|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Dec 2, 2014 14:42:44 GMT
We cannot change your cash position without making statement entries. Although a different context, that quite clearly isn't true - my cash account suddenly jumped today by a significant amount, without any statement entries having been generated. My "Settled bids" also fell by the same amount at the same time, and I'd had an email yesterday about the loan in question, making it obvious what had happened despite the lack of any statement entry. Presumably AC don't consider it worth bothering to generate statement entries for money being returned from settled bids on the grounds that this function won't be relevant in the future, but it clearly demonstrates that mechanisms exist for AC to change our cash position without making statement entries. I got my email about York phones: 1/12/14 18.44
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092 
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Dec 2, 2014 15:08:11 GMT
This has been covered many times. A bid isn't a movement of cash it's a reservation of funds, in the same way your current account or credit card can have a forward transaction placed against them. ... AC have not, do not, and cannot move funds without a transaction and your above statement is unfortunately wrong. The trouble is that this "reservation of funds" explanation would imply the "settled bids" were part of the cash account - it would seem quite reasonable for these legacy bids to form part of the cash account from which the funds were originally reserved, and then quite logically when the reservation was cancelled the funds would naturally drop into the cash account without any need to generate a statement entry. They are, however, shown under the MLIA... and when the "reservation of funds" is cancelled, there is then a movement of funds from the MLIA to the cash account that doesn't generate any statement entries. If the bids are really a reservation within the cash account (which is how I'd understood them before they appeared within the MLIA), they need to be shown there, rather than in the MLIA. It would be a simple change that would avoid an awful lot of confusion! Edit: similarly, shadow bids are also shown within the MLIA, which implies that cash should be placed in the MLIA in order to settle them. Again, unnecessary confusion could have been easily avoided by showing things in the correct place!
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Dec 2, 2014 15:12:03 GMT
This has been covered many times. A bid isn't a movement of cash it's a reservation of funds, in the same way your current account or credit card can have a forward transaction placed against them. ... AC have not, do not, and cannot move funds without a transaction and your above statement is unfortunately wrong. The trouble is that this "reservation of funds" explanation would imply the "settled bids" were part of the cash account - it would seem quite reasonable for these legacy bids to form part of the cash account from which the funds were originally reserved, and then quite logically when the reservation was cancelled the funds would naturally drop into the cash account without any need to generate a statement entry. They are, however, shown under the MLIA... and when the "reservation of funds" is cancelled, there is then a movement of funds from the MLIA to the cash account that doesn't generate any statement entries. If the bids are really a reservation within the cash account (which is how I'd understood them before they appeared within the MLIA), they need to be shown there, rather than in the MLIA. It would be a simple change that would avoid an awful lot of confusion! Those reservations of funds are against the cash account. The reporting of the bids is from the bid records themselves shown against the MLIA at the request of the lenders, but your funds still sat in the cash account. We couldn't move them without deleting the original transactions and creating new ones which would likely have caused more confusion. Hopefully this is a moot point with bids coming to an end.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Dec 2, 2014 15:16:32 GMT
The reporting of the bids is from the bid records themselves shown against the MLIA at the request of the lenders... Hopefully this is a moot point with bids coming to an end. As I recall, the "request of lenders" was to include the value of bids on the overall dashboard total, rather than specifically within the MLIA, but as you say, with so many higher-priority fixes to keep the IT team busy until the remaining bids are resolved, the point is moot now.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on Dec 2, 2014 21:40:57 GMT
Hi..
Any news or an estimate of when the code for the GEIA will be tweaked to lend out the last few bob that is left awaiting investment on all of our accounts ??
chris It's imminent. Any progress in fixing my incorrect dashboard total for the GEIA?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 3, 2014 2:40:50 GMT
Could this be £0.08 due Falmouth... That would be my guess. Might you have bought some Falmouth parts during the period when they were undervalued by about 9%? If you bought 82p worth, and that was subsequently revalued when the error was corrected to become worth 90p, then your account would have picked up 8p in value for no obvious reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Dec 3, 2014 16:08:37 GMT
Could this be £0.08 due Falmouth... That would be my guess. Might you have bought some Falmouth parts during the period when they were undervalued by about 9%? If you bought 82p worth, and that was subsequently revalued when the error was corrected to become worth 90p, then your account would have picked up 8p in value for no obvious reason. Continuing the GEIA test, when I checked this morning the £0.08 had disappeared so I am back to the £18.00 total invested I should have, since this was coincident with the Falmouth corrections I am guessing it was Falmouth, but since there are no entries in the statement to cover the gain and the loss I cannot definitively state that it was Falmouth. Logging on this afternoon I find that my total invested has now dropped to £17.95. Some quick searching of the statements reveals that yesterday's fix by AC means that transactions are stated correctly but only from yesterday the fix is not retrospective so I have still got transactions that I can only apportion through assumption, however they do reveal that the GEIA has sold (uninstructed by me) £0.05 of Montrose and has put the Money in my CA but at the same time has failed to invest the £0.49 that is awaiting investment. My assumption here is that there is a bug in the GEIA which means that when it is attempting to balance the diversification of my investment it cannot distinguish between income generated as the result of sales it has instigated and income from repayments, interest and sales resulting from withdrawal requests, and because I have the account set to withdraw repayments and interest it has transferred the income form a sale it instigated itself to my CA rather than adding it to the total waiting investment. This bug would also explain the previous withdrawal of £1.66 rather than the £0.27 my GEIA was instructed to withdraw. Why it didn't attempt to balance my diversification by using the uninvested £0.49 I have no idea other than this is another, but this time known, bug. So that is roughly 8% of my investment that has been withdrawn without an instruction from me to do so and 3% that has never been invested. This time I am not going to replace the £0.05, rather I am going sit a watch how much more the GEIA withdraws of its own accord and thus how much I am losing in terms of lost interest through the action/in action of the GEIA. Awaiting Investment: £0.49 (2.7%) Currently Invested:£17.46 Total Investment: £17.95
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 3, 2014 23:20:38 GMT
I regret to have to report that today's transactions in my experimental GEIA have completely baffled me. At 1616 there are two credits for Falmouth WT interest -- 1.46234p and 0.04619p. Why were there two separate credits? I haven't a clue. Then at 1814 there were two further transactions -- a 0.04619p credit for Falmouth WT interest, and a 0.04619p debit for a transfer to my Cash Account. Why did I receive a third credit? And why was there a simultaneous transfer into my Cash Account? Unlike batchoy, I have my GEIA set to 'Reinvest Repayments' so any income received into my GEIA should remain there. Can anyone here explain what might be going on? And since, AIUI, we have been told that AC no longer will be responding to questions like these, I guess I need to ask them directly of AC via email. |
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Dec 3, 2014 23:29:07 GMT
I regret to have to report that today's transactions in my experimental GEIA have completely baffled me. At 1616 there are two credits for Falmouth WT interest -- 1.46234p and 0.04619p. Why were there two separate credits? I haven't a clue. Then at 1814 there were two further transactions -- a 0.04619p credit for Falmouth WT interest, and a 0.04619p debit for a transfer to my Cash Account. Why did I receive a third credit? And why was there a simultaneous transfer into my Cash Account? Unlike batchoy, I have my GEIA set to 'Reinvest Repayments' so any income received into my GEIA should remain there. Can anyone here explain what might be going on? And since, AIUI, we have been told that AC no longer will be responding to questions like these, I guess I need to ask them directly of AC via email. There were legacy issues with Falmouth resulting from the principle repayment that for some reason split the interest payment into multiple pieces. The interest withdrawal is down to a bug in the statement fix. See the change log discussion thread. (I Can't post the.link as I haven't yet mastered cut and paste on my new iPad 
|
|
|
|
Post by batchoy on Dec 4, 2014 16:33:26 GMT
A better day to day in the GEIA test, no unplanned withdrawals and it has managed to invest a little of the uninvested cash:
Awaiting Investment: £0.17 (0.9%)
Currently Invested:£17.78
Total Investment: £17.95
|
|
niceguy37
Member of DD Central
Posts: 504
Likes: 254
|
Post by niceguy37 on Dec 4, 2014 17:10:47 GMT
I put £10 in to test. It seems it's still using the algorithm that invests 20% of the available balance, reducing the investment on each loan as it goes, leaving me with 71p uninvested (7%).
To my surprise, although I'd made no changes, 6 hours later it sold 2p of one loan (and I wasn't over-weight on that loan) so who knows what triggered that seemingly erroneous action.
To get invested I then added £2, which it started to invest in the now familiar reducing amounts, this time stopping with £1.25 left.
I withdrew the £1.25, and have set repayments to withdraw.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Dec 4, 2014 17:48:19 GMT
6 hours later it sold 2p of one loan
Chris, why did it do that?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 5, 2014 4:40:06 GMT
A better day to day in the GEIA test, no unplanned withdrawals and it has managed to invest a little of the uninvested cash: Awaiting Investment: £0.17 (0.9%) Currently Invested:£17.78 Total Investment: £17.95 is having better luck with his GEIA test than I am. I had no activity at all Thursday, so my situation is: Awaiting Investment: £0.35 (1.7%) Currently Invested:£19.67 Total Investment: £20.02 (My GEIA is set to reinvest repayments.) I certainly can't explain why niceguy37's GEIA sold anything. Perhaps chris can. Or maybe it's not necessary since he's already told us that a change in the investment algorithm is in the works and on Tuesday he said of the update "It's imminent". So if it was imminent then it must be very imminent now! Or is that just wishful thinking?
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Dec 5, 2014 7:24:07 GMT
As reported before, my £10 test started on 21 Nov with repayments set to withdraw is still selling shrapnel. I am now down to £7.93 invested. Every time I think it has stopped selling it seems to start again. Last sale of minuscule amounts were two separate ones on 3 December. Nothing yesterday so we shall see.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Dec 5, 2014 9:54:42 GMT
A better day to day in the GEIA test, no unplanned withdrawals and it has managed to invest a little of the uninvested cash: Awaiting Investment: £0.17 (0.9%) Currently Invested:£17.78 Total Investment: £17.95 is having better luck with his GEIA test than I am. I had no activity at all Thursday, so my situation is: Awaiting Investment: £0.35 (1.7%) Currently Invested:£19.67 Total Investment: £20.02 (My GEIA is set to reinvest repayments.) I certainly can't explain why niceguy37's GEIA sold anything. Perhaps chris can. Or maybe it's not necessary since he's already told us that a change in the investment algorithm is in the works and on Tuesday he said of the update "It's imminent". So if it was imminent then it must be very imminent now! Or is that just wishful thinking? I'm following this thread with interest although I'm not involved financially. Is the 7% based upon the total amount of £20 (which I presume is mikes1531 experimental amount) or just that actually invested? If it is the latter then effectively you are in the hands of the algorithm which reminds me of another platform.
|
|
