MarkT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 190
Likes: 159
|
Post by MarkT on Jan 11, 2017 20:51:20 GMT
To be honest, I'd rather they went live, or not, after SS have finished their DD.
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Jan 11, 2017 21:08:06 GMT
To be fair to SS, taken from the pipeline loans page: These are the upcoming projects undergoing assessment and valuation. If the borrower
and security meets the lending criteria the project will be moved to the Available Loans area for investment.It could well be a case of, we'll put it out in the open on the pipeline loans page while we do our DD, and lets just see what any potential investors manage to dig up in the mean time, i.e. us.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 663
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Jan 11, 2017 22:44:02 GMT
To be fair to SS, taken from the pipeline loans page: <snip> That's fair enough and I'd take no issue with loans appearing in the pipeline loans page as soon as SS believes they are worthy of consideration. However, if SS wishes to publish unreviewed information about these loans then I think that needs to be made clear. Ultimately, we need to be able to differentiate between: 1) Information provided to us by SS that has undergone a review as part of their own DD 2) Information that has been provided by independent third parties without review by SS 3) Information that has been provided by the borrower that has not been reviewed by SS Presumably at completion, most pertinent information falls into category (1), but it seems prior to that one can make no assumptions about any information associated with the loan.
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Jan 11, 2017 22:51:51 GMT
To be fair to SS, taken from the pipeline loans page: <snip> That's fair enough and I'd take no issue with loans appearing in the pipeline loans page as soon as SS believes they are worthy of consideration. However, if SS wishes to publish unreviewed and unverified information about these loans then I think that needs to be made clear. Ultimately, we need to be able to differentiate between: 1) Information provided to us by SS that has undergone a review as part of their own DD 2) Information that has been provided by independent third parties without review by SS 3) Information that has been provided by the borrower that has not been reviewed by SS Presumably at completion, most pertinent information falls into category (1), but it seems prior to that one can make no assumptions about any information associated with the loan.IMO you should not make any assumptions whatsoever, its up to you the investor to asses the viability of the loan versus your own risk appetite. I currently have pre-funding set for one of the eight pipeline loans, the rest don't "feel right" to me, and looking down the live loans, i've invested in 12 of the last 30 released.
|
|
mason
Member of DD Central
Posts: 663
Likes: 640
|
Post by mason on Jan 11, 2017 23:08:59 GMT
IMO you should not make any assumptions whatsoever, its up to you the investor to asses the viability of the loan versus your own risk appetite. I currently have pre-funding set for one of the eight pipeline loans, the rest don't "feel right" to me, and looking down the live loans, i've invested in 12 of the last 30 released. Which is precisely why it is essential that the provenance of the information provided by SS is made clear. Unfortunately, even with the great DD that comes out of this community and creative approaches to finding out information about the borrowers and security, there are some things we as potential lenders simply cannot independently verify. Some level of trust therefore must be afforded to the platform to review the information it is advancing to us. Like you, I have been pretty selective in the loans in which I am invested. I have zero pre-funding targets set and am currently invested in a total of 14 loans with about a third of the money invested here as I have in several of the other platforms I use. Quite a different story compared with last April, where SS had more of my P2P funds than any other platform.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,162
Likes: 4,851
|
Post by ozboy on Jan 11, 2017 23:28:31 GMT
"IMO you should not make any assumptions whatsoever, its up to you the investor to asses the viability of the loan versus your own risk appetite. I currently have pre-funding set for one of the eight pipeline loans, the rest don't "feel right" to me, and looking down the live loans, i've invested in 12 of the last 30 released."
So, we can't even assume that a VR, from a well known, Professional RIBA Valuer, is even reasonably accurate, or at the least notifies of very basic information - like PPs?!!!!
This Loan was going to go live and many would have invested, rightly or wrongly, on the basis of the content of said VR.
How would they have felt afterwards when all the past couple of days information surfaced I wonder?
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,162
Likes: 4,851
|
Post by ozboy on Jan 12, 2017 0:16:07 GMT
Sorry, getting my RICS, RIBAs and gawd knows what else confused - it's late and I'm getting tired and emotional ................... G'night folks.
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Jan 12, 2017 2:00:58 GMT
"IMO you should not make any assumptions whatsoever, its up to you the investor to asses the viability of the loan versus your own risk appetite. I currently have pre-funding set for one of the eight pipeline loans, the rest don't "feel right" to me, and looking down the live loans, i've invested in 12 of the last 30 released."So, we can't even assume that a VR, from a well known, Professional RIBA Valuer, is even reasonably accurate, or at the least notifies of very basic information - like PPs?!!!! This Loan was going to go live and many would have invested, rightly or wrongly, on the basis of the content of said VR. How would they have felt afterwards when all the past couple of days information surfaced I wonder? RIBA/RICS slip up is completely excusable. Gawd, I've done much worse (and not even spotted it myself). Four letter acronyms at this time of night are easily confused!
I do have some comments which may vaguely relate to your earlier posts on this thread (my opinions only):
Most of the valuations we get from SS are reasonably complete and accurate. [I've just set myself up for a load of...]
On this forum, I have learnt that where there are omissions and suspected inaccuracies in the SS information, these are usually highlighted by the members who are doing their own due diligence and, helpfully, sharing the information they find. This means that those of us who come here are in the privileged position of being better informed (probably) than those who do not.
Unfortunately, because we are a sceptical bunch, aiming at filling any holes in the VRs and other information produced by SS, much of what is discussed here seems on the surface to be negative. Scepticism and an inquiring nature are the norm. Positive stuff is nice to read and is a great encouragement (especially when, on rare occasions, it relates to one's own posts). But however great it is to read the positive stuff, it doesn't necessarily contribute to the knowledge base as much as the (often negative sounding) commentaries and questions raised.
I've done some SS bashing in the past but I'm trying to give it up (call it a new year's resolution... yes I'm still working on it). SS bashing doesn't help anyone. Sensible suggestions and questions in their direction are certainly more beneficial for all concerned. They do their job pretty well and we do ours. These days, I rarely judge the questions and the information generated on this forum as a negative comment on SS... I simply see this as information which helps us to make a sensible choice about investing (or not).
A typical SS bash starts with something like: "How would the investors feel if..." [and I've written a few of those] While it may be altruistic, it is not necessarily worthwhile to ask: how would other investors feel if... : That is not your problem. Instead, ask the completely self centred question: how I would feel if... and try to mitigate against any negative outcomes you may envisage, answering these scenarios on the forum so that everyone here can benefit.
Sorry... it's late as you said much earlier (and I'm on CET at the moment...)
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 12, 2017 3:04:04 GMT
I suppose that raises the question of whether, if there is a material change to the particulars or valuation, but the loan still goes ahead, will SS always provide plenty of notice of the change ahead of going live with the loan so that prospective investors can adjust their limits accordingly? mason: My answer to that question is an emphatic NO! One specific example I can relate is a loan I invested in that was showing a certain term all through the lead-up to the go-live. Then it went live and was funded immediately. My memory isn't good enough to remember exactly what the term was when I pre-funded and invested, but what I do remember reasonably clearly is that when I looked at the loan soon after it went live I discovered that the term was three months shorted than it had been when I invested. I certainly considered that to be a material change.
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jan 12, 2017 9:23:36 GMT
But all quoted loan durations are imaginary, because you know the borrower can repay early when they like (or even extend), so I wouldn't get too excited about a change on paper.
|
|
dovap
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 410
|
Post by dovap on Jan 12, 2017 9:28:25 GMT
To be fair to SS, taken from the pipeline loans page: These are the upcoming projects undergoing assessment and valuation. If the borrower
and security meets the lending criteria the project will be moved to the Available Loans area for investment.It could well be a case of, we'll put it out in the open on the pipeline loans page while we do our DD, and lets just see what any potential investors manage to dig up in the mean time, i.e. us. with the minor amendment above I reckon that's not too far off the simple elegance of the current system. Be reet (barring any dodgy borrowers obv.)
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Jan 12, 2017 13:10:05 GMT
mason : My answer to that question is an emphatic NO! One specific example I can relate is a loan I invested in that was showing a certain term all through the lead-up to the go-live. Then it went live and was funded immediately. My memory isn't good enough to remember exactly what the term was when I pre-funded and invested, but what I do remember reasonably clearly is that when I looked at the loan soon after it went live I discovered that the term was three months shorted than it had been when I invested. I certainly considered that to be a material change. Isn't this covered by having (something like) 24hrs to fund your account to satisfy the pre-funding requirement after the loan goes live? If you don't like the last-minute revisions don't fund the account. I suspect that might incur the wrath of SS and they may even operate some kind of 'three strikes and out' system, but I'd be tempted to inform them of exactly why the pre-funding amount wasn't going to be fulfilled and head that possibility off. That doesn't work if you have a cash float from recent interest and capital repayments. It also relies on SS communicating the material change before the funding is due.
|
|
voss
Member of DD Central
Posts: 153
Likes: 84
|
Post by voss on Jan 12, 2017 14:18:23 GMT
savingstream , when you had and used the stages system, it was clear where a loan stands and we had an indication that you were in the process of doing DD. As things stand, when we see the VR and we get a PBL number, especially when we receive an email saying that the loan is going live tomorrow, we have no other option other than to assume that your DD has been exhausted. I believe that this is what is causing many (including myself) to over react on our findings because it appears that things have been missed by yourselves. Perhaps a system similar to the stages used previously can help in this matter. Did the stages system ever work properly? There was a mismatch between the simple stages and the complex range of events that could occur in different orders during the preparation of a loan. So the former could not easily map onto the latter.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,874
Likes: 7,919
|
Post by SteveT on Jan 12, 2017 14:39:53 GMT
A simpler solution (than going back to arbitrary "stages") would be for savingstream briefly to list "Items remaining to be checked before draw-down" when posting new pipeline loan details. That way, the forum's DD hounds would know that SS are already aware and on the case.
|
|
locutus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,059
Likes: 1,622
|
Post by locutus on Jan 12, 2017 14:50:33 GMT
A simpler solution (than going back to arbitrary "stages") would be for savingstream briefly to list "Items remaining to be checked before draw-down" when posting new pipeline loan details. That way, the forum's DD hounds would know that SS are already aware and on the case. An excellent suggestion and very much in the spirit of P2P. Sadly, I suspect this has zero chance of happening.
|
|