agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,803 
Likes: 3,597
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 10, 2021 10:14:21 GMT
connectivelending Can you expand on this remark within your Due Diligence section (Personal Asset Loans) please: "During the course of our due diligence, we will ascertain proof-of-ownership for the pledged asset." Question: What will be done, by whom, and if they get it wrong will your insurance cover any consequences of the error? Edit: I've just found the section below on your website (my emphasis added) so please could you also elaborate on the questioning tactics referred to here. " As part of our due diligence process, we will request proof of ownership by obtaining receipts, insurance documents, assess if the item is in its original packaging, V5 documents (vehicles) and other such documentation to help prove the asset belongs to the borrower. Where this cannot be obtained, we question the borrower to determine if they are the true owner of the asset being pledged." The V5 document identifies the registered keeper of the vehicle, not the legal owner (as fans of "can't pay we'll take it away" will know)
|
|
|
|
Post by connectivelending on Feb 10, 2021 10:29:31 GMT
connectivelending Can you expand on this remark within your Due Diligence section (Personal Asset Loans) please: "During the course of our due diligence, we will ascertain proof-of-ownership for the pledged asset." Question: What will be done, by whom, and if they get it wrong will your insurance cover any consequences of the error? Edit: I've just found the section below on your website (my emphasis added) so please could you also elaborate on the questioning tactics referred to here. " As part of our due diligence process, we will request proof of ownership by obtaining receipts, insurance documents, assess if the item is in its original packaging, V5 documents (vehicles) and other such documentation to help prove the asset belongs to the borrower. Where this cannot be obtained, we question the borrower to determine if they are the true owner of the asset being pledged." The V5 document identifies the registered keeper of the vehicle, not the legal owner (as fans of "can't pay we'll take it away" will know) Dear Agent69, Yes we know this hence it being included with receipts and other evidence. Before he started in asset lending in 1997 our head of pawnbroking, Danny Grimes, worked in BMW car dealerships buying and selling vehicles. Good point you make though and a valid point also. Kind regards
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Feb 10, 2021 15:14:43 GMT
Dear Community, We are excited to announce the launch of our platform, Connective Lending which took place on Friday 29th January. Connective Lending is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Our aim is to create a successful community of like-minded people looking for returns on their investments. We achieve this by lending against personal luxury assets and property. In order to ensure our customers get the best service, we have launched our website (www.connectivelending.com) under a beta-testing-phase for an initial 3-month period. Within this time our aim is to onboard up to 500 investors. During this stage, we will be introducing a small portfolio of loans secured against luxury assets. Over time and upon completion of our beta-testing-phase we will look to introduce property bridging loans secured via a first charge only. Furthermore, we currently have several loan opportunities which we look forward to placing on the platform in the coming days and weeks. At Connective Lending we have great plans which we will announce as the products become available. Our number one aim is to introduce good quality secured loans. If you would like to find out more about our platform, you can do so by clicking here. We look forward to answering any questions you may have. The Connective Lending Team. “Your capital is at risk” “Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results” You may be excited. Not so me a previous investor in several other failed platforms. I wonder how much skin in the game if any it is that the principals have committed? What happens if eventually the whole thing goes pear shaped? How much then would you hope to walk away with after the Administrators have had their large helping? Do you not think that a p to p platform launched on a wing and a prayer, not to mention a principal who was part of a failed platform, is not a distinct turn-off for the investing community. I for one will take some serious convincing and will not be an early investor!
|
|
mrdc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 69
Likes: 28
|
Post by mrdc on Feb 10, 2021 16:44:02 GMT
Thought I would have a look. Last question of assessment asks for your net worth, never liked that so exited. Tried to sign in again to see if you could leave it blank and seem to be blocked. Ive broken the site already  I got one answer wrong on the suitability test and am now blocked from logging in. Apparently I will receive an email after 24 hours giving me a second chance. Can I be bothered....? Did you try again Nomad? Ive just been booted out for the second time. I did put a figure in the net worth box this time so it was either a mistake with the questions or i'm not rich enough. Perhaps it's an omen.
|
|
k6
Posts: 132
Likes: 78
|
Post by k6 on Feb 10, 2021 16:45:36 GMT
" Connective Lending is authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority."
After Coll, Ly, FS and MT this statement does not mean much anymore.
|
|
Village Idiot
Member of DD Central
Who was that masked man?
Posts: 2,737
Likes: 2,781
|
Post by Village Idiot on Feb 10, 2021 17:20:59 GMT
" Connective Lending is authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority." After Coll, Ly, FS and MT this statement does not mean much anymore. True, but surely the Funding Secure connection and the useful knowledge that one of the partners was a 'second hand car salesman' once has to counterbalance that somewhat. Looks like a register to view situation, so I think I will just keep on walking, I like to window shop first.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Feb 10, 2021 18:42:53 GMT
I don't know how to phrase this without sounding facetious but anyway...
Has anyone analysed the loans written over at FS during Noman Akram's time as a director (to 23 Jan 2017)? It's before my time and besides I'm not sure I can face digging into the history. I'm not looking for perfection, we know loans go bad and often at the rates offered to borrowers, but I guess what I'm interested in is were any of the howlers written during this initial period?
|
|
|
|
Post by star dust on Feb 10, 2021 19:03:46 GMT
I’ve been waiting for someone to raise this. As I’ve never been an FS investor or even so much as registered for a VI look-around, I thought perhaps I wasn’t too well qualified to mention it. However, I’ve been around these parts long enough to be able to reel these off the top of my head…….. microsculptures; train memorabilia; a certain sort of garnet; Schrodinger’s yachts/speed boat/s; and Italian books as well as the possibility of a few disappearing cars all spring to mind. Funny they’re all pawn loans!
Threads a plenty round here and in DDC if anyone wants to delve for the full list, and my bad if I’ve got any dates wrong 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Feb 10, 2021 19:10:11 GMT
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,040
Likes: 1,781
|
Post by rocky1 on Feb 10, 2021 19:16:15 GMT
wh*tehav*n the invisible timber frames that only FS had sight of. lond*nde**y loans. wimb*ld*n. +many many more 6 month loans that i threw money at over 4 years ago.also has a lot to answer for.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,532
Likes: 2,246
|
Post by iRobot on Feb 10, 2021 20:52:49 GMT
Very quickly.... Between 12/07/13 and 23/01/17 inclusive
there were 1092 loans of which
1073 Completed
and 19 still Defaulted
Of Completed loans
718 (67%) repaid within 194 days*
1068 repaid full capital
10.7% p.a. was the average return (after capital losses)
* - I took 194 days rather than 180 days as I think there was a 14 day grace period before any action could be taken and it allows for delays attributable to weekends, Bank Holidays, etc etc, so seems reasonable to me. The above is based on information gleaned as part of a wider exercise, BUT the focus of that exercise was on a more recent cohort of loans. Therefore I can't confess to having the same degree of certainty over the above data as I do for that other study. That said, I'm confident it's accurate enough for indicative purposes. I also haven't kept as close an eye on things since xmas as I might have, so need to catch up on the state of the Defaults. If there are any specific metric you'd like covered, let me know. I'd quite like to split Pawn from Prop (and bridging from dev) but that's a non-trivial piece of work and best suited to a clearer stretch of free time. And a clearer head  |
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Feb 10, 2021 21:35:12 GMT
I'm reminded of this... What I’ve often wondered (but never been bored enough to work out) is how much the FS figures are flattered by renewal loans, especially where the renewal interest is rolled up into an increased LTV or funded by a further loan / tranche. Consider, for example, a £1m loan at 50% LTV that renews 3 times, increasing the loan each time for the accrued interest, but then eventually defaults. AIUI, the first 3 loans would forever be reported by FS as completed, fully performing loans (totalling something like £3.25m), more than overshadowing the eventual circa £1.2m default. In practical terms, it was really a single 2+ year loan where the borrower never paid a penny. Powerboats spring to mind, and even the disastrous Whitehaven scheme claims 3 fully performing Completed loans! |
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,532
Likes: 2,246
|
Post by iRobot on Feb 10, 2021 21:41:59 GMT
I'm reminded of this... What I’ve often wondered (but never been bored enough to work out) is how much the FS figures are flattered by renewal loans, especially where the renewal interest is rolled up into an increased LTV or funded by a further loan / tranche. <snip> The word "renewal" appears in the Loan Titles of 232 loans out of 1092 (21.2%)
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 808
Likes: 1,015
|
Post by james100 on Feb 10, 2021 21:48:46 GMT
I'm reminded of this... What I’ve often wondered (but never been bored enough to work out) is how much the FS figures are flattered by renewal loans, especially where the renewal interest is rolled up into an increased LTV or funded by a further loan / tranche. Consider, for example, a £1m loan at 50% LTV that renews 3 times, increasing the loan each time for the accrued interest, but then eventually defaults. AIUI, the first 3 loans would forever be reported by FS as completed, fully performing loans (totalling something like £3.25m), more than overshadowing the eventual circa £1.2m default. In practical terms, it was really a single 2+ year loan where the borrower never paid a penny. Powerboats spring to mind, and even the disastrous Whitehaven scheme claims 3 fully performing Completed loans! Microsculptures Made live 11/08/2017 General information section includes the line: "The borrower has previously had loans with us using the same security." Valuation report memorably dated mid 2014 for this rather unique 39-piece collection The same collection which was apparently auctioned for the first time by Funding Secure on 27 October 2014, documented here: www.choicebusinessloans.co.uk/blog/happening-peer-peer-lending-market-commentary-27th-october-2014/ Stuff like that, you mean?
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Feb 10, 2021 22:09:49 GMT
The word "renewal" appears in the Loan Titles of 232 loans out of 1092 (21.2%) I guess some of those loans not including the word "renewal" were repaid by a renewal, i.e. may not have been actual cash paid by the borrower. Regardless, I guess what we want to know is of the original loans written during that period what proportion were repaid by the borrower (even if the original loan was renewed several times)? In fact, returning to my original question, what I want to know is of the original loans written during that period which ones turned really bad?
|
|
