aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,484
Likes: 917
|
Post by aju on Nov 13, 2019 18:12:09 GMT
I was half hoping that deliberately flunking the appropriateness test, to prove I'm not a sufficiently sophisticated investor, might hasten the sale of loans and forced closure of my Funding Circle account. No such luck! Are you sure, I was thinking that if I'm not allowed to lend then I'd get my loans sold out without any fees. Oh well I'll just carry on regardless then!
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Nov 13, 2019 23:25:34 GMT
Yes I'm sure, having read your TISA paper. They can continue to accept your investments even if you 'fail' the test... they're not even obliged to turn you away even if you demonstrate you're a blithering idiot, so there's little chance they'll cash you in early because of it!
|
|
robski
Member of DD Central
Posts: 772
Likes: 462
|
Post by robski on Nov 14, 2019 8:41:08 GMT
Yes I'm sure, having read your TISA paper. They can continue to accept your investments even if you 'fail' the test... they're not even obliged to turn you away even if you demonstrate you're a blithering idiot, so there's little chance they'll cash you in early because of it! Blithering idiot, isn't that the target investor for most of the P2P sector?
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Nov 14, 2019 8:46:54 GMT
I thought the target p2p investor was a 'mug punter'. Idiots and dolts are harder to control.
|
|
|
Post by propman on Nov 14, 2019 9:39:12 GMT
I fear that this will put off many and lending volumes will drop as the disillusioned aren't replaced. I fear that the lending volumes may well drop significantly. It will be interesting how "honest" the questions are made. being aware of risks is one thing, being forced to confirm the risks before accepting them is a little unusual. I wonder what would happen to confectionary sales if you had top answer a quiz about how bad for you they are before purchases were allowed? maybe we should have a tailored political quiz confirming we understand all the risks of the party we are proposing to vote for before we were allowed to cast our vote!
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Nov 14, 2019 10:35:54 GMT
It does smack of nanny state, but I guess they're trying to avoid the next PPI mis-selling scandal.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,484
Likes: 917
|
Post by aju on Nov 15, 2019 9:50:41 GMT
I fear that this will put off many and lending volumes will drop as the disillusioned aren't replaced. I fear that the lending volumes may well drop significantly. It will be interesting how "honest" the questions are made. being aware of risks is one thing, being forced to confirm the risks before accepting them is a little unusual. I wonder what would happen to confectionary sales if you had top answer a quiz about how bad for you they are before purchases were allowed? maybe we should have a tailored political quiz confirming we understand all the risks of the party we are proposing to vote for before we were allowed to cast our vote! Now you are talking. A drop in lending volumes will surely mean a potential uplift in lender rates! mind you they would probably then result in more lending contracts closing after a week or so as well.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2019 8:21:15 GMT
Just by asking somebody whether they are a “restricted investor” does not prevent them from investing much more than 10% of their nett assets if they use multiple P2P providers. Also, the FCA and the P2P providers have no knowledge of an individual’s assets so the whole nonsense of completely unenforceable. Ergo, it is just a total waste of time and “red tape” for no purpose whatsoever.
The FCA should focus its efforts on those companies that operate outside of its control and work with the serious fraud office to penalise non-conformance and criminality. The way Wellesley handled my P2P investment is a good example of a company that should be investigated - a hint here for anybody who thinks getting a free iPad is a great idea.
The FCA ought to be doing more to protect customer investments - why haven’t they introduced an FSCS savings protection scheme for this area of the market? Or maybe the FCA doesn’t really work for the consumer of the investor, it only exits to “front” and protect the banking industry?
Perhaps it is not just the banks that are threatening negative interest in consumer investing.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Nov 16, 2019 10:56:39 GMT
Yes, a pointless waste of time from our perspective as knowledgeable investors, but unsophisticated investors do need this level of nannying these days, as demonstrated by PPI. People like us knew exactly what PPI was when we were offered it, but it seems the great unwashed didn't have a clue. Ditto GAP insurance, etc, etc.
From the industry's perspective, if an investor now claims they were duped by p2p, FCA can now wave this declaration in their face and say they knew exactly what they signed up for, removing all scope for the next mis-selling scandal.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Nov 16, 2019 12:28:29 GMT
Yes, a pointless waste of time from our perspective as knowledgeable investors, but unsophisticated investors do need this level of nannying these days, as demonstrated by PPI. People like us knew exactly what PPI was when we were offered it, but it seems the great unwashed didn't have a clue. Ditto GAP insurance, etc, etc. From the industry's perspective, if an investor now claims they were duped by p2p, FCA can now wave this declaration in their face and say they knew exactly what they signed up for, removing all scope for the next mis-selling scandal. Not just "the great unwashed". There are plenty of posters on this forum who clearly have no idea about the nature of the investments they are making, with a lot of ill-informed bleating when the inevitable happens. That's not to say that there isn't plenty to complain about, of course - incompetence and worse is not in short supply. But there are too many people who seem to think that their investments at 5, 10, 15% are somehow "safe" - there is a lot of education still required.
|
|
Stonk
Stonking
Posts: 735
Likes: 658
|
Post by Stonk on Nov 17, 2019 16:40:28 GMT
From the industry's perspective, if an investor now claims they were duped by p2p, FCA can now wave this declaration in their face and say they knew exactly what they signed up for, removing all scope for the next mis-selling scandal.
The "great unwashed" will just say "oh I didn't actually read the words, I just clicked the button to make them go away so I could get into my account".
That argument seems to have worked fine for PPI claimants, where they could and should have read the T&C's before purchasing the product, and yet they somehow still seem to be entitled to compensation.
Incidentally, I think I might be one of these "great unwashed investors". I regularly log my RS account prior to performing my morning ablutions.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Nov 17, 2019 22:06:12 GMT
The "great unwashed" will just say "oh I didn't actually read the words, I just clicked the button to make them go away so I could get into my account".
That excuse will no longer... er... wash.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,484
Likes: 917
|
Post by aju on Nov 20, 2019 11:26:55 GMT
Not sure if anyone has reported on this but Mrs Aju today selected the self sophisticated option as she didn't want to wait any longer until I had fully reviewed the options. In fact she can change her mind anytime it seems as the screen that she got on trying to lend, having skipped during login, was not going to let her lend until she made a selection. So we went to her account details and there is a record of her selection and it seems she can change her status at anytime in the future. Perhaps RS are changing things as I write but today I was checking the changes being discussed on the other thread regarding options so I went to mine and Mrs Aju's account screens and it seems that there is no longer a view of what options we selected - fortunately being a cynic we made copies of our sections and saved them for reference ourselves. anyone else noticed this - the other thread seems to be discussing recent changes made by the FCA that RS are adhering to. Perhaps they are making some changes to the text accordingly and therefore have removed the online visibility of our selections and worse the ability to change them should we find we have answered incorrectly.
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Nov 20, 2019 14:09:47 GMT
Just to corroborate, aju , I can't find any record of the option I chose either, surprisingly.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,484
Likes: 917
|
Post by aju on Nov 20, 2019 14:24:08 GMT
Just to corroborate, aju , I can't find any record of the option I chose either, surprisingly. RS has apologised and admitted its been removed for update just see the other thread from here for more info on this gaff.
|
|