Member Info for Beevorma

no idea, if they've been discussing it with them though and made this agreement to get it all cleared by end June then logic also says they've been discussing the underlying issue. Whether the output is "you can't lend anymore" or "you can continue to lend but you need to check absolutely everything" either scenario is better than just lending and expecting a variable claims amount. Any RNS released that says "we've now got it sorted" and this will rocket, even if the bill is €50m.

Blind if you we read the Q3 results it should be a matter of a few million, we will never know the real figure until as you mention below we know for sure all new lending is being done in accordance with the guidelines "set in stone"
i want to see number of claims, what period they relate to and if they relate to anything past Q3 last year HOW THE HELL is that possible. The board would be on the hook for misleading investors and i'd sure as hell put my money into following that up.

Blind if you we read the Q3 results it should be a matter of a few million, we will never know the real figure until as you mention below we know for sure all new lending is being done in acccccccccccccccccfc

New lending from Q3 last year was supposed to be clean, hence my email to Kate about them putting in the update some more specifics regarding the claims rather than just a lump sum...

Not showing anything past 16:20?
7.4m sells though, looks like JB wasn’t joking

you're not missing anything BB, JB is missing patience!

49p now, smashing it...

meanwhile my cheeky little bet on STAF seems to have paid off, was only a couple of k but i'll take whatever I can get at the moment!

i didn't think laws applied to listed companies? well not my my experience anyway otherwise people like Dave Sefton would be behind bars!
Buys outstripping sells 2:1 again, but sentiment has us down...?

and as i said that it's just plummeted, happy days.
should have sold out at 14p when i had the chance, always a gift of hindsight!

i quite liked the theory that came up yesterday.
TRG has the relationship agreement with Amigo which limits his control, sell your holding to a series of smaller companies and control it that way.
If we have someone lapping up every 1%, then supply equals demand and we shouldn't be dropping that much?

agree with the amigo part.
SXX didn't have the option of Gov funding, couldn't get it even though the local MP was lobbying the Government for it. I'm well versed on their woes given it cost me about 7k.

just got the following response...

Dear Lord Beevorma,

Yes, well thank you. I hope you are too. Thanks for your email.

As you know, we are in a close period ahead of reporting our full year results and therefore I am unfortunately very limited in what I can discuss with you. For now therefore all I can say is that we will give more information on complaints, redress and level of provision with our results and would ask that you bear with us until then.

Many thanks,

Kate.

Other than poor boards I don’t see how sxx and amigo are comparable at all

Sean there are some rules he would have to adhere to as even with a new company it would still be a takeover, something along the lines of having to make a bid at the highest price paid over the past 12 months but i'm far from knowledgeable on that topic...

i think they had additional countries in mind with the original strategy which probably inflated the SP (bit like PURP)

HH just made you famous on twitter

Hi Yuri,

Yes i know, but it still seems logical to me that if the FCA says X, and we do X, then the FAC should stand by our decision to reject these claims i.e. the claims will continue, but the pay outs won't!
I've sent as follows anyway, let you know if/when i get a response...

Dear Kate,

Hope you are well.
I have some questions on behalf of myself and a number of other shareholders regarding the current situation Amigo is facing with regards to rising claims numbers, supported by the FCA.

On 27th November & 28th November 2019 the following updates were given via RNS:
• Half year report - Received FCA feedback on Guarantor Lending
• Regulatory Update - Hamish Paton, CEO of Amigo, said:
"We are grateful for the significant amount of time and effort that the FCA has committed to the Review and we take on board all of the improvements they have identified. These will be good for customers and other stakeholders, and further reinforce our strategy of doing the right thing for all our borrowers and guarantors."

At this point the impression given to the market was that all lending was now being conducted in a manner that was satisfactory to the FCA, and in the 3rd quarter results on 27th February 2020 lending had continued, but claims provisions were increased to cover the period of lending to 31/12/2019 (without any disclosure of the actual number of claims and indicating the former statement regarding responsible lending was not correct).
Shortly after this on 4th March 2020, James Benamor resigned from the board and claimed that Amigo was still lending in violation of the previous findings, this was refuted by the board on 5th March 2020 stating:
“The Company monitors its loan book regularly and has concluded, as part of its Q3 review process, that it does not have a systemic problem. In the Company's Q3 results, it announced a £18.7m provision. This provision relates to both the estimated costs of customer complaints received up to 31 December 2019 and the projected costs of potential future complaints on certain higher risk historic loans.

Most worrying however is that on 8th June 2020 Amigo announced that it had seen a further significant increase in claims and that it was expected that “clearing the backlog of complaints covered by the Voluntary Requirement will be at least £35 million and could be materially higher.” This indicates that Amigo is continuing to pay out on these claims despite the fact that all lending should have been done according to the improvements suggested by the FCA. If this is the case then this surely effects the going concern of the business and this should have been made clearer to shareholders.

Could you please therefore confirm:
1. Up until today, what period of lending do the claims received relate to?
2. How many claims have been processed in total and what % have been paid out on?
3. Why has Amigo continued to pay out on claims when the lending was “done responsibly” in accordance

SUFC sorry you've had to swallow that loss mate. i had the chance to sell at about 13.8p as soon as i saw the 1st resolution failed but chose to hang on.
For now buys are outstripping sells by 2:1, if there's no market for JB's shares this will sink but if someone wants to lap them up it'll probably dance around here.

hopefully see you back in soon either way

casualinvestorJ - Twit