mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 12, 2014 17:48:48 GMT
Does the statement that the boat "is unlikely to be taken to water until towards the end of the loan term" bother anyone other than me?
One of the most positive points for me about FS security was that FS had complete control over the item(s) they were lending against and therefore would have no problem at all gaining possession in order to sell the security if the borrower failed to repay the loan. The above statement suggests to me that the boat owner could sail off into the sunset -- so to speak -- before the loan was due for repayment and if the loan wasn't repaid FS could find themselves -- and us -- in a rather awkward position.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 12, 2014 18:00:54 GMT
If the length of the drop down list is part of the problem, then a seemingly simple solution would be to truncate the list after the first 'insufficient funds' entry, rather than letting it go all the way to the amount left to fund in £25 increments. The list is probably a red-herring and nothing to do with it, but in the absence of proper flexibility your second para sounds like a good suggestion if it really is the cause. I don't know if it really was part of today's problem, but we do know that the list creation was at the heart of the problem on the first occasion the new website was used for an auction. Aha! I've just looked at the auction page for this boat and see that -- for me, anyway -- the list now is truncated after the first 'insufficient funds' entry. I suspect that means that FS may think the long list was contributing to today's poor website performance.
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Dec 13, 2014 9:26:28 GMT
Could you explain a bit more kaya? Isn't every pawned item being pawned in order to capitalise it? Do you mean the borrower is taking out the loan as a means of selling it? I think we always should be thinking that this might be the case with any item and so, of course, the LTV plays a large part in lending decisions. In this case, I'd have thought the borrower might get a better deal selling in the open market if that were their intention. But perhaps that's not what you meant? Well, perhaps I am not a 'sophisticated investor', but what I mean is, this boat is new or almost new, is a one-off design, and presumably has had a lot of investment to bring it about. Is the developer of this design connected to the person now seeking a 'loan'? I do not know, but even if not, this is still a highly unusual product with an uncertain resale value. If others are happy to put their cash into this, so be it. I find it 'weird', which is about as sophisticated as I get!
|
|
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 13, 2014 10:42:03 GMT
Could you explain a bit more kaya? Isn't every pawned item being pawned in order to capitalise it? Do you mean the borrower is taking out the loan as a means of selling it? I think we always should be thinking that this might be the case with any item and so, of course, the LTV plays a large part in lending decisions. In this case, I'd have thought the borrower might get a better deal selling in the open market if that were their intention. But perhaps that's not what you meant? Well, perhaps I am not a 'sophisticated investor', but what I mean is, this boat is new or almost new, is a one-off design, and presumably has had a lot of investment to bring it about. Is the developer of this design connected to the person now seeking a 'loan'? I do not know, but even if not, this is still a highly unusual product with an uncertain resale value. If others are happy to put their cash into this, so be it. I find it 'weird', which is about as sophisticated as I get! Thanks for explaining kaya. Although I am personally comfortable with this loan, I think your instincts are good and you are wise not to lend on an FS loan which doesn't feel right to you. We know that loans do default, and if we aren't confident in the resale value of an item then the only sensible thing to do is steer well clear. I certainly don't go into every loan myself, and don't always roll over my investment into renewed loans either. I think you're being as sophisticated in your approach as it's necessary to be with FS
|
|
hendragon
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 619
|
Post by hendragon on Dec 13, 2014 16:57:49 GMT
Could you explain a bit more kaya? Isn't every pawned item being pawned in order to capitalise it? Do you mean the borrower is taking out the loan as a means of selling it? I think we always should be thinking that this might be the case with any item and so, of course, the LTV plays a large part in lending decisions. In this case, I'd have thought the borrower might get a better deal selling in the open market if that were their intention. But perhaps that's not what you meant? Well, perhaps I am not a 'sophisticated investor', but what I mean is, this boat is new or almost new, is a one-off design, and presumably has had a lot of investment to bring it about. Is the developer of this design connected to the person now seeking a 'loan'? I do not know, but even if not, this is still a highly unusual product with an uncertain resale value. If others are happy to put their cash into this, so be it. I find it 'weird', which is about as sophisticated as I get! However a sophisticated investor one might think one is, considering the basics is vital. I have had a small investment in this loan, but kaya 's thoughts echo my own, especially the resale value. If any auction were lucky enough to find the right person at the right time it could work well, but it is uncertain. On a more positive note I might ask how much more expensive it might be for the owner to take this loan. It will free up some cash. The boat is insured and stored by FS(probably expensive overheads). Interest paid can be defrayed against tax. I don't have the figures to hand but it might make the logic of using FS to borrow on single, high-value items more understandable. Certainly the net cost is probably a lot less than the headline rate and could indicate the firm resolve to redeem the pledge. It does seem to make more sense of the borrowers perspective.
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Dec 13, 2014 17:05:46 GMT
Well, I imagine it will be alright - a loan of this size, with more to come, would be a major disaster for FS if it defaulted and couldn't be recovered, and presumably they know what they are doing. Still, there are some crazy amounts being put in, and major disasters do happen....... Sometimes you have to wonder if some of this p2p stuff is all just too good to be true. As with SS, an easy 12%, so eeeaazzy - or is it? Personally I feel easier with the smaller, more personal loans on this site, and also think it would be good if there was an option for the borrower to say something about themselves and why they want the loan. Certainly, for this speedboat auction, some more info would help a lot, because there really is very little info when you consider the amount being requested. But they will get the money anyway I guess....
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 17, 2014 2:02:49 GMT
On a more positive note I might ask how much more expensive it might be for the owner to take this loan. It will free up some cash. The boat is insured and stored by FS(probably expensive overheads). Interest paid can be defrayed against tax. I don't have the figures to hand but it might make the logic of using FS to borrow on single, high-value items more understandable. Certainly the net cost is probably a lot less than the headline rate and could indicate the firm resolve to redeem the pledge. It does seem to make more sense of the borrowers perspective. I don't follow the above logic. If the borrower is an individual owner, rather than a company trying to use the boat as part of its business, AIUI they would not get any tax relief on the interest they pay. FS publish their interest rates to borrowers, and those start at 4.7%/month for small loans (£500-£1000). The rate decreases for larger loans, and the lowest published rate is 2.4% for loans of £50-100k, but even that 'low' rate is double what is being paid to FS investors. This loan, being larger still, would likely have a lower rate, but it's still going to be significant, and there's also a footnote on FS's rate chart that says "Additional storage fees may be applied to loans secured aganst [sic] art and motor vehicles" which I would expect to apply to this loan. The bottom line is that I think FS loans are not cheap for borrowers, but they do provide an opportunity to raise cash quickly against a illiquid asset, which a mainstream bank probably wouldn't want to touch. Where FS allow a loan with a LTV of 70%, it wouldn't surprise me if some borrowers choose to borrow from FS as an alternative to selling the item. If they can manage to produce the money to redeem the item, great. But if not, they'll have 'sold' the item very quickly at a price not too far below what could be raised in a quick sale, and with none of the uncertainty a sale would produce. In this case, the LTV for the ultimate £450k loan is thought to be below 60%, so we should expect the borrower to want to repay the loan, but unique items such as this are very hard to value and probably hard to sell as well, so who knows what the borrower might be thinking. On a separate issue, I note that the website page for this loan says "Date Ending: 16/12/2014". Have fundingsecure given any clue as to what will happen next, considering the loan was only 72% funded by that date? Will the date be extended? Will underwriters be brought in to fund the remaining 28% of the initial loan? (Actually, without a secondary market anyone brought in to complete the funding wouldn't actually be underwriting, they'd be investing.) And what are the implications for the other £200k the borrower wants?
|
|
Bagman
Member of DD Central
Posts: 209
Likes: 131
|
Post by Bagman on Dec 17, 2014 13:31:38 GMT
This has just arrived from FS..
The Powerboat loan has now attracted 72% of funds and the borrower is anxious to complete by Friday December 19. Therefore, with immediate effect, we are offering improved terms. A bonus of 2% interest p.a is offered on any investments in excess of £10,000. This means that any savers who invest £10,000 or more will earn interest at 15%!
This bonus applies to anyone who has already invested more than £10,000.
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 636
Likes: 658
|
Post by warn on Dec 17, 2014 14:54:01 GMT
This has just arrived from FS..
...in excess of £10,000 ... invest £10,000 or more ...
The latter rather than the former, may we suppose?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 17, 2014 23:24:49 GMT
This has just arrived from FS..
...in excess of £10,000 ... invest £10,000 or more ...
The latter rather than the former, may we suppose? Don't you just love the attention to detail?
|
|
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 May 13, 2015 17:41:43 GMT
|
|
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 May 13, 2015 18:08:08 GMT
Yikes Do hope the teenager comes out of it OK in the end.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on May 13, 2015 18:14:01 GMT
Sympathy and best wishes for those injured of course.
If this is the same one, all reports would indicate that FS got the initial valuation correct in this instance. No aboriginal art connotations.
I guess the statement "Very Good Condition" probably no longer applies. The person who put in £50k into the loan must be particularly concerned that the 'loss payable' clause in FS's favour was included and that the insurance is still extant. I guess the comment that it would not take to the water until close to the end of loan term was either somewhat inaccurate or is now unnecessarily cautious as it certainly won't be taking to the water close to the end of the loan term (although it will be taking in water).
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on May 13, 2015 19:00:56 GMT
I guess the comment that it would not take to the water until close to the end of loan term was either somewhat inaccurate ... The comment doesn't look like an issue to me. The first tranche loan has an end date that's less than six weeks away which, on a six-month loan, seems reasonably 'close to the end of the loan term'. If there's an issue, it might be with FS's decision to repeat those same words in the description of the second tranche loan which happened a month after the first tranche. I wonder how long it might take for the insurer to pay up? There's obviously a lot of £££ at stake here, and no doubt the insurer will be looking at the policy very carefully to see if they can find a reason why the incident might not be covered so that they can avoid paying. If it does get dragged out, it could be quite awkward for FS. Meanwhile, I think I'll limit my FS lending to security that isn't subject to such risks.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2015 9:08:46 GMT
Flat calm, looks like he was speeding in Southampton Water, hit a buoy, amazed police not called, prat.
|
|