|
|
Post by chris on Apr 19, 2016 9:59:04 GMT
Our record with bridging loans has not been where we wanted it to be, skewed by one batch of difficult loans from a single broker we don't work with any more. That was the original batch of 6 month bridging loans. Exclude those and our track record has been very good. SS's home page stats suggest ~£23m has been repaid thus far but a good portion of that (over 50% if my casual observance of the platform and dodgy memory is correct) have been on platform refinances where the borrower hasn't repaid any capital. Yes, you can drop that figure by just under half. I make it 11.8m repaid on terminated PBL (21.8m on site) which excludes rollovers & non-drawdowns (SS includes the later) plus about £1m on boats - so 12.8m. I make AC to have repaid £17.4m on terminated loans. SS have repaid c45 loans (23 PBL & 20-25 boats), AC c40. (usual exclusions) Take your point on bad apples, though most bridging loans have required some form of extension/rolled over but ISTM that is to be expected. I would argue the difference is that many of our loans do not have interest withheld up front, and many are amortising, so you have earlier indication of inability to repay.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Apr 19, 2016 10:06:18 GMT
From what I remember of it (without trawling through any stats) AC have had a fair few loans which they have re-financed themselves. Loan monitoring isn't exactly AC's strong suit either, although to be fair there do seem to have been improvements over the last six months or so.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Apr 19, 2016 13:11:37 GMT
From what I remember of it (without trawling through any stats) AC have had a fair few loans which they have re-financed themselves. Loan monitoring isn't exactly AC's strong suit either, although to be fair there do seem to have been improvements over the last six months or so. Two loans have been flagged in the system as refinancing another totalling £2.8m between them, but there may have been soft refinancing of other loans. Those two cases were explicit refinancing of those loans which allowed for rollovers of lenders from one to the next without having to deposit new funds. In total a little over £33m of loans have been repaid, with the amortising loans having some capital repayments on top of that.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330 
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 19, 2016 14:08:34 GMT
From what I remember of it (without trawling through any stats) AC have had a fair few loans which they have re-financed themselves. Loan monitoring isn't exactly AC's strong suit either, although to be fair there do seem to have been improvements over the last six months or so. Two loans have been flagged in the system as refinancing another totalling £2.8m between them, but there may have been soft refinancing of other loans. Those two cases were explicit refinancing of those loans which allowed for rollovers of lenders from one to the next without having to deposit new funds. In total a little over £33m of loans have been repaid, with the amortising loans having some capital repayments on top of that. Slightly misleading as that figure includes all the bridging loan extensions which AIUI were migrated to a new loan but not actually repaid so that knocks about £10m off. I confess I was slightly disingenuos with my earlier figures as I missed a 3m+ WT loan which I hadnt realised wasnt a system extension. Soft refinancing is actually the same for both platforms as the rollover/morphs on SS which were excluded were technically all new loans, which borrowers could opt not to roll.
|
|
|
|
Post by chris on Apr 19, 2016 14:16:03 GMT
Two loans have been flagged in the system as refinancing another totalling £2.8m between them, but there may have been soft refinancing of other loans. Those two cases were explicit refinancing of those loans which allowed for rollovers of lenders from one to the next without having to deposit new funds. In total a little over £33m of loans have been repaid, with the amortising loans having some capital repayments on top of that. Slightly misleading as that figure includes all the bridging loan extensions which AIUI were migrated to a new loan but not actually repaid so that knocks about £10m off. I confess I was slightly disingenuos with my earlier figures as I missed a 3m+ WT loan which I hadnt realised wasnt a system extension. Soft refinancing is actually the same for both platforms as the rollover/morphs on SS which were excluded were technically all new loans, which borrowers could opt not to roll. I don't have a system function where I can look up a loan that wasn't explicitly rolled, hence stating what the figure represented. Would give the figure if I could. It's still not a like for like comparison though as loans like that WT have been making repayments during their term as opposed to interest being held up front. I'd like to think we're also a lot more transparent in what is happening behind the scenes.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Apr 19, 2016 14:19:04 GMT
I'd like to think we're also a lot more transparent in what is happening behind the scenes. There's no question in my mind on that subject. I really do appreciate AC's transparency.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 19, 2016 14:29:06 GMT
Slightly misleading as that figure includes all the bridging loan extensions which AIUI were migrated to a new loan but not actually repaid so that knocks about £10m off. I confess I was slightly disingenuos with my earlier figures as I missed a 3m+ WT loan which I hadnt realised wasnt a system extension. Soft refinancing is actually the same for both platforms as the rollover/morphs on SS which were excluded were technically all new loans, which borrowers could opt not to roll. I don't have a system function where I can look up a loan that wasn't explicitly rolled, hence stating what the figure represented. Would give the figure if I could. It's still not a like for like comparison though as loans like that WT have been making repayments during their term as opposed to interest being held up front. I'd like to think we're also a lot more transparent in what is happening behind the scenes. Ok, your usual robust defence of AC. The second point I freely concede and did actually intend to include it but got distracted. I was amused at this bit of understatement on todays update on #181 much work is undertaken in the Furness and Cumbria area, which encountered a particularly wet winter  and the need on #39 to explain in the light of a lender mistype of evicted that the borrower hadnt been 'evacuated' Keep it up. 
|
|
lobster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 636
Likes: 467
|
Post by lobster on Apr 22, 2016 9:32:39 GMT
All of a sudden yesterday (21st April) a whole load became available on the SM. Looks like a number of attempted sales of between 20k and 30k as far as I can see.
Does anyone know if this is likely to be underwriters doing the selling, or perhaps a "normal" AC account holder ? Just seems like a lot to hit the SM all at once ??
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 22, 2016 11:01:48 GMT
All of a sudden yesterday (21st April) a whole load became available on the SM. Looks like a number of attempted sales of between 20k and 30k as far as I can see. Does anyone know if this is likely to be underwriters doing the selling, or perhaps a "normal" AC account holder ? Just seems like a lot to hit the SM all at once ??
At a guess I'd say underwriter (singular) - QAA.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Apr 22, 2016 11:15:17 GMT
All of a sudden yesterday (21st April) a whole load became available on the SM. Looks like a number of attempted sales of between 20k and 30k as far as I can see. Does anyone know if this is likely to be underwriters doing the selling, or perhaps a "normal" AC account holder ? Just seems like a lot to hit the SM all at once ?? Not Sure. Looks as though the QAA size has increased about 200k since yesterday, there were no new loans released yesterday, and nothing imminently awaiting underwriting. I notice 3 loans have exactly £25k available.
|
|
|
|
Post by integrating on Apr 22, 2016 11:17:11 GMT
All of a sudden yesterday (21st April) a whole load became available on the SM. Looks like a number of attempted sales of between 20k and 30k as far as I can see. Does anyone know if this is likely to be underwriters doing the selling, or perhaps a "normal" AC account holder ? Just seems like a lot to hit the SM all at once ??
At a guess I'd say underwriter (singular) - QAA.
I noticed this too - but it doesn't seem to be behaving normally... I've a buy order in on loan 258 which has been there for over 4 hours now, concurrently with the units for sale. I've not bought any units and the total number on sale hasn't reduced. Any thoughts? Cheers
|
|
lobster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 636
Likes: 467
|
Post by lobster on Apr 22, 2016 11:25:03 GMT
At a guess I'd say underwriter (singular) - QAA.
I noticed this too - but it doesn't seem to be behaving normally... I've a buy order in on loan 258 which has been there for over 4 hours now, concurrently with the units for sale. I've not bought any units and the total number on sale hasn't reduced. Any thoughts? Cheers Sound strange to say the least ?? At the risk of asking the obvious, the funds are definitely in your MLIA account as opposed to just in your cash account ?
|
|
brad
Posts: 16
Likes: 7
|
Post by brad on Apr 22, 2016 11:27:18 GMT
Me too. Since yesterday,my buy orders have not been actioned, even though the SM reports that there are units available. Something is obviously not working correctly.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 22, 2016 11:30:21 GMT
Flagging this for chris 's attention - I PM'd him details of a similar anomaly a couple of days ago, but my funds were snaffled by another loan shortly thereafter. |
|
|
|
Post by chris on Apr 22, 2016 11:44:51 GMT
Yup on my desk. Still working through a couple of minor issues from the hosting migration to do with some of the behind the scenes code. Will get to this afterwards. I suspect it's a display issue with the aftermarket showing loan units as being for sale that shouldn't be rather than the market itself being stuck, but will clarify and fix as soon as I can.
|
|
and the need on #39 to explain in the light of a lender mistype of evicted that the borrower hadnt been 'evacuated' Keep it up. 
