Are you happy with the administration process so far?

The FCA have powers to challenge unfair terms in financial services consumer contracts. They have these powers as a regulator under the Consumer Rights Act 2015 (CRA), and as a qualifying body under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCRs).

Using these powers they may seek an undertaking from a firm that it will amend or remove an unfair contract term from its future consumer contracts. They can also apply to a court for an injunction to prevent a firm from using or enforcing the term against its existing customers.

They coordinate their work with the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which has a leadership role in enforcing both the CRA and the UTCCRs.
That should help you to sleep better of a night.

I was given the link to  Unfair terms  by RSM and think this must be worth following up  , with this and the possibility of proceedings there may be  some assistance to Lenders .  

I don't think at that time they would have or been obliged to take a view.

What is so infuriating is we own 1st charge over the assets of these defaulted loans. If there is going to be next to nothing left after RSM and Lendy have taken their cut, wouldn’t it be great if we could sack them both and keep the assets until such a time as we can sell them for a reasonable return!

The issue here is the way in which the FCA operates, it is a reactive body not proactive. It might act if fed information (the mini bonds issues show they are not very not at all reactive) but since the exact terms (and their implications) were to investors at the time unknown/opaque no challenge was / could be made.

Whilst I cannot be certain what went on for the long time between Lendy applying for full Part 4A approval and it being granted there is nothing in the Part 4A application paperwork that suggests this issue will have been examined.

Of course you can ask the questions directly of the FCA via a FOI words along the lines of

• Did the FCA examine and approve Lendy's Consumer Terms and Conditions before granting Full Permissions?
  
• Did the FCA examine and approve the 'payments waterfall' (in particular default payments) before granting Full Permissions?

I can't say they will answer since there is an investigation in progress .....

That however is water under the bridge now, the FCA have firmly washed their hands of Lendy with their statement.

I note RSM have pointed 11025 back to the FCAs "Unfair contract terms" which gives us a circle, FCA passes to RSM and RSM passes to the FCA who have already said all inquiries shoud be directed to RSM.
If raised with the FCA they might add the issue to their 'investigation' as noted on their statement but as anybody who is involved with Col will know these investigations can stretch on for years.

If this matter is to be sorted IMHO it needs to be officially (and legally) raised with RSM.  I am not on the CC or even a member of LAG so I don't know if this has already been done but if this matter is to be raised now is the time before payments are made, distributed and salted away.

Thanks ilmoro, it was just wishful thinking on my part. Metaphorically throwing cards up in the and seeing what lands. Any loopholes we can exploit etc - Lendy have failed in their capacity as our Agents, we are the only party standing to loose capital, and others gaining from it.