pip
Posts: 542 
Likes: 725
|
Post by pip on Nov 15, 2019 10:34:25 GMT
Please see below my letter to the administrator which I have sent today:
I was an investor of loans facilitated by Funding Secure. I have read your proposals in regard to how the loan book and investors should be treated due to Funding Secure now being in administration.
It is my opinion that your proposals have no basis in law. Investors are not creditors and as administrator of Funding Secure I don't believe you have any relationship with Funding Secure investors. Obtaining a vote of investors to overturn the ring-fencing of funds within the trust will not mean that investors can or should be treated as creditors or that you have any legal claim to proceeds from the loan book.
I have contacted the FCA to firstly complain about their oversight of the controls of Funding Secure, including the lack of a functioning wind-down mechanism which would protect the ring-fencing of investors assets in the event of platform failure. Secondly I have called on the FCA to provision, in the absence of one provided by the platform, a mechanism for the loan book to be wound down while maintaining the ring fencing. It is my opinion that the administrator of Funding Secure is not best placed to take this role, due to the level of fees and lack of experience an administrator would usually have in loan book management. In addition, the proposition to treat investors as creditors would potentially mix investors claims to proceeds from the trust with those of other creditors, even preferred creditors, which is not in the interest of investors.
I do not believe any changes to the ring-fencing of investors funds should be made until the FCA have concluded this complaint.
Thanks
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Nov 15, 2019 12:49:31 GMT
firstly many thanks to pip for all his efforts which I think have got the ADMIN and FCA scratching their flea ridden heads.are the FSAG behind you as hundreds of investors cannot be ignored.i read that the FCA seem to investigate themselves in the first instance and then issue an apology or call the whole mess unfortunate when a complaint is made against them.are the FOS or anybody else able to question them or is the whole set up old school tie you scratch my back and close ranks.
|
|
pip
Posts: 542
Likes: 725
|
Post by pip on Nov 15, 2019 13:22:41 GMT
firstly many thanks to pip for all his efforts which I think have got the ADMIN and FCA scratching their flea ridden heads.are the FSAG behind you as hundreds of investors cannot be ignored.i read that the FCA seem to investigate themselves in the first instance and then issue an apology or call the whole mess unfortunate when a complaint is made against them.are the FOS or anybody else able to question them or is the whole set up old school tie you scratch my back and close ranks. Rocky - I have joined the FSAG facebook group and post, but don't claim to represent anybody else but myself. All other investors must make their own decisions about how to proceed. I am very grateful for all the excellent work members on FSAG have done and appreciate their efforts. I don't personally at this stage believe that it is in my interest to try to be treated as a creditor by the administrators. Others appear to have decided that for them this is a route they wish to pursue, which they are totally entitled to and I wish them well.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Nov 15, 2019 15:53:10 GMT
Please see below my letter to the administrator which I have sent today: I was an investor of loans facilitated by Funding Secure. I have read your proposals in regard to how the loan book and investors should be treated due to Funding Secure now being in administration. It is my opinion that your proposals have no basis in law. Investors are not creditors and as administrator of Funding Secure I don't believe you have any relationship with Funding Secure investors. Obtaining a vote of investors to overturn the ring-fencing of funds within the trust will not mean that investors can or should be treated as creditors or that you have any legal claim to proceeds from the loan book. I have contacted the FCA to firstly complain about their oversight of the controls of Funding Secure, including the lack of a functioning wind-down mechanism which would protect the ring-fencing of investors assets in the event of platform failure. Secondly I have called on the FCA to provision, in the absence of one provided by the platform, a mechanism for the loan book to be wound down while maintaining the ring fencing. It is my opinion that the administrator of Funding Secure is not best placed to take this role, due to the level of fees and lack of experience an administrator would usually have in loan book management. In addition, the proposition to treat investors as creditors would potentially mix investors claims to proceeds from the trust with those of other creditors, even preferred creditors, which is not in the interest of investors. I do not believe any changes to the ring-fencing of investors funds should be made until the FCA have concluded this complaint. Thanks You make very valid points.How do you anticipate the winding down of the loan book will be funded? It will cost alot of money. It needs doing quickly to preserve the value of the assets contained within the loans. It needs experienced negotiators and solicitors. involving the FCA will certainly drag things out. I for one cannot imagine the FCA contributing towards the costs. Like you I accept we have been provided with assurances that our funds were ring-fenced but the reality is that this is the only money readily available. The correct strategy is to punish the FCA in retrospect. Dragging them into the dismemberment process is doing yourself and other larger investors no favours. Small investors are not too worried. They are annoyed but know that whatever route is taken is not going to make that much difference. Sorry to be so negative but you know that righteous indignation can at times get in the way of self interest.
|
|
mullet
Member of DD Central
Posts: 126
Likes: 137
|
Post by mullet on Nov 15, 2019 17:18:43 GMT
Anyone got any idea ballpark how much the administrators will cost?
With the 'All Active and Past Loans' feature disbales its hard to keep track of the loans that have repaid since the restrictions were placed on withdrawls, but there has been at least the following, which totals abot 436k sitting around.
W*** Gr**n Road - 96k
Watches - 10k
Stretf**d - 129k
As*****ne Avenue - 201k
Giving this will drag on for a while the figure will probably rise significantly.
I appreciate the administrators need to be paid, and would be prepared to lose a % of this to them. Are they suggesting this money could be used to pay other creditors? - That is obviosuly unacceptable
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Nov 15, 2019 17:38:45 GMT
With the 'All Active and Past Loans' feature disbales its hard to keep track of the loans that have repaid since the restrictions were placed on withdrawls, but there has been at least the following, which totals abot 436k sitting around. There is a list of all loans and those that have repaid since administration on FS DD (Pinned thread FS INDEX). It is currently accurate to 13th Nov 2019,and is updated by mrclondon
|
|
|
|
Post by FSAG Forum on Nov 15, 2019 18:33:35 GMT
Firstly, let me mention that I am the Admin. of the FSAG Forum. In the first instance, the FSAG plan was to get investors recognised as creditors, in order that they became eligible for seats on the Creditor’s Committee, without which investors would have no say in how the administration is handled. Since that starting point, however, largely due to pressure from the FSAG, the administrators have accepted that lenders will be eligible for seats (see the Administrators Proposals), so there is no immediate necessity to be accepted as creditors. Also divulged in the Administrators Proposals, is the fact that there is some uncertainty about the status &/or beneficiary(s) of the loan trusts (or ring-fencing if you’d rather), furthermore it appears that the ring-fencing of investors cash accounts has already been broken due to the fact that FS management have co-mingled their funds with that of clients (investors). Due to these circumstances, the administrators are proposing that they seek guidance from Queen’s Council, if this were to go against the interests of investors, the CC would have the power to overrule, in which case it would go to court to be decided. The logical conclusion from this is that, unless any individuals here have more the £2m invested in FS, the only way to get an influence is to join the FSAG and proxy your votes to one of their Creditor’s Committee nominations. The more members we have, the more likely we are able to take control of the CC. If you would like to join us, please read this thread before registering for forum membership or join us on Facebook here
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Nov 16, 2019 9:24:47 GMT
Why is representation on the CC so important? Surely the role of the cc is very limited by the Administrators? Sitting down at a table with the Administrators provides an opportunity to be informed of progress and to a limited extent influence the cost of the Administration. There is little opportunity to impact the process. members of the cc are then hamstrung by NDAs. All one-sided. Those inexperienced in such matters might surmise there was an on-going two way process but the impression created is that this is not so. i.e. Administrators have a well-defined agenda which they must and will follow.
|
|
|
|
Post by FSAG Forum on Nov 16, 2019 9:50:02 GMT
If Queen's Council advise that FS own the rights to proceeds from the loans (NOT us lenders) the CC have the power to overrule that advice for a start, see 5.3-5.7 of the administrator's proposals.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,337
Likes: 11,562
|
Post by ilmoro on Nov 16, 2019 10:52:50 GMT
If Queen's Council advise that FS own the rights to proceeds from the loans (NOT us lenders) the CC have the power to overrule that advice for a start, see 5.3-5.7 of the administrator's proposals. ISTM They don't have power to overrule it, which implies they can get the admin to proceed how the CC wishes, they have the power to reject it and the admin will the seek direction on how to proceed from the Courts and that direction will be followed. Effectively the CC can ask for a second opinion but that second opinion will be definitive.
|
|
|
|
Post by FSAG Forum on Nov 16, 2019 17:49:32 GMT
If Queen's Council advise that FS own the rights to proceeds from the loans (NOT us lenders) the CC have the power to overrule that advice for a start, see 5.3-5.7 of the administrator's proposals. ISTM They don't have power to overrule it, which implies they can get the admin to proceed how the CC wishes, they have the power to reject it and the admin will the seek direction on how to proceed from the Courts and that direction will be followed. Effectively the CC can ask for a second opinion but that second opinion will be definitive. Agreed, but IMO, it's much better to have 2 attempts at getting the "right" answer, especially seeing that it's the administrator's solicitors that will be asking the questions & the administrator's are too close to the Directors for our liking.
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Nov 17, 2019 13:29:12 GMT
If enough lenders dont co-ordinate through fsag to get at least 3 seats in cc, we are going to get stuffed.
Lenders must assert their claim as unsecured creditors based on breaches of fiduciary duty which runs in parallel with rights as beneficiaries to trust assets.
I realize it's a nuanced argument, but join fsag, look at the template forms which will be posted soon, have a think, then make your vote count!
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Nov 18, 2019 0:44:39 GMT
I have asked before if the forms can be in WORD format for filling in then they can be saved as PDFs by individual lenders,
|
|
|
|
Post by FSAG Forum on Nov 18, 2019 12:08:03 GMT
I have asked before if the forms can be in WORD format for filling in then they can be saved as PDFs by individual lenders, We only have forms in PDF format, as supplied by the adinistrators.
|
|
technik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 72
Likes: 80
|
Post by technik on Nov 18, 2019 12:22:11 GMT
I have asked before if the forms can be in WORD format for filling in then they can be saved as PDFs by individual lenders, If you wanted the convenience you could still fill out pdf's digitally by adding a text box on top of them - FSAG Forum would that still be allowed? They may still need to be signed by hand. Otherwise print all and fill in by hand would be the other option and I imagine what most will do anyway.
|
|
