|
|
dorset
Member of DD Central
Posts: 281
Likes: 187
|
Post by dorset on Oct 4, 2019 13:15:13 GMT
Still think the classic is 24242.
Three partner firm of solicitors in Southampton borrow £250k and get graded A+. Make two payments out of 60 and go into liquidation. All partners now declared bankrupt with no assets. Returns to FC lenders including yours truly - zero.
Dug around on this after the event and found that the firm appeared to be already stuck into some sort of property deal in the New Forest. Took in our £250k knowing they were about to go under and then shipped the money out to - where?
|
|
coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 706
Likes: 464
|
Post by coogaruk on Oct 4, 2019 16:51:06 GMT
tv repair (? amazing anyone still does this - assuming that they ever did do this, that is) They certainly did - It was my Dad's apprenticed trade. Mind you, he was in his mid-80s when he died a few years back.
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Oct 4, 2019 18:26:30 GMT
coincidentally my dad was also a TV repair man from the days of valves, his claim to fame was repairing Max Bygraves's TV in Jersey, but that wasn't what I meant, I didn't mean did anyone ever repair TVs, I meant did this lender ever do TV repairs business..... and one needing a £350k loan? that's enough to build a factory.
|
|
|
Post by shanghaiscouse on Oct 4, 2019 18:28:02 GMT
Still think the classic is 24242. Three partner firm of solicitors in Southampton borrow £250k and get graded A+. Make two payments out of 60 and go into liquidation. All partners now declared bankrupt with no assets. Returns to FC lenders including yours truly - zero. Dug around on this after the event and found that the firm appeared to be already stuck into some sort of property deal in the New Forest. Took in our £250k knowing they were about to go under and then shipped the money out to - where? Indeed that is always the issue, these companies get the loan money then - whoosh - the cash disappears and somehow cannot be recovered during the receivership. Its clearly fraud.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,594
Likes: 2,624
|
Post by keitha on Oct 6, 2019 19:47:11 GMT
Security is for wimps; FC go Fully Commando.
54439 was/is a used car sales co in Wales. Took out £53k on 10 Apr 18 for 60 months and could not make a repayment of £1165 on 10 May. Has never paid a penny, FC still chasing the guarantor. Indication of some' difficult circumstances' - possibly their dragon died. Profit in accounts Feb 17 was 23K, net worth about the same, but they had already borrowed £35k elsewhere (probably secured on the stock) when applying to FC and net worth would be negative. Computer says yes! Band C 11.5%. Word gets round that you when you are in trouble you can take an FC loan with no security, based on old figures with no questions asked, and repayments are optional, and FC do not have the resources of motivation to be tough on the guarantor = 'underperforming cohort'. £90 I will never see again. Crazy. It sounds like fraud to me. www.yell.com/biz/dragon-motors-caernarfon-4367156/ if it's these its more than fraud, seriously more than fraud
|
|
|
Post by steamer on Oct 11, 2019 11:25:48 GMT
When FC changed their model and we could no longer assess loans I stopped investing and am letting my loans run down.
The frequency of this sort of behavior is too high presumably due to Funding Circle's failure to do even modest amounts of research which make it a death trap of blind investment. Their model still asses my overall profit at 5.1%, while mine is now below 5%, with it falling steadily.
|
|