London Capital and Finance

doe808

Jelli wrote: »

I hope everything goes well as I invested 61k.

The placeholder page still says the same assurances such as no defaults and security is still in place.

I wish you the best of luck.

jimjames

Jelli wrote: »

I hope everything goes well as I invested 61k.

The placeholder page still says the same assurances such as no defaults and security is still in place.

Fingers crossed. Were you aware of the risks when you invested?

sully1311

Jelli wrote: »

I hope everything goes well as I invested 61k.

The placeholder page still says the same assurances such as no defaults and security is still in place.

Oh god. 61k?

dealer_wins

Not looking good at all is it!

Best of luck if you are invested because you will need it.

Jelli

I were aware of the risks but invested based on the borrowers and their property existing.

Sledger

I phoned FCA on 28 Dec following their latest announcement about concerns of their presence triggering a possible LCF capital flight contingency plan and if they were reviewing the bonds whereabouts which I understand do not come under their control. They could not tell me about their investigation for obvious reasons and I advised that a lot of advance homework was required with so many companies set up with intertwining Directors forming a complex family tree which makes things hard to trace.. They referred me to the Citizens advice Bureau??? I asked them what they were doing with the clone Blackmore now at the top of the Best Savings List and had to spell the name out to them??. If LCF were planning anything untoward, which I sincerely hope not, and are not all they appear on their Brochure, FCA may have limited authority to close any loopholes . Bail in has written many articles on his efforts to get some transparency on the loan sector to no avail so what policing authority has more clout and control to intervene and scrutinise all aspects of the Business Model before its too late.

bail-in

Jelli wrote: »

I hope everything goes well as I invested 61k.

Naturally, in the light of the FCA investigation, the LC&F threads are receiving more attention from worried investors. In this new light I see responses here are more conciliatory than with earlier posts by LCF investors. Perhaps now we can see posts from investors giving their experience of due diligence enquiries with the LCF directors re evidence of the LCF commercial lending business. When a person enquires about buying an Apple iPhone online he endeavours to have proof of genuineness, such as a valid serial number. It is no value if the seller simply states it is a genuine Apple. Proof, evidence is required. As a FCA approved, high net worth, etc investor what steps did you and other concerned LCF bondholders take to verify the LCF commercial lending business before investing. What personal direct experiences, responses investors had, rather than us being spoon fed invited Feefo reviews on customer service. Results of meetings with LCF staff, directors, etc. Were they informative, open and helpful or frustratingly lax in verifiable information. Have you spoken directly with the CEO or other directors in relation to due diligence, before and after investing? Sharing of such information could shed more light on the current FCA investigation.

jimjames

Jelli wrote: »

I were aware of the risks but invested based on the borrowers and their property existing.

What investigation did you do to verify that they did exist and that it was correctly recorded?

masonic

The trouble with asking someone if they were aware of the risks is that they won't answer accurately if they are still unaware of some of the risks. A more accurate question to ask is, "did you realise there was a distinct possibility you would lose all of the money you invested?" I wish all who invested the best of luck, but that's the situation.

Jelli

I don't think it's possible for me and a lot of people to understand deeply how a financial company and products work before proceeding with such things, but thought the presence of FCA meant it was running legitimately with no falsehoods on the website. I invested small amounts over a number of years and assumed it would be illegal to missel on a UK website if regulated.

If all information on the website is true then I knew the risks. If not then I didn't know the risks. As far as I know they lend to small to medium companies and is protected by assets.