|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 4, 2014 10:40:04 GMT
Today there is another Breath of Foul Air, an 'in liquidation' downgrade after one payment.
After what seemed to me to be appalling slowness and lack of enthusiasm to take any action over the Breath of Foul Air, little expectation of anything much back from this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by phlitb on Feb 4, 2014 11:35:48 GMT
Sigh, I have this one too  I've recently raised my personal lending rates by 150-200bp and ramped up my trading activities to try and make FC investing even remotely viable. But if it's not safe to hold a loan for more than a month, it really is a complete waste of time. |
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Feb 4, 2014 11:39:33 GMT
Escaped. Must have been munching a banana. Can't even remember what it was or why I didn't bid. Was it a C- ?
|
|
jimbo
Posts: 234
Likes: 42
|
Post by jimbo on Feb 4, 2014 11:45:15 GMT
I'm assuming this is one of the smaller loans, as I don't have it in my watchlist and usually only bid on loans in excess of £70 - 90k these days...?
|
|
|
|
Post by phlitb on Feb 4, 2014 11:47:10 GMT
It was a 40K B. I don't touch C/C- - too risky  |
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Feb 4, 2014 11:51:33 GMT
So I wonder what they didn't tell FC when they applied. Non disclosure in the application is fraud isn't it? They must have known they were close to the edge, and if all had been revealed FC would not have passed the loan application ....... would they? (Ahem)  |
|
jimbo
Posts: 234
Likes: 42
|
Post by jimbo on Feb 4, 2014 12:32:58 GMT
It was a 40K B. I don't touch C/C- - too risky Most of my loans are to Cs and I've had fewer defaults than A and B risk bands (with the exception of C-, which is too early to say really). Appreciate that Cs started in late 2011 (from memory), so appreciate there is not the same kind of track record. I'm not deterred by the higher risk ratings; tending to only take smaller stakes in the unsecured loans and only lend to companies whose current liabilities vs. current assets are not too different in the order of magnitude the former has over the latter...
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 4, 2014 13:24:07 GMT
The borrower stated a specific purpose for the funds, which was to pay the costs of a number of engineers to be on site at a university for ten months, until payment was received for the work done.
As the funds will not now be used for the purpose specified to the lenders, are there legal grounds to demand repayment?
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Feb 4, 2014 13:28:22 GMT
It was a 40K B. I don't touch C/C- - too risky The facts/statistics do not support your position. Bs are (so far) by far the most risky, followed by As, Cs, A+s and C-s in that order, although there is actually very little SIGNIFICANT (to 5% confidence) difference. Closest to any 'significant difference' is that C-s are (almost) significantly LESS risky. Risk, as defined by me, is pounds lost per pound invested per year (or 'looking likely to be lost', with Zombie lates). You might as well take the 14% on a C- as faff about with the 6% on an A+ as far as I can tell.
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Feb 4, 2014 13:49:11 GMT
Today there is another Breath of Foul Air, an 'in liquidation' downgrade after one payment. After what seemed to me to be appalling slowness and lack of enthusiasm to take any action over the Breath of Foul Air, little expectation of anything much back from this one. I’ll probably be ostracised for saying it but this simply adds weight to the case for being a “flipper”
It’s just not worth the risk holding loans due to what appears to be sloppy due diligence by FC.
When I criticised FC’s due diligence on the old forum I was pilloried, however, I take no pleasure from saying this and it’s certainly not schadenfreude but the warning bells were ringing a long time ago and continue to do so.
|
|
|
|
Post by yorkshireman on Feb 4, 2014 14:25:01 GMT
Woohoo, I feel like one of the gang now  Oh, that means...boohoo  They must definitely have known this was on the cards, if the latest project falling through causes them to pop after 67 yrs of trading. Still, there's a guarantee in place so were ok, right? Trading for 67 years?
Of course they knew this was on the cards.
With regard to my earlier comment about FC’s due diligence:
QED.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 4, 2014 14:41:39 GMT
I’ll probably be ostracised for saying it but this simply adds weight to the case for being a “flipper” A before first payment flipper at that.
|
|
mikeb
Posts: 1,072
Likes: 472
|
Post by mikeb on Feb 4, 2014 19:58:52 GMT
So I wonder what they didn't tell FC when they applied. Non disclosure in the application is fraud isn't it? They must have known they were close to the edge, and if all had been revealed FC would not have passed the loan application ....... would they? (Ahem) Let's hope you're right about that -- I mean, a company collapsing so soon after taking a loan must look suspicious. And remember, (although some would prefer that this phrase never existed) If a borrower is discovered to have committed fraud in borrowing
through Funding Circle, Funding Circle will fully refund lenders for
amount lent to that borrower.
So pray that it is found fraudulent. It's the best chance you've got of any recoveries. If, of course, FC make good on that. forum.fundingcircle.com/showthread.php?9943-Improved-communication-on-defaults/page3
|
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Feb 17, 2014 13:43:51 GMT
My outstanding to 4381 dropped today, so payment made. I might just cross my fingers on this one, to help it along.
|
|
