Alt Lending Week ending 3rd. June 2022

Gullibility in untrained and poorly regulated financial markets

The Times chronicles how investors are so easily fooled by plausible crooks with a business card and a suit. For Investors, some of whom are supposed to be professionals read lenders. The basis of this is that three fund managers working for a German Insurance company fooled investors by simply falsifying numbers and sounding reasonable. It highlights todays lack of professional training in risk and that regulation is often poorly directed. I have recently seen something similar in spades when a so called seasoned professional was completely fooled by a bunch of charlatans with fool’s gold in the form of a power point presentation. On top of this the same man tried to get a regulated institution heavily influenced by an unregulated London based chancer to lend  more than half a billion dollars to two separate and uncreditworthy borrowers. Too many chancers are not on the FCA’s radar. The lesson. Do your due diligence and don’t believe everything you hear just because you want to.

If professionals  can’t handle charlatans how are the rest of us supposed to?

This was a helpful little article highlighting the different ways credit card offerings work and how it can confuse people with. It is useful because it points out the ways that regulation can work against an honest punter. For example making too many applications for a new card in a short period of time can mean a greater chance of rejection. Why? Because that’s what the application software says. Does it make any sense? Sometimes yes, sometimes no. Buying finance is not like buying other products. The lenders know a lot about you but they don’t always use the evidence correctly. You on the other hand know nothing about them.  This all stems from regulation but it is they who are regulated and you who are left to the consequences.

Revolut’s Head of Compliance quits

As in so many unexplained resignation reports I wonder what has really gone on here. There were the usual denials and statements that they have a lot of people working in compliance and legal, things like that. It is quite obvious thought hat there was a serious disagreement within the organisation and Revolut are not going to tell anyone what caused it without having it dragged out of them. Despite the fact that this company is still essentially a start up it is like many of its counterparts arguably massively overvalued and should keep its shareholders fully informed of disagreements at  the top of the company. We know that there has a been a reorganisation of responsibilities and that there have been regulatory criticism in the past. Is it too much to ask for the shareholders and depositors to be told the truth. Apparently yes.

 

Howard Tolman is a well-known banker, technologist and entrepreneur in London,We have a self imposed constraint of 3 news stories per week because we serve busy senior  Fintech leaders who just want succinct and important information. For context on Alt Lending please read the Interview with Howard Tolman about the future of Alt Lending and read articles tagged Alt Lending in our archives.

Daily Fintech’s original insight is made available to you for US$143 a year (which equates to $2.75 per week). $2.75 buys you a coffee (maybe), or the cost of a week’s subscription to the global Fintech blog – caffeine for the mind that could be worth $ millions.

Start the conversation at Daily Fintech Conversations