ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on May 14, 2021 11:16:18 GMT
Q148 - "a very sophisticated hack". Do what? A VERY careful and deliberate choice of extremely misleading words. Undoubtedly discussed in detail at FCA inner circles and then designed to minimise what happened and make the FCA look the innocent victim. The truth will out.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,183
Likes: 5,989
|
Post by registerme on May 14, 2021 11:20:03 GMT
Q148 - "a very sophisticated hack". Do what? A VERY careful and deliberate choice of extremely misleading words. Undoubtedly discussed in detail at FCA inner circles and then designed to minimise what happened and make the FCA look the innocent victim. The truth will out. I realise that some people aren't overly IT-literate I really don't think that "File - Edit" counts as sophisticated! Or even, perhaps, as a hack, where the ability to edit the files is intentional. Am I misremembering things?
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on May 14, 2021 12:05:31 GMT
For a Government created organisation, formed to "Protect Financial Consumers", the FCA spends an awful lot of time, effort and money on denying any and all culpability, especially when they ARE the DIRECT, proven cause of the financial disaster.
I'm looking at you Collateral.
Wonderful integrity flowing through the FCA's veins isn't there.
|
|
misscas
Member of DD Central
Posts: 64
Likes: 55
|
Post by misscas on May 14, 2021 12:18:37 GMT
Q148 - "a very sophisticated hack". Do what? A VERY careful and deliberate choice of extremely misleading words. Undoubtedly discussed in detail at FCA inner circles and then designed to minimise what happened and make the FCA look the innocent victim. The truth will out. When I read it I thought “That is a barefaced lie, calculated and deliberate to avoid blame. They have no shame”. I do believe the truth will eventually come out and that there will eventually be some form of financial recompense for investors but will any mud be visible on the FCA? Nah, any faint smudge will be just a trick on the light.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on May 14, 2021 12:31:41 GMT
Amazing how things can change. This week my portfolio dropped in value more than my collateral investment. The difference is hopefully SM will recover and funds should recover. Anybody in crypto would also be stung. Valuations of portfolios only matter when they have to be realised. I am sure the funds tied up in Collateral were more likely to impact lots of the investors in the immediate aftermath of the disaster as they seemed to be a reasonable “Short term “ offering and attracted lots of ordinary folks just trying to do best for their families.
That is the sad side of failing P2P companies the number of smaller investors that got caught up with little backup to tide them over.
The big boys also lose out but usually it’s not their only investments.
Lets hope we all get back what we were promised as things were not that bad before FCA intervened.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 5,635
|
Post by duck on May 14, 2021 13:17:44 GMT
...... Or even, perhaps, as a hack, where the ability to edit the files is intentional. Am I misremembering things? Nope, no misremembering happening. If I was feeling harsh I would suggest that the FCA facilitated the actions taken. Leave the register open on all fields, don't attach 'flags' so that you can see where changes have been made, don't include a unique identifier ............ and then provide the 'log in'.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,586
Likes: 4,181
|
Post by agent69 on May 14, 2021 16:04:45 GMT
Amazing how things can change. This week my portfolio dropped in value more than my collateral investment. The difference is hopefully SM will recover and funds should recover. Anybody in crypto would also be stung. Valuations of portfolios only matter when they have to be realised. I am sure the funds tied up in Collateral were more likely to impact lots of the investors in the immediate aftermath of the disaster as they seemed to be a reasonable “Short term “ offering and attracted lots of ordinary folks just trying to do best for their families. That is the sad side of failing P2P companies the number of smaller investors that got caught up with little backup to tide them over. The big boys also lose out but usually it’s not their only investments. Lets hope we all get back what we were promised as things were not that bad before FCA intervened.
I've got a couple of grand in Col and am hoping to get some of it back, but I don't buy into the 'it's all the FCA's fault' narrative. Bottom line is that Col was an accident waiting to happen long before the FCA expedited their demise. The FCA had nothing to do with overvalued chattel loans, which resulted in the adminstrator being unable to redeem them, or a multi-million pound development loan in Bolton that had more unfilled tranches than I've had hot dinners.
There may have been a limited number of investors who were swayed by the FCA authorisation, but I suspect that most couldn't see past the 10 - 15% interest rates being offered. It's easy to persue the FCA, as they are the only ones with any money, but I suspect that the chances of success are slim
|
|
squid
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 204
|
Post by squid on May 14, 2021 16:22:35 GMT
Amazing how things can change. This week my portfolio dropped in value more than my collateral investment. The difference is hopefully SM will recover and funds should recover. Anybody in crypto would also be stung. Valuations of portfolios only matter when they have to be realised. I am sure the funds tied up in Collateral were more likely to impact lots of the investors in the immediate aftermath of the disaster as they seemed to be a reasonable “Short term “ offering and attracted lots of ordinary folks just trying to do best for their families. That is the sad side of failing P2P companies the number of smaller investors that got caught up with little backup to tide them over. The big boys also lose out but usually it’s not their only investments. Lets hope we all get back what we were promised as things were not that bad before FCA intervened.
I've got a couple of grand in Col and am hoping to get some of it back, but I don't buy into the 'it's all the FCA's fault' narrative. Bottom line is that Col was an accident waiting to happen long before the FCA expedited their demise. The FCA had nothing to do with overvalued chattel loans, which resulted in the adminstrator being unable to redeme them, or a multi-million pound development loan in Bolton that had more unfilled tranches than I've had hot dinners.
There may have been a limited number of investors who were swayed by the FCA authorisation, but I suspect that most couldn't see past the 10 - 15% interest rates being offered. It's easy to persue the FCA, as they are the only ones with any money, but I suspect that the chances of success are slim
Is that not the very point though? - The FCA should have been involved in regulating all platforms for which permission is required to operate...
|
|
micky
Member of DD Central
Posts: 651
Likes: 536
|
Post by micky on May 14, 2021 16:28:54 GMT
Amazing how things can change. This week my portfolio dropped in value more than my collateral investment. The difference is hopefully SM will recover and funds should recover. Anybody in crypto would also be stung. Valuations of portfolios only matter when they have to be realised. I am sure the funds tied up in Collateral were more likely to impact lots of the investors in the immediate aftermath of the disaster as they seemed to be a reasonable “Short term “ offering and attracted lots of ordinary folks just trying to do best for their families. That is the sad side of failing P2P companies the number of smaller investors that got caught up with little backup to tide them over. The big boys also lose out but usually it’s not their only investments. Lets hope we all get back what we were promised as things were not that bad before FCA intervened.
I've got a couple of grand in Col and am hoping to get some of it back, but I don't buy into the 'it's all the FCA's fault' narrative. Bottom line is that Col was an accident waiting to happen long before the FCA expedited their demise. The FCA had nothing to do with overvalued chattel loans, which resulted in the adminstrator being unable to redeem them, or a multi-million pound development loan in Bolton that had more unfilled tranches than I've had hot dinners.
There may have been a limited number of investors who were swayed by the FCA authorisation, but I suspect that most couldn't see past the 10 - 15% interest rates being offered. It's easy to persue the FCA, as they are the only ones with any money, but I suspect that the chances of success are slim
Seriously Collateral was no accident, these guys had history and knew what they where doing. The FCA allowed lots to happen that should not have, they had the opportunity to stop a lot of extra investment when they eventually caught up with what was going on, but they didn't.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on May 14, 2021 17:05:10 GMT
agent69, there is MUCH yet to be revealed, it will more than make your hair curl, it will fall out. The FCA are 100% culpable for Collateral. For a starter, Collateral shouldn't have even been on their website Register except for their gross incompetence and non-existent security. "You can trust the Register." Really?!!! And then what happened after, well............. Watch this space.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,742
Likes: 3,137
|
Post by jonno on May 14, 2021 17:06:42 GMT
Amazing how things can change. This week my portfolio dropped in value more than my collateral investment. The difference is hopefully SM will recover and funds should recover. Anybody in crypto would also be stung. Valuations of portfolios only matter when they have to be realised. I am sure the funds tied up in Collateral were more likely to impact lots of the investors in the immediate aftermath of the disaster as they seemed to be a reasonable “Short term “ offering and attracted lots of ordinary folks just trying to do best for their families. That is the sad side of failing P2P companies the number of smaller investors that got caught up with little backup to tide them over. The big boys also lose out but usually it’s not their only investments. Lets hope we all get back what we were promised as things were not that bad before FCA intervened.
I've got a couple of grand in Col and am hoping to get some of it back, but I don't buy into the 'it's all the FCA's fault' narrative. Bottom line is that Col was an accident waiting to happen long before the FCA expedited their demise. The FCA had nothing to do with overvalued chattel loans, which resulted in the adminstrator being unable to redeem them, or a multi-million pound development loan in Bolton that had more unfilled tranches than I've had hot dinners.
There may have been a limited number of investors who were swayed by the FCA authorisation, but I suspect that most couldn't see past the 10 - 15% interest rates being offered. It's easy to persue the FCA, as they are the only ones with any money, but I suspect that the chances of success are slim
Sorry to be blunt, and with the greatest respect, but you speak for yourself. If you blundered in with little or no DD, then fine; but please don't tar us all with the same brush
|
|
littonowl
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 355
|
Post by littonowl on May 14, 2021 21:45:43 GMT
Hi duckJust catching up on events having been reminded today of the Col nightmare by the P2P Finance News email. Would like to thank you and your ‘lings for all your efforts on behalf of us investors. If it’s not too late, please could you pm me the details and I’ll happily add my support and contact my MP. BR LittonOwl
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on May 14, 2021 23:03:13 GMT
Without direct FCA involvement Collateral could never have sold regulated investments.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 5,635
|
Post by duck on May 15, 2021 5:02:35 GMT
I've got a couple of grand in Col and am hoping to get some of it back, but I don't buy into the 'it's all the FCA's fault' narrative. Bottom line is that Col was an accident waiting to happen long before the FCA expedited their demise. The FCA had nothing to do with overvalued chattel loans, which resulted in the adminstrator being unable to redeem them, or a multi-million pound development loan in Bolton that had more unfilled tranches than I've had hot dinners.
There may have been a limited number of investors who were swayed by the FCA authorisation, but I suspect that most couldn't see past the 10 - 15% interest rates being offered. It's easy to persue the FCA, as they are the only ones with any money, but I suspect that the chances of success are slim
Everybody is of course entitled to their opinions I will try to put over my point of view True and the chattels are but the tip of the iceberg regarding what went on inside Col. I cannot and do not blame the FCA for these things. However that misses the point. Col should never have been allowed to offer these loans. These were FCA regulated loans offered with no FCA authorisation. Take this point further. Col should never have been allowed to trade, this is a fact. They didn't have Interim Permissions and due to the date of incorporation they were never eligible. Investors should never have seen the website and should not have been able to invest a single 1p. The fact that investors saw the website and were able to invest £m was entirely down to the FCA, they allowed it and knew it was happening. How did the FCA allow this to happen? Lets use a scenario here. You run a franchise business and a man off the street approaches you and wants to use your name. The person says I've got £1m in the bank, a good name and what's more here is my name on your (insecure) database. Do you - Instantly say come on in, use my name and you can start making money off it.
- Take on trust what the person says without knowing anything about the person.
- Do some checks on the person and his bank balance.
The FCA took the first 2 options. They didn't check anything, they took Part 4A applications 'on trust'. Everything after that point is secondary but lets look at one of the FCAs principal remits 'protecting consumers'. The FCA had multiple chances to protect consumers but missed/chose not to at every opportunity. - The FCA comprehensively broke the law, this cost consumers many £m.
- When the FCA eventually discovered 'the problem' they decided to quietly cover their tracks, this cost consumers £3.8m.
- The FCA had the powers to protect client money and didn't use them, money went missing.
- The FCA had the powers to protect the data they didn't use them preferring the word of those who had led them a merry dance for 2+ years, this has cost consumers probably £1m (only BDO know the figure)
So do I think that the FCA are to blame for consumers losses ..... Yes.
not actually true. The FCA is funded by levies on the financial industry, they have no money of their own, a point they continually make. Where the FCA levies fines this money is ring fenced for investigations into regulated companies (which is why Col investors are almost certainly having to pay for the investigation) anything left over is paid to the Treasury.
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,568
Likes: 5,635
|
Post by duck on May 15, 2021 5:14:20 GMT
Hi duck Just catching up on events having been reminded today of the Col nightmare by the P2P Finance News email. Would like to thank you and your ‘lings for all your efforts on behalf of us investors. If it’s not too late, please could you pm me the details and I’ll happily add my support and contact my MP. BR LittonOwl Certainly not too late, you have a PM.
|
|