ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168 
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Apr 5, 2017 16:45:55 GMT
Guys & Gals, it's patently obvious to all of you, which is why you're all being such Rottweilers on this, that LfSS don't want you to know the PF amount and they have no intention of telling you. This attitude also pertains to previous queries wrt Progress/Surveyors Reports. I find it all highly amusing watching them squirm, duck and dive. Re the PF, maybe one or more are driving/flying/sailing around in it?   |
|
dzo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 158
Likes: 150
|
Post by dzo on Apr 5, 2017 18:06:28 GMT
I don't know why they don't just tell us. We all know it's less than the 2% target due to being used recently and not having had time to be replenished yet.
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Apr 5, 2017 18:44:15 GMT
I'm sure some bright spark will come up with a way to re-dress some of the loans that are likely to default, like re-package them as a new, higher value loan.  |
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 5, 2017 18:57:46 GMT
I'm quite sure that if the PF still exists and contains a healthy sum then LfSS would publish the figure - a good PF figure would be very good for business.
The fact that they have stopped publishing the PF value - and at the same time paid back in full a very nasty default - indicates to me that the PF is not at all healthy.
That is the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the facts.
EDIT: From the facts at our disposal.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on Apr 5, 2017 19:44:43 GMT
I'm quite sure that if the PF still exists and contains a healthy sum then LfSS would publish the figure - a good PF figure would be very good for business.
The fact that they have stopped publishing the PF value - and at the same time paid back in full a very nasty default - indicates to me that the PF is not at all healthy.
That is the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the facts.
EDIT: From the facts at our disposal. Lendy does not want to release the damage that it did the the provision fund for the simple reason that they would significantly lose investors confidence, from the limited information avaliable it looks like there has been a significant loss and it has been costly, mostly through Lendy lack of risk managment. In the grand scheme of things this was a pretty simple default, and I very much doubt after looking at the issues they had with this on Lendy would be up to managing a default with a difficult borrorower which lets be honest most of these have already run rings around plenty of others. I am more curious if Lendy took there fees from it to, suprisingly this question was not answered when I asked.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,428
Likes: 1,212
|
Post by sqh on Apr 5, 2017 19:48:52 GMT
I'm sure some bright spark will come up with a way to re-dress some of the loans that are likely to default, like re-package them as a new, higher value loan. You mean package up the DEF loans and include a couple of IOA loans so we don't need to class them as sub-prime. Call them LDO001, 002 etc and invite HBoS and RBS to buy them.
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 5, 2017 19:54:45 GMT
I'm quite sure that if the PF still exists and contains a healthy sum then LfSS would publish the figure - a good PF figure would be very good for business.
The fact that they have stopped publishing the PF value - and at the same time paid back in full a very nasty default - indicates to me that the PF is not at all healthy.
That is the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from the facts.
EDIT: From the facts at our disposal. Lendy does not want to release the damage that it did the the provision fund for the simple reason that they would significantly lose investors confidence, from the limited information avaliable it looks like there has been a significant loss and it has been costly, mostly through Lendy lack of risk managment. <snip> I am more curious if Lendy took there fees from it to, suprisingly this question was not answered when I asked. So, effectively you agree with my analysis.
I had not considered your final question which makes an interesting point (which I will paraphrase): Is the PF just for investors or can it also be used to cover Lendy's own shortfall?
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Apr 5, 2017 20:14:00 GMT
I'm sure some bright spark will come up with a way to re-dress some of the loans that are likely to default, like re-package them as a new, higher value loan. You mean package up the DEF loans and include a couple of IOA loans so we don't need to class them as sub-prime. Call them LDO001, 002 etc and invite HBoS and RBS to buy them. I was thinking more along the lines of giving them PBL/DFL numbers and releasing them as new loans, now you have me thinking about it, there are a couple which spring to mind.
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Apr 5, 2017 20:46:13 GMT
Every time Lendy decide to engage with us on the forum they are subject to a multi pronged attack from forum users which drive them away again.
It was obvious from Paul's first reply that he did not want to give a direct answer to the question on the forum but you don't let it go and you keep on at him and now we won't see him again for a while.
Next week people will be moaning because they don't come on the forum and reply to posts!
|
|
investibod
Member of DD Central
Posts: 288
Likes: 152
|
Post by investibod on Apr 5, 2017 20:50:24 GMT
Every time Lendy decide to engage with us on the forum they are subject to a multi pronged attack from forum users which drive them away again. It was obvious from Paul's first reply that he did not want to give a direct answer to the question on the forum but you don't let it go and you keep on at him and now we won't see him again for a while. Next week people will be moaning because they don't come on the forum and reply to posts! As opposed to coming to the forum and not answering questions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2017 20:54:11 GMT
Every time Lendy decide to engage with us on the forum they are subject to a multi pronged attack from forum users which drive them away again. It was obvious from Paul's first reply that he did not want to give a direct answer to the question on the forum but you don't let it go and you keep on at him and now we won't see him again for a while. Next week people will be moaning because they don't come on the forum and reply to posts! I have to admit Paul's answers would have made you average politician proud with his evasive side stepping, however as soon as a Lendy representive pipes you can almost see the packs circling. I would love all the platforms to engage but I often wonder why they would bother if I'm honest! For what it's worth I would love to know what's in the PF and for it to be shown on the site but it's obvious Lendy have no intention of sharing that with us anymore.
|
|
guff
Posts: 730
Likes: 707
|
Post by guff on Apr 5, 2017 22:01:18 GMT
… I would love to know what's in the PF and for it to be shown on the site but it's obvious Lendy have no intention of sharing that with us anymore. If they are not now willing to share that figure with us then I would like to know why.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on Apr 5, 2017 22:24:43 GMT
… I would love to know what's in the PF and for it to be shown on the site but it's obvious Lendy have no intention of sharing that with us anymore. If they are not now willing to share that figure with us then I would like to know why. They were quite happy to show it before the default and they used it as a fairly major selling point over their competitors. I and everybody else on here expect it to have taken a fairly significant hit and the fact that they are not willling to show makes you think it me be even worse then that. Also it had previously been stated that Lendy or whoever they were that week had a share in so what happened to that?
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Apr 5, 2017 22:54:02 GMT
… I would love to know what's in the PF and for it to be shown on the site but it's obvious Lendy have no intention of sharing that with us anymore. If they are not now willing to share that figure with us then I would like to know why. Well it's clear you are not going to know how much is in the fund and with that in mind you have to make a decision whether or not you wish to continue to invest. The provision fund is not mandatory and it didn't exist for the first couple of years and it's not really a massive issue I think given it could clearly never cover a mass of defaults all involving losses on the scale experienced with the garden centre. Therefore it is all a bit of a red herring and slightly irrelevant is it not. If investing here is on the basis there is a gold plated provision fund that will bail out people from losses then I think those people are mistaken.
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 5, 2017 23:03:59 GMT
Every time Lendy decide to engage with us on the forum they are subject to a multi pronged attack from forum users which drive them away again. It was obvious from Paul's first reply that he did not want to give a direct answer to the question on the forum but you don't let it go and you keep on at him and now we won't see him again for a while. Next week people will be moaning because they don't come on the forum and reply to posts! Your first point is undoubtedly true. I have been guilty of 'LfSS bashing' but I now try to desist from simple negativity and attempt to make my criticism constructive. Where there are reasons to be concerned they should be raised - but in such a way that any criticism is balanced with a constructive alternative suggestion to make their operation more 'user friendly'.
In your second point (regarding questions about the value of the PF) you state 'he [Paul] did not want to give a direct answer to the question' and that is true and perfectly observed. However, you go on to say 'but you don't let it go and you keep on at him' and, while that is also true, I ask why should we not press for an answer on this point?
If (heaven forbid) I was interviewing a politician I would hound them until I was blue in the face, trying to get them to answer such a simple question, especially a question to which the answer had been previously available, and constantly updated on-line but which has subsequently disappeared from view.
My questions to you (not to LfSS) are: - Why shouldn't we have an answer to the PF question?
- Why do you defend LfSS for removing the information from public view and now keeping it a secret?
I agree with the majority of your defences of LfSS (and have posted thus); Many posts attacking LfSS are unfounded in my opinion. However, I believe there are good reasons to hound them on this point.
Your third point is simple speculation with reasoning which cannot be proven even if the prediction turns out to be correct: it will simply fall into the 'more moaning' category which, in your opinion, is full enough already.
P.S. Many people put a lot of store in the PF. However, I (and many others before me) have stated on several occasions that investment decisions should disregard the PF. It is a red-herring, an anomaly, it is a hook to entice investors but should not be relied upon to get you out of the pond if you've invested in carp (sentence ending deliberately obscure).
EDIT - This was in reply to GeorgeT from about five posts back. It took a while to compose and has done quite a bit of crossing.
|
|
