London Capital and Finance

masonic

Malthusian wrote: »

No, the ISA rules are very clear, non-transferable securities are ineligible. If they're non-transferable securities then they're not allowed to be held in IFISAs. Hopefully the investments you are talking about are in reality transferable. Don't most P2P platforms allow you to flog your bonds to others via the platform?

Are "non-transferable securities" something different than "non-readily realisable securities"? P2P falls into the latter, but as you say, P2P loan contracts can be transferred by novation.

Edit: I should add that not all P2P platforms offering ISAs have secondary markets or allow the sale of loan parts.

Malthusian

masonic wrote: »

Are "non-transferable securities" something different than "non-readily realisable securities"?

Yes.

Definition of non-readily realisable security

Definition of transferable security

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if other P2P providers had got this wrong. Note that Blackmore also got it wrong and has hastily amended its website to say that the bonds in its ISA are actually transferable. Who you'd transfer them to is not clear.

Supercalafragalistic wrote: »

Forgive my ignorance, am not sure how to add a screenshot. When i click on the little photo icon it asks for a url?

You can just upload it to a website like imgur.com and then insert the URL into MSE.

AnotherJoe

Malthusian wrote: »

Yes.

Definition of non-readily realisable security

Definition of transferable security

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if other P2P providers had got this wrong. Note that Blackmore also got it wrong and has hastily amended its website to say that the bonds in its ISA are actually transferable. Who you'd transfer them to is not clear.

Perhaps they had a sweetheart deal with LC&F? You can swap in either direction

Supercalafragalistic

https://imgur.com

sully1311

Supercalafragalistic wrote: »

https://imgur.com/user/supercalafragilistic

Nothing is showing for me.

Supercalafragalistic

sully1311 wrote: »

Nothing is showing for me.

They are screenshots of texts from lc and f to enquirers.
I shall give you an idea
“Thankyou for your valued enquiry
I fully appreciate your apprehension when you enter an investment and there is an element of risk. We are an fca regulated company but we do not use the FSCS with reason.The FSCS is very comprehensive if you have money on deposit in a bank or building society. Our bonds are classed as an investment and all therefore in a different category in the eyes of the FSCS. The FSCS do offer protection for investments but it is very limited compare to the excellent coverage given to deposits. We do have security in the form of assets”

and another one
“ at present we have £78,500,000 out in corporate loans and we hold assets from those companies securing the loans amounting to £257,600,000. For there to be any problem we would need to have multiple companies default on their loans and the security assets would need to D value from £247,600,000 to be worth less than £78,500,000 and therefore create exposure. In theory this can happen and that’s why as a responsible FCA regulated company we have to say “your capital is at risk.”However we would argue it is unlikely that the assets which consist of land and building assets would devalue so significantly and we have yet to have one single default let alone multiple defaults. As a company we could sustain a number of defaults anyway it would take a significant number of companies virtually defaulting at the same time and the assets devaluing to cause any financial difficulty.

And more
“ LC and F are in our six year of business and we have yet to have one single default from a company on any of our corporate loans as verified by PricewaterhouseCoopers who audit our accounts. All investors are that the capital and interest returns on time without default.

masonic

Malthusian wrote: »

Yes.

Definition of non-readily realisable security

Definition of transferable security

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if other P2P providers had got this wrong. Note that Blackmore also got it wrong and has hastily amended its website to say that the bonds in its ISA are actually transferable. Who you'd transfer them to is not clear.

I'm still not clear how, if LCF bonds were deemed non-transferable securities, P2P loan contracts could be deemed transferable securities. Most P2P loans can only be transferred with the consent of a third party (in all cases there is no independent market where investments can be traded, the platform itself executes any sales and purchases, in most cases at its own discretion).

This might explain why one provider who seemed dead against any form of secondary market for a long time, hurriedly and clumsily implemented one recently, and why some platforms charge prohibitive fees to discourage the use of their SM - because it only exists as part of a box-ticking exercise.

Sledger

Supercalafragalistic wrote: »

Oh bgr...sorry. Masonic was telling me how to upload a url. Obviously hasnt worked
They are screenshots of texts from lc and f to enquirers.
I shall give you an idea
“Thankyou for your valued enquiry
I fully appreciate your apprehension when you enter an investment and there is an element of risk. We are an fca regulated company but we do not use the FSCS with reason.The FSCS is very comprehensive if you have money on deposit in a bank or building society. Our bonds are classed as an investment and all therefore in a different category in the eyes of the FSCS. The FSCS do offer protection for investments but it is very limited compare to the excellent coverage given to deposits. We do have security in the form of assets”

and another one
“ at present we have £78,500,000 out in corporate loans and we hold assets from those companies securing the loans amounting to £257,600,000. For there to be any problem we would need to have multiple companies default on their loans and the security assets would need to D value from £247,600,000 to be worth less than £78,500,000 and therefore create exposure. In theory this can happen and that’s why as a responsible FCA regulated company we have to say “your capital is at risk.”However we would argue it is unlikely that the assets which consist of land and building assets would devalue so significantly and we have yet to have one single default let alone multiple defaults. As a company we could sustain a number of defaults anyway it would take a significant number of companies virtually defaulting at the same time and the assets devaluing to cause any financial difficulty.

And more
“ LC and F are in our six year of business and we have yet to have one single default from a company on any of our corporate loans as verified by PricewaterhouseCoopers who audit our accounts. All investors are that the capital and interest returns on time without default.

Is that a real LCF post or have you made it up ?? If its real can you please forward the source and link. I have been struggling to add arttachnments when this URL pops up and am non the wiser cheers

Sledger

Botheredin wrote: »

Some other properties may be changing hands and here are some more assets
https://www.instagram.com/annarae1027/?hl=en

Can you please redo tghe link as get this Sorry, this page isn't available.
The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed. Go back to Instagram.

masonic

Supercalafragalistic wrote: »

Oh bgr...sorry. Masonic was telling me how to upload a url. Obviously hasnt worked

It was Malthusian, not me, but if you are using Chrome browser, the easiest way is to right click on the picture after upload and select 'Copy Image Address', then that's what you need to paste into the insert image dialogue box over here.

Sledger wrote: »

Is that a real LCF post or have you made it up ?? If its real can you please forward the source and link. I have been struggling to add arttachnments when this URL pops up and am non the wiser cheers

None of that text should be of any surprise to anyone at this point. In fact, the reasoning behind FSCS protection not being very useful for this type of investment is more than I'd have expected from Surge (presumably that's where the quote originated), as for the bit about the value of the assets, it's no surprised but of course the valuation is worthless, just like the assets.