Peer-to-peer lending sites: MSE guide discussion

jamesd

masonic wrote: »

Coming back to the discussion of the new terms, I have posed the question in the P2PIF around 12.1 and whether it is intended to convey this meaning. The Q&A document suggests this is not the intention.

Everything from "Such" onward would be redundant that way.

It'll be interesting what they make of things like:

"I didn't receive the expected payment for this loan"

"I received the full expected payment for this loan on time five minutes ago"

"I'm considering buying this loan but it's less than 15 days since the last payment was due, was the payment made? On time? What about the earlier ones, is this a consistent good payer?"

"To make it easier to know which loans aren't late I've created a shared spreadsheet with payment schedule and history for each loan and a summary page showing for each loan the date of the most recent payment being due and if it's been paid yet. Please update it as you get full, partial or no payments so we can all see promptly which ones are late, by how much and any reasons given."

The latter broadly matches what a platform like Ablrate does as a standard feature, without routine glitches or delays causing issues with lots of selling.

That sort of thing gets to some of the heart of the issue: are they trying to conceal the fact that the payment wasn't made on time, make it hard to find out (where can you see a loan's payment history?) and such. It's the sort of thing I expect to see a click or two away when considering buying.

Added later:

It's worth considering what some might consider acceptable:

1. A borrower naturally wouldn't want their name easily searchable combined with information about late payments and I expect that most lenders would understand that. Anything that makes it harder to do this search can be fine, whether it's not naming, using non-public places, abbreviations or spaces between letters. Ridiculous are blatantly false claims in the T&C after a loan has been made that the borrower name is private and confidential when it's disclosed by borrower and platform at Companies House and is trivial to find.

2. A platform might want to keep the secondary market stable. A platform is required to treat customers, including buyers, fairly and concealing material risk information is not something I can reconcile with that. Routine banking glitches for a day or two probably wouldn't matter much but as the time lengthens, absent some reason, the cause for concern rises and can be expected to exceed the acceptable risk thresholds of an increasing number of investors. All of whom can be expected to regard themselves as having been cheated by the platform if they buy and late becomes default. it seems to me to be very unwise for a platform to transmute risk from a borrower to its own future in this way.

taylornj

jamesd wrote: »

Looks as though the ecopark loans at Ablrate (1000039, 1000049, 1000078) will be repaying next week. The borrower has requested redemption price statements. Ablrate have closed the secondary market for them pending developments. Looks as though the recent positive news may have allowed them to get cheaper funding.

Just had these three repaid little under £8k in total returned.


Ablrate has a new loan on Wednesday so will keep some back, rest I will withdraw for now, nothing on secondary market for me, already in most of the loans, not keen on adding more.

masonic

For those following the Collateral saga, it transpires that Refresh Recovery, the firm of insolvency practitioners originally acting as Administrator for the Collateral companies was itself put in Administration on 28th June.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3070415

We had a lucky escape!

fun4everyone

Hahaha nice find couldn't make it up!

I do wonder what connection exactly the old Collateral people had with Refresh Recovery, and possibly with a member or two on the P2PIF. Who knows. Just waiting patiently for my money (and with popcorn for any potential criminal charges)

bhjm

Ratesetter brings the "old" Rolling market back.

We agree that the choice of whether to invest at the Market Rate or to set your rate is one of the empowering features that makes RateSetter stand out as a market-leading investment product because it gives you control over the rate at which you are lending.

So, taking on board your feedback, we are planning to reintroduce the ability to set your rate on reinvestments. This will harmonise the Rolling market with the other RateSetter markets and give you the control you have told us you want.

As you previously set your own rate for reinvestments in the Rolling market, we thought you would like to know about this upcoming change. Please look out for more details in your !!!8203;July !!!8203;2018 statement.

AdrianC

masonic wrote: »

For those following the Collateral saga, it transpires that Refresh Recovery, the firm of insolvency practitioners originally acting as Administrator for the Collateral companies was itself put in Administration on 28th June.

https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3070415

We had a lucky escape!

Ouch.

Given the hit their rep took from it, and the fact they had to pay back all the fees they'd received, it may well be that the Collateral case was the reason they went south, however.


But an administration specialist going into administration... there's a certain irony.

masonic

AdrianC wrote: »

Ouch.

Given the hit their rep took from it, and the fact they had to pay back all the fees they'd received, it may well be that the Collateral case was the reason they went south, however.


But an administration specialist going into administration... there's a certain irony.

Yes, although it might also have something to do with this. If criminal proceedings were being brought against Gordon Craig, then I could see how that might make things difficult for the firm. Not that the press release states whether or not they are.

jamesd

KTF wrote: »

Not keen on Assetz Capital then?

I'd be happy enough giving them a try but so far I haven't. Maybe some this year.

jamesd

A nice new feature from Ablrate is the red notification of the count of new documents or admin notes on a loan. A loan just paid late and anyone looking at the loan sees the prominent red background, white 1 count for the new admin note which simply says: "Paid one day late" with the note timestamp of "Posted On 17/07/2018 08:46" to go with the yellow late indicator in the repayment history that's automatically set if the payment hasn't been made.

Much closer to giving everyone timely information than some places, though a payment not made yet flag would be good for the non-amortising loans in particular, so you see the status without reviewing the payment record. For amortising you already get a payment pending notification on the loan's secondary market details.

As usual the late payment had no visible effect on the secondary market for the loan.

masonic

jamesd wrote: »

As usual the late payment had no visible effect on the secondary market for the loan.

It seems a million pound loan had no visible effect on the secondary market either. Although it's good to see at least one platform bringing in opportunities, even if this last one wasn't to my taste.