Yacht (and vehicle) P2P Pawn Broking

Ok so which one of these super yachts did you lend £664,000 against, and did you get Brian's permission to use the picture he took on the 6th October 2006 of some random super yachts during his trip to Monarco? 

We can't identify the actual asset such as the Superyacht in question because of borrower confidentiality.


People who have to effectively pawn their high end assets generally don't want the internet to know about it. Hence we remove identifying marks from the images.


We only have a limited amount of funding required at the moment and it is being funded quickly. 

[mod hat on]
batchoy, you're doing a very good job of pointing out issues and holding Saving Stream to account, but please stay calm and take the emotion out of your posts. Thanks.

Time for a cuppa all round.  One lump or two? 

There is nothing slanderous about my comments:

1. It has been effectively proved that the James Marshall pictured on your website is not James Marshall.
2. Your claimed regulated status for your P2P platform has nothing to do with that platform it relates to your lending through your lending platform thus you are not regulated when it comes to the P2P site.
3. All the images used on your facebook page and captioned with the amounts you have lent against the vessel come from other sources on the internet including private collections of holiday snaps and boat sales sites located across the globe for boats that are currently up for sale to cite but a few and are therefore unlikely to represent the actual vessels you claim to have lent against. 

I think it does need a chillout round here elljay although I can understand why folks get a bit hot under the collar. There have been several P2P lenders that have come and gone over time so most new ones are viewed with a certain degree of cynicism.

SS have not exactly got off to the best of starts which is probably an understatement on my part. It would be advisable if rather than trying to defend what is rapidly becoming indefensible, they simply took a backwards step and reviewed everything. Certainly their original T&C's were a mess so this needs to be sorted if it has not already done so - this is elementary and one of the first things lenders view before committing funds. The web site could be considered misleading although whilst the use of stock banner images may be acceptable, anything else is not. If this is the case then it reminds me of trying to sell a car but not using a picture of the actual vehicle I was offering for sale.

As a further aside, full disclosure is an absolute must in my book - it is non-negotiable. So the common ownership that exists between Lendy and SS should be explained. Why would a successful marine pawnbroker like Lendy be offering a slice of the action through SS. I'm sure there exists a simple explanation but nonetheless one that requires clarification.

My ramblings are in no way designed to be anything but hopefully constructive. I feel that the enthusiasm of SS (aka Lendy) to get started has possibly distracted the owners from fully understanding the P2P or P2B lenders/investors mindset.

elljay (earlier knuckle warp duly noted) the analogy with Polar Bears is close but this goes a little deeper, and as you say the Funding Secure situation is very much the same as the problem here.
However when their lending claims on facebook pages have been questioned because the images appear to have been ripped from other sources on the internet, rather than simply stating that the images are illustrative rather than true representations of the vessels that have been lent against as the captions appear to suggest, savingstream have chosen to obfuscate and this obfuscation leads to the questioning of not just the images but the lending claims in the caption. Similarly when their 'Fully Regulated' claims are questioned.

The situation that really disturbs me however is one of the images on Facebook where the caption on the original source clearly identifies the owners of the vessel. Now if savingstream have lent to this company it is potentially a significant breach of confidentiality, but if they haven't lent to this company and have simply ripped an image from the internet then it could clearly be detrimental to this company if someone does a search related to this company which picks up savingstream's Facebook post.

Staying with this image the original source clearly states who the copyright holder is and under what conditions the copyright holder allows this image be reused, unfortunately in their posting on Facebook savingstream do not fulfill the requirements of the copyright licence and are thus clearly in breach of the copyright. As much as I would like to identify the image doing so in an open forum would only compound the issue and could be detrimental to the owners of the vessel, so I am choosing not to. However it is not beyond the skills of other forum users to do the same searches that I have done to verify the facts. 

 

Fine I can understand that and assuming that is the case then all that was required was a little more transparency over this (along with several other points).

But hey, it's their organisation so it's up to SS & Lendy to sort out the misunderstandings. Wouldn't be that difficult either IMO.