最有看点的互联网金融门户

最有看点的互联网金融门户
全新的互联网金融模式国际资讯

那些倒闭的P2P平台后来都怎么样了?

全新的互联网金融模式国际资讯

那些倒闭的P2P平台后来都怎么样了?

如果一家P2P公司倒闭,投资者该怎么办?

Collateral是一家没什么名气的典当、房地产P2P借贷平台,据报道,目前该平台已经被政府接管,而投资人则身陷困境,不仅无法拿回自己的钱,甚至无法查看账户。

Collateral的运行并没有获得FCA授权。其临时权限已经在今年2月失效。

据了解,该平台放出的贷款累计高达850万英镑,大大超过了投资者的需求。现在投资人210万英镑投资中部分资金可能面临风险。为了收回资金,FCA(英国金融服务管理局)已经介入与Collateral合作。

昨天这条新闻成为爆炸性新闻,被登在英国《金融时报》网站头条位置。我觉得这也不意外,风头正劲的P2P破产当然很引人注目。

这种情况有先例吗?以前有P2P平台破产吗?这些投资者后来怎么样了?以下将列举一些破产的P2P平台。

Be The Lender

2014年8月,小企业在线借贷平台Be The Lender倒闭。此前,该平台不仅向投资者提供高额回报,还声称"向贷款人提供领先市场的强有力安全保护,避免客户遭受坏账冲击"。

该公司在FCA临时授权下运营,是一家名为People 2 People控股公司的子公司。该集团涵盖了一系列金融服务,员工人数一度达到上百人。该公司无力偿还债务后由政府接管。

据透露,一些员工也在Be The Lender平台上进行投资,但他们的钱实际上被借给了People 2 People集团旗下的公司。

一位投资人与我们的谈话中透露,公司出现问题后,投资者似乎拿回来一部分钱,但并非全部。

GraduRates

GraduRates是一家非常小的P2P贷款机构,专门为研究生提供贷款。2014年,针对P2P公司的新监管制度即将推出,创始人Jonathan Webb决定关闭公司。

当时P2P领先平台RateSetter介入,接手解决了GraduRates相当轻微的负债问题。因此尽管公司倒闭,但学生贷款人的情况却没有受到影响。

TrustBuddy

TrustBuddy是一家专门为消费者提供短期贷款的P2P公司。作为第一家破产的大平台,它或许是P2P破产中最有名的案例。

2015年末,一家新管理团队发现了该平台严重不当行为的证据。该平台一直"违背贷款人的意愿"使用贷款人的资金。据透露,客户的资金并没有与TrustBuddy公司的账户分开。

该管理团队的调查揭露了投资人与客户银行账户的可用余额之间存在350万英镑差额。TrustBuddy还将现有贷款(其中一些是不良贷款)重新分配,向借贷人筹集新资金,以掩盖糟糕的业绩。

新管理团队向Nasdaq OMX集团(该公司在纳斯达克交易所上市)及瑞典金融服务管理局上交了调查结果。FSA随后要求TrustBuddy立即停止服务,即投资者不能取款或存款。

对该平台的投资者来说,这个倒霉故事似乎没完没了。平台破产中个人借贷人的权利不清不楚。指定清算人一度希望出售贷款组合,试图尽力为投资人挽回损失,但这种做法遭到一些借贷人的抵制,他们坚持认为他们的贷款合同是与公司分离的财产。有争议的未偿贷款共计约240万英镑。

个人借贷人与清算人之间的基本矛盾在于是继续追索未偿贷款,还是直接卖掉公司。但随之而来的自然是长期混乱。一些报告认为投资者最终将损失四分之一本金。这一切都有力证实FCA为何有诸多针对英国P2P贷款机构的规则 (用于隔离客户账户、备份服务安排等)。

e租宝

最后这场彻头彻尾的闹剧是e租宝的破产。虽然中国失败的P2P平台也不少,但e租宝显然还是"拔得头筹"。

e租宝曾是中国最知名的P2P贷款机构之一。2016年初,该平台向借款人者发放了总计500亿元人民币(相当于76亿美元)的贷款。这一平台最终演化成一场庞氏骗局,20人因涉案被捕。

整个事件的展开就像一场电影。警方租了两台挖掘机,从地下深处挖出了1200本账簿。据说该平台34岁的创始人丁宁拿投资者的现金大肆挥霍,其新加坡的别墅价格高达1.3亿人民币,他还曾购入价值1200万人民币的粉色钻石。他的弟弟作为总经理月薪为100万人民币。根据当时的报道,该平台支持的项目中95%都是假的。

从借贷人损失的资金总额来说,e租宝毫无疑问是P2P行业历史上最大的骗局。

What happens to investors when a P2P firm collapses?

A little-known pawnbroking and property-backed peer-to-peer lending platform named Collateral has gone into administration, according to reports. Its investors are in limbo, unable to access their money or even view their accounts.

Collateral, it transpires, was not operating under FCA authorisation. Its interim permissions seem to have lapsed in February.

The platform got into trouble when it took on an £8.5m loan that significantly outweighed demand from its investors. Now some £21m of those investors’ cash is at risk. The FCA is involved and is working with Collateral, presumably to recover the funds.

Yesterday, this news was deemed significant enough to land front and centre on the website of the Financial Times. Fair enough, I suppose: punchy peer-to-peer disruptors blowing up is attention-grabbing stuff.

But is there precedent for this situation? Have P2P platforms failed in the past? And what became of their investors? Well, since you ask…

Be The Lender

Be The Lender folded in August 2014. It was a tiny peer-to-peer platform with a focus on lending to small businesses. The platform offered high returns to its investors and claimed to offer “market leading security to lenders providing strong protection from bad debts”.

The firm operated under interim permissions granted by the FCA. It was part of a holding company called People 2 People that went into administration when unable to pay its debts. The group encompassed a range of financial services, and at one time employed upwards of 100 people.

It transpired that some of those employees held investments in the Be The Lender platform, and that the businesses their money was being lent to included companies that were in fact part of the People 2 People group.

When it all went wrong, investors appeared to recover some but not all of their money, as our conversations with one such investor at the time revealed.

GraduRates

GraduRates was a very small peer-to-peer lender specialising in loans to post-graduate students. In 2014, with a new regulatory regime for P2P firms looming, its founder Jonathan Webb decided to close down operations.

It was then that leading peer-to-peer platform RateSetter stepped in to take over the servicing of the admittedly very modest GraduRates loanbook. The situation was thus unchanged for the student lenders’ borrowers, despite the business closing down.

RateSetter hailed this as an example of the P2P sector “growing up”.

TrustBuddy

TrustBuddy was a peer-to-peer firm specialising in short-term loans for consumers. It is perhaps the best-known example of a P2P blow-up because it was the first big platform to go belly-up.

A newly arrived management team uncovered evidence of serious misconduct by the platform in late 2015. The platform had been using lenders’ capital “in violation of their instructions”. Client money, it transpired, had not been held separately from the TrustBuddy company account.

The new management team’s investigation uncovered a £3.5m discrepancy between the amount owed to investors and the available balance of the client bank accounts. TrustBuddy had also been re-assigning existing loans, some of which were non-performing, to new capital deployed by lenders – thereby disguising poor performance.

The new management team informed Nasdaq OMX (the exchange on which TrustBuddy was listed) and the Swedish FSA of its findings. The FSA then demanded TrustBuddy suspend its services with immediate effect, meaning investors could not make withdrawals or deposits.

For the platform’s investors, the saga rolled on seemingly interminably. The rights of individual lenders’ in the bankruptcy was painfully unclear. The appointed liquidators at one point wished to sell off the loan portfolios in an attempt to extract as much value as possible for investors, but this course of action was resisted by some individuals, who insisted that their loan contracts were segregated property. The outstanding loanbook being squabbled over amounted to roughly £24m in size.

The fundamental argument between individual lenders and the liquidators was whether outstanding loans should be pursued or simply sold off. A protracted mess ensued. Some reports suggested investors would end up losing a quarter of their principal. The whole thing is starkly indicative of why many FCA rules for UK peer-to-peer lenders (pertaining to segregated client accounts, back-up servicing arrangements, etc.) exist.

Ezubao

Finally, the complete comedy that was the Ezubao blow-up. There are many, many examples of failed Chinese P2P platforms, but Ezubao takes the biscuit.

Ezubao was one of China’s highest profile peer-to-peer lenders. In early 2016, it transpired that the platform had fleeced its investors for a grand total of Rmb50 billion (the equivalent of $7.6bn). 20 people were arrested in connection with what turned out to be a giant ponzi scheme.

The whole thing unfolded like a film. Two excavators were hired by police to uncover 1,200 account books buried deep underground. The platform’s 34-year old founder Ding Ning was said to have used investor cash to splash out on absurdly lavish gifts, including a Rmb130m villa in Singapore and a pink diamond worth Rmb12m. His younger brother was paid Rmb1m a month as a salaried executive. 95 per cent of the projects backed by the platform turned out to be fake, according to reports at the time.

Ezubao was and is beyond shadow of a doubt the biggest scam (accounting for the largest sum of money lost by lenders) in the history of the P2P industry.


用微信扫描可以分享至好友和朋友圈

扫描二维码或搜索微信号“iweiyangx”
关注未央网官方微信公众号,获取互联网金融领域前沿资讯。

发表评论

发表评论

您的评论提交后会进行审核,审核通过的留言会展示在下方留言区域,请耐心等待。

评论

您的个人信息不会被公开,请放心填写! 标记为的是必填项

取消

吕林倩未央编辑团队

144
总文章数

TA还没写个人介绍。。。

爆雷潮下的整改:拿什么拯救你,玩脱的净值标游戏

张召 | 零壹财经 1小时前

两极分化的现金贷:一批王者归来,一批倒地不起

松子同学 | 新流财经 2小时前

未央今日播报:北京要求拟良性退出的P2P机构制定清退计划 谷歌被欧盟罚款43.4亿欧元

未央研究 18小时前

银豆网、钱爸爸、永利宝…接连爆雷,P2P终到清盘季

独角金融 20小时前

P2P良性退出,怎么操作?

肖飒 | 大成律师事... 21小时前

版权所有 © 清华大学五道口金融学院互联网金融实验室 | 京ICP备17044750号-1