robski
Member of DD Central
Posts: 772
Likes: 462
|
Post by robski on Aug 20, 2020 16:06:17 GMT
Rate Setter Action Group Disclosure: I was a co-founder of Lendy Action Group / Funding Secure Action Group. I do not think there is the same illegal goings on at RS as some other failing / failed platforms, but that does not mean lenders position as crucil stakehlders is being fairly represented. It isn't.
At this juncture we know that RS management will now be focussed on meeting MetroBank targets and not on building a sustainable business for an independent RS. That means lenders sentiment is now dispensible to RS. One visible consequence is that 50% of the re-paid money from Access markets is clearly NOT being allocated to meeting Access market RYI. That money may be diverted to filling 1 & 5 yr market RYI, but only RS know that. It would generate fees and lower the cost of capital for them if they did this of course. The other less visible way RS can increase margins is by reducing investment into recoveries of defaulting or late loans. Lenders won't see the effect of that for a few months, but will result in the loss scenario we all fear.
In short RS need to have a lender body to engage with and lenders need to be at the table in the transistion from an independent compnay to MB ownershiip.... in short it's well time for RSAG to form.
In practical terms a group of motivated lenders need to find each other and start a site where others can join. FB is easy and will do. A mission statement needs agreeing and sending to RS, FCA, the press. Only 25 lenders are needed to come together to be a credible group... experience shows that would quickly and organically grow to over 1,000.
It doesn't take alot of effort to do this, and the effort will be repaid many times over in terms of a fairer outcome moving forward.
I invite lenders interested in forming / being involved in RSAG to make themselves known by posting below.
Because of my commitments to other P2P groups I cannot be the leading light for RSAG, but I can share what I have learnt with others who are interested.
>> Don't leave it to others - if you have what you consider a significant balance in RS - do something for yourself and help start RSAG....
Do you have any proof for your 1 year and 5 year stuff as it sounds like CT stuff to me. The markets seem to be operating utterly independently as we have known historically and is RS world we see. They could switch fnds between products, but in reality it would likely benefit APM and not hinder it, considering the simple fact that there is far far more money in APM at significantly lower rates than 5 year. With 5 year regualrly matching to 6% or close that would seem to torpedo your views to any logical mind I don't see any evidence of what you prescribe What I see see evidence of is that daily 5 year seems to match funds to RYI as when we get decent amounts matched you get more que movement, and more people saying they have had their money We do see that new lending is almost purely in APM, this is the "open product" as such with RS. 1 year and 5 year are now defunct products. Do you believe RS should write new business purely on these markets in order to release funds from the current product? You have no way of knowing whats being diverted in APM since RS do not declare. If everyone in APM set the reinvestment to the max rate and kept taking it out there would be zero RYI. You cant get round that fact, so throwing facts of what RS are and aren't doing is grossly negligent.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Aug 20, 2020 17:14:29 GMT
I have an RS account but have never invested. RS owe me nothing. I owe RS nothing. With that in mind, when I try to stand in the shoes of an RS investor - regardless of product, regardless of RYI queue position - I think the following approach would not be unreasonable. The acquisition by MB is not a done deal, but does seem highly likely. The RNS from MB suggests completion before or in Q4 (depending on how you choose to read it). Asking RateSetter for their view on a likely timeline - specifically for the RS shareholder vote (within their control) and FCA approval - would seem reasonable at this point. The FCA aspect is out of RS' control, but it could be established if both these requirements for an acquisition can run in parallel or whether the FCA won't start its' deliberations until the result of the RS Shareholder vote is in. The FCA will likely have given an estimate for how long its' process may take and I see no reason why that couldn't be shared, even if the process details themselves are kept behind closed doors. Assuming the acquisition goes ahead, RS should provide clear communications to its lenders as to what they might expect in the near and medium term and what the end-game is for each of the account types. (It will likely need to communicate to borrowers too, but that's another matter). If that communication isn't forthcoming within a week of the acquisition completion, I would suggest that is the time for a concerted and co-ordinated effort. I would suggest a formal letter of complaint to RS, on the grounds of RateSetter not acting professionally in contravention of the Conduct of Business Sourcebook and copy in the FCA. A separate complaint should also be made to the FCA, for completeness The muster-point for this co-ordinated effort could be FaceBook - although during my brief dalliance with FB, I found it both 'messy' and 'noisy' and not conducive to clear communication. Alternatively it could be here or a separate, dedicated ProBoards forum. Can't see the advantage in a separate forum, unless some degree of privacy were required (and good luck with vetting applicants!) and duck has managed to co-ordinate some activities relating to COL / FCA within this domain, so here would seem as good as anywhere. The initial goal isn't to punish RateSetter, it's to encourage them to do the right thing by their lenders and be open and communicative. If that needs to go under the banner of an 'Action Group', so be it. It's only words. Could be that none of this is even necessary and I invite RateSetter to set out their expectations for how things will progress pre-acquisition and commit to a communication plan on the assumption the acquisition goes ahead.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Aug 20, 2020 18:13:00 GMT
Hmm, not seeing a lot of takers for this proposition - even the OP wasn't up for it.
I think it's way premature, TBH. There's no evidence of anything properly iffy such as has been seen at other platforms, and for the moment RS is still performing. We're still getting interest (reduced, sure, but some) and loans are ending normally.
OK, A/P/M RYIs aren't happening but they were never assured in the first place. If you have to wait until your loans mature, so be it.
Now, all of this could change at some point in the future and, who knows, RS might do something to stiff lenders but, until then, I can't see a justification for this action.
And, as others have mentioned, I'd really rather you didn't rock the boat. My calculations suggest that in about 4 months I should reach the milestone of having withdrawn more than I invested into RS in the first place, which for me is a decent baseline. Give it another couple of months after that for me to get well ahead and, sure, knock yourselves out.
But I'm not seeing any signs of a rush here...!
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Aug 20, 2020 20:01:45 GMT
1. Ratesetter still write loans. 2. Ratesetter still release funds and daily. 3. No one has lost money so far and they can still apply other tricks. 4. Their team is available to talk to. 5. Having them deal with some action group is costly and a waste of time as it stands.
Set it up if you must but frankly a waste of time and there is no administrator here but terms we agreed to. Whether you like it or not if they keep operating you need to go through proper channels and if not happy go to the ombudsman.
You shouldn't rock the boat and potentially impact a deal which places more risk on things.
I will not support you unless there is a proper reason to do so.
I suggest as others state to complain formally.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2020 23:36:34 GMT
I think the big difference here is that, while nobody thinks the current situation is perfect, it is better (or rather less bad) than any realistic alternative I can think of.
And some of the alternatives really could be quite unpleasant indeed.
So please, be careful what you wish for.
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Aug 21, 2020 10:13:50 GMT
The conservative sentiment expressed in the replies RSAG idea I have seen before,, for instance in the year prior to the administration of Lendy.
When I wrote published draft letters on here to FCA calling Liam Brooke out, the prevailing view on this site was 'what do you know, leave it to the experts'.... I have met many who have since told me they wish they had been more proactive and less trusting, as everything in my letters to FCA (still on this site) was true and more besides.
I have always said RS is not Lendy /FS / Col and I don't think RSAG need be confrontational, however I do think it would be better if lenders had a focal point to express their position as stakeholders and if this does not appear soon as relations with MB unfold, many lenders will be sorry in the future that it wasn't done.
Lender outcomes in P2P always boils down to TRUST.
The platform is our Trustee. The platform owes us a Fiducuiary Duty.
For instance P2P terms always make clear the Platform will decide how and to what extent to pursue late loans and defaults.
The costs and fees charged by the platform are opaque.
Lendy / FS / Col obviously did not merit trust and they crossed the line into serious abuse of Fiduciary Duty.
Note that dis-unity of lenders meant the party was always ended by FCA, and well after the horse had bolted.
RS is not I hope, in the same class and I hope the management are of a higher quality.
Nonetheless management make decisions based on what appear to be the salient pressures of the moment.
Once that was keeping a community of private lenders happy. Now it is meeting targets set by MB acquisition. In that context RS future approach to Fiduciary Duty to lenders may be very different to the past. And if lenders feel abused after the event, well, what are they going to do about it? The answer is nothing but moan on this website, it's very hard to right a wrong afterwards.
Personally I would like to gently pressure RS on some guarantees vis management of the legacy loan book as it winds down under MB ownership for a start and that is something a nascent RSAG could lobby FCA to require of MB.
Like I said I haven't enough time or £ in RS to be the founder, but I will discuss with any interested RS lenders of my experiences.
Do not let those with no agency on this site dissuade you ;-)
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Aug 21, 2020 11:08:19 GMT
If you personally want some of the above then go for it. How else would you rather they manage this?
|
|
coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 703
Likes: 463
|
Post by coogaruk on Aug 21, 2020 16:05:37 GMT
Just thought I'd throw this into the mix, for what it's worth:
RateSetter will likely be a wholly-owned subsidiary of Metro Bank before any RSAG gets off the ground.
|
|
|
Post by nebula on Aug 21, 2020 20:32:22 GMT
The conservative sentiment expressed in the replies RSAG idea I have seen before,, for instance in the year prior to the administration of Lendy.
When I wrote published draft letters on here to FCA calling Liam Brooke out, the prevailing view on this site was 'what do you know, leave it to the experts'.... I have met many who have since told me they wish they had been more proactive and less trusting, as everything in my letters to FCA (still on this site) was true and more besides.
I have always said RS is not Lendy /FS / Col and I don't think RSAG need be confrontational, however I do think it would be better if lenders had a focal point to express their position as stakeholders and if this does not appear soon as relations with MB unfold, many lenders will be sorry in the future that it wasn't done.
Lender outcomes in P2P always boils down to TRUST.
The platform is our Trustee. The platform owes us a Fiducuiary Duty.
For instance P2P terms always make clear the Platform will decide how and to what extent to pursue late loans and defaults.
The costs and fees charged by the platform are opaque.
Lendy / FS / Col obviously did not merit trust and they crossed the line into serious abuse of Fiduciary Duty.
Note that dis-unity of lenders meant the party was always ended by FCA, and well after the horse had bolted.
RS is not I hope, in the same class and I hope the management are of a higher quality.
Nonetheless management make decisions based on what appear to be the salient pressures of the moment.
Once that was keeping a community of private lenders happy. Now it is meeting targets set by MB acquisition. In that context RS future approach to Fiduciary Duty to lenders may be very different to the past. And if lenders feel abused after the event, well, what are they going to do about it? The answer is nothing but moan on this website, it's very hard to right a wrong afterwards.
Personally I would like to gently pressure RS on some guarantees vis management of the legacy loan book as it winds down under MB ownership for a start and that is something a nascent RSAG could lobby FCA to require of MB.
Like I said I haven't enough time or £ in RS to be the founder, but I will discuss with any interested RS lenders of my experiences.
Do not let those with no agency on this site dissuade you ;-)
I support your idea.
|
|
|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Aug 21, 2020 20:48:13 GMT
Imho this post from iRobot is it. I've resigned myself to the fact that my Access funds will be inaccessible for the foreseeable future while paying me chump change (or nothing, if the 50% interest deduction goes up to 100% as some have suggested is inevitable). What I would want is for RS to tell us Access investors what the end game is. Crudely put, when will I get my money back? Hopefully it won't need a coordinated push but if as iRobot says they don't give me a clear picture then I'll definitely be up for an RSAG. Thanks wuzimu for this thread, much appreciated. I have an RS account but have never invested. RS owe me nothing. I owe RS nothing. With that in mind, when I try to stand in the shoes of an RS investor - regardless of product, regardless of RYI queue position - I think the following approach would not be unreasonable. The acquisition by MB is not a done deal, but does seem highly likely. The RNS from MB suggests completion before or in Q4 (depending on how you choose to read it). Asking RateSetter for their view on a likely timeline - specifically for the RS shareholder vote (within their control) and FCA approval - would seem reasonable at this point. The FCA aspect is out of RS' control, but it could be established if both these requirements for an acquisition can run in parallel or whether the FCA won't start its' deliberations until the result of the RS Shareholder vote is in. The FCA will likely have given an estimate for how long its' process may take and I see no reason why that couldn't be shared, even if the process details themselves are kept behind closed doors. Assuming the acquisition goes ahead, RS should provide clear communications to its lenders as to what they might expect in the near and medium term and what the end-game is for each of the account types. (It will likely need to communicate to borrowers too, but that's another matter). If that communication isn't forthcoming within a week of the acquisition completion, I would suggest that is the time for a concerted and co-ordinated effort. I would suggest a formal letter of complaint to RS, on the grounds of RateSetter not acting professionally in contravention of the Conduct of Business Sourcebook and copy in the FCA. A separate complaint should also be made to the FCA, for completeness The muster-point for this co-ordinated effort could be FaceBook - although during my brief dalliance with FB, I found it both 'messy' and 'noisy' and not conducive to clear communication. Alternatively it could be here or a separate, dedicated ProBoards forum. Can't see the advantage in a separate forum, unless some degree of privacy were required (and good luck with vetting applicants!) and duck has managed to co-ordinate some activities relating to COL / FCA within this domain, so here would seem as good as anywhere. The initial goal isn't to punish RateSetter, it's to encourage them to do the right thing by their lenders and be open and communicative. If that needs to go under the banner of an 'Action Group', so be it. It's only words. Could be that none of this is even necessary and I invite RateSetter to set out their expectations for how things will progress pre-acquisition and commit to a communication plan on the assumption the acquisition goes ahead.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 971
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Aug 22, 2020 9:45:16 GMT
Imho this post from iRobot is it. I've resigned myself to the fact that my Access funds will be inaccessible for the foreseeable future while paying me chump change (or nothing, if the 50% interest deduction goes up to 100% as some have suggested is inevitable). What I would want is for RS to tell us Access investors what the end game is. Crudely put, when will I get my money back?
Hopefully it won't need a coordinated push but if as iRobot says they don't give me a clear picture then I'll definitely be up for an RSAG. Thanks wuzimu for this thread, much appreciated. Not sure why this is a difficult question. You'll get your money back (probably) as the loans repay. If you want to know when that is, extract a sheet from RS with your dates and amounts and work it out, it's not hard. If your portfolio is "average" you'll have half of it back in 1 to 2 years from now, but you'll get a much better answer by looking at your specific data. There is of course the risk that the PF will run out of money and that there might be haircuts before we get to the end, and there is a risk (hopefully reduced by Metro) of total collapse and administration. Going the other way, there is a possibility of some early loan repayments.
|
|
|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Aug 22, 2020 11:11:30 GMT
Thanks for your opinion ceejay . With all due respect, you setting out what you think will happen is pretty worthless as is me analysing the outstanding loans and assuming that RS will pay me back as they repay. Neither of those can take the place of what iRobot suggested - RS formally setting out their plan to get us Access investors our money back. Timelines, fees, PF, etc etc. Imho this post from iRobot is it. I've resigned myself to the fact that my Access funds will be inaccessible for the foreseeable future while paying me chump change (or nothing, if the 50% interest deduction goes up to 100% as some have suggested is inevitable). What I would want is for RS to tell us Access investors what the end game is. Crudely put, when will I get my money back?
Hopefully it won't need a coordinated push but if as iRobot says they don't give me a clear picture then I'll definitely be up for an RSAG. Thanks wuzimu for this thread, much appreciated. Not sure why this is a difficult question. You'll get your money back (probably) as the loans repay. If you want to know when that is, extract a sheet from RS with your dates and amounts and work it out, it's not hard. If your portfolio is "average" you'll have half of it back in 1 to 2 years from now, but you'll get a much better answer by looking at your specific data. There is of course the risk that the PF will run out of money and that there might be haircuts before we get to the end, and there is a risk (hopefully reduced by Metro) of total collapse and administration. Going the other way, there is a possibility of some early loan repayments.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Aug 22, 2020 11:22:11 GMT
Thanks for your opinion ceejay . With all due respect, you setting out what you think will happen is pretty worthless as is me analysing the outstanding loans and assuming that RS will pay me back as they repay. Neither of those can take the place of what iRobot suggested - RS formally setting out their plan to get us Access investors our money back. Timelines, fees, PF, etc etc. I've asked RS a couple of questions about the plan post-acquisition (although not everything you specify above) and will report back as and when I receive a response. But I'm afraid it wouldn't surprise me if they're fairly coy about all this until completion actually happens, just in case it all goes wrong.
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Aug 22, 2020 14:09:42 GMT
Thanks for your opinion ceejay . With all due respect, you setting out what you think will happen is pretty worthless as is me analysing the outstanding loans and assuming that RS will pay me back as they repay. Neither of those can take the place of what iRobot suggested - RS formally setting out their plan to get us Access investors our money back. Timelines, fees, PF, etc etc. I've asked RS a couple of questions about the plan post-acquisition (although not everything you specify above) and will report back as and when I receive a response. But I'm afraid it wouldn't surprise me if they're fairly coy about all this until completion actually happens, just in case it all goes wrong. what do you expect them to say? they can't say anything until completion and until such a time all remains as is. loans written, money out etc
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Aug 22, 2020 15:10:50 GMT
what do you expect them to say? they can't say anything until completion and until such a time all remains as is. loans written, money out etc What makes you think they can't say anything? As I specifically said in the post you quoted, I agree they're likely to be coy - but it's a slightly odd attitude to suggest there's no point in at least trying...?
|
|