|
|
Post by ronl on Feb 12, 2021 18:51:13 GMT
What do you feel about Metrobank's compulsory purchase of our loan books, especially now the interest rate reduction has been removed? Personally I feel Ratesetter are in violation of their terms which say that they should act REASONABLY as agents for investors. I do not think it is reasonable to sell our profitable loan books to a third party without out consent. I believe Metrobank is profiting at our expense and should be challenged. I have done so and have had an email saying they have logged my complaint but it may take eight weeks for them to respond, significantly not until after they have completed the buyout. I feel we are being shafted. What are your views?
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,119 
Likes: 1,940
|
Post by rocky1 on Feb 12, 2021 19:19:19 GMT
investors have done a lot better than WELLESLEY AND COs buyout of their loanbook to themselves. to get 100% capital back seems a good result.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Feb 12, 2021 19:22:16 GMT
What do you feel about Metrobank's compulsory purchase of our loan books, especially now the interest rate reduction has been removed? Personally I feel Ratesetter are in violation of their terms which say that they should act REASONABLY as agents for investors. I do not think it is reasonable to sell our profitable loan books to a third party without out consent. I believe Metrobank is profiting at our expense and should be challenged. I have done so and have had an email saying they have logged my complaint but it may take eight weeks for them to respond, significantly not until after they have completed the buyout. I feel we are being shafted. What are your views? I feel relieved that my RS journey is going to end with a reasonable profit as opposed to a capital loss I'm expecting from some other platforms when the losses are crystallised.
|
|
trevor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 556
Likes: 379
|
Post by trevor on Feb 13, 2021 9:44:57 GMT
I do think they have cheated because they waited until the lenders had finished taking all the pain of 50% interest reduction and then just as we get back to receiving 100% of interest they buy the loan book. A more equitable way would have been to offer no more loans to retail investors and rundown retail investors loans naturally. A final small buyout when only dregs were left would have been acceptable.
|
|
|
|
Post by mfaxford on Feb 13, 2021 11:15:15 GMT
I do think they have cheated because they waited until the lenders had finished taking all the pain of 50% interest reduction and then just as we get back to receiving 100% of interest they buy the loan book. Or as they stated in the announcement MB have only just got to the point of being able to buy the loan book having sold of the RS property loans a couple of months ago and £3bn sale of residential property mortgages at Christmas. The timing of the announcements wasn't great as it makes it look like one was dependant on the other. But looking beyond that I expect that the purchase of the loanbook now has a lot more to do with the portfolio sales than the provision fund. The better question might be: Do you think MB would have bought the remaining RS loanbook now even if the interest reduction was still in place and the provision fund unable to cover all expected losses? That's already been the case since September, the only thing our money has gone into since then is buying out others investments when they RYI potentially leaving those still invested with a higher risk (I think some of the financial hit of this pandemic is yet to come when we find out what furlough has been hiding for the past year).
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,243
Likes: 2,686
Member is Online
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Feb 13, 2021 14:42:05 GMT
I think cheated is a strong word but I think RS and Metro were probably economical with the truth about their intentions. Buying the loan book now neatly gets rid of the pesky lenders, but they were happy to use lenders interest payments to get the PF replenished for Metro and allow many lenders to pay to get their funds back (while possibly knowing it wasn't necessary because Metro were going to buy the loan book anyway). I don't know whether buying the loan book 'when the time was right' was the intention all along or it was just a happy happenstance. Would Metro have bought the loan book if the PF was still depleted? I don't think so, but we will never know for sure.
Getting out without losses (apart from some interest and paying extra fees!) is still a reasonable outcome, but it just all leaves a bit of a sour taste.
|
|
trevor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 556
Likes: 379
|
Post by trevor on Feb 13, 2021 15:47:19 GMT
I think cheated is a strong word but I think RS and Metro were probably economical with the truth about their intentions. Buying the loan book now neatly gets rid of the pesky lenders, but they were happy to use lenders interest payments to get the PF replenished for Metro and allow many lenders to pay to get their funds back (while possibly knowing it wasn't necessary because Metro were going to buy the loan book anyway). I don't know whether buying the loan book 'when the time was right' was the intention all along or it was just a happy happenstance. Would Metro have bought the loan book if the PF was still depleted? I don't think so, but we will never know for sure. Getting out without losses (apart from some interest and paying extra fees!) is still a reasonable outcome, but it just all leaves a bit of a sour taste. Where bankers are concerned there is no such thing as a coincidence
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 13, 2021 15:48:49 GMT
i think we need to accept it there is nothing we can do.
The FCA know, and as we get all our money back they do not care.
We earnt interest, and if we did not add to the fund we would lose capital.
It is a bit underhand but if they did not buy ratesetter we would lose way more than what future interest people think they should earn.
Capital, administration fees etc.
Time to be happy we all have our capital back and move on.
|
|
beagle
Investor in ratesetter, funding circle, lendy (lesson learnt) and AC
Posts: 670
Likes: 322
|
Post by beagle on Feb 13, 2021 15:52:32 GMT
I think cheated is a strong word but I think RS and Metro were probably economical with the truth about their intentions. Buying the loan book now neatly gets rid of the pesky lenders, but they were happy to use lenders interest payments to get the PF replenished for Metro and allow many lenders to pay to get their funds back (while possibly knowing it wasn't necessary because Metro were going to buy the loan book anyway). I don't know whether buying the loan book 'when the time was right' was the intention all along or it was just a happy happenstance. Would Metro have bought the loan book if the PF was still depleted? I don't think so, but we will never know for sure. Getting out without losses (apart from some interest and paying extra fees!) is still a reasonable outcome, but it just all leaves a bit of a sour taste. Where bankers are concerned there is no such thing as a coincidence exactly - this was all planned and they make money - good for them. they saved ratesetter and therefore us too. see it differently if you like but without them - we would have alot less than what we do.
|
|
coogaruk
Hello everyone! Anyone remember me?
Posts: 703
Likes: 463
|
Post by coogaruk on Feb 13, 2021 18:27:35 GMT
Cheating is putting it a bit strong but do I think MB have acted entirely honourably? No!
|
|
dave4
Member of DD Central
Cynical is a hobby not a lifestyle
Posts: 998
Likes: 569
Member is Online
|
Post by dave4 on Feb 13, 2021 19:50:57 GMT
Going to end up with capitol and interest, that is a good outcome for lenders however you look at it. Maybe not handled in the best way, and metro have the better outcome.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Feb 13, 2021 21:08:41 GMT
Going to end up with capitol and interest, that is a good outcome for lenders however you look at it. Maybe not handled in the best way, and metro have the better outcome. IIRC MB was attracted by RS's model, not the p2p part of it. It was quite clear from the outset that p2p will be ditched sooner or later. Keep the borrowers and get rid of grumpy investors. I don't think there is the best way to handle it, can't please everyone. I'm personally happy with RS finale. I was hoping my remaining funds will stay there for a bit longer earning me 6%, but I'm more happy to have it crystallised earlier. The same for self-select loans - I like early repayments.
|
|
ashtondav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 1,087
|
Post by ashtondav on Feb 14, 2021 9:56:58 GMT
In the midst of the worst crisis since WW2 we have enjoyed returns several times higher than the risk free rates. This is no time for sniping.
Take your winnings and move on.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Feb 15, 2021 19:39:35 GMT
Has anyone actually clarified the status of the provision fund with RateSetter?
It seems to me that any cash in the provision fund after the sale still (at least morally) "belongs" to the investors whose money was diverted there, and should be used to refund pro-rata as much of the 50% interest as it has the resources for.
I think MB/RateSetter would do well to pay out the entire cash balance of the PF to investors pro-rata to their contributions. Even better, if they arranged for the sale price to MB to be at a level that ensures every penny of withheld interest gets re-imbursed to investors on completion of the deal.
Whether legally required or not, it would seem a relatively cheap way to generate goodwill for MB.
I'd also be a little surprised (unless they're legally barred from doing so) if MB don't use the cross-selling opportunity to provide an easy way to immediately re-invest the proceeds in a MB-branded savings account of some kind.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,845
Likes: 11,072
|
Post by ilmoro on Feb 15, 2021 19:50:35 GMT
Doesnt the money in the PF belong to the people who put it there ie the borrowers? I dont see anyone advocating that any surplus should be returned to borrowers who repaid their loans in full without recourse to the PF and therefore 'overpaid' interest to protect lenders.
Surely morally that would be correct argument for any surplus?
|
|
