Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Apr 3, 2017 13:46:36 GMT
I'm sure SS/L are not alone. Thincats for one has always backdated transactions by several months, often putting them in a different tax year to when the payment was made(happens on late payments/loans in arrears). will What time are you selling all of your SS/L loans i'm sure plenty will be happy to take them off your hands. I really think there will be bigger fights to fight with SS/L. God help SS/L when a few hundred on here actually suffer a loss. When you have lost thousands for pounds in a loan like I have, then trivial matters tend not to get you angry. Has anyone had an e-mail response from SS/L? |
|
will
Member of DD Central
Posts: 98 
Likes: 57
|
Post by will on Apr 3, 2017 14:00:00 GMT
I'm sure SS/L are not alone. Thincats for one has always backdated transactions by several months, often putting them in a different tax year to when the payment was made(happens on late payments/loans in arrears). will What time are you selling all of your SS/L loans i'm sure plenty will be happy to take them off your hands. I really think there will be bigger fights to fight with SS/L. God help SS/L when a few hundred on here actually suffer a loss. When you have lost thousands for pounds in a loan like I have, then trivial matters tend not to get you angry. Has anyone had an e-mail response from SS/L? Suffering a loss is expected. A business decision to manipulate historic transactions is a decision to do things incorrectly. I have no issue with suffering a loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by lendinglawyer on Apr 3, 2017 14:02:31 GMT
I'm sure SS/L are not alone. Thincats for one has always backdated transactions by several months, often putting them in a different tax year to when the payment was made(happens on late payments/loans in arrears). will What time are you selling all of your SS/L loans i'm sure plenty will be happy to take them off your hands. I really think there will be bigger fights to fight with SS/L. God help SS/L when a few hundred on here actually suffer a loss. When you have lost thousands for pounds in a loan like I have, then trivial matters tend not to get you angry. Has anyone had an e-mail response from SS/L? Suffering a loss is expected. A business decision to manipulate historic transactions is a decision to do things incorrectly. I have no issue with suffering a loss. I have a big issue with the continuing use of the word "manipulate" in this context, however, given the negative connotations of that word. As Lendy emailed people (admittedly after the fact) saying what they had done, I think "amend" is the word you should use as there was no funny business going on here that I can see.
|
|
will
Member of DD Central
Posts: 98
Likes: 57
|
Post by will on Apr 3, 2017 14:13:46 GMT
I have a big issue with the continuing use of the word "manipulate" in this context, however, given the negative connotations of that word. As Lendy emailed people (admittedly after the fact) saying what they had done, I think "amend" is the word you should use as there was no funny business going on here that I can see. Call it whatever you like. The log of transactions is supposed to be an audit trail of all changes to the balance on an account. Going in and manipulating / changing / amending / fixing historic data makes that audit trail completely worthless. It may as well not exist. If they went and accidentally multiplied every historic transaction in your account by 0.1 and you then complained and their response could be "Well, we have no record of that, all the numbers add up". As someone with many years of system design and development experience, I can assure you that this is not how it's done. No one should have the ability to change or delete any of the transactions data. Data should only ever be added.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Apr 3, 2017 14:28:29 GMT
I think Liam and Tim and even the creative Paul should be well aware what comes top on a Google search if you put the three words "Lendy alter accounts" in.
Better management required if a better reputation is desired.
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Apr 3, 2017 14:41:07 GMT
I think Liam and Tim and even the creative Paul should be well aware what comes top on a Google search if you put the three words "Lendy alter accounts" in. Better management required if a better reputation is desired. People are more likely to ask for 'saving stream review' or 'lendy review' - Google comes up with references from trustpilot etc.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Apr 3, 2017 14:56:17 GMT
I have a big issue with the continuing use of the word "manipulate" in this context, however, given the negative connotations of that word. As Lendy emailed people (admittedly after the fact) saying what they had done, I think "amend" is the word you should use as there was no funny business going on here that I can see. Call it whatever you like. The log of transactions is supposed to be an audit trail of all changes to the balance on an account. Going in and manipulating / changing / amending / fixing historic data makes that audit trail completely worthless. It may as well not exist. If they went and accidentally multiplied every historic transaction in your account by 0.1 and you then complained and their response could be "Well, we have no record of that, all the numbers add up". As someone with many years of system design and development experience, I can assure you that this is not how it's done. No one should have the ability to change or delete any of the transactions data. Data should only ever be added. OK now I'm pissed off! Just checked my 2nd account(thought I had already checked) and have a £3.40 negative balance. I didn't think I was affected because: A: I have not had any e-mails from Lendy, B: I have never held any loan that wasn't 12%. So Paul64 if I have never held a loan less than 12%, how come I have had my interest amended? If I have been overpaid then fine, an explanation would be nice. Taking money from someone's account with no explanation is plain wrong.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Apr 3, 2017 15:01:08 GMT
I haven't voted; there is no option for me. It doesn't make me angry; I'm of the opinion SS do have the right to take their money back, but the fact is, it should happen in the first place The complaint isn't that SS have taken their money back, but that they have adjusted the transaction history to reflect what should have happened rather than what actually did happen. My initial reaction was that it's 6 of one and half-a-dozen of the other, but the point that it pollutes downloaded account records is well made. (So I end up in the missing green category.)
|
|
will
Member of DD Central
Posts: 98
Likes: 57
|
Post by will on Apr 3, 2017 15:02:54 GMT
OK now I'm pissed off! Just checked my 2nd account(thought I had already checked) and have a £3.40 negative balance. I didn't think I was affected because: A: I have not had any e-mails from Lendy, B: I have never held any loan that wasn't 12%. So Paul64 if I have never held a loan less than 12%, how come I have had my interest amended? If I have been overpaid then fine, an explanation would be nice. Taking money from someone's account with no explanation is plain wrong. If there was a new transaction on your account then you'd probably be able to work it out for yourself! As I just said, there is effectively no audit trail so we're all just playing a guessing game.
|
|
jomantha
Member of DD Central
Posts: 177 
Likes: 63
|
Post by jomantha on Apr 3, 2017 15:11:03 GMT
It betrays basic accounting principles - they should not be able to just do it in my opinion.
|
|
puffin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 87
Likes: 26
|
Post by puffin on Apr 3, 2017 15:12:08 GMT
"Should Saving Stream EVER alter existing transactions? ", rubbish question.
I choose YES, because in the second or so it took to read I had thought of several reasons you might want to alter a transaction. Data corruption (hardware fault) sprung immediately to mind.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Apr 3, 2017 15:13:11 GMT
OK now I'm pissed off! Just checked my 2nd account(thought I had already checked) and have a £3.40 negative balance. I didn't think I was affected because: A: I have not had any e-mails from Lendy, B: I have never held any loan that wasn't 12%. So Paul64 if I have never held a loan less than 12%, how come I have had my interest amended? If I have been overpaid then fine, an explanation would be nice. Taking money from someone's account with no explanation is plain wrong. If there was a new transaction on your account then you'd probably be able to work it out for yourself! As I just said, there is effectively no audit trail so we're all just playing a guessing game. I do agree that they should show the transactions. In my case, there is no explanation because I have never held non-12% loans, which is worrying. I don't even know which of the dozens of loans to check. I wonder how many more people haven't noticed either because e-mails aren't being sent. Maybe and only a guess is that they paid interest on loans when they were up for sale. Paul64 is this correct. It would be nice to know wat has happened.
|
|
will
Member of DD Central
Posts: 98
Likes: 57
|
Post by will on Apr 3, 2017 15:17:25 GMT
"Should Saving Stream EVER alter existing transactions? ", rubbish question. I choose YES, because in the second or so it took to read I had thought of several reasons you might want to alter a transaction. Data corruption (hardware fault) sprung immediately to mind. Then you add a correcting transaction. You don't change one that already exists. Also, I'd assume (hope) their databases are on a RAID array, which makes data corruption through hardware fault near impossible. What they have just tried fixing is effectively a data corruption caused by incompetence.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Apr 3, 2017 15:20:16 GMT
OK now I'm pissed off! Just checked my 2nd account(thought I had already checked) and have a £3.40 negative balance. I didn't think I was affected because: A: I have not had any e-mails from Lendy, B: I have never held any loan that wasn't 12%. So Paul64 if I have never held a loan less than 12%, how come I have had my interest amended? If I have been overpaid then fine, an explanation would be nice. Taking money from someone's account with no explanation is plain wrong. If there was a new transaction on your account then you'd probably be able to work it out for yourself! As I just said, there is effectively no audit trail so we're all just playing a guessing game. Come on Paul64. Earn your money. Non-fiction please. No fake news. .
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 3, 2017 15:31:27 GMT
Maybe and only a guess is that they paid interest on loans when they were up for sale. Paul64 is this correct. It would be nice to know wat has happened. Good thought... which had also crossed my mind but I think it is unlikely because a selling loan part has an end date and so should behave just like a sold loan part in the interest run.
I cannot check whether you're right as I had nothing selling overnight during any of March.
Are you quite sure you haven't inadvertently bought into something at sub-12% level?
|
|
