blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Aug 26, 2016 17:03:39 GMT
blender You can't get much more public than I did by going on TV and airing my and others views about FC and their handling of this case. (See above) As to suing FC that is another story but I could not find a decent lawyer prepared to take the case on, on a "no fix not fee basis". All said "far too complicated and very expensive" and would take years to get a result. It is true that the TV was very public, but when the FC person spoke to you it was done and could not be undone. I suspect that the purpose of the FC call was to find out what you would do in future and whether they could maintain their position. You don't need solicitors, just a multi-lender group with a media based campaign to press FC to consider this loan a suitable case for refunding. It's future bad publicity they do not like, especially when going through FCA approval. Back in May there was a thread on this board which was removed by the OP after pressure from FC, who wished to tell the lenders about the developments first - foolishly I thought they were going to refund it! Rather, they wished to discourage public comment. Notification from the mods was: 'I am just letting you know that at the request of the OP the entire thread "FC Guarantor Jailed for 5 Years for VAT Fraud" together with your posts have been removed from the forum. Apparently, FC have requested that this is not discussed publicy until an update is provided to all lenders. Thanks for your understanding on this.'
|
|
merlin
Minor shareholder in Assetz and many other companies.
Posts: 902 
Likes: 302
|
Post by merlin on Aug 26, 2016 18:45:41 GMT
blender to be able to go to law successfully I was told I would have to get a majority of lenders to agree. Sounds simple doesn't it? However the bulk of lender do not wish to put their heads above the parapet - what's new. Then when you say majority how will you define that by monetary value or number or lenders? When you have been able to answer that there are another thousand or more answer you will need to reply to, all for a few hundred quid. As far as I am concerned I have better things to do with my life. When I first spoke on the phone to one of the bosses of FC I asked if he was recording the conversation I never got a sensible reply so from then on I was doubly guarded and largely just listened to what he had to say. However it became very clear that FC knew an awful lot more about me than I guess they did of any of their borrowers. So they can do their homework when they think its in their interest to do so. Perhaps you get the idea now of why FC and many other P2P providers are so arrogant.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Aug 26, 2016 20:22:41 GMT
Merlin, I don't think the solicitor wanted the job on those terms.
FC had done their homework because there was £100k and a precedent at stake, and they would wish to know if you were friendly with other interests. They wanted to put you back in your box, imo.
|
|
merlin
Minor shareholder in Assetz and many other companies.
Posts: 902
Likes: 302
|
Post by merlin on Aug 26, 2016 20:59:21 GMT
blender I am fortunate enough to have a daughter who is a very successful High Court barrister to call on. So I do not have to depend upon a two bit solicitor for advice. I had consulted her before getting involved with "Despatches". She told me that whilst we had a very strong moral case for recompense from FC proving they were negligent, reckless or whatever in the High Court would be exceedingly difficult. Unfortunately the High Court does not make judgements on moral arguments alone. IMHO ultimately if P2P is to be properly policed we need an FCA with real teeth. So writing top them using Crappy Scrappy and FC as an example of bad practice may prove useful.
|
|
|
|
Post by bonfemme on Aug 27, 2016 6:12:48 GMT
blender to be able to go to law successfully I was told I would have to get a majority of lenders to agree. Sounds simple doesn't it? However the bulk of lender do not wish to put their heads above the parapet - what's new. Then when you say majority how will you define that by monetary value or number or lenders? When you have been able to answer that there are another thousand or more answer you will need to reply to, all for a few hundred quid. As far as I am concerned I have better things to do with my life. I agree with both viewpoints. Life is too short and you need to move on. But, is this letting FC off the hook too easily? Blender's suggestion of a multi-lender group campaign prompted me to read through the list of bidders and I recognise quite a few names from this forum. There must be many more who bid under different names (like me). I for one would be very happy to put my head above the parapet.
|
|
merlin
Minor shareholder in Assetz and many other companies.
Posts: 902
Likes: 302
|
Post by merlin on Aug 27, 2016 7:32:19 GMT
blender to be able to go to law successfully I was told I would have to get a majority of lenders to agree. Sounds simple doesn't it? However the bulk of lender do not wish to put their heads above the parapet - what's new. Then when you say majority how will you define that by monetary value or number or lenders? When you have been able to answer that there are another thousand or more answer you will need to reply to, all for a few hundred quid. As far as I am concerned I have better things to do with my life. I agree with both viewpoints. Life is too short and you need to move on. But, is this letting FC off the hook too easily? Blender's suggestion of a multi-lender group campaign prompted me to read through the list of bidders and I recognise quite a few names from this forum. There must be many more who bid under different names (like me). I for one would be very happy to put my head above the parapet. Thanks for your thoughts. There was a time when I was much younger when I would have fought FC tooth and nail over the issues surrounding this loan. Unfortunately as I now rapidly approach my ninth decade I feel I must leave to others to take up the cause if They feel fit. I think I gave it my best shot by going on the tele and at least exposing the case to the wider public. This must have had some effect otherwise why would a principal of FC take the time and risk of contacting me. But as my daughter has pointed out there is a wide gulf between the law and morality and FC seem to very much play on this. Yes we could irritate FC and cause them some concern but I think the press would now see this as a done job. Again thanks for your kind thoughts.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Aug 27, 2016 8:28:30 GMT
You have clearly done a service to lenders already, merlin, and I agree that the legal route would be most unwise. The more productive route, and inexpensive, would be for a group of lender/creditors on this loan to be formed and to express dis-satisfaction to FC, claim that this is a case for reimbursement and require a refund of all lender losses. Given that this would be unsuccessful there would need to be a longer-term escalation plan of public embarrassment. But I am not a lender on this loan, and not wishing to be a complete stirrer, will now exit and leave to the lenders to follow up or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Aug 27, 2016 13:58:44 GMT
blender I am fortunate enough to have a daughter who is a very successful High Court barrister to call on. So I do not have to depend upon a two bit solicitor for advice. I had consulted her before getting involved with "Despatches". She told me that whilst we had a very strong moral case for recompense from FC proving they were negligent, reckless or whatever in the High Court would be exceedingly difficult. Unfortunately the High Court does not make judgements on moral arguments alone. IMHO ultimately if P2P is to be properly policed we need an FCA with real teeth. So writing top them using Crappy Scrappy and FC as an example of bad practice may prove useful. /mod hat off I was a lender in this, and I'd have no problem sticking my head up, but for the <£100 I ventured I am reluctant to invest a lot of time .. I just chalked it up to experience, down-checked FC significantly (one of many black marks they have now collected .. apart from 'low loan origination' they have practically a full set!) and moved on. As with many loans it was possible to tell this one was a bad 'un within a month or two of origination (beaten only by the guy who said 'I don't need to answer questions now the loan is fully funded', who turned out to be an equally big crook) .. at least it was possible for anyone even vaguely looking at the ball, which ruled out FC of course. Their philosophy is 'pile 'em high, ship 'em out, try to stay under the %losses guideline' which they do quite well. Caveat Lender. 8>.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 27, 2016 14:17:37 GMT
I have to remind myself that Crappy Scrappy is not my biggest loss. The biggest two by a very long way are on AC (plumber - only two repayments, and lens maker) where so called security has fallen far short when it comes to defaults.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Aug 27, 2016 16:07:25 GMT
If we're having a moan can I join in?
I started on FC with £20 a loan for the first hundred or so loans. Our ferrous friend was one of my first ventures in the £40 bracket (£39.53 outstanding). Like most others I am just writing it off, although it is tempting to protest outside FC HQ with some appropriately worded banners (crappy scrappy, we're not happy perhaps?).
I finished with FC shortly thereafter. At least the plumber repaid 50%.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Aug 28, 2016 10:30:30 GMT
But as my daughter has pointed out there is a wide gulf between the law and morality And this is why I have contempt for the law and those who make their living from interpreting and exploiting it. It started with observations as a teenager and experience over the following 6 decades has reinforced that viewpoint. I am sure there must be some good in it somewhere but I have never come across it - just rogues, scoundrels, scammers, liars, thieves, all trying to make a quick buck at the expense of the meek, the ignorant or the uneducated whom I think the law should be protecting.
|
|
easylender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 249
Likes: 225
|
Post by easylender on Aug 28, 2016 10:36:46 GMT
I too lost a few quid on loan 3032, but being well diversified have more than made up for it elsewhere and so financially it is of little consequence to me. The same should be true for all other lenders involved, and if not then something was seriously wrong with your understanding of P2P lending.
Of course what hurts is to be taken in by such a blatant con. I hope that FC have learned lessons from this, and I hope that we lenders do too. I remember the loan passing my own dd checks at the time, but feeling uneasy about it. That uneasiness was due to "scrap metal dealer", anonymous borrower through a third party, and a less than credible reason for borrowing. I now avoid anonymous borrowers and treat borrowers introduced by third parties with extra caution. It would be interesting to hear how other lenders have improved their dd as a consequence of this one.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Aug 28, 2016 10:49:11 GMT
Yes, at the time there was a cluster of failures locally and some of us avoided South Wales. I seem to remember a loan request for a proposal to build temporary houses, and a narrow gauge railway, for workers tunnelling into a mountain to capture a dragon, whose fire would melt scrap metal at less expense. But I may have mis-remembered, and have been watching The Hobbit on TV.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 28, 2016 11:42:17 GMT
FC has all the get-outs it needs to avoid any responsibility, even that of failing to realise it was asking us to lend to a business (group) which was involved in recent (at the time) criminal activity, openly documented on-line for google to unearth. That group of businesses continues to trade but FC's lawyers are unable to apply any of that to the PG of the borrower. My second biggest gripe after FC's initial incompetence (my financial loss being insignificant) is the crass stupidity of the law, in which the word "guarantee" does not mean guarantee, yet all loan platforms present it as though it does. I'm sure we are all on the lookout for any attempt by the various Mr E characters to raise finance on any of the p2p platforms in the future. PS I apologise for naming a borrower, and assert that it is NOT connected to the worthy gentleman illustrated below.  Attachments:
|
|
