|
Post by waryinvestor on Aug 16, 2020 12:52:35 GMT
default interest as a concept needs to be sorted out in p2p across the board.once a platform is winding down or enters administration this little golden egg as we are finding out with FS LENDY and MT should not come before lenders capital under any circumstances. financial gains for their incompetance in managing loans and feeding BS month after month while they are looking at their fees costs expenses etc etc mounting up knowing when the sh*t hits the fan they can play the T&Cs card that also default interest and anything else comes before lenders capital. FCA authorised and regulated to screw lenders and borrowers for as much as possible before walking away.any default interest after a platform has thrown in the towel should be used to help pay for the costs of receivers administrators and all the other vultures who jump in. In case of other P2P providers, the Default Interest is due to the Lenders. A % of that might be due to the Platform (like Prop.... keeps a % from all the Interests, but not 100%). Here, if a Loan pays 12% to Lenders under Normal circumstances and a Default Rate of 18%, the whole of 18% should go to the Lenders AND that is before the Borrower is entitled to any Left Over Funds (as that is part of his Ts & Cs with FS irrespective of Administration/Receivership). This has nothing to do with the Firm going into Admin and/or Admin Charges. Agreed that Admins are entitled to their Charges from the Net Receivables, so their charges (whether 5% or 5+3=8%) should come off the Net Receivables after the Default Interest is included in the Net Receivables (Borrower not paying this Admin Charge as per their Ts & Cs).
So, in this particular case, the Default Interest should have come to FS before the Borrower and then the waterfall is as per the Ts & Cs of Admin. That's my understanding of it (happy to be corrected).
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Aug 16, 2020 13:21:07 GMT
Even though, unlike many FS loans, lenders have done well receiving 97% of Capital & Interest on this loan, it is the principle of the way the charges have been dealt with; and some of the points raised in this thread, that require scrutiny.
How do we get FSAG representatives, to place this on the agenda, when they have their next meeting ?
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Aug 16, 2020 17:46:32 GMT
default interest as a concept needs to be sorted out in p2p across the board.once a platform is winding down or enters administration this little golden egg as we are finding out with FS LENDY and MT should not come before lenders capital under any circumstances. financial gains for their incompetance in managing loans and feeding BS month after month while they are looking at their fees costs expenses etc etc mounting up knowing when the sh*t hits the fan they can play the T&Cs card that also default interest and anything else comes before lenders capital. FCA authorised and regulated to screw lenders and borrowers for as much as possible before walking away.any default interest after a platform has thrown in the towel should be used to help pay for the costs of receivers administrators and all the other vultures who jump in. In case of other P2P providers, the Default Interest is due to the Lenders. A % of that might be due to the Platform (like Prop.... keeps a % from all the Interests, but not 100%). Here, if a Loan pays 12% to Lenders under Normal circumstances and a Default Rate of 18%, the whole of 18% should go to the Lenders AND that is before the Borrower is entitled to any Left Over Funds (as that is part of his Ts & Cs with FS irrespective of Administration/Receivership). This has nothing to do with the Firm going into Admin and/or Admin Charges. Agreed that Admins are entitled to their Charges from the Net Receivables, so their charges (whether 5% or 5+3=8%) should come off the Net Receivables after the Default Interest is included in the Net Receivables (Borrower not paying this Admin Charge as per their Ts & Cs).
So, in this particular case, the Default Interest should have come to FS before the Borrower and then the waterfall is as per the Ts & Cs of Admin. That's my understanding of it (happy to be corrected).
While that may be the way others do it, upon late redemption the terms here were quite clear that we would continue to accrue interest at the agreed rate, while FS would get an additional 5%. What wasn't clear to me or most others was that the 5% ranks ahead of our capital and interest and is quite galling that the directors of a failed business still receive an income at our expense even after they've folded. Alternatively, are we sure this 5% doesn't go to the administrators as they are in an operational sense FS now? If so, I could understand them saying this is what they need to wind the business down, but they should have been much more open on it.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Aug 20, 2020 13:38:04 GMT
I note there could be an argument that CG & Co fees on defaulted loans should be taken from lenders, even when there is a surplus for borrowers.
However, I had a loan that paid back in December on time with full interest, without any charges.
The fact that a borrower defaults, actually causes a charge to be applied to the lender.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Mar 17, 2021 8:48:15 GMT
Sequence of events on the same day. Property sold early afternoon. Update; Receivers appointed mid afternoon. My query to FS by telephone just after update. Lady said she entered update on instruction of administrator. My query to CG & Co by telephone around 17.00. I had a go & asked what was going on & to ring me back. CG & Co suggested receiver appointment within a few hours after the sale was a coincidence. I was telephoned back around 18.00 confirming what I had told them & that there would be an update the following day. Thought I would bring this one back to life, regarding receivers being appointed after the property was sold & then paid out of the proceeds. Need to keep this on the list of anomalies.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Mar 17, 2021 11:13:09 GMT
thanks for bringing this one back to life - certainly many anomolies and yet again questions about fees and lenders not getting what they expected
F
Sold one of my houses on Monday - huge amount of work for about £2.5K after tax (should have been more but buyers needed legal action to help concentrate their minds) - this chap defaults and gets £13K repaid so clearly more intelligent than I am - good luck to him but not at lenders' expense...
I really would be interested to have more details and know who actually bought this one!
|
|
|
Post by multiaccountmanager on Mar 18, 2021 10:28:23 GMT
thanks for bringing this one back to life - certainly many anomolies and yet again questions about fees and lenders not getting what they expected F Sold one of my houses on Monday - huge amount of work for about £2.5K after tax (should have been more but buyers needed legal action to help concentrate their minds) - this chap defaults and gets £13K repaid so clearly more intelligent than I am - good luck to him but not at lenders' expense... I really would be interested to have more details and know who actually bought this one!
Check out the Land Registry (once the sale is registered which takes a while) - cost is £3 to find out. See the DD thread for land registry link to this property.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Nov 3, 2021 17:03:49 GMT
Sequence of events on the same day. Property sold early afternoon. Update; Receivers appointed mid afternoon. My query to FS by telephone just after update. Lady said she entered update on instruction of administrator. My query to CG & Co by telephone around 17.00. I had a go & asked what was going on & to ring me back. CG & Co suggested receiver appointment within a few hours after the sale was a coincidence. I was telephoned back around 18.00 confirming what I had told them & that there would be an update the following day. Thought I would bring this one back to life, regarding receivers being appointed after the property was sold & then paid out of the proceeds. Need to keep this on the list of anomalies. Don't forget what happened with this one, if ever Administrators are brought to account
|
|
pfffill
Member of DD Central
Posts: 175
Likes: 206
|
Post by pfffill on Nov 4, 2021 7:44:58 GMT
Thought I would bring this one back to life, regarding receivers being appointed after the property was sold & then paid out of the proceeds. Need to keep this on the list of anomalies. Don't forget what happened with this one, if ever Administrators are brought to account Sounds like a whole lot of mutual, professional back-scratching going on.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Nov 4, 2021 15:16:58 GMT
Don't forget what happened with this one, if ever Administrators are brought to account Sounds like a whole lot of mutual, professional back-scratching going on.Yeah, while in bed with each other, after coitus............. I'll refrain from referencing shafting.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,426
Likes: 1,211
|
Post by sqh on Nov 4, 2021 17:53:56 GMT
Thought I would bring this one back to life, regarding receivers being appointed after the property was sold & then paid out of the proceeds. Need to keep this on the list of anomalies. Don't forget what happened with this one, if ever Administrators are brought to account criston I raised the calculations with the administrators. The response was we've done nothing wrong, but they obviously have. In fact their calculations are total nonsense and they won't even accept that their basic maths are wrong. I then raised a complaint with the IP but I heard nothing more. I have a reference no. C21/071842. It probably needs more lenders to complain. IP Complaints form link: www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/ExternalOnlineForms/InsolvencyPractitionerComplaint.aspxEdward Avery-Gee IPA 12410 Jonathan Avery-Gee ICAEW 1549
|
|