London Capital and Finance

verybigchris

If you turn your ad-blocker off and Google "best savings accounts", "best isa rates" or similar, the sponsored results are sites that pose as savings comparison sites, but are really just pushing savers to LC&F. I wonder how many unsuspecting savers they have referred to LC&F to cover the cost of the advertising, and what proportion of the 7,000 that adds up to?

Malthusian

dunstonh wrote: »

Feefo reviews are pointless. There is no measure of the knowledge and understanding of the person making the review. Plus, there is no guarantee that the reviews are genuine. All the scams out there have great reviews as the scammers generate them. This is not a scam but there is no measure of whether the reviews are genuine or not.

Genuine or not, the reviews for these outfits are quite revealing (not LC&F specifically but unregulated corporate loan notes in general) https://bondreview.co.uk/2018/02/07/trustpilot-lays-bare-how-many-unsophisticated-investors-have-invested-in-high-risk-unregulated-bonds/

bail-in

Malthusian wrote: »

Genuine or not, the reviews for these outfits are quite revealing (not LC&F specifically but unregulated corporate loan notes in general) https://bondreview.co.uk/2018/02/07/trustpilot-lays-bare-how-many-unsophisticated-investors-have-invested-in-high-risk-unregulated-bonds/

Thanks for that link.
Also there is the following link for a London Capital and Finance Review on the same site:
https://bondreview.co.uk/?s=London+capital+and+finance
Also note what happened with completed administration of Providence Bonds Plc bottom right link.
Interesting articles about unregulated bonds on this website https://bondreview.co.uk

bail-in

Below are phone numbers for the company head office and the borrowers link to the new website launched in 2017. However, this loan flow chart and online application form for a loan has only been published on the site since 2017. The company was formed in 2012. There are no reviews or posts by borrowers, which I am aware do not mean much in terms of verification anyway. Anyone here want to try their luck and oratorial skill and phone and ask about the lending business, especially the illusive lending team? No? No time to waste? I did not think so.

08452186918 Tunbridge Wells
020 3861 9060 London
020 7071 3984 London
https://lcaf.co.uk/borrowers/
https://anonymouslcafgmail.weebly.com/

The phone contact for LC&F bonds marketing team is 0800 410 1155

cloud_dog

I'm really lost. Why are you posting, what is the point of your posts?

I'm tempted to report your post as spam.

firestone

think its called reverse psychology

Zanderman

cloud_dog wrote: »

I'm really lost. Why are you posting, what is the point of your posts?.

This is turning into a really entertaining thread!
What, indeed, is the point of bail-in's posts?
And what do they mean?
I'm gonna have to subscribe to this one....

ValiantSon

Glad I'm not the only one who is completely puzzled both by what each individual one of bail-in's posts mean, but also what overall point he is trying to make.

Malthusian

The point bail-in is making is that LC&F claim to be generating returns to its investors by lending to SMEs, but a website for SMEs to apply for said loans has only just appeared, several years after LC&F started not just taking investors' money but making capital repayments.

This, bail-in implies, means that LC&F do not actually lend out investors' money; or if they do, they have only just started. This would mean LC&Fs interest and capital payments to existing investors up until now have been paid using new investors' money, which would make LC&F a Ponzi scheme. I thought it was pretty obvious what bail-in's point was.

This point is, of course, libellous. The fact that this website for applying for loans from LC&F is new is no evidence that LC&F have not been making loans. They could easily have been making loans via other channels. But LC&F have no need to say how, as under English libel law the burden of proof is on the person making the defamatory statement to show it is true.

Hence bail-in not making his point explicitly and asking if someone can ring LC&F to see if they can fool them into voluntarily revealing a smoking gun that proves his conspiracy theory is correct. The chances of LC&F doing so are, of course, nil.

bail-in

I yam sayin nuffink yor 'onour!
A hint is good enough to the wise!