|
|
Post by chielamangus on Feb 2, 2016 15:51:59 GMT
I rest my case, if a document isn’t checked how can you rely on the information it contains? If you don't trust the documentation then don't invest. However I would counter that by saying that we pioneered the practice of making all this information available to the crowd and I believe still lead the way in terms of transparency in this regard. There is strength in cross examination from the crowd that other sites simply don't get where they don't publish this information either at all or before the loan draws down. That's a bit extreme. There is much to question in most of the documentation, but that does not make the investment a non-starter. If one suspends one's critical faculties, one is basically going blindfold. Simple factual errors are a sign that deeper errors may exist (and the latter can exist without the former). Caveat investor! I wouldn't say that AC credit reports are always clear, logical, consistent & comprehensive but I will say that they are infinitely superior to anything I come across on the other platforms I use. So, yes, I fully support your last point, chris, about the level of information that AC provides. But don't get so sensitive about certain comments - the document in question was not even an AC in-house document.
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,188 
Likes: 1,546
|
Post by pikestaff on Feb 2, 2016 21:20:41 GMT
...we pioneered the practice of making all this information available to the crowd and I believe still lead the way in terms of transparency in this regard. There is strength in cross examination from the crowd that other sites simply don't get where they don't publish this information either at all or before the loan draws down. I can't let that go without comment. You get at least as much information on TC, who were the pioneers, and the Q&A on TC is still somewhat better as well.
|
|
jonah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,031
Likes: 1,113
|
Post by jonah on Feb 8, 2016 19:12:37 GMT
Not sure if it is deliberate chris, but it seems that the new loans on the lower of the 2 tables turn up on the next working day to the agreements being signed. So the 395k accountancy and 11% SME are on today but weren't on yesterday even though they were signed on the 5th. Not really an issue though, just odd considering that you default to sorting on that column. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Feb 8, 2016 19:15:47 GMT
Not sure if it is deliberate chris , but it seems that the new loans on the lower of the 2 tables turn up on the next working day to the agreements being signed. So the 395k accountancy and 11% SME are on today but weren't on yesterday even though they were signed on the 5th. Not really an issue though, just odd considering that you default to sorting on that column. Possibly the admin team back dating the receipt of the documents and there are also other conditions that need to be fulfilled for the loan to be listed beyond just the offer letter being returned signed which may not have been completed when the docs were received.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 8, 2016 21:22:49 GMT
Did neither of the two drawdowns expected today happen? Or are we going to get another late night allocation -- or two?
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Feb 9, 2016 0:46:45 GMT
5 Feb "Following excellent progress with the legal paperwork this week this loan is now in a position to draw on Monday 8 February 2016."
Yeah, right! As if ....
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 9, 2016 17:25:07 GMT
#214 has drawn down. I received an allocation of £366.22 at 1644. That was less than I asked for, so I presume it's the maximum allocation.
There's a note on the loan saying 35% of the £140k loan was being allocated to MLIAs. That would be £49k, and the maximum allocation was 0.75% of that.
That's a lot smaller than the last loan I remember, which had a maximum allocation that was more like 4% of the total. IIRC, that loan drew down with very little notice so investors didn't get a lot of time to consider it and place buying instructions, whereas this loan was shown as upcoming for a reasonable period.
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Feb 9, 2016 17:31:51 GMT
And #226 has drawn down with max allocation £623.23.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Feb 9, 2016 17:37:49 GMT
And #226 has drawn down with max allocation £623.23. That's 0.64% of the £98k allocated to MLIAs. That suggests this loan was a bit more popular than #214.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,053
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 12, 2016 18:46:00 GMT
I thought the new AC mantra was better quality, lower rates. 2 related loans just appeared (231 and 232), with the borrower looking for over £900k. Why is the money needed? - failed business venture cost £600k
- £1.5m owed to the taxman (looks like nobody realised that you have to pay VAT and PAYE)
Where's that barge pole
|
|
bob76
Posts: 103
Likes: 22
|
Post by bob76 on Feb 13, 2016 9:11:50 GMT
I thought the new AC mantra was better quality, lower rates. I guess the lower rates part is achieved, with several loans offering 7% interest. However, some of them are BTL property loans with 75% LTV, so not sure about quality. AC must be desperate to attract borrowers to suddenly offer that types of loans...
|
|
daveb4
Member of DD Central
Posts: 220
Likes: 116
|
Post by daveb4 on Feb 13, 2016 9:29:44 GMT
I thought the new AC mantra was better quality, lower rates. 2 related loans just appeared (231 and 232), with the borrower looking for over £900k. Why is the money needed? - failed business venture cost £600k
- £1.5m owed to the taxman (looks like nobody realised that you have to pay VAT and PAYE)
Where's that barge pole
Very interesting points don't forget they were also missold a fixed rate as well. All this in the past? Too be fair, they seemed to have tidied the business up, some good contracts in near future and also relative good security especially when they start organising repayment in 6 months. Barge pole or one for a punt 
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Feb 13, 2016 10:49:43 GMT
I thought the new AC mantra was better quality, lower rates. 2 related loans just appeared (231 and 232), with the borrower looking for over £900k. Why is the money needed? - failed business venture cost £600k
- £1.5m owed to the taxman (looks like nobody realised that you have to pay VAT and PAYE)
Where's that barge pole
A full explanation of the cause of the underpayments to HMRC and how the arrears have arisen has been provided. Essentially this was due to poor systems collating the required information over a number of years. This has not been uncovered previously by either the companies’ auditors or HMRC. Following a local compliance visit, HMRC advised the group that there were certain anomalies in their VAT returns. The group instructed a tax specialist to review their tax records. Having advised their bankers, Lloyds, of the potential HMRC issues, Lloyds engaged a third-party accountant to review the position and their security. Management were advised, meanwhile, that HMRC would be likely to agree a Time-To-Pay arrangement If they were bad they could just drop the company into administration and not repay HMRC. They are doing an honorable thing. As always, if you don't like the deal, don't invest.
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Feb 18, 2016 18:53:43 GMT
chris Any chance of 227 drawing down on t’night turn tonight? 
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Feb 18, 2016 19:15:27 GMT
chris Any chance of 227 drawing down on t’night turn tonight? Ops director has pulled out of our management call tomorrow to make sure it draws then, so based on that it will be tomorrow. As I understand it it's down to the lawyers now though to just go through the final steps to actually draw funds so it would take something unexpected to stop it drawing tomorrow.
|
|
