coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 703
Likes: 463
|
Post by coogaruk on Feb 10, 2021 12:26:14 GMT
(in which you should never have thrown your money in to start with) It's not about savers vs investors; it's been about active vs passive investing and it is not the domain for the passive investor. Try telling the savers here that (if there are any left). Many of us tried in the past.
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 10, 2021 12:45:58 GMT
It's not about savers vs investors; it's been about active vs passive investing and it is not the domain for the passive investor. Try telling the savers here that (if there are any left). Many of us tried in the past. coogaruk is right !!
|
|
|
Post by mfaxford on Feb 10, 2021 12:51:14 GMT
I'm still waiting for their response on the Agent conflict and I know am not the only one to have complained so I suppose they are taking the legal advise now.They may well be taking advice, they may well be overwhelmed. They also likely do not care that much (the business on the face yes) the staff member likely not at all, it is just another twist in the tale. They probably know some of their jobs will go. Would be interested to see where you get to, good luck. (I think the first line came from someone else, but I'm quoting as currently posted) If anyone took it as far as the FCA or some other legal process I suspect the initial response might be "MB are paying the current value of what's in the loan book, are you really sure you want to take this further and potentially pay the legal costs involved?". I think there would have been a stronger claim of Agent Conflict had RS sold of the remaining loanbook to MB under it's current value, however as we're getting all our capital and the interest due until 2nd April I suspect there's limited benefit in pursuing the question very far. The one thing that MB could potentially have done better would have been a statement a few months ago to say they would like to buy the complete loan book once other investments of theirs had been sold/closed giving them the required capital and that any purchase of the loan book would go ahead for it's full value regardless of the state of the provision fund at that time.
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 11, 2021 8:56:52 GMT
I'm still waiting for their response on the Agent conflict and I know am not the only one to have complained so I suppose they are taking the legal advise now.They may well be taking advice, they may well be overwhelmed. They also likely do not care that much (the business on the face yes) the staff member likely not at all, it is just another twist in the tale. They probably know some of their jobs will go. Would be interested to see where you get to, good luck. (I think the first line came from someone else, but I'm quoting as currently posted) If anyone took it as far as the FCA or some other legal process I suspect the initial response might be "MB are paying the current value of what's in the loan book, are you really sure you want to take this further and potentially pay the legal costs involved?". I think there would have been a stronger claim of Agent Conflict had RS sold of the remaining loanbook to MB under it's current value, however as we're getting all our capital and the interest due until 2nd April I suspect there's limited benefit in pursuing the question very far. The one thing that MB could potentially have done better would have been a statement a few months ago to say they would like to buy the complete loan book once other investments of theirs had been sold/closed giving them the required capital and that any purchase of the loan book would go ahead for it's full value regardless of the state of the provision fund at that time. True but by making any such announcement would not be possible. other banks are involved and it would impact major share holder and value as stocks stall/plunge or jump for them and other parties linked. they would never have said that and could be in trouble for doing so with regulators. they did what is right for them and that is the banking way.
|
|
|
Post by RateSetter on Feb 19, 2021 19:18:49 GMT
Good evening all. We are emailing all investors to provide notice that in preparation for the loan portfolio purchase in April, auto investing and investment release requests will end on 26 March 2021. The full message can also be found in the RateSetter Notices section of your account dashboard. An abridged version is below for ease of reference:
|
|
|
Post by benj111 on Feb 20, 2021 14:13:45 GMT
Hi everyone.
Just been searching around to find out if the situation has developed at all.
I made a complaint on the day of the announcement and have yet to receive a response.
No one on here seems to have pointed out that this is a potential breach of RSs duty of care towards us. they are duty bound to be working in our best interests, but yet they were negotiating with Metro Bank to sell the portfolio at the same time as they were withholding interest to top up a provision fund that we would never be able to use. Redeeming a 5%+ bond with a supporting (over)provision(ed) fund at par, also seems to be vastly undervaluing the investment.
further the Key Investor Information Document states:
“By investing through the RateSetter platform you are entering into credit agreements as a lender with one or more individuals or businesses as the borrower(s).”
“RateSetter facilitates loans to UK individuals and businesses”
So I would question whether RS even has the right to step in and unilaterally sell the loan book in this way.
|
|
coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 703
Likes: 463
|
Post by coogaruk on Feb 20, 2021 16:06:03 GMT
No one on here seems to have pointed out that this is a potential breach of RSs duty of care towards us. I have
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 20, 2021 22:56:06 GMT
Hi everyone. Just been searching around to find out if the situation has developed at all. I made a complaint on the day of the announcement and have yet to receive a response. No one on here seems to have pointed out that this is a potential breach of RSs duty of care towards us. they are duty bound to be working in our best interests, but yet they were negotiating with Metro Bank to sell the portfolio at the same time as they were withholding interest to top up a provision fund that we would never be able to use. Redeeming a 5%+ bond with a supporting (over)provision(ed) fund at par, also seems to be vastly undervaluing the investment. further the Key Investor Information Document states: “By investing through the RateSetter platform you are entering into credit agreements as a lender with one or more individuals or businesses as the borrower(s).” “RateSetter facilitates loans to UK individuals and businesses” So I would question whether RS even has the right to step in and unilaterally sell the loan book in this way. if Ratesetter was not bought by metrobank last year you would have lost capital and paid administration fees. now you will have your capital and have earnt interest. it isn't the best news in the world but what would you rather of the two choices? The pandemic killed a business already with financial constraints. it was either collapse and we lose alot or someone buy them and we get something back.
|
|
coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 703
Likes: 463
|
Post by coogaruk on Feb 21, 2021 11:27:02 GMT
if Ratesetter was not bought by metrobank last year you would have lost capital and paid administration fees. now you will have your capital and have earnt interest. it isn't the best news in the world but what would you rather of the two choices? The pandemic killed a business already with financial constraints. it was either collapse and we lose alot or someone buy them and we get something back. Your first point is pure supposition.
I have been running down my portfolio since the interest rate cut and by the time interest had been fully restored and the announcement that MB is purchasing the loanbook had already seen 100% of my original captital returned.
I would rather continue to run off my portfolio for the duration. A maximum of four years at an average rate above 5%.
If the RS loanbook was in any way likely to lose money then believe me MB would not be purchasing it. Stop trying to make out they are doing us all a big favour as it's simply not true.
|
|
|
Post by benj111 on Feb 21, 2021 18:25:19 GMT
coogarukAh ok, missed that..... I agree with you. beagleThe fact of the matter is, it's my money, I should get a say in what happens. If Ratesetter want to treat it as their money, then I should be covered under the FSCS, and shouldn't be expected to be taking capital risks. If they want to treat themselves as a marketplace and middle man, then they need to stay out of the deals I have arranged with borrowers. They can't have it both ways If this were a traditional bond or share, I would get a say, and my share dealing platform would not be selling my shares because theyve been bought out. That is how Ratesetter have characterised themselves. I would agree that Ratesetter going bust would cause issues for us, but our underlying investments aren't with Ratesetter, so we wouldn't necessarily lose money. as it stands the provision fund is predicted to cover 180% of capital and 100% of interest. a bond paying over 5% with those kinds of guarantees would not be valued at par. The fact still remains, it isn't for Ratesetter to take that decision. I shouldn't have to take the risks when the goings bad, then be ejected out when someone with deeper pockets does a deal behind my back.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,012
Likes: 4,824
|
Post by adrianc on Feb 21, 2021 22:36:37 GMT
The fact of the matter is, it's my money, I should get a say in what happens. You lent it to Ratesetter, in full knowledge of their Ts & Cs. They didn't. They treated it as your money, and repaid it, in line with those self-same Ts & Cs. Yet you voluntarily lent it to a non-FSCS-protected entity, in full knowledge they weren't FSCS-protected. You didn't, subject to the PF Ts & Cs - which you lent in full knowledge of.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Feb 22, 2021 0:12:16 GMT
On the subject of terms
3.2. By agreeing to these Terms, you’re appointing RateSetter to act as your agent in all matters relating to the
origination, negotiation, administration and management of your loans. This includes:
entering into any transfer arrangements on your behalf in order to transfer the benefit of any loans (or
part thereof) to the Provision Fund, another RateSetter investor, RateSetter itself or a third party; and
anything else RateSetter reasonably considers necessary to manage your loans, including terminating those
loans.
16.1. We can end our agreement with you, close or suspend your RateSetter account and stop providing any services
by giving you at least two months’ notice.
So RS has total discretion to transfer loans to a third party ie Metro Bank and anyway can just close your account with 2 months notice (2Feb-2Apr) and do what it likes with the loans.
There is absolutely no requirement for RS to do anymore than pay what is due to you at the point it closes your account.
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 22, 2021 8:32:44 GMT
if Ratesetter was not bought by metrobank last year you would have lost capital and paid administration fees. now you will have your capital and have earnt interest. it isn't the best news in the world but what would you rather of the two choices? The pandemic killed a business already with financial constraints. it was either collapse and we lose alot or someone buy them and we get something back. Your first point is pure supposition.
I have been running down my portfolio since the interest rate cut and by the time interest had been fully restored and the announcement that MB is purchasing the loanbook had already seen 100% of my original captital returned.
I would rather continue to run off my portfolio for the duration. A maximum of four years at an average rate above 5%.
If the RS loanbook was in any way likely to lose money then believe me MB would not be purchasing it. Stop trying to make out they are doing us all a big favour as it's simply not true.
point 1 is - yes, however, by looking at their accounts (comp house) and admittance of their CEO it is clear capital would have dried up within 2020. i don't make out they did anyone a favour. I make out we should be pleased we walk away without real scratches and can be part of the few with no capital loss.
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 22, 2021 8:41:07 GMT
coogaruk Ah ok, missed that..... I agree with you. beagle The fact of the matter is, it's my money, I should get a say in what happens. If Ratesetter want to treat it as their money, then I should be covered under the FSCS, and shouldn't be expected to be taking capital risks. If they want to treat themselves as a marketplace and middle man, then they need to stay out of the deals I have arranged with borrowers. They can't have it both ways If this were a traditional bond or share, I would get a say, and my share dealing platform would not be selling my shares because theyve been bought out. That is how Ratesetter have characterised themselves. I would agree that Ratesetter going bust would cause issues for us, but our underlying investments aren't with Ratesetter, so we wouldn't necessarily lose money. as it stands the provision fund is predicted to cover 180% of capital and 100% of interest. a bond paying over 5% with those kinds of guarantees would not be valued at par. The fact still remains, it isn't for Ratesetter to take that decision. I shouldn't have to take the risks when the goings bad, then be ejected out when someone with deeper pockets does a deal behind my back. It is your money, correct, however, if you want to manage it as such you do not need to use a platform to do so. They make it clear in their terms. What deal have you arranged with a borrower? Did you manage risk, APR, profiling? I am not sure they have it both ways or perhaps you are not pleased with the fact that you will not get as a good a yield elsewhere. If you prefer total control buy debt on the debt market. It is actually totally for Ratesetter to take that choice - the terms to which you agreed states this. You passed your funds to an non FSCS entity.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Feb 22, 2021 9:09:32 GMT
On the subject of terms 3.2. By agreeing to these Terms, you’re appointing RateSetter to act as your agent in all matters relating to the origination, negotiation, administration and management of your loans. This includes: entering into any transfer arrangements on your behalf in order to transfer the benefit of any loans (or part thereof) to the Provision Fund, another RateSetter investor, RateSetter itself or a third party; and anything else RateSetter reasonably considers necessary to manage your loans, including terminating those loans. 16.1. We can end our agreement with you, close or suspend your RateSetter account and stop providing any services by giving you at least two months’ notice. So RS has total discretion to transfer loans to a third party ie Metro Bank and anyway can just close your account with 2 months notice (2Feb-2Apr) and do what it likes with the loans. There is absolutely no requirement for RS to do anymore than pay what is due to you at the point it closes your account. Indeed. I notice there is no section on 'Thou shalt not hit the toppled statue of the Idol with your sandals' Some (and I am inclined to agree with them) feel Reluctant Servant have not behaved as well as they could/should have here. So if Remarkably Sneaky get a bad press and a few virtual sabres rattled at them I am Remarkably Sanguine.
|
|