|
|
Post by davefoz on Jun 10, 2023 5:20:49 GMT
I will attempt to answer both Garreh and dave2’s points, without being drawn into argument.
In my first post I highlight a numbers of breach’s of T&Cs and ways in which I believe I / we have not been treated unfairly. Individuals will have their own specifics many of which have already been discussed on this forum. I / we are entitled to take whatever action necessary to recover our monies. It also is worthy of note that the action the lawyers propose may not just be against AC.
As regards the comment “The money to pay for all the lawyers to represent AC will be funded out of your own, and others, investments.” I have 3 comments to make.
1. The lions share of ACs funding is now institutional.
2. If AC are not at fault the cost to them will be zero.
3. If you believe “the money to pay for all the lawyers to represent AC will be funded out of your own, and others, investments.” Then this would again be another example of a breach of terms and investors being treated unfairly. I could argue that if they are prepared to use your capital to fund compensation for injured parties, they’re probably already using it to fund Directors salaries & Stuart’s Bentleys !
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,376
Likes: 2,780
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 10, 2023 8:55:23 GMT
Mendelsons site says they have already claimed successfully against Assetz (and Lendy), does anyone know what these claims refer to? mendelsonssolicitors.co.uk/who-can-i-claim-against/Clicking on the link to Assetz just gives general info. Link to Terms of Business doesn't work for me, so can't see anything about them. |
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315 
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 10, 2023 9:13:38 GMT
I will attempt to answer both Garreh and dave2’s points, without being drawn into argument. In my first post I highlight a numbers of breach’s of T&Cs and ways in which I believe I / we have not been treated unfairly. Individuals will have their own specifics many of which have already been discussed on this forum. I / we are entitled to take whatever action necessary to recover our monies. It also is worthy of note that the action the lawyers propose may not just be against AC. As regards the comment “The money to pay for all the lawyers to represent AC will be funded out of your own, and others, investments.” I have 3 comments to make. 1. The lions share of ACs funding is now institutional. 2. If AC are not at fault the cost to them will be zero. 3. If you believe “the money to pay for all the lawyers to represent AC will be funded out of your own, and others, investments.” Then this would again be another example of a breach of terms and investors being treated unfairly. I could argue that if they are prepared to use your capital to fund compensation for injured parties, they’re probably already using it to fund Directors salaries & Stuart’s Bentleys ! 1. What do you mean by AC? The retail platform which I assume is the target of the legal action as thats who the contractual relationship is with. The institutional side is now through separate entities. Also AC isnt funded by institutions, the lending is ... likely an important distinction 2. That seems just naive, there will inevitability some cost and zero cost assumes they will be successful in recovering full costs which seems unlikely 3. Like everything it will come from fee income which comes from lenders & borrowers. So the argument is that because AC SME uses income to pay salaries there is no issue with them having to cover additional costs from it. History would suggest that the probable outcome of any significant success is that AC walks away from the retail platform, administration, which never works out well for lenders and the legal claims become creditor claims. Hopefully by the time anything makes its way through the legal backlog, the inflight loans will have been funded, and reasonable amount of cash will have been extracted. No idea how competent the lawyers are ... site seems very vague on successful claims, just providing details of a load of failed financial firms. I note Lendy has now appeared on the list with a load of factually inaccurate nonsense about FOS & FSCS ... just looks like a ambulance chasing BS ... caveat emptor.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 10, 2023 9:19:56 GMT
Mendelsons site says they have already claimed successfully against Assetz (and Lendy), does anyone know what these claims refer to? mendelsonssolicitors.co.uk/who-can-i-claim-against/Clicking on the link to Assetz just gives general info. Link to Terms of Business doesn't work for me, so can't see anything about them. The Lendy one is almost certainly BS ... the company is in administration so legal claims can only be raised with the consent of the administrators or Court. Any claims would just be creditors anyway. There is also a pile of nonsense about FOS (which cant deal with companies in admin) & FSCS, which certainly isnt about to start receiving claims in relation to P2P (excluding claims relating to third party SIPP) Azzets (sic) also seems unlikely Looks like its a fishing expedition, just listing recent financial collapses
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
dead
Posts: 741
Likes: 498
|
Post by jo on Jun 10, 2023 9:45:48 GMT
The fact that AC continues to lie that they are unable to write off dead loans (when every other platform on the planet can), should be enough to convince any reasonable investor not to buy a used car from them.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,030
Likes: 4,431
|
Post by agent69 on Jun 10, 2023 10:09:33 GMT
Mendelsons site says they have already claimed successfully against Assetz (and Lendy), does anyone know what these claims refer to? mendelsonssolicitors.co.uk/who-can-i-claim-against/Clicking on the link to Assetz just gives general info. Link to Terms of Business doesn't work for me, so can't see anything about them. The Lendy one is almost certainly BS ... the company is in administration so legal claims can only be raised with the consent of the administrators or Court. Any claims would just be creditors anyway. There is also a pile of nonsense about FOS (which cant deal with companies in admin) & FSCS, which certainly isnt about to start receiving claims in relation to P2P (excluding claims relating to third party SIPP) Azzets (sic) also seems unlikely Looks like its a fishing expedition, just listing recent financial collapses I share your scepticism.
I was put off by the fact they have 2 case studies on their website that claim to have recovered money from banks. However, when you look at the list of all companies that they have recovered money from, there's not a bank in sight.
|
|
|
|
Post by davefoz on Jun 10, 2023 13:52:05 GMT
If investors are at all concerned as regards Mendelson’s credibility, I suggest they proceed with an alternative law firm.
Note to everyone - please be aware employees of Assetz Capital post on this forum, indeed I am led to believe the forum is in part funded by Assetz Capital.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 10, 2023 14:40:11 GMT
You appear to have been misled ... AC/AH apparently stopped funding the forums more than 4 years ago (no doubt a staff member will correct me if Im wrong) p2pindependentforum.com/thread/2327/thank-plus-shameless-plug-fundsNo idea on the other suggestion ... though the official staff are identified & seemingly silent ... couple of former directors floating about too, also disappointingly silent. |
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Jun 11, 2023 7:59:09 GMT
Money thing were I think committed to an orderly wind down until legal action by a lender was started , that really worked out well for investors  . Also it did not impoverish or punish the x owners, they just got employed by the administrator at administration rates at the expense of the borrowers. We need an orderly wind down , administration should if possible be avoided at all costs. |
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Jun 11, 2023 8:11:25 GMT
Money thing were I think committed to an orderly wind down until legal action by a lender was started , that really worked out well for investors . Also it did not impoverish or punish the x owners, they just got employed by the administrator at administration rates at the expense of the borrowers. We need an orderly wind down , administration should if possible be avoided at all costs. I think that was legal action by a borrower, but same result.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob2010 on Jun 11, 2023 9:44:05 GMT
Money thing were I think committed to an orderly wind down until legal action by a lender was started , that really worked out well for investors . Also it did not impoverish or punish the x owners, they just got employed by the administrator at administration rates at the expense of the borrowers. We need an orderly wind down , administration should if possible be avoided at all costs. If they try and ente liquidation, then surely this plays a part www.fca.org.uk/firms/regulated-financial-advice-firms-and-individuals-attempt-avoid-their-redress-liabilities
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 11, 2023 10:20:31 GMT
Money thing were I think committed to an orderly wind down until legal action by a lender was started , that really worked out well for investors . Also it did not impoverish or punish the x owners, they just got employed by the administrator at administration rates at the expense of the borrowers. We need an orderly wind down , administration should if possible be avoided at all costs. If they try and ente liquidation, then surely this plays a part www.fca.org.uk/firms/regulated-financial-advice-firms-and-individuals-attempt-avoid-their-redress-liabilities As they arent regulated financial advisors, in fact specifically prohibited from offering financial advice, Id say no. The general point is that if they are insolvent as a result of a legal debt then the platform enters administration or worse. The main example is actually BLN/Thincats which couldnt meet its liabilities under a FOS ruling so went into administration.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,376
Likes: 2,780
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 11, 2023 11:59:04 GMT
As they arent regulated financial advisors, in fact specifically prohibited from offering financial advice, Id say no. The general point is that if they are insolvent as a result of a legal debt then the platform enters administration or worse. The main example is actually BLN/Thincats which couldnt meet its liabilities under a FOS ruling so went into administration. Yes, that worked out so well for everyone, a couple of lenders were awarded refunds of investments, BLN didn't have the money so folded while other associated entities carried on trading. Be careful that the entity you are trying to recover funds from actually has any money. I suspect Assetz would also have things carefully separated between entities. These company structures are a bit above my pay grade!
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 11, 2023 16:16:06 GMT
You appear to have been misled ... AC/AH apparently stopped funding the forums more than 4 years ago (no doubt a staff member will correct me if Im wrong) p2pindependentforum.com/thread/2327/thank-plus-shameless-plug-fundsNo idea on the other suggestion ... though the official staff are identified & seemingly silent ... couple of former directors floating about too, also disappointingly silent. They stopped having any involvement in the running of the platform, or any say in the way the forum was run, about 12 and half or so years ago. Although my memory is not necessarily entirely reliable on such minutiae, I would say it was about 2-3 weeks after the forum was set up. When it was first started, they did make a multi year payment to secure the domain. I can't recall whether that was 3 years, 4 years, 5 years worth. But no longer than that, and regardless that did not give them any say over the forum nor influence over the [entirely volunteer and zero employment connection with any platform] board 'staff'. So I'd guess that their first domain funding ran out at least 7 years ago. Since then it has been entirely funded by other forum members. One donation was offered by another platform, and accepted, but again it did not buy them any influence and that was understood, and the donation transparently stated at that time. We are of course talking only about order of £25 per year IIRC as it is domain name only. There is no other funding needed or required. The ProBoards hosting is the FOC version - hence why people get adverts - and the admin/moderators have always been volunteer.
|
|
toffeeboy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 538
Likes: 385
|
Post by toffeeboy on Jun 13, 2023 10:30:37 GMT
If investors are at all concerned as regards Mendelson’s credibility, I suggest they proceed with an alternative law firm. Note to everyone - please be aware employees of Assetz Capital post on this forum, indeed I am led to believe the forum is in part funded by Assetz Capital.and under forum rules wouldn't need to be identified whereas AC employees would (I know it is down to them to identify themselves) Spurious accusations always make me doubt what people have to say and for as bad as AC are you are coming out with a few things yourself now as you try to sell us on this. Like others I don't see where this goes for Mendelson's although my suspicion is that part of your contract requires you to get more investors to sign up. From what you say you have a good case because you didn't state what type of investor you are and AC carried on investing for you so good luck with that but I did state a type so your case wouldn't help me and I suggest it will cost the rest of us more fees as AC will just pass the costs on to us
|
|
. Also it did not impoverish or punish the x owners, they just got employed by the administrator at administration rates at the expense of the borrowers. We need an orderly wind down , administration should if possible be avoided at all costs.
