Latest Comments

In response to: Wonga move into peer-to-peer lending

easteregg [Member]
Unfortunately the site didn't even last a year and has subsequently been closed down.
PermalinkPermalink 12/01/15 @ 11:01
Tobias

In response to: isePankur.ee attracting British lenders

Tobias [Visitor]
how many percent german lenders make up ?
PermalinkPermalink 26/11/13 @ 12:37
T Bradley

In response to: RateSetter P2P returns

T Bradley [Visitor]
I apologise for the latest email after reading your response again I think you have answered my question
PermalinkPermalink 19/11/13 @ 11:06

In response to: RateSetter P2P returns

admin [Member]
In response to the previous comment, your monthly payment should stay the same, but the interest element will reduce, whereas the capital element will increase. If you reinvest the funds the monthly repayments will increase as the overall balance increases.
PermalinkPermalink 14/11/13 @ 11:18
T Bradley

In response to: RateSetter P2P returns

T Bradley [Visitor]
I invested in a 5year plan with Ratesetter but I am confused and unable to find out about monthly interst. I am taking the interest every month and reinvesting the capital back into the plan, which I am happy with at the moment, and want to know if my monthly interest will reduce over the 5 years. I know this is difficult due to the varying rates but assuming the rate never changes will my interest reduce
PermalinkPermalink 14/11/13 @ 11:05
Anton

In response to: Nicola Horlick to launch crowdlending business

Anton [Visitor]
Let's hope for the best.
PermalinkPermalink 12/11/13 @ 22:12
James

In response to: Funding Circle pass £150million in loans

James [Visitor]
As of 22nd October, Funding Circle have comfortably passed the 163 million mark, which makes it 13 million loaned in one month. Not bad going for a company that didn't even exist four years ago!
PermalinkPermalink 22/10/13 @ 06:34
GA Davies

In response to: News coverage of P2P lending

GA Davies [Visitor]
As a potential borrower I found the Funding circle very slow to follow up on our trading figures which we sent to them. They charge 3% for the FC and about 9% for the lender. This puts them higher than the bank,( 8.9%) so the scheme is not viable..
PermalinkPermalink 07/08/13 @ 10:31
A different James

In response to: P2P regulation - what do you want?

A different James [Visitor]
ISAs and SIPPs mainly. Do not want to see interference in lending or secondary markets.
PermalinkPermalink 25/07/13 @ 05:55
James

In response to: P2P regulation - what do you want?

James [Visitor]
Would be nice to be able to use S&S ISA allowance for P2P leaning.
PermalinkPermalink 24/07/13 @ 18:26
Matt

In response to: Santander eyes move into P2P lending

Matt [Visitor]
Terrible idea.
PermalinkPermalink 23/07/13 @ 09:11
FundingSecure

In response to: Peer-to-peer pawnbroking

FundingSecure [Visitor]
Hi. I believe peer to peer lending can be adapted to many forms of borrowing, pawnbroking being one of them. It is subprime credit, I will agree. However, we take control of the asset, i.e, it is transported by us, professionally valued by our experts and stored in our secure units. So there’s no real collection process other than auctioning the asset. Pawnbroking is another form of a secure loan which protects savers’ investments and earns them a decent return. Presently our borrowers are setting interest rates for savers between 10%-13%. And with zero fees being charged by us, we think that’s a good return.
PermalinkPermalink 11/07/13 @ 14:58
Peer Lending Advisors

In response to: Peer-to-peer pawnbroking

Peer Lending Advisors [Visitor]
I'm a big fan of Peer-to-Peer Lending, but Peer-to-Peer pawnbroking doesn't make a lot of sense to me. The best part of Peer-to-Peer Lending is the superior, Prime credit. Dealing in Pawnbroking includes subprime credit and lots of collections - not something that Peer-to-Peer is set up to do well.
PermalinkPermalink 04/07/13 @ 05:06
Daniel

In response to: Funding Circle rate change comments

Daniel [Visitor]
The complaints about "liquidity" seem to be misplaced. Funding Circle was never meant to be a market for speculators flipping loans. The secondary market was always intended for people needing to cash in their investments, for whatever reason, hence the limit of 3% discount/premium on sales. If this scares the speculators away then so much the better. The secondary market is looking a lot better for buyers now. I have been buying more than I have done for a long time. Of course, I am buying at rates that I am happy to hold for the duration of the loan, which is what I intend to do.

Some of the other complaints just seem to boil down to "I recently lent/bought a load of loans at stupid low interest rates and now I look stupid." Yeah, well. Who's fault is that?

Where there is some room for legitimate complaint is how this drastic change was swung on us without notice, although at least it was a mostly beneficial change (unlike Zopa's recent drastic changes which have killed Zopa for me and left me withdrawing my money as interest comes in because you simply can't get money out at any rate at all unless you sign up to "Safeguard").

I also worry a little that loans are now funded so quickly that there is no time to check out the borrowers or to ask them questions.

I also worry that the minimum rates are a bit too high for the B and C markets. Admittedly, they are only a little bit higher than I have my Autolend set to but then I was always happy to lend manually at lower rates than my Autolend rates on decent loans with good asset security on them. In fact, in the run up to this change I had pretty much been focussing exclusively on secured loans as the others did not seem to offer any sort of sensible risk adjusted return.

So, in my view, there is room for a few tweaks to the new system but I still see it as mostly positive.
PermalinkPermalink 29/06/13 @ 17:55
James

In response to: Funding Circle rate change comments

James [Visitor]
Agree with your comments, re. the longer term picture. However, shorter term, there appears to be (judging by the FC Forum Comments) a not insignificant number of lenders now locked into loans they intended to sell-on, and are much less likely to be able to do so. They are, understandably, not happy. I'm an FC lender who is less unhappy, but I still don't appreciate such a radical change being rushed into place without any prior warning. It has profoundly altered the bidding process on C-based loans. Indeed, because loans are now being filled much faster at these minimum/floor rates, there is now almost no point in asking questions of the borrower because the auction will have been filled at the minimum rate by the time you've finished typing.

In my opinion, rushing these minimum limits into place is a massive balls-up on the part of FC, and they are going to lose some of their lender base as a result of it. People do not appreciate having their money locked into an asset they believed to be liquid. It's one thing when normal market forces cause a loss of liquidity. It's quite another when it is done by a centrally planned change.
PermalinkPermalink 25/06/13 @ 06:38
Barrie Lindsey

In response to: Funding Circle and RateSetter win awards

Barrie Lindsey [Visitor]
Peer to Peer lending is not all its cracked up to be and the rates are misleading. If you lend £10,000 for 5 years at 5%, you will receive a fixed payment every month that consists of both capitol and interest. But as the capitol decreases you only get 5% interest on what is still owed. So month after month the fixed payment is more capitol repayment and less interest. Lending with Rate Setter, a £10,000 loan at 5% gives a Net return (after fees) of £11,296. A 5 year Fixed Rate Bond with interest at 2.44% AER will give the same return. The only way to beat these rates is to loan to the high risks borrowers. Not recommended!!
PermalinkPermalink 12/06/13 @ 21:24
J Robertson at Veganline.com

In response to: ReBuildingSociety on CrowdCube

J Robertson at Veganline.com [Visitor]
The pitch valued the company by hours worked, which is a good system but not great for investors anticipated expansion seems out of proportion.

What it does do is emhasise that investors would to better lending on Rebuildingsociety than investing in it! As a rival investor, it pains me to encourage competition. But the current DIY wordpress site is as bad as my own, or nearly as bad, with long routes to vital pages and wonky letter spacing which both put lenders off. The problem is so bad that loans have to be re-advertised and come round again because of low or expensive take-up.

So:
-investors welcome
-rival lenders welcome too
JR
PermalinkPermalink 21/04/13 @ 17:16
Daniel Rajkumar

In response to: ReBuildingSociety on CrowdCube

Daniel Rajkumar [Visitor]
Thanks for sharing this.

To give readers a performance update, we're now 6% funded. I have had a lot of interest on the forums which make for interesting reading.

We're close to having successfully funded £250k and forecast to have funded £1m by the end of June.

We're also developing some exciting strategic relationships - soon to be announced.

Dan Rajkumar
PermalinkPermalink 21/04/13 @ 12:04
Geoff

In response to: RateSetter provision fund

Geoff [Visitor]
While there's no independent regulator of P2P, I think it is vital that Ratesetters (& other p2p's) provide complete information on their websites.

The Ratesetters website offers no link (that I could find) to this independant Trust which holds this provisional fund. The details offered seem sparse

www.ratesetter.com/lending/provision_fund.aspx#principles

Surely the Ratesetter site needs to offer a link to this trust, so we can see the trust's objects or articles? Ratesetter's site (or a link to the Trust) needs to show who the trustees are and show their independent to the Ratesetter business.

The trustees running this trust on behalf of the lenders need to publish a regular independent report about how well the trust is funded and performing, compared to the Trust's objectives?

Where is the link on the Ratesetters site to the annual accounts of this trust. Do Ratesetter or the provisional fund finance its operation?

If the cash in this fund and the trust that holds & manages it has been transferred to a new trust within just a couple of years of operation. Shouldn't this press release mention why and the lenders be told?

(I continue to lend via Ratesetters, I'm questioning the lack of full, transparent information on their website, rather than their operations)
PermalinkPermalink 26/03/13 @ 11:27
Ray

In response to: Government lending through Funding Circle

Ray [Visitor]
This annoys me on two counts.

1. The only way councils could have obtained funds for this kind of activity must have been by overtaxing their long suffering residents and businesses. I would far rather they reduced business rates and council tax and stuck to the provision of basic services.

2. I fear that they will get more favourable deals than I can. This is similar to the ludicrous 'funding for lending' effect on savings deposit rates generally.

I'm out.
PermalinkPermalink 25/03/13 @ 13:06
colin henders

In response to: Funding Circle passes the £80million mark

colin henders [Visitor]
I seem to have account problems with FC. Anyone else had issues? I have missing funds and a not very sensible reply from FC.
PermalinkPermalink 22/03/13 @ 21:17

In response to: Customer participation at the heart of P2P Finance

easteregg [Member]
Hi Rodney,
Thanks for the feedback and I'll certainly consider how we can do this !
PermalinkPermalink 19/02/13 @ 10:36
Dave Martyn

In response to: Where should P2P newcomers begin?

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
Where should P2P newcomers begin?

1. By not accepting the laughable rates available on Ratesetter’'s Monthly Access, now below 2%. You can still beat that with some banks and building societies if you are prepared to put some work into it. In fact I would recommend avoiding Ratesetter altogether until rates start to move upwards as their 1, 3 and 5 year offerings aren’t attractive at present.

2. Don’t chase low rates on Funding Circle auctions and ensure that when you do bid, you have carried out due diligence on the firm making the loan request.
PermalinkPermalink 17/02/13 @ 20:43
Rodney Buckland

In response to: Customer participation at the heart of P2P Finance

Rodney Buckland [Visitor]
Hazel's done it again!

As she so efficiently and effectively says, the future of P2P and P2B lending and borrowing will very much depend on the empathic design capabilities of the various platforms. I have been distributing my lending across several platforms for five years or so, but am now favouring platforms that are the most responsive to my suggestions for incremental improvements in their user interfaces. I suggest that P2PMoney adds a 'user interface' rating to its comparison tables.
PermalinkPermalink 17/02/13 @ 08:59
Rodney Buckland

In response to: P2P companies show an increase in late payments

Rodney Buckland [Visitor]
You quote percentages for 'overall late payments' but do not define the numerator and denominator. What is the definition of these quantities?
PermalinkPermalink 17/02/13 @ 08:38
Steve Davis

In response to: Rates fall on peer-to-peer lending

Steve Davis [Visitor]
The low rates are likely to persist while the government insists on breaking up P2P lending by guaranteeing money, and some bidders having absolutely no intention of keeping the debt longer than it takes to resell it.

This leaves to much money chasing too little debt, plus some bidders seem happy to lend at negative interest rates.
PermalinkPermalink 26/01/13 @ 08:04
Dave Martyn

In response to: RateSetter break £50million barrier

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
Further to my comments of 13/01/13 regarding “City Boys” manipulating Ratesetter, I suggest that you consider the following screen shot taken at 15:30 hours 22/01/13.
You will notice that there are loan requests for £3,113.20 on both monthly access and 1 year. The fact that this is the second time in the last 24 hours where there have been identical amounts requested on both investment options is more than a coincidence and adds weight to my theory therefore I repeat that small investors should boycott Ratesetter.

Monthly Access
Market View
2.1%Current Rate:
Below is the current Monthly Access market.
Placing your first order?
Borrowers Rate Lenders
>>2.5% £209.8k
2.4% £65.3k
2.3% £36,973.95
£3,113.20 2.1%
£6.9k 2.0%
Last matched Rate: 2.0%, matches last 24 hours: 403

1 Year Bond
Market View
3.3%Current Rate:
Below is the current 1 Year Bond market.
Placing your first order?
Borrowers Rate Lenders
>>3.6% £95.0k
3.5% £29.4k
3.4% £17,277.10
£3,113.20 3.3%
£7.0k 3.1%
Last matched Rate: 3.4%, matches last 24 hours: 73
PermalinkPermalink 22/01/13 @ 13:46
Dave Martyn

In response to: RateSetter increases cashback to £20

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
“With rates on the 3 year and 5 year fixed rate loans starting to rise, now is an excellent time to become a lender on RateSetter.”
Unfortunately that’s not the case for monthly access or 1 year bonds which are now at bad joke levels.
To prove the point, the following is a screen shot of the Ratesetter site taken at 19:00 hours 13/01/13:
Current Rates
AERs available now
MONTHLY ACCESS
1.9%

1 YEAR BOND
3.0%

3 YEAR INCOME
4.7%

5 YEAR INCOME
5.9%


I repeat the suggestion I made last year that “City Boys” are manipulating the monthly access market in order to borrow at ridiculously low rates in order to “short” on other investments and repay the RS loan out of the profits.
Nothing illegal in that but that’s no consolation to small investors looking for a reasonable return and a good reason to avoid Ratesetter until rates return to a sensible level.
PermalinkPermalink 13/01/13 @ 17:20
Dave Martyn

In response to: Rates fall on peer-to-peer lending

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
I must beg to differ about Rate Setter.

The rates have been appalling for some time now, see my comment dated 30/11/12 when rates for monthly access were 2.2% and they have subsequently fallen even lower, whilst 1 year loans were attracting only 3.2% as recently as yesterday, 7/1/13.

It’s still possible to achieve better instant access rates with some bank and building societies therefore my money is staying with those institutions until I see better rates on RS. After all, I’m an investor looking to make money, not a charity!

I sincerely hope that your forecast of increased demand for loans will push rates higher proves correct.
PermalinkPermalink 08/01/13 @ 21:55

In response to: Predictions for 2013

easteregg [Member]
Apologies - the link was in the text, but I've repeated it here: http://www.p2pmoney.co.uk/predictions.htm
PermalinkPermalink 03/01/13 @ 20:41
Dave Martyn

In response to: Predictions for 2013

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
I’m probably being obtuse and I’ll freely admit to not being an expert in the use of the internet, computers generally and technology but where’s the article?
PermalinkPermalink 30/12/12 @ 18:20
DevonshireDozer

In response to: Why government P2P lending is good for lenders

DevonshireDozer [Visitor]
Not sure I agree. I can see how it might translate into benefits for the lenders' managements but not much else.

Every time governments meddle, spreading the taxpayers' money around with gay abandon, things get worse for most of us. As far as I can see, the dimwits that rule us take our wads, peel some off for themselves (MPs salaries, expenses, Whitehall Mandarins' mega-wages & perks etc.) & give what's left to a few of their friends. These chums then take some for themselves and waste the residue on lost causes or give it, in turn, to their pals. Later they might get gongs, quango appointments or even become government ministers & advisers. So the wheel turns . . .

My main concern is that the government might get better terms than the rest of us & we are at risk of being marginalised. Something similar has happened to so many small shareholders have been in the past. The disgraceful shenanigans at what used to be LloydsTSB is a good example. Of course, given the governments general negotiating ability in the past (for instance, at the MoD), they won't have read the small print. Doubtless there will be large penalties payable to such as Goldman Sachs at some point.

It would have been better to have given generous tax breaks to individuals lending via authorised & regulated P2P lenders. Simple, quick, easy & probably put a lot more money out there. So it'll never happen!
PermalinkPermalink 14/12/12 @ 08:02

In response to: Christmas bargains

easteregg [Member]
I've updated the post with some data from Zopa taken from the excellent ljay.org.uk which provides market information on Zopa.
PermalinkPermalink 07/12/12 @ 19:30
Funding Knight

In response to: Peer-to-peer to become regulated

Hazel McHugh [Member]
You can read FundingKnight's positive response to regulation http://blog.fundingknight.com/2012/12/07/fsa-to-regulate-peer-to-peer-lending-crowdlending-gets-a-boost/
We welcomed today's announcement, especially since we've already been talking to the FSA about regulating certain parts of our business and are well advanced in the process, which should hopefully make us the first regulated P2P Lender in the UK.
PermalinkPermalink 07/12/12 @ 16:05
Rodney Buckland

In response to: Christmas bargains

Rodney Buckland [Visitor]
Where is the evidence for this? Over the years and aggregating experience from several platforms, I have found the complete opposite is true.

RAB
PermalinkPermalink 07/12/12 @ 08:36
Dave Martyn

In response to: RateSetter lender improvements

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
The improvements are fine, pity about the rates for lenders!!

A current loan request on monthly access at 2.2% is simply taking the mickey to put it politely.

No thanks, I’ll keep my hard earned brass in the bank until rates start to increase.

PermalinkPermalink 30/11/12 @ 22:31
Dave Martyn

In response to: Collaborative consumption and P2P finance

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
To quote from the article:
“According to Rachel Botsman, one of the best known proponents of collaborative consumption, there are four essential principles:
1. Critical mass
2. Idling capacity
3. Belief in the commons
4. Trust between strangers
Then come the ‘softer’ values of a new mindset that places a greater value on:
• Simplicity
• Traceability and transparency
• Participation”

And according to me that’s a whole lot of high falutin pseudo academic bull**** that Ms Botsman is spouting.

PermalinkPermalink 26/11/12 @ 21:43

In response to: Encash / YES-secure down

easteregg [Member]
YES-secure / Encash have now resolved the problems.

Dear Members,

YES-secure website was unavailable due to some unavoidable database issue. We sincerely apologise for the inconvenience caused. encash services have now been restored.

Sincere apologies for the inconvenience caused.

Regards
YES-secure Support Team
PermalinkPermalink 05/11/12 @ 19:34
John Robertson

In response to: Could Zopa move into P2B lending ?

John Robertson [Visitor]
Hope they lend to business.

Burnley Savings and Loans has a queue over year long to lend to business, because that's important and pays good returns.

At the other end of the scale, when Zopa had a more direct person to person market, some of the borrowers wanted a dream wedding. I don't think it helps anyone to encourage a dream wedding. It only encourages the import of chinese goods bought in part because there isn't enough lending to UK business.
PermalinkPermalink 06/08/12 @ 16:58

In response to: Lies, damn lies and statistics

easteregg [Member]
With any market there will always be supply and demand. P2P is growing in popularity that rates to lenders are starting to fall, but then as borrower demand increases they will rise.

The monthly market on RateSetter has been extremely popular with lenders and borrowers and I'm sure this is a big part of their overall business.
PermalinkPermalink 24/07/12 @ 13:06
Dave Martyn

In response to: Lies, damn lies and statistics

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
An addition to my comment of 23/07/2012.

I posted the same comment on the RateSetter forum to which I received an email response from RS and following my reply to this, received a phone call from RS this morning.

I’m not suggesting for one moment any malpractice on the part of RateSetter but my comments appear to have rattled some cages and the expression “no smoke without fire” comes to mind.

I’ll leave readers to draw their own conclusions.

PermalinkPermalink 24/07/12 @ 11:41
Lee Carr

In response to: Crowdfunding vs P2P lending

Lee Carr [Visitor]
Tradional sources of lending are not flowing as they were and impeding comercial loans and therefore business growth in the UK. P2P lending is a varible alternative.
PermalinkPermalink 23/07/12 @ 13:50
Dave Martyn

In response to: Lies, damn lies and statistics

Dave Martyn [Visitor]
This is all very nice but pointless when you get blatant manipulation of Ratesetter’s Monthly Access platform as has happened twice in July 2012.

Lender offers have got steadily lower to the point where they dropped to 3.3% over the weekend of 21st / 22nd July and then right on cue this morning, 23rd July, there were 11 borrower requests totalling well in excess of £50000 at 3.3%.

Don’t anyone try telling me that this isn’t manipulation which, I strongly suspect is instigated by “City Boys” or similar, borrowing at low rates in order to “short” the market.

Once again the smaller investor is being shafted by the spivs in the City of London therefore I suggest a campaign of withdrawing funds from RateSetter until rates return to a more sensible level, there are a number of places where you can achieve 3.2% if not 3.3% monthly.

Fight back!

PermalinkPermalink 23/07/12 @ 11:00
Wiseclerk

In response to: League table of P2P performance

Wiseclerk [Visitor]
The table seems to suggest there are no bad debt figures on Squirrl available.
Actually they are online on their website
https://www.squirrl.com/uk/eng/Statistics/Overview
Not that they are meaningful yet, with that marketplace only a few months past launch

P.S.: In the table "lending attributes" the note 5 seems to be placed in the wrong field
PermalinkPermalink 17/07/12 @ 20:14
Rodney Buckland

In response to: What makes a P2P company successful ?

Rodney Buckland [Visitor]
While I agree that 'innovative products', 'targeted marketing', 'promotions' and 'keeping trust' are important enablers of success in the P2P/P2B domain, I would add
'relative advantage', '(lack of) complexity' and 'compatibility (with other successful providers and with user needs and wants)' to the mix.
Zopa and Ratesetter perform very well in my additional criteria. Yes-Secure/Encash doesn't seem to have a clue, and there is no sign that the management want to learn. Sadly, when Yes-Secure ceases trading - as it almost certainly will - it's going to have a significant negative impact on this young sector.
PermalinkPermalink 15/06/12 @ 16:23

In response to: YES-secure consider closing their forum

easteregg [Member]
I've had requests to open up a forum on P2P money for YES-secure. The response I received from YES-secure was concerning. More to follow later...
PermalinkPermalink 06/06/12 @ 20:50

In response to: New entrant Squirrl.com

easteregg [Member]
I should also state that it was Wiseclerk that broke the story yesterday about Squirrl.com, and many thanks for your coverage of this.
PermalinkPermalink 18/05/12 @ 12:16
Wiseclerk

In response to: New entrant Squirrl.com

Wiseclerk [Visitor]
I will publish an interview with Sophie Coles next week on P2P-Banking.com
PermalinkPermalink 18/05/12 @ 12:13
Dave Gibson

In response to: Is Funding Circle squeezing out the genuine lender ?

Dave Gibson [Visitor]
Since posting my comment earlier today I visited Funding Circle and couldn't help but notice that one of the individuals I referred to must be feeling the pinch as they can only muster 110 x £100 i.e £11000 of multiple bids against one loan request.

I can't be bothered to check how much they have bid on other loans but I'm convinced that the city parasites are now manipulating FC at least.
PermalinkPermalink 03/04/12 @ 12:59
Dave Gibson

In response to: Is Funding Circle squeezing out the genuine lender ?

Dave Gibson [Visitor]
I must say that I agree with John Robertson's comments regarding UK manufacturing.

However, the irony of the situation is that it is probably the very people (the bankers)who won't lend to the manufacturing sector who are controlling Funding Circle and now Rate Setter where some pretty sizeable amounts have been placed in recent days.

Like you Easter Egg, I put in modest multiple bids but when one individual, as happened last week, places 130 bids each of £100, i.e. £13000 in one block on one Funding Circle loan request whilst having in excess of £50000 bid on other requests I can only conclude that the spivs are now into what used to be known as "Social Lending"
PermalinkPermalink 03/04/12 @ 11:03