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 Feb 15, 2015 12:59:00 GMT
A couple of quick questions for regular lenders with Funding Secure in case anyone knows. I did drop an email to Funding Secure but they didn't reply.
30 Day extension I see some borrowers are given a "30 day extension".
Is there a specific clause in the T&Cs that covers this or is this just something that we have given funding secure permission to do as part of a general clause in the T&Cs?
I couldn't see a clause about this and assume we don't get a choice about lending our money for longer.
7 day window for default Clausen 7.3 in the T&Cs talks about defaulting the loan after "three days", but Funding Secure talks about 7 days in their communications. It's only a small difference but I was wondering where in the T&Cs the "7 days" comes from?
Thanks in advance for any information.
I think borrowers should have to pay the interest for the extension period. Therefore, if they request a 7 day extension then they must pay 7 days interest immediately. If they request a 30 day extension then they must pay 30 days interest immediately.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 15, 2015 21:24:28 GMT
I think borrowers should have to pay the interest for the extension period. Therefore, if they request a 7 day extension then they must pay 7 days interest immediately. If they request a 30 day extension then they must pay 30 days interest immediately. : While this would be nice, I don't think it actually happens that way. If it did, I'd expect the extension payment to be passed on to lenders and I've never received anything of that nature despite having been in some loans that have been granted extensions. I suspect that most extensions are granted because the borrowers have told FS that they can't repay on time but that they expect to be able to repay in some number of days' time and want to redeem their security then -- and FS believe them. As long as the security is solid and the LTV isn't too high, that's probably not an unreasonable position to take. An argument could be made that this means lenders don't receive their investment and interest when they expected it, so that FS will be disappointing their lenders, but it also can be argued that if the loan were to be declared a default at the time it was initially supposed to mature then the lenders wouldn't get their money on time either. And if the borrower does come up with the money by the end of the extension, then granting the extension was the right thing to do. The problem is that if the borrower doesn't come up with the money by the end of the extension, then granting the extension probably was the wrong thing to do because it will delay any recovery action and make it that much harder to sell the security for enough to cover all accrued interest and fees. I don't know how much FS can do during the extension period towards arranging a security sale before they start incurring significant time/money costs, but a bit of preliminary work possibly could reduce the delay to recovery caused by having granted the extension.
|
|
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 Feb 16, 2015 14:57:00 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. As half expected, one of these loans didn't make enough at auction to cover all outstanding interest. At the time of the default (which I still believe to have been 8/11/14 rather than the reported 8/12/14) the outstanding interest was reasonably comfortably within the amount that was eventually received for the item. So, fundingsecure, I'm still wondering what I wondered back in January - why couldn't a bunch of non-specialist items have been auctioned sometime before 3 months had elapsed from the default, thereby giving us lenders something nearer the expected interest return? There may well be a very valid reason, but if you don't tell us we don't understand and get a bit miffed. (For those not involved directly, it was loan 24181978 - assorted jewellery. £169 interest outstanding at time of default, £262 interest outstanding to date, enough made to cover £219 of it, after FS took out only their direct cost, and it would appear having generously waived their fees.)
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 16, 2015 15:08:02 GMT
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. As half expected, one of these loans didn't make enough at auction to cover all outstanding interest. At the time of the default (which I still believe to have been 8/11/14 rather than the reported 8/12/14) the outstanding interest was reasonably comfortably within the amount that was eventually received for the item. So, fundingsecure, I'm still wondering what I wondered back in January - why couldn't a bunch of non-specialist items have been auctioned sometime before 3 months had elapsed from the default, thereby giving us lenders something nearer the expected interest return? There may well be a very valid reason, but if you don't tell us we don't understand and get a bit miffed. (For those not involved directly, it was loan 24181978 - assorted jewellery. £169 interest outstanding at time of default, £262 interest outstanding to date, enough made to cover £219 of it, after FS took out only their direct cost, and it would appear having generously waived their fees.) Looking at another one that has just been auctioned - 572782847. Initial Valuation - £3150. Loan Amount - £2200. Auction - £1688 net. So apart from the obvious interest loss, there is also a capital loss on this one.
|
|
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 Feb 16, 2015 15:18:21 GMT
As half expected, one of these loans didn't make enough at auction to cover all outstanding interest. At the time of the default (which I still believe to have been 8/11/14 rather than the reported 8/12/14) the outstanding interest was reasonably comfortably within the amount that was eventually received for the item. So, fundingsecure, I'm still wondering what I wondered back in January - why couldn't a bunch of non-specialist items have been auctioned sometime before 3 months had elapsed from the default, thereby giving us lenders something nearer the expected interest return? There may well be a very valid reason, but if you don't tell us we don't understand and get a bit miffed. (For those not involved directly, it was loan 24181978 - assorted jewellery. £169 interest outstanding at time of default, £262 interest outstanding to date, enough made to cover £219 of it, after FS took out only their direct cost, and it would appear having generously waived their fees.) Looking at another one that has just been auctioned - 572782847. Initial Valuation - £3150. Loan Amount - £2200. Auction - £1688 net. So apart from the obvious interest loss, there is also a capital loss on this one. Ouch!! I managed to dodge that one; must have been out or in a forgetful state as I'm normally like a magpie where diamonds are concerned, so I had a lucky escape. My commiserations to all those of you who were in on that.
|
|
coop
Member of DD Central
Posts: 714
Likes: 571
|
Post by coop on Feb 25, 2015 9:21:10 GMT
This seems as good a place as any to mention there should be a new loan going up this morning. BMW 8 series I believe.
|
|
coop
Member of DD Central
Posts: 714
Likes: 571
|
Post by coop on Feb 25, 2015 10:48:53 GMT
£5950 funded out of £7k at 13% in 48 mins get in there quick!
|
|
bob2014
Member of DD Central
Posts: 54
Likes: 3
|
Post by bob2014 on Feb 25, 2015 11:32:40 GMT
£75 left...
|
|
