London Capital and Finance

System

Masonic... am guessing those photos about surge arent permitted?
I

masonic

We know that previous posts that have been removed or redacted, suggesting this thread is being monitored by those connected to LCF.

If there is information that is in the public domain, then it is certainly fair game to discuss it in general terms here, it is fair game to suggest the steps one might take that could lead them to the source, it might be fair game to post a link, but it would not be fair game to reproduce it here and make MSE an additional publisher of the information. That information could include personal information, or allegations.

Even more concerning would be the thread turning into a witch hunt targeting connected individuals and their contact details.

Our forum overlords can and do shut down / delete threads that create them a lot of moderation work.

Of course you can say and present exactly what you want on your own website, as at least one person does.

System

Masonic, oh i see. Oooh, being monitored by those with connections.with lcf ... bit scary really!

System

Jelli wrote: »

Then stick it on every webpage as a permanent fixture, making people think the entire business is above board.

"Authorised & regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority". Oh great, all info has been cleared and is truthful.

I am one of the dozy people who thought regulated , meant regulated.
I thought it meant to the firm and its products.
It feels like saying a car has got an mot, so its fine to buy, only to find its the owner of the car that has it, not the car itself!

masonic

The LCF insolvency is the lead story in this week's Money Box. A few things have been confirmed:

- £236 million invested by approx. 14,000 customers, loaned to just 12 companies! One of which the oil and gas firm discussed earlier in the thread.

- The 'hope' is that those 12 companies will continue to make repayments of interest and will be able to repay capital at the end of the term. The Joint Administrators will be treating them with kid gloves so as not to cause them to become distressed or fail.

- The security trustee exists but only "has security over LCF, so that doesn't really give any extra benefit because the bondholders are owed money by LCF anyway".

AnotherJoe

{text_removed_by_MSE_Forum_Team} wrote:

I am one of the dozy people who thought regulated , meant regulated.
I thought it meant to the firm and its products.
It feels like saying a car has got an mot, so its fine to buy, only to find its the owner of the car that has it, not the car itself!

That's one mistake you made but I'd say it's a second order mistake.
The primary mistake is, you believed what they said.yiu believed the advert that compared companies and believed the comparison. Never mind the regulated part, you believed what they said about regulated, about guarantees, about how solid they were, and so on. Suppose regulated actually did mean regulated in the way you mean, for example. They coudl simply have lied about being regulated.

System

AnotherJoe wrote: »

That's one mistake you made but I'd say it's a second order mistake.
The primary mistake is, you believed what they said.yiu believed the advert that compared companies and believed the comparison. Never mind the regulated part, you believed what they said about regulated, about guarantees, about how solid they were, and so on. Suppose regulated actually did mean regulated in the way you mean, for example. They coudl simply have lied about being regulated.

This is true. As i am what i consider an average person, i have been listening to programmes like Martins about using comparison sites to get the best deals and to stop banks “ripping us off” (sort of thing) with bad interest rates. I believed the comparison sites...what a twit!

masonic

{text_removed_by_MSE_Forum_Team} wrote:

This is true. As i am what i consider an average person, i have been listening to programmes like Martins about using comparison sites to get the best deals and to stop banks “ripping us off” (sort of thing) with bad interest rates. I believed the comparison sites...what a twit!

No, you believed the comparisons that were part of the advertising. LCF bonds have never been listed on true savings comparison sites, one of which owns MSE.

Reaper

masonic wrote: »

The LCF insolvency is the lead story in this week's Money Box.

I thought it unduly optimistic. Admittedly they had only just started looking at the set up but they seemed to be assuming the loans were genuine business decisions and asset backed. They seemed unaware of the incestuous nature of many of the companies involved.

masonic wrote: »

- The security trustee exists but only "has security over LCF, so that doesn't really give any extra benefit because the bondholders are owed money by LCF anyway".

I was confused by that. Can anybody translate?

I was sad to hear the upset investor. He said he spent a month researching it before investing but found nothing adverse. It's a shame he didn't find this thread, we normal rank quite high on Google. 14,000 people are in danger of losing their money but I like to hope (rightly or wrongly) many others did a search, found this thread, and decided not to proceed.

londoninvestor

Reaper wrote: »

I was confused by that. Can anybody translate?

The only assets the Security Trustee has a hold over are those that belong to LCF - and LCF's asset base will consist almost entirely of future receivables on the loans it has made. So the existence of the Security Trustee doesn't put the bondholders in a much better position than they already are as creditors.

Particularly, the Security Trustee has no influence to make the loanee companies repay, or to manage themselves in a way that increases the likelihood of future repayments happening.