Ukmikk
Member of DD Central
Posts: 452 
Likes: 306
|
Post by Ukmikk on Sept 11, 2024 15:08:56 GMT
I have one where hindsight was required by us lenders, but should not have been needed by the platform if it had done even the minimum amount of DD. The crucial facts were known to the CP person responsible, but not, according to him, by the owner, at the time of the launch. Then after the loan had defaulted they had opportunities to offload and the only reason that I can imagine why not was to preserve the "no losses" claim which they were making at the time. I am in agreement with littleoldlady . CP have tried to keep up this façade of no capital losses and, subsequently, minimal losses for a very long time as a Public Relations exercise. It has been to the significant detriment of existing lenders. As for the comment about the discontent with CP reducing the number of new projects, I am in alignment with the unhappiness regarding that: as far as I am concerned, CP should not be reducing the number of new project launches but killing them off altogether. CP obviously have a very substandard vetting process in terms of the borrowers they bring on board. Just under 50% of my CP loans are more than 12 months in default, with many an incredibly long 24+ months overdue!
It's an enormous amount of my life savings that is now stuck. It causes me untold daily, and nightly, distress. Capital redemptions are very thin on the ground. The avalanche of 1 star Trustpilot reviews from disgruntled CP lenders demonstrates my situation is very common. Such a massive long-term default ratio proves that CP's processes have been very inadequate thusfar. If a car manufacturer was releasing motor vehicles of which 50% of their engines burst into flames when on the road, they would immediately stop selling new cars until the causes of the problems were resolved. CP need to do the same. Stop all new loan launches. Dramatically overhaul processes. Bring in new staff who perform. And not launch a single new loan until they get on top of the growing mountainful of loans in long-term default. CP's staff and resources need to be focused on getting existing borrowers to pay back lenders' capital and accrued interest, not making the problem even worse by launching new loans that are also likely not to pay back as advertised to lenders. Unfortunately I have to agree. I have only defaulted loans left now and have not received a payment for months. Luckily I do not have an enormous proportion of my savings in CP, and this illustrates the importance of not ever putting too many eggs in one basket, no matter how attractive that basket may appear to be initially. I hope p2pfan gets their money back in due course, and the rest of us too of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 24, 2024 7:07:32 GMT
Another project is now in default, so now 40 in default (73 defaulted, of which 33 have since repaid/settled, 1 of which had a capital loss)
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 403
Likes: 379
|
Post by scooter on Sept 24, 2024 7:40:41 GMT
"CP have tried to keep up this façade of no capital losses and, subsequently, minimal losses for a very long time as a Public Relations exercise."
I have a response from the FO which gives this as the very reason why CP can do what they like and get away with it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 24, 2024 7:54:26 GMT
"CP have tried to keep up this façade of no capital losses and, subsequently, minimal losses for a very long time as a Public Relations exercise." I have a response from the FO which gives this as the very reason why CP can do what they like and get away with it. I don't understand the bolded sentence. Would you care to share the FO response, with any personal data redacted?
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 403
Likes: 379
|
Post by scooter on Sept 24, 2024 8:34:03 GMT
"CP have tried to keep up this façade of no capital losses and, subsequently, minimal losses for a very long time as a Public Relations exercise." I have a response from the FO which gives this as the very reason why CP can do what they like and get away with it. I don't understand the bolded sentence. Would you care to share the FO response, with any personal data redacted? It's still ongoing, but basically, the FO and CP agree that that they the wording of the Autolend marketing was misleading. Projects v phases of projects. But that doesn't matter because CP quoted to the FO how much interest i had received and the fact that there was no loss of capital. The FO sucked it up. " having invested in over 200 projects, of which 139 have been repaid to you. And I note you have received a realised average return of 8.05%, which exceeds the contracted average return." The fact is that 40 odd are likely to not repay in full and or not return further interest, reducing that 8% considerably over time. And i am over invested by Autoinvest in most of them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 24, 2024 9:05:12 GMT
I don't understand the bolded sentence. Would you care to share the FO response, with any personal data redacted? It's still ongoing, but basically, the FO and CP agree that that they the wording of the Autolend marketing was misleading. Projects v phases of projects. But that doesn't matter because CP quoted to the FO how much interest i had received and the fact that there was no loss of capital. The FO sucked it up. " having invested in over 200 projects, of which 139 have been repaid to you. And I note you have received a realised average return of 8.05%, which exceeds the contracted average return." The fact is that 40 odd are likely to not repay in full and or not return further interest, reducing that 8% considerably over time. And i am over invested by Autoinvest in most of them. Thanks for replying. I completely agree that CP basing Autolend on tranches rather than projects is absolutely bonkers. I said so directly to them when it was introduced, and many times on here since. That they haven't fixed it in 5 years is madness. Sorry, but you won't like this bit: I think the FO are right to "suck it up" at this stage. You have so far received a profit that is better than advertised. The FO can't consider a claim for losses when none have yet occurred. You will need to wait until your remaining loans conclude and try again if you do actually suffer losses. I get it that you think that CP are dragging their feet to avoid declaring losses. I don't agree with you when looking at my own loanbook. Even if you are right they won't be able to delay forever. There will definitely be some losses, and CP have been open about that. I'm still expecting that we will both see overall profits that are commensurate with those forecast at the outset, and I back that up with continuing to be an active lender. My reason for logging all of the defaults and recoveries in this thread is to monitor how this progresses over time. I confess that the rate of recoveries has been slower than I expected, but I can't see how the defaults I'm in can be rushed to a better conclusion. Time will eventually tell.
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Sept 24, 2024 10:21:36 GMT
Unsustainable due to costs and resources unless there is a money tree in the garden or everyone is working for nothing. There is going to be a lot of loans paying no interest at best.
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 403
Likes: 379
|
Post by scooter on Sept 24, 2024 12:22:02 GMT
It's still ongoing, but basically, the FO and CP agree that that they the wording of the Autolend marketing was misleading. Projects v phases of projects. But that doesn't matter because CP quoted to the FO how much interest i had received and the fact that there was no loss of capital. The FO sucked it up. " having invested in over 200 projects, of which 139 have been repaid to you. And I note you have received a realised average return of 8.05%, which exceeds the contracted average return." The fact is that 40 odd are likely to not repay in full and or not return further interest, reducing that 8% considerably over time. And i am over invested by Autoinvest in most of them. Thanks for replying. I completely agree that CP basing Autolend on tranches rather than projects is absolutely bonkers. I said so directly to them when it was introduced, and many times on here since. That they haven't fixed it in 5 years is madness. Sorry, but you won't like this bit: I think the FO are right to "suck it up" at this stage. You have so far received a profit that is better than advertised. The FO can't consider a claim for losses when none have yet occurred. You will need to wait until your remaining loans conclude and try again if you do actually suffer losses. I get it that you think that CP are dragging their feet to avoid declaring losses. I don't agree with you when looking at my own loanbook. Even if you are right they won't be able to delay forever. There will definitely be some losses, and CP have been open about that. I'm still expecting that we will both see overall profits that are commensurate with those forecast at the outset, and I back that up with continuing to be an active lender. My reason for logging all of the defaults and recoveries in this thread is to monitor how this progresses over time. I confess that the rate of recoveries has been slower than I expected, but I can't see how the defaults I'm in can be rushed to a better conclusion. Time will eventually tell. Except my claim is not about interest and returns. It is about capital being over invested in projects and subjecting me to levels of risk i didn't sign up for. If they had auto invested correctly, my interest would be similar but from more projects. I asked for my over investments to be returned to my account which would put me back to the position i should have been in. Perhaps i could agree that the could deduct interest paid on those loans, but not many hve actually paid any interest yet. Oh, and CP were "acting in my best interest....." i think my cat understands more about P2P than the FO. They also think that because i am still invested with CP i happy to accept the updated terms. Not a clue.... I think i might just have found the next Govenor of the Bank of England. Sorry to hijack your post. I'll shut up now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 24, 2024 13:21:49 GMT
Thanks for replying. I completely agree that CP basing Autolend on tranches rather than projects is absolutely bonkers. I said so directly to them when it was introduced, and many times on here since. That they haven't fixed it in 5 years is madness. Sorry, but you won't like this bit: I think the FO are right to "suck it up" at this stage. You have so far received a profit that is better than advertised. The FO can't consider a claim for losses when none have yet occurred. You will need to wait until your remaining loans conclude and try again if you do actually suffer losses. I get it that you think that CP are dragging their feet to avoid declaring losses. I don't agree with you when looking at my own loanbook. Even if you are right they won't be able to delay forever. There will definitely be some losses, and CP have been open about that. I'm still expecting that we will both see overall profits that are commensurate with those forecast at the outset, and I back that up with continuing to be an active lender. My reason for logging all of the defaults and recoveries in this thread is to monitor how this progresses over time. I confess that the rate of recoveries has been slower than I expected, but I can't see how the defaults I'm in can be rushed to a better conclusion. Time will eventually tell. Except my claim is not about interest and returns. It is about capital being over invested in projects and subjecting me to levels of risk i didn't sign up for. If they had auto invested correctly, my interest would be similar but from more projects. I asked for my over investments to be returned to my account which would put me back to the position i should have been in. Perhaps i could agree that the could deduct interest paid on those loans, but not many hve actually paid any interest yet. Oh, and CP were "acting in my best interest....." i think my cat understands more about P2P than the FO. They also think that because i am still invested with CP i happy to accept the updated terms. Not a clue.... I think i might just have found the next Govenor of the Bank of England. Sorry to hijack your post. I'll shut up now. No need to be sorry, or to shut up. All views are very welcome. As I said, in this case I completely agree with you that CP's autolend is not fit for purpose. I think that we only disagree on the likelihood of losses across a diversified portfolio. Of your 40 remaining loans, have many of them actually got more than your set maximum invested in them? I ask because it's not the case for me. Those loans where I have only auto investments across multiple tranches generally sum to much less that my set maximum. Typically, my maximum was set to £1k per loan (tranche as it happens), but I was generally only allocated between £50 to £100 in each tranche, so it would have taken a very high number of tranches to get a total allocation of more than £1k. In fact I often deliberately set my maximum to much higher than I wanted to try to get a higher allocation (which may come to bite me if those loans suffer losses). I can see that it would have been likely to get far more allocated if one's maximum was set lower, £50 say, as a £50 minimum per tranche often applied. In that case one would very likely have been allocated more than one's desired £50 per loan maximum across multiple tranches. If this is the case for you I can understand your grievance.
|
|
scooter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 403
Likes: 379
|
Post by scooter on Sept 24, 2024 15:15:58 GMT
Except my claim is not about interest and returns. It is about capital being over invested in projects and subjecting me to levels of risk i didn't sign up for. If they had auto invested correctly, my interest would be similar but from more projects. I asked for my over investments to be returned to my account which would put me back to the position i should have been in. Perhaps i could agree that the could deduct interest paid on those loans, but not many hve actually paid any interest yet. Oh, and CP were "acting in my best interest....." i think my cat understands more about P2P than the FO. They also think that because i am still invested with CP i happy to accept the updated terms. Not a clue.... I think i might just have found the next Govenor of the Bank of England. Sorry to hijack your post. I'll shut up now. No need to be sorry, or to shut up. All views are very welcome. As I said, in this case I completely agree with you that CP's autolend is not fit for purpose. I think that we only disagree on the likelihood of losses across a diversified portfolio. Of your 40 remaining loans, have many of them actually got more than your set maximum invested in them? I ask because it's not the case for me. Those loans where I have only auto investments across multiple tranches generally sum to much less that my set maximum. Typically, my maximum was set to £1k per loan (tranche as it happens), but I was generally only allocated between £50 to £100 in each tranche, so it would have taken a very high number of tranches to get a total allocation of more than £1k. In fact I often deliberately set my maximum to much higher than I wanted to try to get a higher allocation (which may come to bite me if those loans suffer losses). I can see that it would have been likely to get far more allocated if one's maximum was set lower, £50 say, as a £50 minimum per tranche often applied. In that case one would very likely have been allocated more than one's desired £50 per loan maximum across multiple tranches. If this is the case for you I can understand your grievance. Yeah, mine was set at £100. CP say that they email every time you purchase and you can opt out... All true, but the email only tells you what you are being allocated, not whether you already have any of that project. Also, i too got allocated £50 or less so I would get more than one allocation regularly. It is supposed to be a "hands free" system. I am over invested by over £2k on a £20k investment. It's not like I had every other loan on offer. They could have allocated loans "correctly" . Of course I am not the only one and that in my opinion is where the ombudsman get nervous about finding in investors favour.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Oct 1, 2024 9:05:01 GMT
Another loan in default has repaid in full with penalty interest (R******y F**m, G***'s O*k, W*****m C***s). It was 8.5 months beyond its due date. There are now 39 in default (73 defaulted, of which 34 have since repaid/settled, 1 of which had a small capital loss).
Note that the stats page has not yet been updated (should be updated overnight tonight) as the loan was initially mistakenly marked as partially repaid rather than fully repaid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Oct 8, 2024 7:32:48 GMT
Another loan in default has repaid in full with penalty interest (B********e F**m, S*******d L**e, P*****n). It was 7 months beyond its due date. Also one more project is now in default. There are now 39 in default (74 defaulted, of which 35 have since repaid/settled, 1 of which had a small capital loss).
Oddly all 5 tranches of the repaid project have been marked as repaid (added to stats, listed in repaid projects list and marked as repaid in full, and moved to completed tab on dashboard), but the actual repayments have only been credited to my account for 2 of the 4 tranches that I'm in. And, the 2 tranches I'm in that have repaid are very fractionally short of a full capital repayment. I expect that this is just an admin oversight/error that will be corrected today. If not then I'll give CP a nudge to get it sorted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Oct 8, 2024 13:06:29 GMT
Another loan in default has repaid in full with penalty interest (B********e F**m, S*******d L**e, P*****n). It was 7 months beyond its due date. Also one more project is now in default. There are now 39 in default (74 defaulted, of which 35 have since repaid/settled, 1 of which had a small capital loss). Oddly all 5 tranches of the repaid project have been marked as repaid (added to stats, listed in repaid projects list and marked as repaid in full, and moved to completed tab on dashboard), but the actual repayments have only been credited to my account for 2 of the 4 tranches that I'm in. And, the 2 tranches I'm in that have repaid are very fractionally short of a full capital repayment. I expect that this is just an admin oversight/error that will be corrected today. If not then I'll give CP a nudge to get it sorted. My capital and interest is now showing as fully repaid in all tranches, but each tranche is showing a few quid short in total capital repaid to CP. I presume it's an admin error. Doesn't seem to affect lenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Nov 2, 2024 9:04:22 GMT
According to the stats page another 4 projects are now in default, so now 43 in default (78 defaulted, of which 35 have since repaid/settled, 1 of which had a capital loss).
I was aware of 1 loan that would reach 180 days late today (the older L**d at 18 D****n C***e), which was already roughly half repaid via a refinance. I'm not aware of the others, presumably loans I'm not in. It seems unlikely that 4 loans would all reach 180 days late on the same day as I don't recall there ever being 4 new loans funded on the same day. Perhaps this aspect of the stats page update mechanism had been broken again!
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Nov 7, 2024 8:33:02 GMT
According to the stats page another project is now in default, so now 44 in default (79 defaulted, of which 35 have since repaid/settled, 1 of which had a capital loss).
|
|
