Discussion
The Treasury released consulatation info about the peer to peer ISA yesterday. On a professional level, it's another miss-selling disaster just waiting to happen. Clients love the idea of big risk and big reward but as soon as there's a big loss, all of a sudden, amnesia sets in. And who'll be to blame?
I think P2P will be very successful though - Osborne sees it as populist and directly injecting cash into the economy.
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/isa-qu...
I think P2P will be very successful though - Osborne sees it as populist and directly injecting cash into the economy.
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/isa-qu...
That's it, selling the other side. With Zopa etc investors knew the risk and if they lost money or didn't make much it was their bad luck. But here the returns are fixed/promised.
The rise of these things is I suspect linked to the fact that banks don't like lending money or paying interest, so the niche has appeared.
What happened to Bank of Dave?
The rise of these things is I suspect linked to the fact that banks don't like lending money or paying interest, so the niche has appeared.
What happened to Bank of Dave?
Zopa moved to fixed returns last year having closed the previous user set loan interest book. They had been pairing down user choice options for years prior, both schemes now have some form of "protection" respectively the Zopa Safeguard and Provision Fund.
The difference being one is a unsecured retail lender offering mainly conventional retail personal loans, other is a business lender offering short term high value loans targeted specifically at property developers or investors as bridging finance. The portfolio isn't diversified so any "investor" is left highly exposed to one asset class (land, unbuilt, part-built or unsold property) the prospectus is actually quite clear on this. Even still I personally would consider Wellesley to be a higher risk and likely to trigger miselling claims should the property market correct as per '08.
I haven't studied the T&C's of either in detail recently to understand if the money is just big pot such that mass default would affect all investors or if the company is acting as agent and loss/risk remains purely with the investor(s). Zopa used to cap the risks of systematic default back to just the affected investors, I think with Wellesly the overall fund would be disembersed based on percentage invested.
The difference being one is a unsecured retail lender offering mainly conventional retail personal loans, other is a business lender offering short term high value loans targeted specifically at property developers or investors as bridging finance. The portfolio isn't diversified so any "investor" is left highly exposed to one asset class (land, unbuilt, part-built or unsold property) the prospectus is actually quite clear on this. Even still I personally would consider Wellesley to be a higher risk and likely to trigger miselling claims should the property market correct as per '08.
I haven't studied the T&C's of either in detail recently to understand if the money is just big pot such that mass default would affect all investors or if the company is acting as agent and loss/risk remains purely with the investor(s). Zopa used to cap the risks of systematic default back to just the affected investors, I think with Wellesly the overall fund would be disembersed based on percentage invested.
I know it's somewhat of a thread resurrection but thought this was the most pertinent of old threads that I could find.
Looks like Simpo was a whole year out
... https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/articl...
Hope no one here has been caught.
Looks like Simpo was a whole year out
... https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/articl...Hope no one here has been caught.
I had some money in Wellesley and managed to withdraw all but about £200 in 2018. They were continually offering bonuses for adding more money in and rolling fixed term investments over which didn't sit well with me.
"We are contacting you to offer an exclusive opportunity to receive an additional bonus paid upfront as 5% cashback when you invest into the Wellesley Property Mini-Bond."
"Your 3 Year Income bond at 4.75% has now matured. As a valued customer and to thank you for your continued loyalty, we’d like to offer you an exclusive re-investment opportunity."
etc
In the end, the returns were actually quite low in retrospect compared with the risk. I think I was very lucky to get my initial investment back plus approx 10%.
"We are contacting you to offer an exclusive opportunity to receive an additional bonus paid upfront as 5% cashback when you invest into the Wellesley Property Mini-Bond."
"Your 3 Year Income bond at 4.75% has now matured. As a valued customer and to thank you for your continued loyalty, we’d like to offer you an exclusive re-investment opportunity."
etc
In the end, the returns were actually quite low in retrospect compared with the risk. I think I was very lucky to get my initial investment back plus approx 10%.
sleepezy said:
I know it's somewhat of a thread resurrection but thought this was the most pertinent of old threads that I could find.
Looks like Simpo was a whole year out ... https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/articl...
Hope no one here has been caught.
Yay! Every time I get something right I award myself a virtual teddy-bear. Looks like Simpo was a whole year out
... https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/articl...Hope no one here has been caught.
I would just re-write the opening para thus: 'Following a strategic review and an independent analysis of its business in response to the ongoing market challenges, Wellesley is f
ked'.Well have a virtual round of applause too!
In some ways I hope the CVA fails - goes to admin and a report on conduct is made. Be interesting to see if his background alters the outcome - last person I 'worked with' who was teeming and lading was subsequently banned as a Director for 14 years (and he tried to put forward a ridiculous CVA which would have avoided a report too). Given Dazmanultra's experience of guaranteed returns for reinvestment this doesn't seem far adrift.
In some ways I hope the CVA fails - goes to admin and a report on conduct is made. Be interesting to see if his background alters the outcome - last person I 'worked with' who was teeming and lading was subsequently banned as a Director for 14 years (and he tried to put forward a ridiculous CVA which would have avoided a report too). Given Dazmanultra's experience of guaranteed returns for reinvestment this doesn't seem far adrift.
Hang on? But it looked like building society and all Victoriany and houses are like, real safe and stuff.
What could have gone wrong in lending money to people who never intended to pay it back or had been deemed very unlikely to do so? How could then have run out of mugs to lend them money at 100% risk for no credible return?
This is those evil banks at work with their pesky due diligence, regulatory frame work and client protections.
What could have gone wrong in lending money to people who never intended to pay it back or had been deemed very unlikely to do so? How could then have run out of mugs to lend them money at 100% risk for no credible return?
This is those evil banks at work with their pesky due diligence, regulatory frame work and client protections.
Simpo Two said:
Yay! Every time I get something right I award myself a virtual teddy-bear.
I would just re-write the opening para thus: 'Following a strategic review and an independent analysis of its business in response to the ongoing market challenges, Wellesley is fked'.
How many teddies in your collection then?I would just re-write the opening para thus: 'Following a strategic review and an independent analysis of its business in response to the ongoing market challenges, Wellesley is f
ked'.Literally first few seconds of the advert you are not covered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvKQ3BLSBr8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvKQ3BLSBr8
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff