Shoreditch residential loan

I got an email earlier saying that it is repaying overnight tonight.

I agree with your points, but I am gradually adding more to LI as I like the look of most of the loans, not that many overrun, and I see no need for a SM.

LI do state that they may extend the loan if they feel the need to. As others have put I am quite happy with it and is currently my biggest p2p site having recently over taken SS.

The sites and offering are pretty different.

A lot of the LI loans are on assets that are currently making money. If you do a bit of DD you can usually easily find the owners/price etc of the property and what they paid for it etc. I feel a lot of the LI loans could probably get banks to lend them to them and I doubt what LI charge is proably that much more then banks charge.

If you look at FS for example fees interest etc is not taken into account until the loan completes so we as lenders are taking most of the risk, with a company with proven history I am happy to do that but not when it is Fred from down the road haivng a punt which most seem to be. If it works then great but if it does not we are left with an asset that probably is not worth what it says and a fair few only have planning in principle which is about as much use as a choclate fire guard.

Moving on to SS, look for a certain garden centre on there boards which suggests what there DD is like. However I do invest there and that was one loan I avoided like the plague. But looking forward SS seems to be going down the DFL which is all good from there point of view and the borrower but from us lenders not as good. When an asset goes from PBL to DFL we basically pay ourselfs the interest on the PBL and the new fees for the new loan as well as lend the money to complete the build. So the risk is pretty much all being taken by us, personally I prefer the borrower to have some incentive in case things go bad rather then just walking away and starting again somewhere else.


If you are looking for a higher rate then LI I would suggest the broadoak on MT as the loans look pretty good to begin with for the amount offered and with them having a first loss stake you know they are not going to be selling the rubbish that nobody else would list.

Also forgot to put that LI is usually first charge where a lot of the higher ones are generally second charge.

Is it correct that LendInvest isn't true P2P? From the FAQ page:
What is online marketplace lending?

Online marketplace lending is the practice of (i) lending money to individuals or businesses through online platforms and (ii) enabling investors to either lend directly to those borrowers or to invest in the loans to those borrowers. Borrowers are often able to gain access to funds quickly and at competitive rates of interest, making online marketplace lending an attractive alternative to traditional forms of finance. Investors are able to gain access to a market to which they may otherwise be unable to invest in.

So they call it a marketplace, and they say we lend to individuals or businesses.

I am reducing P2P and property loans in particular (at the current rates), but I am not reducing LI much. I will if your understanding of their business is correct (ie. it isn't true P2P).

EDIT (added from here) and crossed with archie

So after a bit more reading of their FAQ:-
"...An advantage of participating in this sort of investment, rather than lending directly to a borrower, is that you avoid taking on any obligations to the borrower or to the property, while at the same time being able to benefit from the returns. You have no direct contact with the borrower. Instead, our experienced team deals with the borrower for you, including all handling queries, repayments or – in rare instances – recoveries..."

So beechside would seem to be correct, which contradicts an email from their customer services "individuals and companies lending to other individuals and companies".

Can you comment lendinvest ?

I am 99% sure that we lend directly to Montello and, therefore, this is not "pure" P2P.

However, not everyone believes that pure P2P is advantageous.  An easy question is: "Will a pure P2P platform be as careful with their Due Diligence when there is little financial risk to the platform?".  Another way of putting it is that the "Lending to a platform" model means they have real skin in the game and are likely to be more careful than pure P2P, when it's not their own money.

Of course, the platform managers are not just interested in financial risk.  Reputational risk is clearly important as well and the pure P2P companies I have invested with still do an excellent job on their DD.

Just to be clear, I see both sides of the argument and the topic was widely debated when SS went to pure P2P.  You can find the arguments here.  Some were for and some were against.

It's not that I am fundamentally against the LI model, it's just that I have no say when I want to withdraw my money from an extended loan, as happened twice with the Shoreditch case.  Liquidity is important to me and I tend to favour monthly interest payments (thank you LI) and an option to bow out from an extension (as can happen with FS).

Having said that, the potential for a platform to fail because of a single, large loan going bad is far worse and that is why the majority tend to favour pure P2P.