Exit from QAA account investments queued. (AC)

Too much cash, so we have had a percentage withdrawn and then reinvested but in a queue with no interest accruing AIUI

I suspect that a large chunk of this rejected cash will find its way to Loanpad. A platform that didn't suffer from any of the lockin problems during Covid, is happy to accommodate rolling withdrawals, has lower 42% average LTVs, seems to welcome retail investors, and is generally going from strength to strength. 

Unfortunately this pretty much sums up my feelings on this. I've given AC the benefit of the doubt multiple times and stuck by them as they tried to navigate the past few years but dropping this on us with no prior warning is disgusting and I do feel like I've been treated as an afterthought - I really feel sorry for people who have recently deposited (especially in an ISA) that now have to unpick this.

From some very poorly offered and handled loans at their outset (I'm still waiting for my mineral water) to the topsy-turvy, pillar to post handling of recent events I've just lost faith and I'm breaking my rule on diversification and sticking the lot in LoanPad - knowing my luck they'll be next. I've made a decent (scrap that - it's a good) return on Assetz over the many years but it's no longer about the money I just don't trust them anymore. It would be nice to know my final score but until they put in the functionality to finally crystallize losses (something you'd have thought would be there from the start but after at least two website revamps I can recall still is impossible) I'll just have to try and figure it out myself.

The amusing aspect is it wasn't that long ago Assetz were crowing about how they'd have to manage all the new money from Ratesetter etc., from the looks of it that's now someone else's problem. It'll also no doubt be galling to see the articles on the eminently reliable and unbiased P2P review sites (you know the ones) allowing Assetz to spin this as a 'we're so popular we just can't handle the fame' aspect rather than the 'failure to acquire new business like others have done' that it really is.

OK, rant over - I may completely change tack tomorrow but for now I'm fuming.

Looks like whatever loan request came along was funded by CBILS over the last or so year.
That shares the securities between us and gov but probably also makes the loans somewhat safer.
The QAA queues were emptied, which is in a sense what people asked for when they set up the requests. 
The MLA drained, because it pays more than the QAAs for less fees.
As a consequence the MLA default rate per volume doubled to 30% throughout the loan book.
Now there is too much cash for too little new loans.
Whoever had sell instructions got what they asked for (what else could AC assume as that that is what the customer wants?)
The excess was released to whoever did not ask for it (10%).
Apparently AC would not have wanted to pay 4% interest on cash for an extended time. They had to do this.
Could have been better managed; and setting up buy orders without lender confirmation was probably inappropriate.
Or perhaps they only did that for those that had the reinvest option on (not sure I had). 

Any idea were this is going to go?

Just to clarify, I had no withdrawal requests in progress, everything set to re-invest in the AA account and had actually invested in the Access Accounts while people were wanting to leave - I do not feel like I got what I wanted!

As for where it's going to go - for me - somewhere else!

I’ve consistently been miffed by AC failing to reward loyalty and level of investment whilst inducing new customers with premium rates when investing 50 Quid.

Realistically the business should look at diverting its excess cash burying its dead GBBA I & II.

Having got to the unfortunate point where the queue to invest in the access accounts was put in too late IMHO I think AC had little choice.

The alternative would have been to reduce the lender interest rates on the access accounts. I doubt this would have been popular and may have seen more money leave the accounts all over again. AC have said in the past they would rather not do this.

With so little unallocated cash in the PFs there is little room for flexibility. There was just 50k not ring fenced in the 90DAA at the last update. A single large loan getting into trouble for an unknown reason could have caused issues in the short term at least. Building up the PFs to be able to handle future risks is absolutely critical. The PFs are underfunded at the moment IMHO. I think the reality is that the 90DAA interest rate is perhaps too high at the moment in the short term.

CBIL has been very popular with borrowers. AC are yet to be authorised for the Recovery Loan Scheme but if/when they are we don't yet know if this scheme will be more popular with AC borrowers than AC P2P lending. Am not sure how many typical AC borrowers from previous years have now been put off AC P2P and P2P lending for good.