elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jul 26, 2017 15:12:48 GMT
I've recently had defaults on highly liquid loans with months to run on two of your newer, favourite platforms; I wouldn't take it for granted that retained interest will always be your saviour  |
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322 
Likes: 1,576
|
PBL066
Jul 26, 2017 15:48:48 GMT
Post by GeorgeT on Jul 26, 2017 15:48:48 GMT
I've recently had defaults on highly liquid loans with months to run on two of your newer, favourite platforms; I wouldn't take it for granted that retained interest will always be your saviour Ah yes, but my comments on the LY forum are related solely to LY - which of course has it's own unique and unusual defaults policy. Retained interest is my saviour on LY (although I hope not to need one as I'm on a slow exit with an ETA of Dec 2017). But I can't rely on interest on MT or COL because I have a lot more invested on those platforms than interest I have received therefrom. In a sense I'm at greater risk on those others but I'm finding the new loan quality over there and higher rates too appetizing to ignore.
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
PBL066
Jul 26, 2017 15:59:04 GMT
Post by GeorgeT on Jul 26, 2017 15:59:04 GMT
Defaults can occur anytime during the loan - some investors don't seem to realise that; a safe loan is not any loan with a big term number attached to it <snip> I have a feeling some investors who employ a certain "strategy" may get a rude awakening In the last 4 years, over 20 loans have defaulted on the SS/LY platform. Every single one had gone into negative days. Not a single loan has ever defaulted while in +days remaining term. While the LY default policy does allow them a little bit of wriggle room, it's a proven historical fact that a loan with a long unexpired term is considerably lower risk than one without - regardless of who the borrower is, whether the valuation was accurate etc. The proven, riskiest strategy is holding to term on the basis of DD and hoping for the best. In my opinion DD may be giving some people a false comfort blanket. The property market can crash quite suddenly - and will again at some point. All the DD in the world won't insulate anyone from that. Remain agile and liquid is my advice.
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
PBL066
Jul 26, 2017 18:15:33 GMT
Post by GeorgeT on Jul 26, 2017 18:15:33 GMT
In the last 4 years, over 20 loans have defaulted on the SS/LY platform. Every single one had gone into negative days. Not a single loan has ever defaulted while in +days remaining term. While the LY default policy does allow them a little bit of wriggle room, it's a proven historical fact that a loan with a long unexpired term is considerably lower risk than one without - regardless of who the borrower is, whether the valuation was accurate etc. It's nothing to with "historical fact" - LY are going through the procedure to get Full FCA Approval and to get that they have had to (and continue to have to) make some changes, such as IA (and removal of SBL, which was removed likely due to the FCA). One of these changes is to indicate a defaulted loans as and when they actually default - LY internal procedure will default loans when they see that repayment (not recovery) is unlikely, and they will have to indicate that on the platform (along with pausing the SM) Do remember - up until fairly recently, there was no default "procedure" on the platform (i.e. negative 180days), and all interest was paid on all loans regardless of term (apart from the GC - and let's remember that the GC only defaulted on the platform because the Administrators were appointed - nothing to do with term, and can occur during any stage of the loan) Now surely you agree that LY should be upfront with investors when a loan defaults? I rather feel as though you like to pick a fight with me and will argue that black is white if it enables you to challenge me. What has happened in the last 4+ years on SS/LY, and the last 3+ years of my investing, is a matter of historical fact. You can't dispute history. It's all about having the right strategy for the right era. And history proves I did! It wasn't by some fluke chance that I never ended up having a penny invested in any of the 20+ defaulted loans! But, anyway, I'm glad you are now adopting the GeorgeT investment strategy. I note you have stated you are selling your LY loan parts early because of risk concerns. So you are doing exactly what I do - while at the same time trying to argue my strategy is wrong. So you have started arguing against yourself!? When I have advocated selling out early to avoid risk you have derided my approach and said I should do, and rely on, DD and be prepared to hold to term end. So I'm a bit surprised because you've spent the last year telling us that your big on DD approach protects you from risk. Now your actions prove you don't have as much confidence in your strategy as you claim and you don't really believe it. Perhaps a case of do as I say, not as I do? You were challenging me long before the 1/8/17 policy was announced. But now you try to suggest I'm wrong because of changes that come into effect on 1/8. I'll assume what you are doing is a tacit acceptance that my strategy was the best one for risk reduction, all along. But as you say, the landscape is chaging again next week, and I'm convinced my flexible and liquid position is robust and low risk. I'm staying another 5 or 6 months because I invested in all the recent new 365 day, 12%ers that you suggested to avoid on DD grounds (PBL178, PBL179, DFL027, DFL028, DFL029) and they are too good to sell at the moment. They sell in seconds. How about looking at it this way - the market determines supply and demand. A 12% loan with 300+ days to run sells in seconds. A 12% loan with 30 days to run will take much much longer to sell out of, if it's possible at all. Why is there so much more demand for long dated loans than short dated loans.... It's because they are much lower risk investments. That's a fact that most investors recognise. It's not some random coincidence. You can try and deny that but it's really a hollow argument. 330 days to run, or 50 days to run but the DD looks great. I know which loan people will want. The market doesn't lie. Anyway, good luck with your selling out and I hope you achieve full exit with all capital and interest intact. As I said, I expect to be following you out of the door later in the year and I hope you still post here or I will miss our friendly duels and good natured P2P flavoured banter 
|
|
pom
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,922 
Likes: 1,244
|
Post by pom on Jul 26, 2017 20:16:13 GMT
Yawn... get a room guys!
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
PBL066
Jul 26, 2017 20:21:12 GMT
Post by GeorgeT on Jul 26, 2017 20:21:12 GMT
You have suffered a malfunction - you have written a long and pointless post that is in no way relevant to the subject in my post  It was entirely relevant and addressing your suggestion that the success of my strategy to date has nothing to do with historical fact when it is a historical fact that my strategy was a successful one for the circumstances of the time and resulted in me avoiding all 20 defaulted loans by selling out early. Also it was far from pointless for me to mention that you have written several times on here recently that you are selling out early - when you have repeatedly criticised me for doing the exact same thing as you.Defaults can and will occur - if (or when) they occur during term then the SM will likely be paused in line with the requests from the FCA Of course defaults can occur - 20+ already have. I made reference to that. I also made the more important point that the LY defaults policy is changing with effect from 1 Aug 2017, which changes the circumstances in which a loan may default. That is in the future. I have never written about the future or proposed a strategy for the future. None of us even knew about the 1 Aug changes until a short while ago. You are trying to conflate the previous / existing defaults policy with the future, FCA compliant defaults policy. They are totally different and I also made it clear that I am winding down my LY portfolio with a view to exit by the end of the year. I'm not picking a fight with you; in fact, my OP didn't even quote you (it was in reply elliotn ). You are the one who makes it a hobby to insult those who bother to do DD along with digs aimed directly at me.
I think you have suffered a malfunction here. Your post, 2 above, directly quoted me and responded to what I wrote. Otherwise I would not have replied. It is here - p2pindependentforum.com/post/203262/thread
And I have never insulted anybody on here or changed somebody's post to 'pointless' in a quotation. I don't ever insult people, let alone make it a hobby. I would have been, quite rightly, banned if that were the case. Everybody is entitled to their opinion and to adopt their own approach. There is no right or wrong way, or right or wrong strategy. If there was, everybody in the investment world would use the right way and it would be an ever growing tower of unstoppable success for everybody. A world where everyone was a winner, which is an impossibility. I think you should give more respect to the views of others who disagree with you and consider that, sometimes, they may be right and not consider the expression of an alternative point of view to be an insult.
I will leave it there.
* Text in blue written by GeorgeT.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jul 27, 2017 1:58:43 GMT
You have suffered a malfunction - you have written a long and pointless post that is in no way relevant to the subject in my post It was entirely relevant and addressing your suggestion that the success of my strategy to date has nothing to do with historical fact when it is a historical fact that my strategy was a successful one for the circumstances of the time and resulted in me avoiding all 20 defaulted loans by selling out early. Also it was far from pointless for me to mention that you have written several times on here recently that you are selling out early - when you have repeatedly criticised me for doing the exact same thing as you.Defaults can and will occur - if (or when) they occur during term then the SM will likely be paused in line with the requests from the FCA Of course defaults can occur - 20+ already have. I made reference to that. I also made the more important point that the LY defaults policy is changing with effect from 1 Aug 2017, which changes the circumstances in which a loan may default. That is in the future. I have never written about the future or proposed a strategy for the future. None of us even knew about the 1 Aug changes until a short while ago. You are trying to conflate the previous / existing defaults policy with the future, FCA compliant defaults policy. They are totally different and I also made it clear that I am winding down my LY portfolio with a view to exit by the end of the year. I'm not picking a fight with you; in fact, my OP didn't even quote you (it was in reply elliotn ). You are the one who makes it a hobby to insult those who bother to do DD along with digs aimed directly at me.
I think you have suffered a malfunction here. Your post, 2 above, directly quoted me and responded to what I wrote. Otherwise I would not have replied. It is here - p2pindependentforum.com/post/203262/thread
And I have never insulted anybody on here or changed somebody's post to 'pointless' in a quotation. I don't ever insult people, let alone make it a hobby. I would have been, quite rightly, banned if that were the case. Everybody is entitled to their opinion and to adopt their own approach. There is no right or wrong way, or right or wrong strategy. If there was, everybody in the investment world would use the right way and it would be an ever growing tower of unstoppable success for everybody. A world where everyone was a winner, which is an impossibility. I think you should give more respect to the views of others who disagree with you and consider that, sometimes, they may be right and not consider the expression of an alternative point of view to be an insult.
I will leave it there.
* Text in blue written by GeorgeT. Tbpf 'long and pointless' post could justifiably refer to the similarly waffly elliotn.
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 638
Likes: 659
|
Post by warn on Jul 27, 2017 13:51:52 GMT
Best news we've had all week!
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
PBL066
Jul 28, 2017 13:48:25 GMT
Post by r1200gs on Jul 28, 2017 13:48:25 GMT
From the weekly update: Some transparency - good!!! (And I'm so glad ozboy is 'on holiday' this week  ) That's a hell of a shortfall. What were the LTV? 60 percent was it? Some transparency is good, what it's shows is not so good. OZ! 
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Jul 28, 2017 20:27:53 GMT
I agree the numbers look bad from a valuation perspective but for balance I would make the following general points -
1. The valuations were done in 2015. A lot has changed since then. Brexit wasn't even a word, we had a proper government and the market was quite buoyant.
2. Assets always sell for knock down prices when sold under distressed / forced sale situations. There are extra risks in buying 'repo' type properties.
3. The Courts have decided there's a valuation margin of 10-15% for non-standard, non-residential properties. So the valuer has 10-15% to play with - even before the other factors are taken into account.
4. As far as I recall, SS didn't ask for forced sale valuations in these cases, only Market Values assuming normal conditions of sale. (I also recall SS's letters of instructioin were very vague back in 2015. Now they have a more thorough template). Contributory negligence by SS? The valuer can say he wasn't asked to provide distressed sale values .....
5. One factor that is usually used in defence of such claims is 'contributory negligence' by the claimant. How robust was SS's DD at that time, how clear were their instructions, did they analyse all the information properly and research the borrower properly. They will have to present a very solid case.
6. You can only claim for actual losses and the costs of bringing a claim are high and will require expert witnesses, a barrister etc. A lot of cost, risk and time involved.
For that bundle of reasons I'm not surprised LY is going down the PG route first.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Jul 30, 2017 20:13:35 GMT
I don't think we'll be hearing from ozboy anytime soon I hear he is having a well earned holiday... for about a week I'll be back. I AM back! And thoroughly refreshed .....................
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Jul 30, 2017 20:24:01 GMT
The size of mismatch between evaluation and market final value is astonishing. RICS Valuation: 1.700.000 (PBL66+PBL67) Sale proceedings: about 680.000 Now I would immediately put at use the new Lendy recovery lawyer to write to those fantastic RICS surveyors and ask what their professional cover is, as it looks to me as if they got the valuation wrong by 150%!!! This would be a much nicer lawsuit than with the 'borrower'.... At least the surveyors appreciate the value of of decent DD & PI insurance. From one of their own articles: I couldn't possibly comment......... ............ ................ 
|
|
|
|
PBL066
Nov 6, 2017 16:09:56 GMT
Post by da2279 on Nov 6, 2017 16:09:56 GMT
Latest from my support request on the accrual Interest and Bonus payments: -
"In regards to PBL066 and PBL067 - we continue with our recovery strategy to enforce the balance of the debt against the borrower and the guarantor.
.....
We are currently developing a new tab where partially repaid loans will appear, and updates will be included accordingly."
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
PBL066
Nov 7, 2017 4:03:55 GMT
Post by mikes1531 on Nov 7, 2017 4:03:55 GMT
We are currently developing a new tab where partially repaid loans will appear, and updates will be included accordingly. (The quote above originated from Lendy.) Will they also introduce a 'Suspended' tab at the same time?
|
|
)
