We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
The MSE Forum Team would like to wish you all a Merry Christmas. However, we know this time of year can be difficult for some. If you're struggling during the festive period, here's a list of organisations that might be able to help
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Has MSE helped you to save or reclaim money this year? Share your 2025 MoneySaving success stories!
RateSetter risky?
Comments
-
I'm in full agreement regarding lack of transparency, and it is clear from past misdeeds that it should not be trusted as far as loan origination is concerned. This is one reason I wouldn't lend at market rate (which at times is around 3% for the 5 year market) and require a significantly better rate for the risk I believe I am taking on.GiddyInvestor wrote: »My position is that I don’t trust RS at the moment as they are insufficiently transparent. The default rate of small loans to many people for phones are easily estimated but property loans are where you get into dangerous positions.
If RS went to a Stabilisation event they are finished and I suspect Rhydian Lewis would use every justification he could think of to not make that move. I love the idea of RS and want to return but need evidence of stability rather than obfuscation.
I've heard the argument that declaring a Stabilisation event would be tantamount to the end of the platform before, but I'm not convinced. While I see the logic behind it - that a large cohort of RS investors are naively confusing the platform with a savings account and have been conditioned on statements of "not a penny lost" to believe that such an event should not happen - I think there is an element of hyperbole in such claims. Presumably the management of RS doesn't believe it would spell the end of the platform, or they would have just kept the original "Resolution event" in which the platform was wound down in such circumstances, rather than putting a lot of noses out of joint by making the provision fund discretionary and waiving exit fees for those of us who objected strongly enough to disinvest.
As it is, it would probably be better if the provision fund were abolished and the markets run more like a collective investment scheme where investors received a single market rate and spread the risk of defaults without the false sense of security the current model affords. Given the FCA's dislike of provision funds, this might be a forced reality one day.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 246K Work, Benefits & Business
- 602.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards