ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 16:55:54 GMT
In terms of timings my complaints which were forwarded by myself in July have a deadline to be allocated of 12/4/21!! Complaints Re timeliness of dealing with can be forwarded the independent assessor, Dame Gillian Guy, and I believe she has have three months to address that complaint. Whilst your data may be accurate the internal reporting may the true picture might be wholly inaccurate! Do your case(s) have reference numbers? If so, at what point did they get them? I suspect that denotes entry into the system & statistics. There is a noted backlog in allocating cases due to CV19. Got a reference number but the case not allocated
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 17:04:58 GMT
There are more risks in P2P than I can remember. The ones I can recall are: Platform Risk Crowd Risk Liquidity Risk Economic Risk Regulatory Risk Fraud Risk And that’s before we get to - Credit Risk. AND I wouldn’t be surprised if I’ve forgotten more risks than most p2pers have thought about! An obvious one for me is "Comprehension" risk - people investing in things they dont understand or on the basis of information they dont understand. A subset of this would be "stupidity" risk - people investing without or only partially reading the information provided And this is where a reasonableness test prevails - what a layman might expect. When investing in a 30 day or quick access account would it be reasonable to expect something marketed (to a layman) as a “fixed interest term account” to change into a complex tradable financial product. (A Mixture of cash, default loans, etc ) which changes daily which a large percentage of which might be redeemed overnight ! 😀 I strongly suspect such a fundamental change to the investment might be one which makes beyond the comprehension or understanding of most of investors.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 17:57:35 GMT
In terms of timings my complaints which were forwarded by myself in July have a deadline to be allocated of 12/4/21!!! ... Got a reference number but the case not allocated Complaints PLURAL but case number singular? Have multiple cases been given a single case number? Or has something different happened. They haven’t been allocated case numbers yet or allocated to a or multiple case handlers
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Mar 4, 2021 19:05:21 GMT
An obvious one for me is "Comprehension" risk - people investing in things they dont understand or on the basis of information they dont understand. A subset of this would be "stupidity" risk - people investing without or only partially reading the information provided And this is where a reasonableness test prevails - what a layman might expect. When investing in a 30 day or quick access account would it be reasonable to expect something marketed (to a layman) as a “fixed interest term account” to change into a complex tradable financial product. (A Mixture of cash, default loans, etc ) which changes daily which a large percentage of which might be redeemed overnight ! 😀 I strongly suspect such a fundamental change to the investment might be one which makes beyond the comprehension or understanding of most of investors. I don't think this product was mis-sold. It may have looked to some as a “fixed interest term account”, but it wasn't marketed like this. One can't really blame AC for not reading T&C prior to committing any funds. The product was marketed as an investment - it was very clear that the access, interest rate and PF are not guaranteed. I've had virtually no experience in p2p or any other type of investment when I first put my funds into QAA and I didn't understand all details, but the key warning of no guarantee was written all over it.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 4, 2021 19:16:06 GMT
I can think of half a dozen complaints which might be valid regarding the introduction of the secondary market, alone! Those complaints would cost £3900 if there are 5 like minded individuals on this thread; with a couple accounts each, the cost is up to £39,000. Hopefully they haven’t referred a couple of people each or your close to £100k ! There certainly could be complaints Re the Pool distribution; Lenders fee; funding of development tranches & Forbearance. Borrowers might also have the odd gripe too ! Knocking up a hypothetical scenario based on supposition is quite the deviation from stating: I lknow of in excess of 300 complaints that have gone to the ombudsman Re AC. Perhaps I'm missing the point... (By the way, do you think the FOS may have a 'circuit-breaker' in place? Perhaps one which prevents 'nuisance claimants' from generating unreasonable levels of complaints which might not only be unduly injurious to a Firm (in respect of the £650 Case Fee) but which also might take up a disproportionate amount of the FOS' resources.) In terms of timings my complaints which were forwarded by myself in July have a deadline to be allocated of 12/4/21!! Complaints Re timeliness of dealing with can be forwarded the independent assessor, Dame Gillian Guy, and I believe she has have three months to address that complaint. Whilst your data may be accurate the internal reporting may the true picture might be wholly inaccurate! Who mentioned timings? Not me. So, apologies, but I don't see the relevance. Those posts of mine you quoted related to the quantity of complaints and specifically the observation that you initially stated you were aware of " in excess of 300 complaints that have gone to the ombudsman Re AC", and then seemingly deviated away from that statement by presenting a hypothetical scenario. I previously asked if you knew how many complainants had between them submitted the " in excess of 300 complaints" but you either missed the question or chose to ignore it.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 4, 2021 20:03:30 GMT
An obvious one for me is "Comprehension" risk - people investing in things they dont understand or on the basis of information they dont understand. A subset of this would be "stupidity" risk - people investing without or only partially reading the information provided And this is where a reasonableness test prevails - what a layman might expect. <snip> Some investments are not suitable for lay-people. Hence the 'appropriateness tests' which investors are periodically required to complete on P2P platforms.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 4, 2021 20:11:04 GMT
In terms of timings my complaints which were forwarded by myself in July have a deadline to be allocated of 12/4/21!! Complaints Re timeliness of dealing with can be forwarded the independent assessor, Dame Gillian Guy, and I believe she has have three months to address that complaint. Whilst your data may be accurate the internal reporting may the true picture might be wholly inaccurate! Who mentioned timings? Not me. So, apologies, but I don't see the relevance. Those posts of mine you quoted related to the quantity of complaints and specifically the observation that you initially stated you were aware of " in excess of 300 complaints that have gone to the ombudsman Re AC", and then seemingly deviated away from that statement by presenting a hypothetical scenario. I previously asked if you knew how many complainants had between them submitted the " in excess of 300 complaints" but you either missed the question or chose to ignore it. I haven’t deviated from anything and stand by my original statement. Regardless why don’t you ask Stuart? Also ask him for a timetable of when distributions are planned from the access accounts. What is the planned timescale for integration of the GBBA into the access accounts. Can we have the cash position of each of accounts on a daily basis. This information should be available in order for investors to make informed decisions about continued investment in a product that bares no resemblance to the product investors subscribed to 12 months ago.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329 
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 4, 2021 20:29:25 GMT
Who mentioned timings? Not me. So, apologies, but I don't see the relevance. Those posts of mine you quoted related to the quantity of complaints and specifically the observation that you initially stated you were aware of " in excess of 300 complaints that have gone to the ombudsman Re AC", and then seemingly deviated away from that statement by presenting a hypothetical scenario. I previously asked if you knew how many complainants had between them submitted the " in excess of 300 complaints" but you either missed the question or chose to ignore it. I haven’t deviated from anything and stand by my original statement. Regardless why don’t you ask Stuart? Also ask him for a timetable of when distributions are planned from the access accounts. What is the planned timescale for integration of the GBBA into the access accounts. Can we have the cash position of each of accounts on a daily basis. This information should be available in order for investors to make informed decisions about continued investment in a product that bares no resemblance to the product investors subscribed to 12 months ago. Why do you think the GBBA is likely to be integrated into the QAA? Has this been suggested at some point? AA product hasnt changed, exactly the same structure as before, only change is the restrictions on access due to an "unprecedented financial crisis" and two measures to alleviate that, otherwise same auto-invest account diversified across a wide range of loans, managed by AC, a cash element, target rate, and discretionary provision fund.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 4, 2021 21:36:04 GMT
Who mentioned timings? Not me. So, apologies, but I don't see the relevance. Those posts of mine you quoted related to the quantity of complaints and specifically the observation that you initially stated you were aware of " in excess of 300 complaints that have gone to the ombudsman Re AC", and then seemingly deviated away from that statement by presenting a hypothetical scenario. I previously asked if you knew how many complainants had between them submitted the " in excess of 300 complaints" but you either missed the question or chose to ignore it. I haven’t deviated from anything and stand by my original statement. Regardless why don’t you ask Stuart? <snip> Why? Because I'm asking you.
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Mar 5, 2021 0:04:59 GMT
AA product hasnt changed, exactly the same structure as before, only change is the restrictions on access due to an "unprecedented financial crisis" and two measures to alleviate that, otherwise same auto-invest account diversified across a wide range of loans, managed by AC, a cash element, target rate, and discretionary provision fund. The AAs product has changed completely because of the introduction of the SM, before it was on open product with a resemblance to unit trusts and now it is a closed product with a resemblance to investment trust but traded through just one broker on an OTC market. It has in effect changed from what AC described as accounts to tradable products. The major difference between this tradable product and most others is there is no independent scrutiny/audit.
Before the AAs worked mostly on new money to pay the people withdrawing funds, now because of the SM there is and will not be any new new money while the SM is in existence. This not only has changed the whole nature of the accounts but put these accounts in drawdown for as long as there is an SM.
Before lockdown it was possible to get capital repayments returned to lenders now it is not, AC are holding onto large amounts of excess cash where before this would be used for withdrawals.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 5, 2021 7:15:43 GMT
I haven’t deviated from anything and stand by my original statement. Regardless why don’t you ask Stuart? Also ask him for a timetable of when distributions are planned from the access accounts. What is the planned timescale for integration of the GBBA into the access accounts. Can we have the cash position of each of accounts on a daily basis. This information should be available in order for investors to make informed decisions about continued investment in a product that bares no resemblance to the product investors subscribed to 12 months ago. Why do you think the GBBA is likely to be integrated into the QAA? Has this been suggested at some point? AA product hasnt changed, exactly the same structure as before, only change is the restrictions on access due to an "unprecedented financial crisis" and two measures to alleviate that, otherwise same auto-invest account diversified across a wide range of loans, managed by AC, a cash element, target rate, and discretionary provision fund. The Access Accounts have been buying loan parts from the GBBA since their inception. This was curtailed March to December last year. However has accelerated again post Xmas. Approx 30% of my GBBA has been purchased this calendar year - a small amount may be by MLA but the majority is to the access accounts. Leaving aside the non access to the access accounts, and the complete lack of transparency as to when capital will be returned. The introduction of the SM makes the QAA a totally different product. It’s a tradable instrument, a derivative of cash, good & defaulted loans, with access to capital when ?
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 5, 2021 7:17:43 GMT
I haven’t deviated from anything and stand by my original statement. Regardless why don’t you ask Stuart? <snip> Why? Because I'm asking you. And I told you, which you don’t care to believe. If you think I’m bullshitting ask Stuart. It will be interesting to see if there is a contingency for complaints in the next accounts.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 5, 2021 7:32:57 GMT
AA product hasnt changed, exactly the same structure as before, only change is the restrictions on access due to an "unprecedented financial crisis" and two measures to alleviate that, otherwise same auto-invest account diversified across a wide range of loans, managed by AC, a cash element, target rate, and discretionary provision fund. The AAs product has changed completely because of the introduction of the SM, before it was on open product with a resemblance to unit trusts and now it is a closed product with a resemblance to investment trust but traded through just one broker on an OTC market. It has in effect changed from what AC described as accounts to tradable products. The major difference between this tradable product and most others is there is no independent scrutiny/audit.
Before the AAs worked mostly on new money to pay the people withdrawing funds, now because of the SM there is and will not be any new new money while the SM is in existence. This not only has changed the whole nature of the accounts but put these accounts in drawdown for as long as there is an SM.
Before lockdown it was possible to get capital repayments returned to lenders now it is not, AC are holding onto large amounts of excess cash where before this would be used for withdrawals. Spot on Alender - in essence they are a glorified Ponzi scheme - 12 months on one would have hoped a greater proportion of our capital would have been replaced with a combination of equity or institutional debt. It’s all well and good AC being committed to retail lending however it’s lenders aren’t committed to AC ! I would add the fact that investors did not have access to their redeemed capital was also a minor change in the products make up !
|
|
alender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 981
Likes: 683
|
Post by alender on Mar 5, 2021 9:23:21 GMT
The Access Accounts have been buying loan parts from the GBBA since their inception. This was curtailed March to December last year. However has accelerated again post Xmas. Approx 30% of my GBBA has been purchased this calendar year - a small amount may be by MLA but the majority is to the access accounts. So AC have been using my capital repayments to buy loan parts from failed accounts against my wishes when I have explicitly asked for this money to be retuned.
This would explain why a lot the excess cash in the AAs has not been distributed to lenders.
This is one of the many reasons you cannot trust AC, once they get your money they are very reluctant to return it when requested under the T&Cs. They believe once you have invested money with them it is theirs to do with it what they like for as long as they like and will only give it back when it suits them. Now they also believe it is fine to use my money to help them out of trouble with their own failed accounts. They also believe it is fine to add extra fees on locked in funds and in effect raid the PF for these fees to pay directors salary.
Not only are AC holding onto funds against the lenders wishes to be used for their own purpose they are keeping this quite, I have repeatedly asked Stuart for data on these accounts so we know what is going on but every single time he refuses to give us anything of use but just tells us what he wants us to hear. Again it is left to lenders to analysis the data to determine what is happening, I suspect if lenders had not calculated the excess cash and published this we would not have seen anything like the repayments that have taken place.
Before anyone says you do not have the right to complain because you can sell on the SM this does not give the right to AC to use my money as it wishes against my instructions and refusing to tell me what is is doing or planing to do with my funds.
|
|
ian
Posts: 342
Likes: 226
|
Post by ian on Mar 5, 2021 11:31:28 GMT
The Access Accounts have been buying loan parts from the GBBA since their inception. This was curtailed March to December last year. However has accelerated again post Xmas. Approx 30% of my GBBA has been purchased this calendar year - a small amount may be by MLA but the majority is to the access accounts. So AC have been using my capital repayments to buy loan parts from failed accounts against my wishes when I have explicitly asked for this money to be retuned.
This would explain why a lot the excess cash in the AAs has not been distributed to lenders.
This is one of the many reasons you cannot trust AC, once they get your money they are very reluctant to return it when requested under the T&Cs. They believe once you have invested money with them it is theirs to do with it what they like for as long as they like and will only give it back when it suits them. Now they also believe it is fine to use my money to help them out of trouble with their own failed accounts. They also believe it is fine to add extra fees on locked in funds and in effect raid the PF for these fees to pay directors salary.
Not only are AC holding onto funds against the lenders wishes to be used for their own purpose they are keeping this quite, I have repeatedly asked Stuart for data on these accounts so we know what is going on but every single time he refuses to give us anything of use but just tells us what he wants us to hear. Again it is left to lenders to analysis the data to determine what is happening, I suspect if lenders had not calculated the excess cash and published this we would not have seen anything like the repayments that have taken place.
Before anyone says you do not have the right to complain because you can sell on the SM this does not give the right to AC to use my money as it wishes against my instructions and refusing to tell me what is is doing or planing to do with my funds.
I actually view the access accounts as “Son of the GBBAs” in theory with fixed terms and reduced interest. Once the GBBA was in wind down there was a mixture of redemptions from loans actually being redeemed, and sales when loans were sold presumably to the access accounts. I believe between March & December all redemptions in the GBBA were fully distributed, however sales ceased as the access accounts were not being in a position to purchase loans. Post December there has been a notable uplift; the integration presumably has resumed - my funds have reduced from circa £31k to £23k with majority being sales rather than redemptions. Given the GBBA no longer has balancing and no additionally revenue from fees etc this is the fair and logical way to run down the account . As you say I’m not sure how much is in these accounts now... if it’s £10m it would be logical for AC to use say 20% of the next £50m of redeemed access account capital to buy out GBBA loans out at 6.25% and transfer them into funds paying 3.5% ish. I stress parts of loans are being sold in the GBBA not the loan part in entirety. Dee’s indicates there are 12 loans which have increased in excess of £50k - if that’s £1m and there are another 50 that have increased between £10 & £50k we might be talking around £3m of purchases. The one thing we know for sure is AC won’t give clear and concise guidance as to what they have done, are doing or preparing to do !
|
|
