Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011 
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Jan 27, 2020 3:55:48 GMT
Personally, I think that the lack of information in regard to outlining whether loans were linked is a balant example of misselling. For me, the P2P industry and the FCA should be dragged over the coals for it like the banks were for PPI. There are lots of data protection rules and financial disclosure that can affect a business and can’t be disclosed to third parties without permission. I’m sure we don’t wan’t all our business publicly disclosed because you want a loan. The loans my not be pawn as such but the were secured on an asset. If a development loan then it is up to an individual to decide if the LTGDV is an acceptable risk. This is usually accounted for by traunches in the finance.
|
|
|
|
Post by crystal on Jan 27, 2020 12:54:11 GMT
I don't wish to engage in a debate, but as a matter of fact, most businesses that obtain a loan will have a charge that is publicly visible at Companies House - as is the case for this borrower and the companies that engaged FS.
There is a lot of (understandable) nonsense surrounding GDPR. It would be perfectly possible to comply with data protection regulations whilst also flagging the number of loans made to the same borrower. I could see, however, that P2P companies may not wish to make this change as the loans would be likely to be seen as less desirable.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Jan 27, 2020 15:08:34 GMT
I don't wish to engage in a debate, but as a matter of fact, most businesses that obtain a loan will have a charge that is publicly visible at Companies House - as is the case for this borrower and the companies that engaged FS. There is a lot of (understandable) nonsense surrounding GDPR. It would be perfectly possible to comply with data protection regulations whilst also flagging the number of loans made to the same borrower. I could see, however, that P2P companies may not wish to make this change as the loans would be likely to be seen as less desirable. Again platforms have no advantage in lending money that is not in line with best practice as the don't get paid if loan fails and bad press makes for fewer new investors.
There is NO reason for proffessionals and Platforms to set out to fail. The occasional Fraud is normal practice and here is minimal if measured against total funds lent.
Just checked lartest bank ISA rate 0.2% . With P2P paying nearly 100 times this on SM there is obviously some risk and overall the returns are a minimum 50 times the bank even after loss.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Jan 27, 2020 16:20:01 GMT
as a general rule I would agree but what about the theoretical position of the borrower and p2p directors being related - e.g. property financing agents getting a backhander for arranging a loan or even dodgy p2p directors setting up a company so they can clean up what they can and then wind it up whilst still having a charge against the business which may or may not have loan holders as preferential creditors.
As I said purely theoretical ....
|
|
|
|
Post by defaultinator5000 on Jan 28, 2020 12:19:19 GMT
Again platforms have no advantage in lending money that is not in line with best practice as the don't get paid if loan fails and bad press makes for fewer new investors. In what world do you live in? The business plan of many p2p platforms, FS included, is/was to take punts on high risk loans with somebody else's money. If the loan repays, the platform gets their cut. If it doesn't, well, who the hell cares, it was not their money to begin with. Volume is prioritized over quality and when a loan does not repay, the can is kicked down the road to infinity to avoid the costs associated with loan rocovery (which are then charged to the lenders anyway).
|
|
|
|
Post by sebb on Jan 28, 2020 12:19:45 GMT
Personally, I think that the lack of information in regard to outlining whether loans were linked is a balant example of misselling. For me, the P2P industry and the FCA should be dragged over the coals for it like the banks were for PPI. There are lots of data protection rules and financial disclosure that can affect a business and can’t be disclosed to third parties without permission. I’m sure we don’t wan’t all our business publicly disclosed because you want a loan. The loans my not be pawn as such but the were secured on an asset. If a development loan then it is up to an individual to decide if the LTGDV is an acceptable risk. This is usually accounted for by traunches in the finance. This could and should have been disclosed to investors as numerous loans means that it increases the level of risk. As FS even stated once they declared that the loans were linked, they had to take an approach that was suitable for all investors in all loans, therefore indicating that they are tied to a degree and had more risk than stated when searching for funding. Further, as they disclosed this information once everything started to go south, there was no reason why they could not have done it prior, other than to ensure that they loans got filled which is very misleading. Now arguements can be made about researching the investment but that is not really valid here as this key bit of information was not revealed and if it had then I and I suspect a number of people on here would not have invested. Now, I am fortunate in that I only put a small proportion of my portfolio into FS, however I do feel extremley mislead in regard to this loan as the risks that they outlined in the proposal were not the only risks associated with this loan, while I am also someone that researches what I invest in.
|
|
crazi
Posts: 41
Likes: 62
|
Post by crazi on Jan 28, 2020 15:53:53 GMT
As many of us now know or have come to understand,a few of the loans are connected by common directors or groups of borrowers.
Is it possible for ease of access to list these loans in order to gauge our level of exposure and risk
Do we have knowledge of any more? There are many more linked loans - most of which are listed in DDC Seen the updates on these linked loans? 2nd charge Farnham Angle**y L*dg*, G*sp*rt, Hampshire D**w**t Road, Liverpool Development Plot Liverpool Property in Greenwich Property in Southampton Property Loan W*** D**** Road, Liverpool The Borrow has appointed “his own Administrators” even though he’s not in administration? Then offers slightly higher amounts than the new valuations to buy all the properties which seems to be a loss on average of 85% for Lenders – and CG & Co are actually agreeing to this “on our behalf”?! This whole scenario reeks of wrong doing and would be extremely questionable if CG & Co are acting in Lenders best interests to agree so quickly to such an offer from the Borrower! He is clearly chancing his arm and ripping of Lenders! Appoint our own Valuations so we know the truth and not just follow "his appointed valuer" like sheep . This Borrower MUST NOT profit from his dealings with Lenders Monies. Then sue the Borrower and the Valuation companies for any short comings. CG & Co seem to be agreeing to a quick FIRE SALE tactic. This Borrower has a huge portfolio with FS that we were not made aware off at time of Lending/Borrowing and seemingly was linked to one of the Directors of FS! Highly suspicious activity!
|
|
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 Jan 28, 2020 16:01:06 GMT
I think it's the original RICS valuer who needs to account for his valuations. I'll be pressing the administrators to take action against the valuation company.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Jan 28, 2020 16:38:49 GMT
I think it's the original RICS valuer who needs to account for his valuations. I'll be pressing the administrators to take action against the valuation company. It's all coming home to roost, exactly as I knew it would and predicted three years back, despite virtually everyone on here "pooh poohing" me at the time. YES, I am VERY much enjoying being vindicated, I tried very, VERY hard to warn back then but no-one was listening. Read and weep on the LENDY thread under: PBL157/PBL158 - R*****a & C****t, H****** Court Rd DEFAULT And YES, some RICS Valuers should not only be litigated against, some should be in jail. But does "The Royal Institution" care? Not a fig. Contact and Complain and enlighten them about wot's going on, and spew yer guts up at the piss poor arse covering reply you will receive. One word - Rotten. I thank you.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,056
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Jan 28, 2020 16:46:35 GMT
I think it's the original RICS valuer who needs to account for his valuations. I'll be pressing the administrators to take action against the valuation company. It's all coming home to roost, exactly as I knew it would and predicted three years back, despite virtually everyone on here "pooh poohing" me at the time.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Jan 28, 2020 17:07:06 GMT
I listened - thanks - this is why I only put a small amount of money into FS whilst I did my own DD and yes I am still annoyed with myself for trusting these muppets before I got out.
Wearing my developer hat I realised FS were clueless (at best) and I know just how nasty and devious some developers are but I really did underestimate just what the hell FS were up to and how much contempt they showed for the FCA, the law, fair play and we punters.
A certain JL who was a fellow director of our muppet in Spain was involved in the cinema loan and several other loans all of which (I think) have been a disaster - I warned about this one and this is the response I got - puerile and pathetic as I don't drink Horlicks nor follow football and can't see the connection.
Yes I called this one wrong - excuse me! Of my top 40 (actually it is 41 as I combined the speed boat loans) it looks like I called, at least 35, correctly which is not a bad hit rate.
I am going to lose a maximum of £500 due to these idiots which I can afford but would prefer not to - the reason I did my top 40 was exactly as per Ozboy: simply to warn what I thought was a disaster waiting to happen. True I underestimated it but pleased if I stopped one person from losing money,
I think very few of us are going to escape some loss - for most lenders I have huge sympathy - for the 3 who consistently tried (and failed) to undermine me - TOUGH!
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on Jan 28, 2020 17:30:59 GMT
I listened - thanks - this is why I only put a small amount of money into FS whilst I did my own DD and yes I am still annoyed with myself for trusting these muppets before I got out. Wearing my developer hat I realised FS were clueless (at best) and I know just how nasty and devious some developers are but I really did underestimate just what the hell FS were up to and how much contempt they showed for the FCA, the law, fair play and we punters. A certain JL who was a fellow director of our muppet in Spain was involved in the cinema loan and several other loans all of which (I think) have been a disaster - I warned about this one and this is the response I got - puerile and pathetic as I don't drink Horlicks nor follow football and can't see the connection. Yes I called this one wrong - excuse me! Of my top 40 (actually it is 41 as I combined the speed boat loans) it looks like I called, at least 35, correctly which is not a bad hit rate. I am going to lose a maximum of £500 due to these idiots which I can afford but would prefer not to - the reason I did my top 40 was exactly as per Ozboy: simply to warn what I thought was a disaster waiting to happen. True I underestimated it but pleased if I stopped one person from losing money, I think very few of us are going to escape some loss - for most lenders I have huge sympathy - for the 3 who consistently tried (and failed) to undermine me - TOUGH! That’s nice for you. Multiple that by say 1000 and that would be my investments so that wonderful word potential could mean a nice big drop  Think by time markets close in USA I’d be down a couple of grand on the day. Hopefully up a few more after Friday that evens things up. The same for P2P I may be down a few 10s of thousands this year but was up more in previous years giving overall profit. This should be pro rata so is your £500 for current investments in P2P or your overall experience as total investment should include different types of investments. The current updates do seem to offer many opportunities to sue valuers. I can’t see the logic in allowing a borrower to buy back their loan at a discount with our own money as is proposed. No we sell the property and chaise them for any shortfall..
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Jan 28, 2020 17:51:06 GMT
can't see the relevance here we are talking about FS who have clearly let us all down - fortunately I am also in Gold, commercial and domestic property and foreign currency - went short on gold before the Chinese flu panic but fortunately closed when the price dropped today - close one as I nearly lost a packet and was dangerously over-exposd. If I lose on the bullion market that is my fault - I regard my losses with FS entirely due to them as I was diversified and did my own DD and was stupid enough to believe the rubbish we were told.
Personally I think FS had delusions of floating and making a killing as F*ing not square * did. I warned about F* but basically got 100% out so that went OK for me
not convinced - I have read a lot of these valuations and the valuers seem to have covered themselves pretty well with numerous let-out clauses. Also a lot were for completed developments as they stated e.g. plot in Liverpool - the developments weren't completed so how can they be sued? Also even if they are sued that takes time and money and what happens if the valuer goes bust or hasn't or won't pay any court order.
In short Ozboy was right we are stuffed and I agree with Pip the final payout is going to be very disappointing and I predict 50% at best so with those of £2m on the former secondary market - nasty!
|
|
