Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428 
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Mar 31, 2020 12:45:59 GMT
Well it doesn't!
It's farcical to suggest that contractual terms can be changed in this way.********
The very foundation of a valid contract require an offer and acceptance. An acceptance is a final and unqualified expression of assent to the terms which Assetz cannot obtain in this way.
Correct!! We as a group of investors entered into contracts to lend money to investors Peer to Peer. That's where the interest comes from. Many of those borrowers have outstanding borrowing from us investors and we are contractually bound to fund it. AC allowed good liquidity "UNDER NORMAL MARKET CONDITIONS" Well done AC for working for the majority of lenders by numbers not the the minority by amount invested and the borrowers who are in very difficult circumstances. Take care of the borrowers is the best way to protect our capital which is much more important than a bit of interest.
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Mar 31, 2020 12:47:23 GMT
Please show me the exact contractual commitment I made that has bound me to continue to make funds available for future investment propositions.
How about 6.4 (irrelevant parts stripped - see the original T&Cs for the full version)
"... For the period of utilisation of ... an Access Account, ... there will be a continuing instruction to the Assetz Capital Companies to acquire in the name of the relevant Lending Member an appropriate number and value of Micro Loans in Loans that, under the current published investment criteria of the ... Access Accounts..."
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
Member is Online
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 31, 2020 12:48:02 GMT
Please show me the exact contractual commitment I made that has bound me to continue to make funds available for future investment propositions.
How about 6.4 (irrelevant parts stripped - see the original T&Cs for the full version)
"... For the period of utilisation of ... an Access Account, ... there will be a continuing instruction to the Assetz Capital Companies to acquire in the name of the relevant Lending Member an appropriate number and value of Micro Loans in Loans that, under the current published investment criteria of the ... Access Accounts..."
Ok so that's understandable. The instructions cannot be expected to continue indefinitely though as no one would ever be able to leave those accounts. I therefore need to look at how one might instruct the accounts not to be utilised through the use of a withdrawal request.
The beginning of 6.4 states "The details of the Loan Selection Facilities currently available to Lending Members are set out on the Website."
I note the website page for the QAA explains inter alia "The repayment of loans should continue to create some capital which would be available for withdrawal by investors regardless of market conditions being abnormal."
There is no restriction preventing me from withdrawing or attempting to withdrawal monies on the basis that those uninvested funds must continue to remain on the platform to be available for future investment propositions.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043
Likes: 4,437
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Mar 31, 2020 12:48:10 GMT
It wasn't a random change. They have explained their choices. OK, for your benefit: Everyone rushing for the door is the problem, but there is a reason why everyone is rushing for the door. Changing the T&C's and other account conditions overnight and without consent is making the rush for the door even worse. Not having a big enough door is the problem,
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Mar 31, 2020 12:48:51 GMT
It wasn't a random change. They have explained their choices. OK, for your benefit: Everyone rushing for the door is the problem, but there is a reason why everyone is rushing for the door. Changing the T&C's and other account conditions overnight and without consent is making the rush for the door even worse. Well put. Thank you
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
Member is Online
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 31, 2020 12:49:36 GMT
How about 6.4 (irrelevant parts stripped - see the original T&Cs for the full version)
"... For the period of utilisation of ... an Access Account, ... there will be a continuing instruction to the Assetz Capital Companies to acquire in the name of the relevant Lending Member an appropriate number and value of Micro Loans in Loans that, under the current published investment criteria of the ... Access Accounts..."
"The repayment of loans should continue to create some capital which would be available for withdrawal by investors regardless of market conditions being abnormal."
Unfortunately Mikeme you're hearing things that aren't being said again. We're not talking about funds already lent in loans. We're talking about the uninvested cash that is generated when those loans redeem.
|
|
|
|
Post by davee39 on Mar 31, 2020 12:51:44 GMT
This argument is going nowhere. The same complaints have been aired ad-nauseum in every Assetz Thread.
IT IS TIME TO ACT!!!
I suggest crowdfunding a couple of fully armed tanks and driving them to Assetz HQ
Might is right!!
EDIT: While we are at it we can amuse ourselves with a font size competion.
My font is bigger than yours.
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Mar 31, 2020 12:58:51 GMT
You are not leaving any individual loans but an equal spread of loans like the rest of us. Thats why previously for many years it worked well.. You can withdraw all from the access accounts but because of ABNORMAL MARKET CONDITIONS this is taking time the same as the rest of us. Well explained in the blog saying that if some big lenders were able to withdraw ball it would clog up the system.
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Mar 31, 2020 12:59:49 GMT
This argument is going nowhere. The same complaints have been aired ad-nauseum in every Assetz Thread. IT IS TIME TO ACT!!! I suggest crowdfunding a couple of fully armed tanks and driving them to Assetz HQ Might is right!! EDIT: While we are at it we can amuse ourselves with a font size competion. My font is bigger than yours. I suggest you look at the real news and real world.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043
Likes: 4,437
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Mar 31, 2020 13:00:18 GMT
UNDER NORMAL MARKET CONDITIONS "The repayment of loans should continue to create some capital which would be available for withdrawal by investors regardless of market conditions being abnormal."
Unfortunately Mikeme you're hearing things that aren't being said again. We're not talking about funds already lent in loans. We're talking about the uninvested cash that is generated when those loans redeem. Isn't that exactly what is happening?
Also note the use of the term should not will
|
|
|
|
Post by garreh on Mar 31, 2020 13:00:53 GMT
It wasn't a random change. They have explained their choices. OK, for your benefit: Everyone rushing for the door is the problem, but there is a reason why everyone is rushing for the door. Changing the T&C's and other account conditions overnight and without consent is making the rush for the door even worse. Assetz Capital isn't the only P2P Lender out there. Every P2P Lender at the moment has liquidity issues due to the pandemic. Growth Street, for example, have completely frozen all withdrawals on their platform AND forced everyone into re-investing on their platform, even those that were originally held purely in cash. In comparison, AC have not forced re-investment of cash and still continue to allow withdrawals, but a slower rate. Things may evolve, but they do so to protect investors, borrowers and the platform as a whole. That's a good thing. And let's be clear - nobody wanted this. Look at the stock markets, look at the supermarkets, look at the lockdowns. These aren't "normal market conditions". The only way we're going to get through this is to return to those "normal market conditions". Encouraging or suggesting everyone liquidates their P2P is definitely not the solution. The P2P industy is pretty new and has never been tested like this before. Once things have returned to normal, lessons will definitely have been learned.
|
|
bg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,368
Likes: 1,929
|
Post by bg on Mar 31, 2020 13:04:29 GMT
As explained in this post the current cash element of the Access accounts is currently £9.3m. This uninvested cash should be released to investors who do not wish it to be reinvested. Furthermore and more importantly, about half of the investment in these accounts is in development loans that require future funding tranches. If we (as lenders) were to fail to fund these obligations then what happens? We can hardly make a claim against the security if we have not upheld our side of the contract and could be liable for losses by the developer. That would not be a great outcome for anyone. I accept your premise but not your conclusion that this somehow makes it my responsibility. I personally have made no contractual commitment to continue to fund loans on the platform and I understand neither has anyone else.
It's a fair point, I do not know what the legal situation is...I am aware that a Lendy borrower tried to sue borrowers for not funding money that Lendy said they would. That isn't my point though. My point is, what happens to the half of your money that is invested in development loans? Are you happy just to write it off? If AC can't fund future commitments then I expect that our investments in these dev loans will be worth zero. The borrower would have good claim not to pay anything back and we certainly couldn't enforce security. I want my money back too but I do not want AC to default on loans that half my money is invested in. That would be a disaster.
|
|
Mikeme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 428
Likes: 331
|
Post by Mikeme on Mar 31, 2020 13:05:32 GMT
"The repayment of loans should continue to create some capital which would be available for withdrawal by investors regardless of market conditions being abnormal."
Unfortunately Mikeme you're hearing things that aren't being said again. We're not talking about funds already lent in loans. We're talking about the uninvested cash that is generated when those loans redeem. Isn't that exactly what is happening?
Also note the use of the term should not will
It is being paid out. So sorry that you want a bigger amount than IMO AC have rightly decided to pay in equal amounts to all lenders.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
Member is Online
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 31, 2020 13:05:33 GMT
Again we're not talking about funds already lent in loans. We're talking about the uninvested cash that is generated when those loans redeem. I'm talking about the 4 figure sum that is sitting in my QAA not invested in any loan. Sitting as cash. I'm talking about the cash element of the Access accounts which is currently £9.3m in cash.
I do not want my cash to be reinvested in future projects. Assetz seem to be changing the T+C's to allow them to do so which is unlawful.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
Member is Online
|
Post by Mousey on Mar 31, 2020 13:09:16 GMT
As explained in this post the current cash element of the Access accounts is currently £9.3m. This uninvested cash should be released to investors who do not wish it to be reinvested. I accept your premise but not your conclusion that this somehow makes it my responsibility. I personally have made no contractual commitment to continue to fund loans on the platform and I understand neither has anyone else.
It's a fair point, I do not know what the legal situation is...I am aware that a Lendy borrower tried to sue borrowers for not funding money that Lendy said they would. That isn't my point though. My point is, what happens to the half of your money that is invested in development loans? Are you happy just to write it off? If AC can't fund future commitments then I expect that our investments in these dev loans will be worth zero. The borrower would have good claim not to pay anything back and we certainly couldn't enforce security. I want my money back too but I do not want AC to default on loans that half my money is invested in. That would be a disaster. Again I accept your premise but not your conclusion that this somehow makes it my responsibility rather than Assetz's.
The Lendy borrower in question tried to join all the lenders to the claim on the basis that we had individually made commitments to continue funding which was not the case. Whether Lendy had made commitments is another matter.
|
|
