|
|
Post by mfaxford on Dec 8, 2021 10:15:33 GMT
Another P-P becomes a bank then decides to bin the folk who helped build it so it can keep the profits itself. Ratesetter did it, now zopa have done it to me. Yes it feels personal! Pah! Ratesetter were bought out metro bank, zopa have bought out their investment arm themselves. So it’s really very different Whilst there's a difference (RS bought out by Metro compared to Zopa turning into a bank). There are a lot of similarities in terms of how it's happening from the point of view of an Investor. That particular difference doesn't really make much difference for us as investors. In both cases it feels like the decisions are being made in a way that benefit the organisation rather than the investors. A defaulted loan still has some potential value, the borrower might still make some repayments on it as they're able to or the loan can be sold via a debt sale. I did spot this little piece: So they'll buy the loans that are less likely to default from us first (the ones made in the last 18 months when they've had stronger lending criteria). Whilst leaving 8 weeks for some of our older loans to default (So a loan currently worth £7 but with a current missed payment could have defaulted by the time they buy it so they pay us £0). RS might have done a better job at this where parts of the loan book were sold off in one go based on category/market rather than just the age of a loan.
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,405 
Likes: 869
|
Post by aju on Dec 8, 2021 10:42:59 GMT
Ratesetter were bought out metro bank, zopa have bought out their investment arm themselves. So it’s really very different Whilst there's a difference (RS bought out by Metro compared to Zopa turning into a bank). There are a lot of similarities in terms of how it's happening from the point of view of an Investor. That particular difference doesn't really make much difference for us as investors. In both cases it feels like the decisions are being made in a way that benefit the organisation rather than the investors. A defaulted loan still has some potential value, the borrower might still make some repayments on it as they're able to or the loan can be sold via a debt sale. I did spot this little piece: So they'll buy the loans that are less likely to default from us first (the ones made in the last 18 months when they've had stronger lending criteria). Whilst leaving 8 weeks for some of our older loans to default (So a loan currently worth £7 but with a current missed payment could have defaulted by the time they buy it so they pay us £0). RS might have done a better job at this where parts of the loan book were sold off in one go based on category/market rather than just the age of a loan. I thought this but as yet have been busy elsewhere. I agree with your notion of loans defaulting in the time they take with the older loans having more chance of defaulting. I've not checked back across my defaults recently but i'm sure that some defaults have actually been completed too i guess the owners thought they'd be better off paying their loan rather than losing all access to their future credit. I do know some people who have had to resort to assistance from people like step change and whilst they are being helped by paying reduced amounts they are also not allowed to have any additional credit etc for 6 years. That said things don't look that great for us in that we still have 1/3 of our loans value in default status at present. Many are quite old but i'm sure some are still paying smaller sums I seem to recall (Must check again I think!) With the loss of the old statements detail this is much harder but thankfully I have been taking monthly copies of the loanbooks since Feb so i should probably still check back on this - probably still only be penny's though!.
|
|
|
|
Post by multiaccountmanager on Dec 8, 2021 13:34:20 GMT
I am annoyed to find that I am not now able to replace funds withdrawn under Flexible ISA rules, not even by transferring from my standard account. Further, it's unclear whether interim ISA transfers out have been suspended as the text implies that a single transfer of the whole ISA must be done at the end. It is worth trying to fix this. I had a large outstanding piece of funds to replace (withdrawn since April 2021, but prior years' funds). When they suspended new incoming funds I asked about this, and they said that with some prearrangement they would make an exception and accept replacement up to that limit. A couple of weeks ago I mailed them again to make sure the funds wouldn't be returned, got an OK, and sent the money. So it worked fine, but it won't if no-one has manually over-ridden the automatic refusal.
I now intend to transfer to iWeb, who take so long over such matters that waiting for end Jan will make not one jot of difference. I imagine the pile of forms at the Zopa end will soon hobble any attempt to pre-empt that date with an interim transfer anyway.
Ah well, face value for late loans is not bad. But I bet they will be uncommonly assiduous in getting defaults declared before sale.
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 9,975
Likes: 10,038
|
Post by ilmoro on Dec 8, 2021 13:39:26 GMT
Maybe I was wrong. CEO of assetzcapital said to p2p news on hearing this: “ And we remain open to any Zopa investors who wish to move over to ourselves.” Hmmm. Watch this space. Not that they need them as there is plenty of money to fund the modest pipeline.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,774
Likes: 2,368
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Dec 8, 2021 14:03:08 GMT
It is worth trying to fix this. I had a large outstanding piece of funds to replace (withdrawn since April 2021, but prior years' funds). When they suspended new incoming funds I asked about this, and they said that with some prearrangement they would make an exception and accept replacement up to that limit. A couple of weeks ago I mailed them again to make sure the funds wouldn't be returned, got an OK, and sent the money. So it worked fine, but it won't if no-one has manually over-ridden the automatic refusal.
I now intend to transfer to iWeb, who take so long over such matters that waiting for end Jan will make not one jot of difference. I imagine the pile of forms at the Zopa end will soon hobble any attempt to pre-empt that date with an interim transfer anyway.
Ah well, face value for late loans is not bad. But I bet they will be uncommonly assiduous in getting defaults declared before sale.
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status. Apparently no longer flexible, since they stopped taking deposits.
|
|
taffy
Posts: 127
Likes: 300
|
Post by taffy on Dec 8, 2021 14:27:17 GMT
It is worth trying to fix this. I had a large outstanding piece of funds to replace (withdrawn since April 2021, but prior years' funds). When they suspended new incoming funds I asked about this, and they said that with some prearrangement they would make an exception and accept replacement up to that limit. A couple of weeks ago I mailed them again to make sure the funds wouldn't be returned, got an OK, and sent the money. So it worked fine, but it won't if no-one has manually over-ridden the automatic refusal.
I now intend to transfer to iWeb, who take so long over such matters that waiting for end Jan will make not one jot of difference. I imagine the pile of forms at the Zopa end will soon hobble any attempt to pre-empt that date with an interim transfer anyway.
Ah well, face value for late loans is not bad. But I bet they will be uncommonly assiduous in getting defaults declared before sale.
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status. Zopa had a nine-day IT outage in October that could have resulted in the loss of banking Licence. The FCA will be monitoring their process of closing the P/P platform, so rest assured. Stop laughing, I`m trying to be serious. Look at how well the FCA is regulating the demise of Lendy, Funding Secure and others!
|
|
|
|
Post by c64 on Dec 8, 2021 14:27:35 GMT
It is worth trying to fix this. I had a large outstanding piece of funds to replace (withdrawn since April 2021, but prior years' funds). When they suspended new incoming funds I asked about this, and they said that with some prearrangement they would make an exception and accept replacement up to that limit. A couple of weeks ago I mailed them again to make sure the funds wouldn't be returned, got an OK, and sent the money. So it worked fine, but it won't if no-one has manually over-ridden the automatic refusal.
I now intend to transfer to iWeb, who take so long over such matters that waiting for end Jan will make not one jot of difference. I imagine the pile of forms at the Zopa end will soon hobble any attempt to pre-empt that date with an interim transfer anyway.
Ah well, face value for late loans is not bad. But I bet they will be uncommonly assiduous in getting defaults declared before sale.
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status. It is and has always been a flexible ISA (and is still described in the "Investor Principles" as such under 13. Innovative Finance ISA -> Withdrawals). That means you can put money in and out and not lose your allowance as long as you and Zopa both follow HMRC's detailed rules: www.gov.uk/guidance/manage-isa-subscriptions-for-your-investors#f-isa
My £30k had already been withdrawn before they stopped accepting new funds in June, so my "remaining ISA allowance for 2021/22" was stated as £50000. If they'd not let me replace them then that would have a change to my detriment without the requisite 30 days notice, but I did not need to get into that argument, I just asked straight away if they would agree to accept the top-up before April and they said yes. I have now done that, so now I have "remaining ISA allowance for 2021/22 is £20000" because my net subscription is nil.
I also asked if I could replace further sums I might yet choose to withdraw, and the answer was no. But (my words not theirs) that is not because the ISA is not flexible as per HMRC definition - it is because Zopa have already told me (in June) that they have made a commercial decision not to accept more funds, and if I chose to withdraw anyway in say September, knowing full well that it was a one-way street, that is my problem not theirs. I did not care to test that.
Separately, this from the principles: "Please note, you cannot withdraw and fund previous financial years of your ISA" is also a clumsy Zopa-imposed implementation of their "no more funding" decision, not actually a requirement of the flexibility rules themselves. And indeed that term was not there before the change in July - here are the old principles web.archive.org/web/20210628020049/https://www.zopa.com/investor-principles ... and a good job too, as my £30k was all previous years' subscriptions withdrawn under the "Principles" in place at that time. There is also surely some room for argument about being allowed to use non-ISA funds to fill a hole in the ISA without any net increase in "funds on the platform", but I did not try.
I very much hope that armed with some of the above, you and anyone else similarly affected can work out whether your particular obstacle is Zopa's terms or the flexible ISA rules, and obtain a successful outcome.
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,359
Likes: 310
|
Post by zlb on Dec 8, 2021 14:52:42 GMT
I might have a knack of trying to sell loans just before a platform suddenly announces it's closing and not doing so well out of that as it gets caught up in default problems etc, but after my initiating a loan sale last week, Z have at least stopped that and not taken the 1% fee.
Agree with others, some concern about their finding a solution to increase defaults, e.g. calculate it in January after Christmas spending, rather than now. Has anyone seen info on that?
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,405
Likes: 869
|
Post by aju on Dec 8, 2021 14:59:19 GMT
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status. It is and has always been a flexible ISA (and is still described in the "Investor Principles" as such under 13. Innovative Finance ISA -> Withdrawals). That means you can put money in and out and not lose your allowance as long as you and Zopa both follow HMRC's detailed rules: www.gov.uk/guidance/manage-isa-subscriptions-for-your-investors#f-isa
My £30k had already been withdrawn before they stopped accepting new funds in June, so my "remaining ISA allowance for 2021/22" was stated as £50000. If they'd not let me replace them then that would have a change to my detriment without the requisite 30 days notice, but I did not need to get into that argument, I just asked straight away if they would agree to accept the top-up before April and they said yes. I have now done that, so now I have "remaining ISA allowance for 2021/22 is £20000" because my net subscription is nil.
I also asked if I could replace further sums I might yet choose to withdraw, and the answer was no. But (my words not theirs) that is not because the ISA is not flexible as per HMRC definition - it is because Zopa have already told me (in June) that they have made a commercial decision not to accept more funds, and if I chose to withdraw anyway in say September, knowing full well that it was a one-way street, that is my problem not theirs. I did not care to test that.
Separately, this from the principles: "Please note, you cannot withdraw and fund previous financial years of your ISA" is also a clumsy Zopa-imposed implementation of their "no more funding" decision, not actually a requirement of the flexibility rules themselves. And indeed that term was not there before the change in July - here are the old principles web.archive.org/web/20210628020049/https://www.zopa.com/investor-principles ... and a good job too, as my £30k was all previous years' subscriptions withdrawn under the "Principles" in place at that time. There is also surely some room for argument about being allowed to use non-ISA funds to fill a hole in the ISA without any net increase in "funds on the platform", but I did not try.
I very much hope that armed with some of the above, you and anyone else similarly affected can work out whether your particular obstacle is Zopa's terms or the flexible ISA rules, and obtain a successful outcome.
Not sure if its my google version (it does need updating but the wayback machine found that principles link no available. I checked the link it went to and there was an additional space at the end - removed that on the wayback page and it works. I've also removed the space in the one in this thread and it works too. Thanks c64 for the steer will be interesting to see if there were any recent changes.
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Dec 8, 2021 15:10:21 GMT
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status. Apparently no longer flexible, since they stopped taking deposits.
Zopa should take a hard look at themselves, shame on you. They are abandoning P2P investors, the least they can do is depart with some integrity intact even if the FCA are clapping them on. Presumably what they are doing is within the regulations?
In comparison, Growth Street behaved impeccably right to the end. I returned all my flexible ISA cash to my account after the wind down was announced and they transferred it elsewhere.
I left Zopa years ago, like Funding Circle.
|
|
jane
Posts: 144
Likes: 212
|
Post by jane on Dec 8, 2021 17:15:42 GMT
According the the Zopa wind down plan (https://www.zopa.com/invest/risk/contingency) They can: The email states they will be starting to buy up the loans in December. So the 30 days notice has not been give. Also we are not being given the option to opt out of the sale and retain our loans. Guess terms and conditions count for nothing these days. Can't see what incentive they have to bother collecting any repayments now. More more profitable to just mark them off as defaulted buy them for £0.00 and then get to work on collecting the repayments. You can’t opt out. This isn’t a investment is winding down for others and not for Jane. It’s happening for everyone and it’s in the principles. Learn to accept no. Learn to you read babes. I already stated that you cant opt-out. That is the whole point of my comment. If you read the principles it refers to the wind down plan. If you look at the wind down plan as linked it states that you would have the option to opt-out. They are ignoring their own terms. FWIW - i dont want to opt-out anyway, but terms should not be seen as optional.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,774
Likes: 2,368
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Dec 8, 2021 18:05:16 GMT
You can’t opt out. This isn’t a investment is winding down for others and not for Jane. It’s happening for everyone and it’s in the principles. Learn to accept no. Learn to you read babes. I already stated that you cant opt-out. That is the whole point of my comment. If you read the principles it refers to the wind down plan. If you look at the wind down plan as linked it states that you would have the option to opt-out. They are ignoring their own terms. FWIW - i dont want to opt-out anyway, but terms should not be seen as optional. I guess it isn't a wind down, it's a close up shop. They are not in financial trouble or anything else to trigger the wind down plan.
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 229
Likes: 159
|
Post by scooter on Dec 8, 2021 18:45:10 GMT
You can’t opt out. This isn’t a investment is winding down for others and not for Jane. It’s happening for everyone and it’s in the principles. Learn to accept no. Learn to you read babes. I already stated that you cant opt-out. That is the whole point of my comment. If you read the principles it refers to the wind down plan. If you look at the wind down plan as linked it states that you would have the option to opt-out. They are ignoring their own terms. FWIW - i dont want to opt-out anyway, but terms should not be seen as optional. Babes! I though I was on Foxy bingo for a minute. Good one Hun. Only one to go Luv. Ttfn!
|
|
aju
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,405
Likes: 869
|
Post by aju on Dec 8, 2021 19:39:06 GMT
Learn to you read babes. I already stated that you cant opt-out. That is the whole point of my comment. If you read the principles it refers to the wind down plan. If you look at the wind down plan as linked it states that you would have the option to opt-out. They are ignoring their own terms. FWIW - i dont want to opt-out anyway, but terms should not be seen as optional. I guess it isn't a wind down, it's a close up shop. They are not in financial trouble or anything else to trigger the wind down plan. They will also be very rich company if they take the defaults at £0 back to us. Not sure what Face value means in those terms but its a safe bet Zopa will be getting quite a bit of money for nothing in my view.
|
|
|
|
Post by multiaccountmanager on Dec 8, 2021 20:41:26 GMT
When I tried to replace funds I was told it is not a flexible ISA. Which is correct. Funds withdrawn can not be replaced and retain their tax status. It is and has always been a flexible ISA (and is still described in the "Investor Principles" as such under 13. Innovative Finance ISA -> Withdrawals). That means you can put money in and out and not lose your allowance as long as you and Zopa both follow HMRC's detailed rules: www.gov.uk/guidance/manage-isa-subscriptions-for-your-investors#f-isa
My £30k had already been withdrawn before they stopped accepting new funds in June, so my "remaining ISA allowance for 2021/22" was stated as £50000. If they'd not let me replace them then that would have a change to my detriment without the requisite 30 days notice, but I did not need to get into that argument, I just asked straight away if they would agree to accept the top-up before April and they said yes. I have now done that, so now I have "remaining ISA allowance for 2021/22 is £20000" because my net subscription is nil.
I also asked if I could replace further sums I might yet choose to withdraw, and the answer was no. But (my words not theirs) that is not because the ISA is not flexible as per HMRC definition - it is because Zopa have already told me (in June) that they have made a commercial decision not to accept more funds, and if I chose to withdraw anyway in say September, knowing full well that it was a one-way street, that is my problem not theirs. I did not care to test that.
Separately, this from the principles: "Please note, you cannot withdraw and fund previous financial years of your ISA" is also a clumsy Zopa-imposed implementation of their "no more funding" decision, not actually a requirement of the flexibility rules themselves. And indeed that term was not there before the change in July - here are the old principles web.archive.org/web/20210628020049/https://www.zopa.com/investor-principles ... and a good job too, as my £30k was all previous years' subscriptions withdrawn under the "Principles" in place at that time. There is also surely some room for argument about being allowed to use non-ISA funds to fill a hole in the ISA without any net increase in "funds on the platform", but I did not try.
I very much hope that armed with some of the above, you and anyone else similarly affected can work out whether your particular obstacle is Zopa's terms or the flexible ISA rules, and obtain a successful outcome.
Oops. Yes it is flexible. I was misremembering, it is Funding Secure that is not flexible
|
|
