littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,007
Likes: 1,829
|
Post by littleoldlady on Aug 23, 2020 14:56:52 GMT
Obviously it suits the narrow financial interests of those at the front of the queue to get capital plus interest, at the expense of those behind losing capital, rather than all getting capital but reduced interest. If I was at the front this is what I would prefer (actually I am not in the queue at all myself, I am running down the account of an in-law with dementia). However I was not suggesting that it would appeal to them, I was replying to the question "What would I propose instead?" as an idea which RS or the FCA might think is fairer. And your proposal would torpedo queue processing completely. But you clearly don't care, because this would obviously suit your narrow financial interests. What a surprise, your personal idea of fairness suits you and not others. As for deferring the interest component, these are amortising loans - everyone receives interest periodically, even those at the back of the queue. Your proposal would force *everyone* to keep interest on the platform for an extended period, with all the additional risk that entails to those funds which could otherwise be withdrawn by *everyone* and protected. I object to that. I have no financial interest, though it would suit me to complete my task as soon as possible. The interests of those at the back of the queue are clearly different to those at the front and RS cannot make everyone happy, but it was put to me that there was no alternative and I merely suggested one. I do not understand your point about amortising loans. You seem to be confusing interest with part repayments, clearly these could not be diverted to the PF.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Aug 23, 2020 15:12:02 GMT
I object to that. I have no financial interest, though it would suit me to complete my task as soon as possible. The interests of those at the back of the queue are clearly different to those at the front and RS cannot make everyone happy, but it was put to me that there was no alternative and I merely suggested one. With respect, what I was actually suggesting to you was that there was no alternative to an arbitrary selection of a date which will please some and not others. What you have suggested isn’t an alternative; you just picked a date that works for you and not for others - i.e. exactly what I suggested the only option was!
|
|
|
Post by captaincodeman on Aug 23, 2020 15:42:43 GMT
That some people will benefit (or not) from any policy based on their position in the queue is unavoidable but we shouldn't forget that people's position in the queue is largely their own choice. Some decided to get out early, some were willing to accept more risk despite the obvious uncertainty & instability by remaining invested for longer.
I paid the penalty to exit the 5 year market back in February because I couldn't see RS _not_ being adversely affected by what was going on and because there were better investment opportunities elsewhere. I still had some in the rolling market and a few hundred that couldn't be withdrawn from the 5 year market (loans with balances are under £10) which I now have to wait in the queue for or for the regular load repayments to happen. I get less interest on those because I waited, which was my choice. I may ultimately not get some of those loans repaid which again is no one's fault but my own.
|
|
up
Posts: 59
Likes: 62
|
Post by up on Aug 23, 2020 18:43:40 GMT
On issue of whether/when RS will halt RYIs. To point out there is technical complication/cashflow issue: each time RS fulfills an RYI they advance the Interest funds - only the Capital is formed in to a new contract with the new Lender picking up the remaining term. In the transaction logs those are the "Sellout interest outstanding" entries. In the case of 1Y loans that could be a significant time advance - and they dont know yet if the Borrower will pay up (fairness issue in case of PF wind-down).
(BTW a real detail - where a loan contract is only part RYI'd the original lender gets a new part period contract for the remainder - hence the earlier period interest on that part they are keeping can only be settled against the original contract - at the time of the RYI. This is how it was at the time RYI was introduced - not recently confirmed if still the case)
|
|
gmd78
Posts: 57
Likes: 36
|
Post by gmd78 on Sept 3, 2020 16:32:12 GMT
I’ll take up the baton from where an OP puts forward the proposition: “it comes down to a question of Trust”..? I find that statement inexplicable and requires qualifying as does the OP who maintains that the current issues are largely caused by the investors themselves..unquote. I didn’t hit the panic button in March, but in retrospect I most certainly should have done. Many of those who wisely did so, have been rewarded with their full funds returned in the subsequent months to date, or if not, a goodly amount has been mined out.
Whereas, muggins here, has been penalised for his misplaced loyalty to RS by finding that he has over 20k in front of him in the queue, together with the unenviable prospect of a 3 to 5 year wait for his funds, if he’s lucky, that is!
Ergo, the noun “Trust” in the context of this debate, is in my view, demonstrably out of place without being preceded by the standard and ubiquitous financial health warning.
|
|