Kufflink P2P lending chat thread

Alexland

fatherandson wrote: »

What's the general feeling about Kuflink from existing investors? Would you do it again? Have you received the interest you were expecting? How does it compare to other P2P providers that you've been involved with?

We signed up about 3 months ago to get the £100 referral bonuses which were paid promptly and so far they seem a fairly professional small business. However I prefer my chances in the stock market (especially now its better value again) so will be withdrawing the money after the 3.99% auto invest expires next year.

In the event I wanted their products in future then I would use them again.

Alex

bxboards

keyboardworrier wrote: »

I think it's worth it for diversification. They invest 5% (it used to be 20%...) along side us on a first loss basis with a 15% provision fund. I haven't had any defaults so far and interest is always paid on time to the correct amount, they quite frequently have loans with very low LTV's which is a big plus.

I still have a 5 figure sum with them, and that's after withdrawing capital when repaid.

Also no defaults - but I have no defaults in P2P at all on any platform too be fair. I'm VERY picky when self-selecting loans and when I look at the MT / Lendy and FS defaults, I really wonder how many of these got funded. Kuflink seem to more picky who they'll lend to.

Since I've been with them I've seen rates drop from 7.2%-7% ish down to the 6 range, whereas many other sites rates are going up.

But it's a good option I feel for diversification. I always wished there was a secondary market, that stopped me putting in more. I wouldn't want to be in the 3 or 5 year markets, the rates are far too low for such a long lockin. self-select and 1 year seem like the best rates vs. timeframe trade-off to me.

keyboardworrier

bxboards wrote: »

I still have a 5 figure sum with them, and that's after withdrawing capital when repaid.

Also no defaults - but I have no defaults in P2P at all on any platform too be fair. I'm VERY picky when self-selecting loans and when I look at the MT / Lendy and FS defaults, I really wonder how many of these got funded. Kuflink seem to more picky who they'll lend to.

Since I've been with them I've seen rates drop from 7.2%-7% ish down to the 6 range, whereas many other sites rates are going up.

But it's a good option I feel for diversification. I always wished there was a secondary market, that stopped me putting in more. I wouldn't want to be in the 3 or 5 year markets, the rates are far too low for such a long lockin. self-select and 1 year seem like the best rates vs. timeframe trade-off to me.

According to the Kuflink rep on the P2P independent forum a secondary market should be coming at some point in the future.



I wouldn't touch the 1/3/5 year markets either unless there was a very good (better than the 3% they normally offer) cashback offer on, and even then I would think twice due to the absolutely ridiculous situations I find myself in with Lendy and Collateral!

bxboards

keyboardworrier wrote: »

According to the Kuflink rep on the P2P independent forum a secondary market should be coming at some point in the future.



I wouldn't touch the 1/3/5 year markets either unless there was a very good (better than the 3% they normally offer) cashback offer on, and even then I would think twice due to the absolutely ridiculous situations I find myself in with Lendy and Collateral!

I'm in a couple of 1 year self-selects but that was when they were offering 3% cashback on 1 year. Guess that's an advantage of being an early adopter!

Commiserations on Lendy - some of the loans there are ridiculous. I see the 'recievership' loans are having huge defaults - I can't understand how P2P lenders were hoodwinked into essentially bailing out the borrower. How on earth did that ever get put on the platform? Plus the borrower who isn't paying in London and now suing everyone. That loan was obviously a 10 foot barge pole loan and should never have been offered. This isn't hindsight being 20/20, its basic economics. Shocking platform.

Nardge

masonic wrote: »

No doubt if they decide it is necessary of older accounts it will be a prerequisite of withdrawing funds. Otherwise it would be clear that it isn't really necessary. Let's hope our existing electronic verification is deemed sufficient.

I'm not sure they'd be allowed to make it a prerequisite as you state.
Surely they'd be breaking the 'terms and conditions' agreed at the time you joined...

They didn't write and you did not agree to:

'You agree to Kuflink implementing facial recognition technology in the future, at a time stipulated by Kuflink, in order that you be permitted to withdraw your funds at that time'...

Kind Regards

masonic

Nardge wrote: »

I'm not sure they'd be allowed to make it a prerequisite as you state.
Surely they'd be breaking the 'terms and conditions' agreed at the time you joined...

They didn't write and you did not agree to:

'You agree to Kuflink implementing facial recognition technology in the future, at a time stipulated by Kuflink, in order that you be permitted to withdraw your funds at that time'...

Kind Regards

https://www.kuflink.co.uk/terms-and-conditions/
"15.1. We may make changes to these Investor Terms and Conditions from time to time without your consent for any of the following reasons:
...
to reflect changes in law, regulation, industry guidance or a decision of a court or by a regulator or ombudsman."

You should also note they didn't write and you did not agree to any form of AML checks being carried out on you, but you can be sure that there were such checks. So that suggests they can and will subject you to things that aren't mentioned in the T&C.

If Kuflink has reached the position that it is their legal requirement to hold certain verification data on all of their customers, then it follows that allowing anyone to withdraw money from the platform without completing such verification would be unlawful in their eyes. It would not be the first company to subject customers to new AML measures before allowing them to leave.

bxboards

masonic wrote: »

https://www.kuflink.co.uk/terms-and-conditions/
"15.1. We may make changes to these Investor Terms and Conditions from time to time without your consent for any of the following reasons:
...
to reflect changes in law, regulation, industry guidance or a decision of a court or by a regulator or ombudsman."


If Kuflink has reached the position that it is their legal requirement to hold certain verification data on all of their customers, then it follows that allowing anyone to withdraw money from the platform without completing such verification would be unlawful in their eyes. It would not be the first company to subject customers to new AML measures before allowing them to leave.

I can't understand how doing a selfie proves anything? Lets assume I want to withdraw a soon to maturing investment, and they tell me they need a selfie. I could literally get anyone to do that for me, withdraw the money, and never use the platform again. I can't see how an uncertified photo proves anythings.

Often banks if they can't verify you electronically request a passport scan or drivers licence, and even request they are 'certified' by a solicitor / doctor etc who can confirm you are who you say you are. I just can't see how an unverified snap with a camera phone would carry more weight than the the above process.

Seems like using technology for the sake of it to me, and I can see no evidence of any industry guidance requiring this right now.

Anyhow, it's all moot at the moment, I will be doing a 5 figure withdrawal shortly, I won't be impressed if at this stage they decide to do that having been using then for 18 months prior without.

bxboards

keyboardworrier wrote: »

Platforms need to start behaving in a responsible manner very quickly before anything else happens.

Agreed, but lenders who still invest when there is some fantastic crowd DD going on in several places also share part of the blame.

For me once I saw the BVI link and attempts to sell the property previously for years below the loan value where enough. How many red flags do folks need? I think greed when some lenders see double digit interest rates outweighs commonsense.

masonic

bxboards wrote: »

I can't understand how doing a selfie proves anything? Lets assume I want to withdraw a soon to maturing investment, and they tell me they need a selfie. I could literally get anyone to do that for me, withdraw the money, and never use the platform again. I can't see how an uncertified photo proves anythings.

Often banks if they can't verify you electronically request a passport scan or drivers licence, and even request they are 'certified' by a solicitor / doctor etc who can confirm you are who you say you are. I just can't see how an unverified snap with a camera phone would carry more weight than the the above process.

Seems like using technology for the sake of it to me, and I can see no evidence of any industry guidance requiring this right now.

Anyhow, it's all moot at the moment, I will be doing a 5 figure withdrawal shortly, I won't be impressed if at this stage they decide to do that having been using then for 18 months prior without.

I agree with all of that. Presumably, in Kuflink's opinion, this is equivalent to the situation where you go into a branch with ID and they can attest that the person in possession of the ID document is a true likeness of the photograph. But this could be done offline and a certified copy sent to them, as you mention is perfectly acceptable to others.

As I've said elsewhere, it presents a significant challenge to capture and transmit the image/video in such a way that it cannot have been tampered with (e.g. offline image/video fed through virtual cam on device). They also need to protect the information and ensure it is not possible for someone to steal the data and use it fraudulently elsewhere. I suppose if they do some sort of live link where they have a conversation with you, that might work, but that's not what they are doing.

keyboardworrier

bxboards wrote: »

Agreed, but lenders who still invest when there is some fantastic crowd DD going on in several places also share part of the blame.

For me once I saw the BVI link and attempts to sell the property previously for years below the loan value where enough. How many red flags do folks need? I think greed when some lenders see double digit interest rates outweighs commonsense.

I hold my hands up and say that I should have been more careful, but I believed in mass diversification at the time. The platform should be the first line of defence when it comes to DD and I hope lessons can be learnt!


Hopefully, one of the benefits of investing with platforms such as Kuflink and Octopus Choice is that they invest with us, which I would like to believe means they do better DD in all aspects of the loan because it means their capital is also at risk.