tjtl
Posts: 232
Likes: 351
|
Post by tjtl on Apr 28, 2020 10:46:11 GMT
This thread is degenerating into personal abuse and vindictiveness- and thus losing any relevance to others. Could either the Mods please step in, or could posters please exhibit some set-restraint and maturity.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 28, 2020 12:56:14 GMT
- That the "withdraw all" function for repayments on the AA accounts never actually withdrawn capital as due to the fact you were invested in a cash/asset hybrid collective fund you could only ever automatically withdraw any interest payments. If you wanted to withdraw capital you always had to request a separate capital withdrawal for a specific amounts, which you can still do. This is now being touted as a basis for a legal challenge by these shillers. Really! you kidding me aren't you.....you need to getyour facts straight before talking legal chaps.
I really wish you had told AC the "withdraw all" function for repayments on the AA accounts never actually withdrawn capital because they did not know this as they advised me on the phone I could use this function to withdraw capital. Script with AC Xxxx: Just a quick one the same account. When I have the setting "Withdraw payments and Interest" should I expect the odd repayment to be withdrawn through the month? Xxxxx: Yes, that should be happening. The 'On Repayment' setting on the 30 Day Access Account is not working as it should as it's currently with our website developers. This issue is affecting multiple investor accounts and has been marked as a high priority ticket.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043 
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Apr 29, 2020 8:46:10 GMT
In the midst of a social and financial crisis affecting every single institution and business, do you not feel that your self-absorbed vendetta and your repetitive attacks on the company are unhelpful and unwarranted at this time It seems that your narrow minded approach has blinkered you from seeing and understanding what is happening in the real world. Maybe have some patience and understanding and give the company some grace to sort this mess out then take a view in a few months time. In your personal vendetta, I believe that you may have lost sight of what ALL investors want which is Assetz Capital management being able to dedicate all their efforts in difficult times to resolving the current problems and bring about a return to normality as soon as can be achieved for all of us. With respect, your approach is a distraction. FYI I am, and intend on remaining, an investor with near to £300k invested. I don't think you have much of a choice
|
|
|
|
Post by honda2ner on Apr 29, 2020 10:55:53 GMT
In the midst of a social and financial crisis affecting every single institution and business, do you not feel that your self-absorbed vendetta and your repetitive attacks on the company are unhelpful and unwarranted at this time It seems that your narrow minded approach has blinkered you from seeing and understanding what is happening in the real world. Maybe have some patience and understanding and give the company some grace to sort this mess out then take a view in a few months time. In your personal vendetta, I believe that you may have lost sight of what ALL investors want which is Assetz Capital management being able to dedicate all their efforts in difficult times to resolving the current problems and bring about a return to normality as soon as can be achieved for all of us. With respect, your approach is a distraction. FYI I am, and intend on remaining, an investor with near to £300k invested. I don't think you have much of a choice I disagree. The MLA is running very well, I pulled out a 5 figure sum in the last 7 days, all at par. Set it to redistribute now, selling anything below 9% and buying anything with a LTV of less than 60%. Discounts are dropping off, ignoring the meaningless 5-6% loans that only the AAs are in the discount rates have dropped from mid 20%s to between par for the sweet loans and 10% for the 7-8.5% loans, so roughly halved in 2 weeks. I reckon another 2-3 weeks and the discounts will be back to the usual 0.5-1% range in normal loans. Once the panickers have exited then hopefully AC can offer some AA holdings in the MLA and up the dribble of AA repayments to a spurt. :-) I'm sure this will cue the moaners harping on about being left with low quality loans but you can't have your cake and eat it, no matter how many posts, polls and new threads you bleat in.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 29, 2020 11:04:47 GMT
I don't think you have much of a choice I disagree. The MLA is running very well, I pulled out a 5 figure sum in the last 7 days, all at par. Set it to redistribute now, selling anything below 9% and buying anything with a LTV of less than 60%. Discounts are dropping off, ignoring the meaningless 5-6% loans that only the AAs are in the discount rates have dropped from mid 20%s to between par for the sweet loans and 10% for the 7-8.5% loans, so roughly halved in 2 weeks. I reckon another 2-3 weeks and the discounts will be back to the usual 0.5-1% range in normal loans. Once the panickers have exited then hopefully AC can offer some AA holdings in the MLA and up the dribble of AA repayments to a spurt. :-) I'm sure this will cue the moaners harping on about being left with low quality loans but you can't have your cake and eat it, no matter how many posts, polls and new threads you bleat in. I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. At the moment the Access Accounts are being asked to fund them all. I exited the access accounts early in the year.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Apr 29, 2020 11:21:56 GMT
I disagree. The MLA is running very well, I pulled out a 5 figure sum in the last 7 days, all at par. Set it to redistribute now, selling anything below 9% and buying anything with a LTV of less than 60%. Discounts are dropping off, ignoring the meaningless 5-6% loans that only the AAs are in the discount rates have dropped from mid 20%s to between par for the sweet loans and 10% for the 7-8.5% loans, so roughly halved in 2 weeks. I reckon another 2-3 weeks and the discounts will be back to the usual 0.5-1% range in normal loans. Once the panickers have exited then hopefully AC can offer some AA holdings in the MLA and up the dribble of AA repayments to a spurt. :-) I'm sure this will cue the moaners harping on about being left with low quality loans but you can't have your cake and eat it, no matter how many posts, polls and new threads you bleat in. I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. I exited the access accounts early in the year. The way the AC model is now working (due to AA repayments being blocked) means the tranche drawdowns are primally being funded by the AAs, one area where there is a fair amount of agreement is if these are not funded then all AC investors in these loans will take a haircut.
However due to the rule change the burden falls on the AA lenders while the MLA lenders get a free ride. I would like to add this is not the fault of the MLA lenders as many would not like to add (or be able add) more money into P2P during these times but a problem with the AC model and subsequent changes. However it does seem unfair to AA holders are forced take on this burden especially given the differential in interest rates and to help protect other peoples investments.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 29, 2020 11:27:59 GMT
I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. I exited the access accounts early in the year. The way the AC model is now working (due to AA repayments being blocked) means the tranche drawdowns are primally being funded by the AAs, one area where there is a fair amount of agreement is if these are not funded then all AC investors in these loans will take a haircut.
However due to the rule change the burden falls on the AA lenders while the MLA lenders get a free ride. I would like to add this is not the fault of the MLA lenders as many would not like to add (or be able add) more money into P2P during these times but a problem with the AC model and subsequent changes. However it does seem unfair to AA holders are forced take on this burden especially given the differential in interest rates and to help protect other investments.
Have AC approached manual lenders, underwriters, institutional lenders about part funding any of the tranches? I wonder if they would part fund any on the same terms or whether they would want higher rates? Again not a trick question. Am just trying to understand the potential sources of funding and how the risk is being priced.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Apr 29, 2020 11:34:35 GMT
I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. At the moment the Access Accounts are being asked to fund them all. I exited the access accounts early in the year. Remember that the MLA has only ever been a "secondary market", all loans being filled initially via AC's primary funding routes; underwriters, institutional lenders and latterly, over the last few years, the wall of retail money pouring into the Access Accounts (which more or less pushed the underwriters out of the picture). Only once loans and tranches are filled and drawn down by the borrower are units sold on (by the Access Accounts and underwriters) to MLA lenders who have placed Buy orders. It would require something of a process restructure by AC for MLA lenders to be invited to participate directly in funding new loans / tranches prior to draw down, but far from impossible. I suspect, though, that MLA lenders would expect to receive the benefit of much / all of the lending margin that's previously gone to AC's primary funders.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Apr 29, 2020 11:35:43 GMT
The way the AC model is now working (due to AA repayments being blocked) means the tranche drawdowns are primally being funded by the AAs, one area where there is a fair amount of agreement is if these are not funded then all AC investors in these loans will take a haircut.
However due to the rule change the burden falls on the AA lenders while the MLA lenders get a free ride. I would like to add this is not the fault of the MLA lenders as many would not like to add (or be able add) more money into P2P during these times but a problem with the AC model and subsequent changes. However it does seem unfair to AA holders are forced take on this burden especially given the differential in interest rates and to help protect other investments.
Have AC approached manual lenders, underwriters, institutional lenders about part funding any of the tranches? I wonder if they would part fund any on the same terms or whether they would want higher rates? Again not a trick question. Am just trying to understand the potential sources of funding and how the risk is being priced. I think our best hope is that some of the government schemes will make cheaper finance available to these borrowers and they will not take up all the facilities available to them from AC. We are now in a lower interest rate environment but without government backing this will only apply to lenders as risk have increased so very little chance of alternative finance for these tranches without government backing.
|
|
|
|
Post by honda2ner on Apr 29, 2020 11:35:50 GMT
I disagree. The MLA is running very well, I pulled out a 5 figure sum in the last 7 days, all at par. Set it to redistribute now, selling anything below 9% and buying anything with a LTV of less than 60%. Discounts are dropping off, ignoring the meaningless 5-6% loans that only the AAs are in the discount rates have dropped from mid 20%s to between par for the sweet loans and 10% for the 7-8.5% loans, so roughly halved in 2 weeks. I reckon another 2-3 weeks and the discounts will be back to the usual 0.5-1% range in normal loans. Once the panickers have exited then hopefully AC can offer some AA holdings in the MLA and up the dribble of AA repayments to a spurt. :-) I'm sure this will cue the moaners harping on about being left with low quality loans but you can't have your cake and eat it, no matter how many posts, polls and new threads you bleat in. I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. At the moment the Access Accounts are being asked to fund them all. I exited the access accounts early in the year. I would be willing to buy into development loans that looked strong, until the website farce I was buying into 8.5 and 8% development loans but factoring in a raised risk for AC stopped that and I switched to buying corporate bonds, my S&S holdings are static very long term and target dividends. P2P has been (and still is) the high risk bit of my portfolio that I watch like a hawk and yes, I'm brutal but this is the Wild West of the financial industry so I have to be. Like many others I currently have uninvested cash in the MLA looking to buy the right loans or heavily discounted ones, some of these might be development loans although that is unlikely as most development loans are recent so the interest rate isn't that high. My point wasn't about MLA investors taking up the funding of development loans it was merely exploring the possibility of the AA selling loans into the MLA in order to bring in money which can then indirectly fund the development loans or increase payouts to AA lenders that wish to exit, or both.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 29, 2020 11:48:11 GMT
I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. At the moment the Access Accounts are being asked to fund them all. I exited the access accounts early in the year. Remember that the MLA has only ever been a "secondary market", all loans being filled initially via AC's primary funding routes; underwriters, institutional lenders and latterly, over the last few years, the wall of retail money pouring into the Access Accounts (which more or less pushed the underwriters out of the picture). Only once loans and tranches are filled and drawn down by the borrower are units sold on (by the Access Accounts and underwriters) to MLA lenders who have placed Buy orders. It would require something of a process restructure by AC for MLA lenders to be invited to participate directly in funding new loans / tranches prior to draw down, but far from impossible. I suspect, though, that MLA lenders would expect to receive the benefit of much / all of the lending margin that's previously gone to AC's primary funders. Thank you SteveTI did realise that. I was curious if anyone else had been approached recently and if they would be interested. I will ask AC if they have approached manual lenders etc. particularly those who already have holdings in these tranche loans. Interesting you expect they would want some of the margin, I also thought that may be the case. Am just curious about trying to spread some of the load off the access accounts, even a small bit. I am not in the access accounts, but do understand at least some of the issues raised by access account lenders.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 29, 2020 11:52:33 GMT
I have always found the AC model unusual. I doubt many lenders would disagree that tranche drawdowns need funding. Would you as a manual lender be willing to part fund them all at the moment? Not a trick question, I am curious about how AC could fund them at the moment. At the moment the Access Accounts are being asked to fund them all. I exited the access accounts early in the year. I would be willing to buy into development loans that looked strong, until the website farce I was buying into 8.5 and 8% development loans but factoring in a raised risk for AC stopped that and I switched to buying corporate bonds, my S&S holdings are static very long term and target dividends. P2P has been (and still is) the high risk bit of my portfolio that I watch like a hawk and yes, I'm brutal but this is the Wild West of the financial industry so I have to be. Like many others I currently have uninvested cash in the MLA looking to buy the right loans or heavily discounted ones, some of these might be development loans although that is unlikely as most development loans are recent so the interest rate isn't that high. My point wasn't about MLA investors taking up the funding of development loans it was merely exploring the possibility of the AA selling loans into the MLA in order to bring in money which can then indirectly fund the development loans or increase payouts to AA lenders that wish to exit, or both. Thanks useful input. I will ask AC if they have approached others about the tranche drawdowns, even a small part of them. Am not in the access accounts now but do understand at least some of the issues some of the lenders have been raising. No easy answers...
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Apr 29, 2020 11:58:17 GMT
However due to the rule change the burden falls on the AA lenders while the MLA lenders get a free ride.
By the way, your suggestion that "MLA lenders get a free ride" on Access Account lenders is ludicrous. There is no opportunity for MLA lenders to fund new tranches prior to draw-down (see my previous post) and MLA lenders will typically buy units of new loans (funded initially by the Access Accounts) within minutes of draw-down, assuming full capital risk immediately but at a significantly lower interest rate than the borrowers are paying AC. The enormous popularity of the Access Accounts has driven new loan rates available to MLA lenders down by at least 2-3% over the last 3 years, and pushed underwriters largely out of the picture altogether. My suspicion has always been that many (most?) Access Account lenders paid little or no attention to the loans their money was being invested into, ignoring all AC's risk warnings and lender appropriateness test questions in a blind rush to earn 4% "instant access" without questioning the risks they were taking. There's a reason why the typical rate on an FSCS-protected instant access bank deposit account is less than 0.1% !!
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Apr 29, 2020 12:38:30 GMT
However due to the rule change the burden falls on the AA lenders while the MLA lenders get a free ride.
By the way, your suggestion that "MLA lenders get a free ride" on Access Account lenders is ludicrous. There is no opportunity for MLA lenders to fund new tranches prior to draw-down (see my previous post) and MLA lenders will typically buy units of new loans (funded initially by the Access Accounts) within minutes of draw-down, assuming full capital risk immediately but at a significantly lower interest rate than the borrowers are paying AC. The enormous popularity of the Access Accounts has driven new loan rates available to MLA lenders down by at least 2-3% over the last 3 years, and pushed underwriters largely out of the picture altogether. My suspicion has always been that many (most?) Access Account lenders paid little or no attention to the loans their money was being invested into, ignoring all AC's risk warnings and lender appropriateness test questions in a blind rush to earn 4% "instant access" without questioning the risks they were taking. There's a reason why the typical rate on an FSCS-protected instant access bank deposit account is less than 0.1% !! I think that is a very good point SteveT and for avoidance of any doubt it was not me who said anything about a free ride in case anyone reads this post on its own. Do we know how much of the access account is currently available to MLA lenders to help provide liquidity to the access accounts? I will ask AC if not when I ask about why non access account holders don't appear to have been approached in these unfortunate times to partly fund drawdowns. There may well be some good reasons from AC. When I invested in the access accounts I kept an eye on the big loans and an overall view of the others. Am not sure how common that is though and I will be happy to admit my reviews were far from perfect.... It is also not easy when the PF stats are only updated every quarter and then these are delayed by circa 2 months. I doubt I will return to the access accounts myself. Right now I obviously can't even see what I would be investing in without investing... which always seemed strange to me. I have no idea what the current breakdown of loans is now I have left. Somewhat ironic for potential new lenders looking at the accounts. Given I can't see the loans in the access accounts before investing and sorry but the PF stats are basically useless if not updated monthly in the current circumstances, I can't see how it is possible to assess the risk in the access accounts now for future lenders.
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,528
Likes: 2,668
|
Post by cb25 on Apr 29, 2020 12:49:45 GMT
In normal conditions, my MLA strategy for development loans was - lend an initial amount (assuming the project looked OK), then add to it whenever the Credit Report and Monitoring Surveyor reports (that are issued at tranche drawdown) showed good progress. Hence as an MLA investment, I did buy into tranche draw-downs, though as SteveT says, could only do that in retrospect. I'm not following this strategy at the moment primarily due to a lot of developments having halted - hence there are no tranche draw-downs for those loans - not because of money dribbling out of access accounts. |
|
