Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing?

bernard
Member of DD Central

Posts: 66

Likes: 24

Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing? Feb 15, 2017 17:38:59 GMT

Quote

Post by bernard on Feb 15, 2017 17:38:59 GMT

I am sure this has been covered before but rather than resurrect an ancient thread...

I have no problem with the policy of not allowing a sale of a loan part before paying for it. However we have the following behaviour: I start with zero balance. Day 1, I am allocated a loan part in new loan A for 10k. I transfer 10k by faster payments. Day 2, there is an allocation in a new loan B, with an allocation of 1k. Now I cannot sell either loan part A or B (until I transfer the 1k, or rather until SS recognise the 1k I transfer). Surely I should be allowed to sell loan part A, as it is now fully paid for, but not B? What do others think? Has this aspect been flagged to savingstream before?

SteveT Member of DD Central Posts: 6,875 Likes: 7,924	Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing? Feb 15, 2017 17:45:36 GMT Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Back to Top Post by SteveT on Feb 15, 2017 17:45:36 GMT The selling restriction applies to all parts you've owned for less than 7 days, whether bought on the PM or SM, whilst your balance is negative. Them's the rules.

bernard Member of DD Central Posts: 66 Likes: 24	Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing? Feb 15, 2017 17:49:48 GMT Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Back to Top Post by bernard on Feb 15, 2017 17:49:48 GMT Yes I know those are the rules. The question is whether people are of the opinion that it should be changed to work such that loan parts paid for can be sold. Or is there a hidden complication that I miss?

adrianc
Member of DD Central

Posts: 10,015

Likes: 5,144

Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing? Feb 15, 2017 22:19:00 GMT

Quote

Post by adrianc on Feb 15, 2017 22:19:00 GMT

Feb 15, 2017 17:38:59 GMT bernard said:

I am sure this has been covered before but rather than resurrect an ancient thread...

I have no problem with the policy of not allowing a sale of a loan part before paying for it. However we have the following behaviour: I start with zero balance. Day 1, I am allocated a loan part in new loan A for 10k. I transfer 10k by faster payments. Day 2, there is an allocation in a new loan B, with an allocation of 1k. Now I cannot sell either loan part A or B (until I transfer the 1k, or rather until SS recognise the 1k I transfer). Surely I should be allowed to sell loan part A, as it is now fully paid for, but not B? What do others think? Has this aspect been flagged to savingstream before?

Add in a few more buys and sells across a few more loans, and it becomes a lot less clear-cut as to what's what.

Now add in a snidge of malicious/"gaming" intent, and you could quite easily see a situation where a balance is kept deliberately -ve over an extended period by shuffling parts across a few different loans.

Looking at the -ve balance as a whole is by far and away the most sensible way to do it.

vmail Open image in a new tab. Posts: 457 Likes: 217	Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing? Feb 16, 2017 0:26:13 GMT Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Back to Top Post by vmail on Feb 16, 2017 0:26:13 GMT SS will send the heavies to your house to collect the £1000 after 18 months.
	I'm collecting 'likes' to help fight hunger and disease. Like my posts to show your support.

Quirk in negative balance protocol - needs fixing?

Post by bernard on Feb 15, 2017 17:38:59 GMT

Post by SteveT on Feb 15, 2017 17:45:36 GMT

Post by bernard on Feb 15, 2017 17:49:48 GMT

Post by adrianc on Feb 15, 2017 22:19:00 GMT

Post by vmail on Feb 16, 2017 0:26:13 GMT