johni
Member of DD Central
Posts: 368
Likes: 329
|
Post by johni on Aug 16, 2023 13:51:17 GMT
Another progress report on companies House. This explainis that they are continuing to make loads of money at lenders expense, yet failing to return any money even though they have it in the bank. Of course this is all legal because they need it as they haven't booked all the fees needed to cover this amount. When they have done more work looking for the last 50p down the back of the sofa. Which was recovered 2 days into administration, then the returns to lenders will be agreed at approximately 0.005p in the pound.
|
|
averageguy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 855
|
Post by averageguy on Aug 16, 2023 18:53:06 GMT
Yep, got the same. a long explanation of why FCA not culpable followed by compensation, which is linked to the delay and not any loss itself. Nearly missed the offer as the letter was so long winded. Thanks for the clarification. The FCA will offer small amounts for what they view as unreasonable delays in answering complaints and 'distress and inconvenience' ........... but they will fight tooth and nail to avoid paying for anything else. Edited
|
|
averageguy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,174
Likes: 855
|
Post by averageguy on Aug 16, 2023 18:56:03 GMT
Would you mind sharing a template of the letter you wrote to the FCA? Obviously removing anything that could identify you or your details - as it would help myself and others who have been sitting on the fence to highlight the issue with the FCA. Perhaps some strength in numbers? Likewise i wouldnt mind a copy
|
|
jaswells
Member of DD Central
Posts: 255
Likes: 184
|
Post by jaswells on Aug 16, 2023 21:33:42 GMT
I didnt write a letter, just an FCA complaint via their portal.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 347
Likes: 379
|
Post by mah on Aug 18, 2023 19:05:10 GMT
Interestingly, FCA actually said that given the resources they had at that time and the sudden flood of all the inheritance from its predecessors, it had no other option but to ditch us !
"During the relevant period, the FCA regulated about 58,000 firms – so it had to take a proportionate approach to the supervision of firms. In 2014, we had taken on responsibility for approximately an additional 50,000 consumer credit firms regulated by the OFT. The FCA had limited information about these firms, and so had to make difficult decisions on where to prioritise resources. The FCA chose to prioritise high-cost consumer credit, which led to significant consumer benefit. However, the FCA does not have the resources to supervise all firms to the extent that they are constantly monitored to ensure compliance with the Principles."
WoW, who would have thought that it was an optional extra and they could 'pick n choose' !
It also said that MoneyThing carried out P2P Activity without proper authorisation ! Another Collateral like situation ?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,213
Likes: 11,404
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 18, 2023 19:39:01 GMT
It also said that MoneyThing carried out P2P Activity without proper authorisation !
Another Collateral like situation ?
Where did they say that? It factually incorrect in relation to the complaints being made which relate to the period when FCA regulated MT. FCA would have had detailed information on MT from the point they submitted a Part 4A application in 2016.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 347
Likes: 379
|
Post by mah on Aug 18, 2023 19:53:15 GMT
I'll PM you.
|
|
|
Post by minionbob on Aug 27, 2023 10:14:13 GMT
I’ve had a couple of PMs querying what I put into my complaint but it’s over two years ago now. It basically concerned FCA lack of oversight and focused on the granting of permission not being robust with respect to the ‘living will’ specifically with regard to how it was funded. The FCA response reads a lot like they were dumped with regulating the area when they didn’t want to and should get sympathy for not having enough resource to do it properly.
I have been involved in environmental regulation, and the EA are not known for their efficacy and expertise, but negotiations with them often focused on the financial provision that companies needed to make should they go bust or try and walk away from their liabilities, and a range of measures were available including bonds, insurances, escrow etc. it just seems an obvious thing to ensure that the company was sufficiently robust to manage the run down of its loan book. I don’t expect any sympathy in relation to losses on loans, assuming they were based on valid information, but paying large sums, including to the failed former owners, to administer the winding up of the company for several years is not something I believe is reasonable.
|
|
joe91
Member of DD Central
Posts: 53
Likes: 62
|
Post by joe91 on Oct 9, 2023 15:01:11 GMT
Well, you certainly managed a quiet wind down, with minimum disruption. Hardly heard from you since you started. What's happening now then? WHEN ARE WE GETTING OUR MONEY BACK? ?
|
|
ganymede
Member of DD Central
Posts: 301
Likes: 208
|
Post by ganymede on Dec 6, 2023 13:59:26 GMT
Logged on today Support tag / Loan Updates, there are a whole series of Loan updates.
Some funds recovered held in trust might be distributed one day. Some sight progress, some no update / progress.
I'm not expecting to see any funds from loans until well into the new year, Administrators Loan Update is the signing off to party over XMAS/New Year period.
|
|
Jaydee
Member of DD Central
Posts: 417
Likes: 791
|
Post by Jaydee on Apr 3, 2024 10:10:46 GMT
The Administrators failure to make payment to Lenders in a quick and orderly fashion can be viewed as giving the directors and employees of MoneyThing an unfair and unjust payment by way of the agreed system of distributions from recoveries. It is incumbent upon the Administrators to act fairly and impartially and in the interests of the Lenders. By withholding payments when cash is available, they are increasing the payment to MoneyThing unjustly. Our only recourse is firstly to raise a complaint with the FCA and then take impartial legal advice.
|
|
|
Post by rp40000 on Apr 3, 2024 14:16:40 GMT
I'm happy to join you on this one. Dm me if you want to discuss further on game plan etc - I lost c.£20k with MT.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Apr 3, 2024 15:17:48 GMT
The Administrators failure to make payment to Lenders in a quick and orderly fashion can be viewed as giving the directors and employees of MoneyThing an unfair and unjust payment by way of the agreed system of distributions from recoveries. It is incumbent upon the Administrators to act fairly and impartially and in the interests of the Lenders. By withholding payments when cash is available, they are increasing the payment to MoneyThing unjustly. Our only recourse is firstly to raise a complaint with the FCA and then take impartial legal advice. My issue with administrators, they have no qualms about withholding lenders repayments for months/years on end, yet are more than happy to keep on dishing out frequent payments to directors of the collapsed firms, and a multitude of "legal fees" which on many occasions are not even to the benefit of the clients, but for the benefit of the administrator’s own legal advice. All whilst the lenders capital, who these funds are derived from go without. Its unethical and WRONG. And the FCA is where when all this is happening?
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Apr 3, 2024 15:27:29 GMT
Interestingly, FCA actually said that given the resources they had at that time and the sudden flood of all the inheritance from its predecessors, it had no other option but to ditch us !
"During the relevant period, the FCA regulated about 58,000 firms – so it had to take a proportionate approach to the supervision of firms. In 2014, we had taken on responsibility for approximately an additional 50,000 consumer credit firms regulated by the OFT. The FCA had limited information about these firms, and so had to make difficult decisions on where to prioritise resources. The FCA chose to prioritise high-cost consumer credit, which led to significant consumer benefit. However, the FCA does not have the resources to supervise all firms to the extent that they are constantly monitored to ensure compliance with the Principles."
WoW, who would have thought that it was an optional extra and they could 'pick n choose' !
It also said that MoneyThing carried out P2P Activity without proper authorisation ! Another Collateral like situation ?
Whilst this is the "excuse" from the FCA, it should be noted, that I do not believe they pushed back when they were handed this extra workload. And seeing as they charged fees for the P2P industry both for authorisation, and approval, and yearly fees, maybe it could be argued that they did not charge sufficient fees to cover their costs for adequate supervision? So, if they were unaware of the work involved and they are professionals, how are we, the retail lender, meant to know about full risk involved in utilising authorised firms when placing our funds with them? Also, if the FCA is independent, then who exactly pushed this workload onto them, as that entity, govt dept/quango therefore has influence over the FCA, and the FCA is not a fully standalone entity like they claim?
|
|
duck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,742
Likes: 6,398
|
Post by duck on Apr 4, 2024 6:46:59 GMT
The video doesnt appear to be available any more (not that I am keen to see AB yet again) but this short press release from 2018 makes interesting reading
|
|