ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Dec 24, 2014 10:10:08 GMT
perhaps some form of provision fund would help? Should items sell for greater than liabilities then perhaps that might defray the costs of items that do not. I wonder if this might be happening already, except that it is behind the scenes and lenders are unaware of it. I'm not sure it could work because when items sell for greater than liabilities then the excess is due to the owner of the item, i.e. the borrower, so it isn't happening behind the scenes.
|
|
hendragon
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631 
Likes: 619
|
Post by hendragon on Dec 24, 2014 12:03:42 GMT
I think I need to have a look at the T&C s for borrowers. My understanding of pawnbroking is that if the pledge is not redeemed then all value in it goes to lender whether it is a plus or a minus.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Dec 24, 2014 12:11:43 GMT
I think I need to have a look at the T&C s for borrowers. My understanding of pawnbroking is that if the pledge is not redeemed then all value in it goes to lender whether it is a plus or a minus. I'm afraid your understanding isn't correct henders - sorry  . Regardless of what FS Ts&Cs say (and I'm sure they support what I said), it's how the industry works. From Money Advice Service: " It doesn’t happen very often, but if the sale raises more money than you owe, you will lose the item but the pawnbroker must give you any money left over, although you have to ask for it." Edit: for completeness, here is the FS Ts&Cs entry that refers, from the section on Defaults detailing the order in which the proceeds of a sale are used: " 7.3.3.4 the balance (if any) will be returned to the Borrower to their Nominated Account".
|
|
hendragon
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 619
|
Post by hendragon on Dec 24, 2014 12:16:15 GMT
I think I need to have a look at the T&C s for borrowers. My understanding of pawnbroking is that if the pledge is not redeemed then all value in it goes to lender whether it is a plus or a minus. I'm afraid your understanding isn't correct henders - sorry . Regardless of what FS Ts&Cs say (and I'm sure they support what I said), but it's how the industry works. From Money Advice Service: " It doesn’t happen very often, but if the sale raises more money than you owe, you will lose the item but the pawnbroker must give you any money left over, although you have to ask for it." thank-you rose. I think I have had a "should have gone to specsavers moment"
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Dec 24, 2014 12:17:46 GMT
thank-you rose. I think I have had a "should have gone to specsavers moment" 
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 24, 2014 12:24:35 GMT
Today's noontime loan didn't fill instantly, so there's still a bit left if anyone's interested.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Jan 7, 2015 17:08:39 GMT
fundingsecure, a couple of defaulted loans are surely overdue an update. 2092400975, defaulted 5/11/14 and 24181978, defaulted 8/11/14 (both jewellery loans). Both bear the note: "....................THE LOAN IS THEREFORE NOW IN DEFAULT AND THE ASSETS WIL BE AUCTIONED AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY". (Yes, both with the same typo so cut and pasted at the same time). Has there seriously been no opportunity to auction this stuff for 2 months? I know we've had Christmas and all that, but that's an awfully long time.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 7, 2015 19:03:53 GMT
fundingsecure, a couple of defaulted loans are surely overdue an update. 2092400975, defaulted 5/11/14 and 24181978, defaulted 8/11/14 (both jewellery loans). Both bear the note: "....................THE LOAN IS THEREFORE NOW IN DEFAULT AND THE ASSETS WIL BE AUCTIONED AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY". (Yes, both with the same typo so cut and pasted at the same time). Has there seriously been no opportunity to auction this stuff for 2 months? I know we've had Christmas and all that, but that's an awfully long time. I don't have either of those, but I do have 589148050, a jewellery loan (two rings) that was due on 21/Dec. I've been watching that one since before Christmas, waiting for a note to appear, but nothing happened until today, when the Loan Status was changed to "Defaulted". But there's still no 'note' giving any info.  I also note that in my Investment History I have just one loan classified as 'Defaulted'. That one (also jewellery) was due on 8/Oct and successfully auctioned, with an updated note of 2/Dec saying the proceeds had been enough to repay the capital and all accrued interest. Inasmuch as that loan was due a month before ramblin rose's two defaults, if those auctions also were a month after mine then the result should be available around now. But I expect the holidays would have delayed things. Still, fundingsecure ought to be able to provide an update regarding when the auctions are scheduled. I also have two other similar loans that are not classified as Defaulted. The one for the bassoon reported that the instrument was sold for enough to repay capital and accrued interest, so I don't understand why it's classified differently from 589148050. And there's also the Yamaha motorbike, where the note says it was sold and the funds distributed. The note fails to mention that the proceeds were so low that only the capital was returned. Why that one isn't classified as Defaulted is a mystery. (No doubt it helps FS's track record!)
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Jan 12, 2015 14:34:17 GMT
Anyone heard anything about these two loans from Funding Secure?
341992004 - Solitaire Diamond Ring - was given a 30 day extension, which has now passed 1095726259 - Rolex
Both now late?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 12, 2015 14:59:22 GMT
Anyone heard anything about these two loans from Funding Secure?
341992004 - Solitaire Diamond Ring - was given a 30 day extension, which has now passed 1095726259 - Rolex
Both now late? I have a part of the Rolex, which was due on Saturday. I don't have the diamond ring. When was that due? It may be a bit early for feedback on the Rolex, but fundingsecure could tell us what, if any, contact they've had with the borrower because IIRC they try to determine the borrowers' intentions a couple of weeks before the loan is due to be repaid. I think we're overdue for some info on the one I mentioned earlier (589148050) since it now is three weeks past its due date, and also on the two that ramblin rose mentioned (2092400975 and 24181978) which were due over two months ago. If FS don't respond here, and don't put updates on the loan pages on the website, I guess we'll have to start asking questions directly.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,840
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by jlend on Jan 12, 2015 17:16:23 GMT
This was the email response I just got from FS:
In regards to Loan 341992004 - Solitaire Diamond Ring. We have given the borrower till tomorrow to make full payment or the loan will be defaulted. If the item was to default, we are confident we could sell the ring quickly and recoup sufficient funds to pay interest and capital back to investors.
In regards to loan 1095726259 - Rolex watch. The loan is in its 7 day window for the borrower to make payment. If funds have not been received after 7 days and there is no responses from the borrower we will default the loan.
The Solitaire ring was originally due on 7th December - but they were given a 30 day extension by FS.
|
|
ramblin rose
Member of DD Central
“Some people grumble that roses have thorns; I am grateful that thorns have roses.” — Alphonse Karr
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 857
|
Post by ramblin rose on Jan 12, 2015 17:28:09 GMT
fundingsecure, a couple of defaulted loans are surely overdue an update. 2092400975, defaulted 5/11/14 and 24181978, defaulted 8/11/14 (both jewellery loans). Both bear the note: "....................THE LOAN IS THEREFORE NOW IN DEFAULT AND THE ASSETS WIL BE AUCTIONED AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY". (Yes, both with the same typo so cut and pasted at the same time). Has there seriously been no opportunity to auction this stuff for 2 months? I know we've had Christmas and all that, but that's an awfully long time. I don't know when they appeared, but there are updates for both of these loans (claiming that they defaulted 5/12/14 and 8/12/14, which does not match my records which show the November dates I gave above - perhaps I missed extensions somewhere along the line?). They say they will be auctioned in early Feb. If my records are correct, then that means 3 months would be the 'Earliest Opportunity' referred to when the loans went into default, which quite frankly flabergasts me. If I'm wrong and it was December, that would mean 2 months, and I still find that rather a long time. IF they make enough to cover the extra interest as well as all the costs, then I suppose that's OK, but it's rather a big 'IF'. I'm wondering why non-specialist items (and I wouldn't have considered these as specialist, but I admit I'm no expert) can't be sent to auction pretty much immediately.
|
|
hendragon
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 619
|
Post by hendragon on Jan 12, 2015 18:24:00 GMT
The lack of clear information from FS is not helping the platform at all, or for that matter the lenders. A little nagging directed towards SS seemed to help perhaps FS needs the same?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 12, 2015 18:48:53 GMT
Inasmuch as we don't seem to have received any input from fundingsecure here, I've sent them an email asking about 589148050. ramblin rose: I'd suggest you ask your questions of them directly as well. Why FS reply so well to individual direct emails but don't respond here -- where they could answer multiple questions with a single message and also prevent future duplicated questions -- is beyond me. |
|
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: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Jan 12, 2015 18:54:39 GMT
fundingsecure, a couple of defaulted loans are surely overdue an update. 2092400975, defaulted 5/11/14 and 24181978, defaulted 8/11/14 (both jewellery loans). Both bear the note: "....................THE LOAN IS THEREFORE NOW IN DEFAULT AND THE ASSETS WIL BE AUCTIONED AT THE EARLIEST OPPORTUNITY". (Yes, both with the same typo so cut and pasted at the same time). Has there seriously been no opportunity to auction this stuff for 2 months? I know we've had Christmas and all that, but that's an awfully long time. I don't know when they appeared, but there are updates for both of these loans (claiming that they defaulted 5/12/14 and 8/12/14, which does not match my records which show the November dates I gave above - perhaps I missed extensions somewhere along the line?). They say they will be auctioned in early Feb. If my records are correct, then that means 3 months would be the 'Earliest Opportunity' referred to when the loans went into default, which quite frankly flabergasts me. If I'm wrong and it was December, that would mean 2 months, and I still find that rather a long time. IF they make enough to cover the extra interest as well as all the costs, then I suppose that's OK, but it's rather a big 'IF'. I'm wondering why non-specialist items (and I wouldn't have considered these as specialist, but I admit I'm no expert) can't be sent to auction pretty much immediately. I'm not worried about the small loans defaulting and taking 3 months to auction providing FS continue their track record of making up the difference. In fact, it is probably the extra 3 months interest that allows FS to pool the proceeds and pay lenders in event of an auction failure. In the case of 24181978 the borrower is paying 3.3% per month but FS are paying us 1.1%. In 3 months that's 6.6% that FS didn't expect to receive. Of course some auctions will fail to make the valuation, but on average there shouldn't be a problem. If items went straight to auction, then on average more of the proceeds would be returned to borrowers and FS wouldn't have a buffer of extra interest.
|
|
. Regardless of what FS Ts&Cs say (and I'm sure they support what I said), it's how the industry works.
