Look you lot, don't you think you're overreacting

Err.. No, frankly I don't. I think the main problem from the lender's point of view has been to have under-reacted when the escape hatch was opened.

The main problem from the platform's point of view is that those with their hands on the tiller should have looked at their PF status a year ago and concluded that they needed to cut rates rather than raise them. When the writing was writ large by certain erudite posters on this forum, the helmsman asked us not to panic as all was well and they were steering the ship into calmer waters ahead. Just wait and see...

Instead, having steered directly towards the rocks, they allowed many to cram into the lifeboats thus depleting the number of hands on board that might otherwise have been sufficient to turn the ship around. Those loyal hands are now idling on a desert island awaiting rescue, while the escapees breath a massive sigh of relief.

Ok, NOW I've overreacted!

In all seriousness, it's clear that they should and could have cut rates much earlier. Given that they didn't I feel they should have closed all hatches until they had either steadied the ship or admitted defeat and gone into rundown. Thus allowing us all to escape with the same percentage. Isn't that what was supposed to happen under a depleted PF situation. I can't see how this recent cut will be sufficient to repair the PF now, though that's partly because they are  deliberately making it more difficult to see. One can only surmise why. I fully expect further cuts in H2 if they are still afloat.

Now that they've allowed a number ofescapeess to scrape the cream off, it will be all the harder to fix. I should disclose that all of my friends and relatives have fully escaped and I've extracted 90% of my originally invested capital, so only 10% plus two years interest still invested for me. I really can't fathom why I didn't take the lot out when I had the chance. It simply has to go down as a personal cock-up. Having said that, if they were to shut the doors now, I'd be happy to chuck my £9k back in as an act of solidarity with my fellow shipmates. We really should be all in this together.

Good luck all

I make you right in the fact that we knew to expect a haircut from the T&C's in the event of a problem and its possible that if done another way there might have been even more moaning.But to me (not sure about others) that would mean being told for example that there was a 2% haircut on money invested across the board and a lower return going forward to refund the provision - so not good but at least clean cut and straight forward
But Two months on we find out its now ongoing with tweaks and with a promise/hope that in the 2nd half or early next year things may change 

“If you can keep your head when all around you have lost theirs, then you probably haven't understood the seriousness of the situation. ” - David Brent.

The way it was phrased/interpreted at the time was this would be a haircut to 5.4% going forward, not retrospectively.
I think its fair to say investors were misled.

For what its worth I took the escape hatch when it was offered as it seemed like a free option at the time (could always buy back in at the 5.4% rate).
But I took that decision based on the phrasing/interpretation, and it was a close call. 
Given current information, it wouldnt have been a difficult choice at all.

I feel for those stuck in LW.

Hopefully you are right but i'm nowhere near as bullish as i once was - unusual for the p2p finance news site and their puff pieces they have Two stories today of more interest one about the struggle for growth in the market and One about PG's which while behind a pay wall can sometimes be read free (or try incognito)