Important news for P2P lending

221°
Deal Cadet
OLDBOY

Via, Neil Borate@ActusDei


India's P2P lending industry is on the tenterhooks. It may have to STOP redemptions this week unless it can get RBI relief. Let me explain why.

First, a primer on P2P lending. Concept is simple. A platform (licensed as a P2P NBFC by RBI) matches lenders and borrowers (both ordinary people). Max lender exposure is 50 lakh per lender - keeps out the big money. But people don't like the hassle of selecting borrowers. So the platforms came up with some creative interpretations of the rules.

What are these?

1)  'Secondary market' in loans. If I place a redemption order, the algo 'sells' my loan to another guy. All in the background - needs no manual intervention by me or the other guy. RBI has banned this. This was how they gave 'instant liquidity' after a 3 month lock-in.

2) Using the spread between lending and borrowing to absorb losses. Very similar to a bank. Not permitted. Now any loss must be borne by the actual lender.

3) Tie ups with fintechs so that money only goes to their users (think of Cred and Bharatpe and the 9% and 12% clubs). The P2P NBFC just acts as a 'router'. Not allowed.

4) Assuring return. FLDG (First Loss Default Guarantee) from fintechs. Both were anyway banned.

5) T+1 settlement of each repayment. The money must go from the lender's account to escrow and then to borrower and vice versa. The P2P platform can't allow you to 'check box' and just redeploy the maturing repayments to new borrowers. Imagine the cost and hassle of paying out 10 rupee EMIs every day! T+1 kicks in after 90 days.

Put together these reforms mean the end of P2P in India. The industry is desperately knocking at RBI's doors get some relief.

But why might withdrawals stop? You see to comply with the circular, the P2P NBFC cannot shuffle your loans anymore to other lenders on the platform. So your exit only comes when the loans in your portfolio mature.

The circular is silent on grandfathering and went into effect immediately on Friday, after market hours. Either the P2P guys honor redemptions this week and violate the circular or they stop redemptions.

This sorry state of affairs is a result of RBI's inertia for the past 4 yrs. It allowed the industry to grow. About 10-15 lakh small investors and 10k crore in disbursals have happened. P2Ps argued that RBI knew ever inspected them regularly and allowed their operations to continue. Hence it was all legit. Now it is not. I repeat.
@RBI
, what were you doing for the past 4 years?

If you want some background on P2P, read my earlier story on the largest P2P player Liquiloans
https://www.livemint.com/money/the-people-s-bank-that-liquiloans-has-built-11718258584707.html
Top Comments
Hotshot Hotshot
Link Copied

I once promoted p2p ,but later i was against it because i knew it would fail. I made good money with 9 % cred and 12% bhartpe on corpus of 40 lakhs. I withdrew all my money around 1 year back.

23 Comments  |  
8 Dimers
  • Sort By
Deal Newbie Deal Newbie
Link Copied
i thought.. by now there would be at-least four five posts justifying the (¿fake?) sites that give 'cashbacks' for engaging in such illegal activities.

Yes, nearly twenty years back.. was involved with a small/ core group of people with passionate zest to change many things in financial and other markets.
They did develop a stable product or backend for automated arbitrage trading in the forex markets and even the equity markets.
But the rules termed it as algorithm 'trading' and did not make any exceptions or loopholes even if the customers were ultra HNI or banks themselves playing in the forex markets in Europe, Asia.

Some of the backend modules or the know-how was then sold by that desi company (with international employees).. to foreign clients.
But within India, automated trades/ algorithm trades were in contravention of the law.
Mobile Guru Mobile Guru
Link Copied

everyone knew this 12% thing is good until the moment its not, that moment is now

Investor Guru Investor Guru
Link Copied
Not everyone

image

Deal Lieutenant Deal Lieutenant
Link Copied

hmm is this post is to scare P2P investors? when everything with respect to investing always has risks NOT ONLY P2P HAS RISK

1) Stocks has risk of becoming nearly 0, 

2) bonds has risk of default too 

3) P2P has risk of defaults too


I mean any OFFICiAL source from RBI to complement this post that scare P2P investment?


DO YOU MEAN TO SAY RBI WILL BAN P2P?

OLDBOY

Investor Guru Investor Guru
Link Copied
But the risk is much more greater in other stuff than bonds/stocks
View 7 more replies
Deal Cadet Deal Cadet
Link Copied

This post just explained what NBFCs were doing and now after the RBI circular what they will not be able to do. That's it. Do you have a comprehensive problem ?

Deal Lieutenant Deal Lieutenant
Link Copied

I mean can you post the RBI circular as reference that will help

Deal Lieutenant Deal Lieutenant
Link Copied

Lets wait and see how this goes:) already instant withdrawal from P2P flexi schemes got removed some months ago, now have to wait and see how P2P lenders makes their platform:) for 3months and more schemes

Helpful Helpful
Link Copied

Does this affect invoice discounting too?

Hotshot Hotshot
Link Copied

I once promoted p2p ,but later i was against it because i knew it would fail. I made good money with 9 % cred and 12% bhartpe on corpus of 40 lakhs. I withdrew all my money around 1 year back.

Deal Cadet Deal Cadet
Link Copied

Me too with MobiKwik 12% with no restriction plus 1% referral benefits. I withdrew everything when they changed and started tinkering with the duration limit.

View 2 more replies
Hotshot Hotshot
Link Copied

the problem is now that if your money is loaned to 100 individual and if 20-30 do not give it back then your corpus would be 20/30% negative meaning you will directly loose rs 20 from rs 100(corpus) meaning rs 80 +12% interest which will not be equal to your original corpus. I think it is a right decision else at one point some people will get zero return as all the funds have dried up.

replyuser
Click here to reply
Reply