Sr. Lobo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 63
Likes: 17
|
Post by Sr. Lobo on Aug 26, 2016 19:21:20 GMT
marthaskirta there is nothing you can say to restore my confidence, once cheated including retroactive change contracts conditions. I just expect to recover the rest of my money or not lose so much while bondora says I'm winning a lot. Feel free to explain whatever you want, not in a chat, but in this forum so everybody can see bondora's reasons
|
|
|
Post by gmaxkenny on Aug 26, 2016 19:55:32 GMT
Question: How do you make a small fortune with Bondora?
Answer: You invest a large fortune with them.
Well thats what I did.
|
|
|
Post by kissmyjazz on Aug 27, 2016 0:01:18 GMT
Martha, how can you say something like that to the investors and expect them to take Bondora seriously. Bondora willingly pisses away 2/3 of the investors' money to some parasitic DCA while there is perfectly established and much cheaper system for debt recovery called courts. The legal system might be slower, but I least I would be confident that Bondora has signed a valid contract with a real person and the debts of that person are legally recorded and pursued by all legal means necessary. If Bondora refuses to go to the court first with every debtor then I can only conclude that either Bondora is not sure in the validity of the contract or Bondora has simply failed its role as a responsible custodian of investors' funds. Either way Bondora opens itself up to litigation from the investors' side. I hope such litigation is forthcoming.
|
|
|
Post by oktaeder on Aug 27, 2016 6:29:15 GMT
So please answer the following questions @martha 1. Are this fees indeed going to he bailiff? 2. Why have there been no fees until April? 3. Does bondora mix up all the repayments via 3rd party and pays fees to the DCA or is there a fee for every single loan that is paid by the fees for this very loan?
|
|
|
Post by rahafoorum on Aug 27, 2016 11:02:59 GMT
Hello again, Taavi. Money flow was exactly as I described in my previous post. We had and have different kind of agreement which our third party service providers and also for the above-mentioned time period. In terms of the user villuke - this is one of the exceptions that I explained in my previous blog post. The write-off for the previous transfers (starting from April) was made from the last payment (there was no payments after we implemented the system). Sorry for the confusion. Write-offs are done from all the loans that are paid back through the third-parties - in this case through bailiff. We have explained it in details in our blog posts. Thanks. Unfortunately I found no reference in the previous post on where the money came from that was paid to investors. In essence, if a payment of €100 is made to DCA, DCA then forwards that €100 - €30 their fees = €70 to Bondora and investors subsequently receive €100, then €30 is missing somewhere. Bondora paid that €30 from its own pocket? About villuke, which blog post? Can you share the direct link please, since I don't believe I've seen it. Nor do I understand why should there suddenly be write-offs for this loan's payments starting since April where all schedule and everything was agreed upon 3 years ago and all payments have been on schedule. In addition, if you now made write-off for 4 (?) months, then it also wrote off some principal. Had the write-off been done month-by-month, it would have only been interest. In short, this "method" also increased taxable income by the amount of principal written off. Not very much in this case, but still not normal under any circumstances in finances.
|
|
jo
Member of DD Central
dead
Posts: 741
Likes: 498
|
Post by jo on Aug 27, 2016 16:36:11 GMT
I've managed to withdraw 96% of my original stake - hope to have the balance by year-end.
Once I'm playing with 'house' money only, I probably won't bother to look at it again for 5 years.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,618
Likes: 6,432
|
Post by registerme on Aug 27, 2016 18:57:25 GMT
A reminder to all that though you are free to criticise any any platform you need to be polite and constructive whilst doing so.
RM
|
|
carlos
I'm short Bondora and long p2p.
Posts: 104
Likes: 21
|
Post by carlos on Aug 28, 2016 12:55:18 GMT
A reminder to all that though you are free to criticise any any platform you need to be polite and constructive whilst doing so.
RM Enough of your comments! This heated atmosphere is mainly due to decision of independent forum admins to allow Bondora's representative to make PR here! I think that you are probably missing the whole story.. THEY have deleted THEIR OWN forum a banished whole community - which have logically moved here. If we are not welcomed here, just let us know - by any means I don't want to post on board where I'm unwanted..! And there are other forums about P2P... Please answer this question: Is this board here to allow discussion of p2p users or for selling us Bondora products?
|
|
carlos
I'm short Bondora and long p2p.
Posts: 104
Likes: 21
|
Post by carlos on Aug 28, 2016 12:58:57 GMT
A reminder to all that though you are free to criticise any any platform you need to be polite and constructive whilst doing so.
RM I CAN'T RECOMMEND BONDORA TO ANYBODY AS THEY ******* ON US, **** TO US, TOOK OUR MONEY AND SPLIT THEM WITH SOME DCA's... BROKE ALL THE AGREEMENTS AND OWN RULES... WITHOUT OUR CONSENT! Is this polite and constructive enough?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,618
Likes: 6,432
|
Post by registerme on Aug 28, 2016 14:15:48 GMT
This forum is for the entire P2P community, which includes both lenders and platforms (no reason for borrowers not to join the party either). It is free, earns no revenue, and is staffed by volunteers. The forum rules are simple. Be polite, be constructive, and think very carefully before posting anything that might be considered defamatory or libellous, particularly if you provide no supporting evidence.
Polite, constructive commentary about and criticism of platforms is fine, indeed, it's welcomed. Simply throwing mud around is not.
Hopefully the above will be adhered to, and this thread can continue on its merry journey. There has been some interesting and useful discussion, it would be a shame to have to lock it.
RM
|
|
|
Post by coolrunning on Aug 29, 2016 7:43:37 GMT
Personally I welcome Bondora's presence (marthaskirta) here.
Bondora have a lot of explaining to do. OK, they are not very good at explaining but even a little helps.
A debate of sorts, with 2 sides engaged, is better than just a long list of unanswered complaints.
|
|
JamesFrance
Member of DD Central
Port Grimaud 1974
Posts: 1,323
Likes: 897
|
Post by JamesFrance on Aug 29, 2016 9:28:26 GMT
There was a time when many of us posted on the Bondora forum and even here with positive comments and suggestions, pointing out things which we felt would discourage investors from joining, with the intention of helping Bondora to attract investment. Partel used to explain things and address investor concerns directly. Unfortunately Bondora chose to stop posting on the forums with the result that discussion became increasingly negative as investors disagreed with many of the frequent changes made to the investment process. Because Bondora lost the trust of many of us they could hardly continue with their forum when it became obvious that only unanswered complaints were being discussed. They have the same problem here and personally I welcome marthaskirta trying to explain things and joining in the discussions, although it will obviously be difficult to change the negative opinions being posted on the forum.
|
|
yacop
Posts: 68
Likes: 42
|
Post by yacop on Aug 29, 2016 9:29:34 GMT
It looks kind of odd/strange closing their own forum as could not support or administer it. But then - after closing it - to appear in this forum with a representative.
Nevermind, it is what it is. This is just one (small) issue with Bondora that wonders me.
I support that Martha is present here in the forum or on facebook and keeps replying. It helps a little.
Bondora has to explain a lot - often to be done several times on the same subject as either Bondora changed the rules again or the subject is so complex that even very active investors have a hard time understanding what Bondora does. Join that with a my lack of trust in Bondora and it creates a perfect reason for being upset.
|
|
|
Post by marthaskirta on Aug 29, 2016 12:00:50 GMT
Hello! There is a lot of questions. I'll try to answer these in one go. Since I have been answering in FB group already some time now, I add relevant links to FB earlier Q&A sessions also if you may want to take a look. In July I published the % of the write-offs done from the delinquents portfolio where write offs have occurred in FB. The % was then on average over the all markets 11,2%. Based on the data as of 28.08.2016 the write-offs done are as follows: Average Write-Off % 13.1% Average Write-Off %, Estonia 13,2% Average Write-Off %, Spain 13,5% Average Write-Off %, Finland 12,4% Average Write-Off %, Slovakia 17,9% I have uploaded the full calculations including the recovered amounts and write off amount to here: drive.google.com/open?id=0B2Ekj11S8tYJYzBuSDZhRS1yYUEThe % of such write offs are subject to change as we have explained several times in different channels and in our blog (please see related blog post: www.bondora.com/blog/category/collection-and-recovery/). Currently the increase is related to the high amount of court cases filed in August as explained in our blog post: www.bondora.com/blog/performance-recovery-process-august-2016/. Everything that is recovered from the debtor (including any of the court fees, state fees etc and DCA fees that we are able to legally charge to the borrower) will reduce the overall % of the write-off but please keep in mind that it takes time to recover the amount. What are the write-offs Write-offs are done on the gross funds recovered from the delinquent loans – no matter of the stage of the specific loans. Write-off reduces the claim you have against the borrower. These write-off consist of success fees paid to DCA, state fees, court fees, lawyers fees in connection to collection. Write-offs are done on the delinquent portfolio level to keep the write-offs as low as possible. If there is no recovery the write-offs are not done. In general – write-offs are done at the same time when the payment is made to your Bondora account. Since the system was implemented at the end of June, there are some exceptions as follows: 1) Write-offs done before implementing the system and starting as of April 2016 are in some cases inserted in one entry whilst the debtor has made several payments. Write-off % is calculated on the several payments made during this period, hence this one write-off appears to be larger than usual; 2) Write-offs done with the next actual payment. The system was not able to write-off the debt for older payments if during the day we did the write-offs for the older payments the specific borrower was not in debt anymore and the write-off was scheduled with the next payment. Now if the borrower made the payment the write-off was calculated based on several repayments but shown only with the latest payment, hence write-off appears to be larger than usual. These are exceptional cases and most of these you have brought out in here also. In general – write-offs are done together with the payment. Please see full description of the collection process in here: www.bondora.com/blog/bondoras-servicing-collection-recovery-process/Why from the investors not from the borrowers? I copied this from my earlier respond. The collection fees that we or any other lender, agency, court, can charge a borrower are capped by law – regardless if it was written other way around in the loan agreements. Before the legal structure change in 2015 the loan agreements were signed directly between you and borrower. These loan agreements did say that the collection fees will be paid by the borrower. Unfortunately due to the change in legislation it is not legally possible to enforce this clause in full. In addition to this capped amount the legislation prohibited the use of arbitration courts in matters related to consumers, which was the quickest and cheapest way to collect the debt. We thereafter have developed a process that would be as effective as it was before the changes, but it is more expensive than the previous process that we can’t use anymore. We are using local agencies and lawyers in each of our markets, including Slovakia, and they are responsible for enforcing our cases. Without having a local representative the cases tended to get unnoticed for some period of time. We do charge the borrower in the amount that is legally permitted for the collection fees and therefore the deductions are correspondingly smaller. So the fees collected from the borrower reduce the write-off and increase your cash flow. Validity of the agreements before 2015 This section is copied from one of my previous post. In terms of the validity of such change for the agreements signed before the change in legal structure in 2015, the contractual relationship between you and Bondora was regulated by our Terms of Use. Since the change of the legal structure in addition to Terms of Use the contractual relationship between us is regulated by the Assignment Agreement. Both the Terms of Use and the Assignment Agreement allow us to make the changes in the processes we apply for collection and it is valid also for the agreements signed before such process change. I understand that you do not like changes, but due to different reasons, in our case changes in legislation or effectiveness in processes for example, require companies to change their previous processes and terms that you were already familiar with. Links to our relevant blog posts and threads www.bondora.com/blog/bondoras-servicing-collection-recovery-process/, www.bondora.com/blog/performance-recovery-process-august-2016/, www.bondora.com/blog/reporting-of-collection-and-recovery-write-offs/, www.bondora.com/blog/collection-process-overview/, www.bondora.com/blog/follow-up-on-the-collection-process-overview-blogpost/ www.facebook.com/groups/191879057647930/permalink/606822286153603/www.facebook.com/groups/191879057647930/permalink/551625395006626/, www.facebook.com/groups/191879057647930/permalink/551160675053098/I hope this is helpful. Thank you. Kind regards Martha
|
|
|
Post by rahafoorum on Aug 30, 2016 8:03:31 GMT
I guess you mean that you notified investors about also taking fees on loans that defaulted years ago and have nothing to do with DCAs in this paragraph? Source: www.bondora.com/blog/bondoras-servicing-collection-recovery-process/You've got to be joking, right? (this is a rhetorical question, no need to answer) Even after picking out these specific sentences and actually knowing what to look for, it's still not clear. There's no way in hell, anyone could actually reasonably believe that this is notifying of these changes to the process. It seems the title of this thread is aptly worded after all, since this definitely was not the rules the DCA process was implemented with, nor were these the rules the loans defaulted and have been collected with for years and so on. The blog post lacked any explanation or reasoning, why it makes sense or is even legally sound to use old defaulted loans for subsidizing the DCA costs. Please share this explanation as well. Although, if you can't answer properly and it's going to be vague PR BS, then save both our time and don't reply. Let me guess what actually happened here: 1. Someone at the top got the brilliant idea of collecting fees from all the loans irregardless of the process used. 2. The thing was implemented, ignoring the actual fact that this is directly taking money from one investor to subsidize some inefficient services that they're not using nor benefiting from. 3. I guess the people responsible for making the announcements realized that it's cr*p, so it is hidden away in the announcement to make sure almost no investor will notice it, but if needed, there's still a half-ass 1/10th of an ass claim left there to say that you guys actually did notify about it. Anyway, here are the questions that require answers:
1. Please share the explanation on the logic of collecting fees from old defaulted loans that have nothing to do with today's process.
2. Are payments delayed or how is the write-off done on portfolio level if payments come in on different days?
|
|