Member Info for Jonno41

I mean dramatically decreased!

Not sure if anyone else has said this, but Amigo had 1163 complaints between Jan - Jun this years that went to FOS - compare to about 300 in the previous period. @ £600 a complaint thats £700K in fees along. I hope those numbers have dramaitcaly increased now we know (hope) they are giving focus to complaints

How many fake posters do we have on this board, I think I have counted numerous in the last few days.. Good game though, come up with a probably statement and make it out to be a fact. Make 2 or 3 different statements with 2 or 3 different accounts, and one of them will probably turn out to be true, then you can follow it up with "I told you so", and then some unfortunatel souls will start believing you.

Sigh...

I would hope that if our CEO is any good, he will ensure the loan approval process is whiter than white to minimise complaints going forward. I am guessing the job adverts people have been posting has been to process some change control, and inforce rigourous processes - although that does not seem to be the case with your experience which is slightly concerning....

Bearing in mind it is £600 every time a complaint goes to FOS, I am hoping Amigo will be in the process of identifying all loans that they have a greeed where there could be a case against them, and offering compensation. Say they pay compensation to 500 previous customer they believe FOS would of upheld. That would save them £300K and would also make the no win no fee companies less attracted to Amigo, as if Amigo identify and compensate customers who have a claim, the claims company will have a harder job finding people with a genuine claim that can be won.

Thanks for that Clintek - I assume your son is a critical worker so would of been able to apply for the loan? Of course we do not know how many loans have been agreed by Amigo in the last fews months. Not sure if the market has allcated any value to the loans that have been agreed, would be interesting to see some figures from amigo as it could be quite profitable.

Trustpilots entire busines model is to acquire bad reviews to make companies pay them so they can flood them with good reviews - something Amigo cannot do as they are not lending - the best way to get a good review is to ask the person who has borrowed the money to write a review before they have spent it and then do not want to pay it back!

These reviews have been written by lots of people (and I am generalising) who have borrowed money they cannot pay back and sometimes the guarantor is having to pay their installments. So they are embarrassed and fighting for their families money under the guise that they should never have been lent it in the first place (this is becuase they have heard the FOS are ruling in thier favour). And most of them will say anything in order to get some money back from amigo. Surely people should take some responsibiliy for themselves... if I earn £5000 a month and have overheads of £4500 I am not going to take out a loan with repayments of £1000 a month because I will not be able to meet them. And if I did and my dad had to pay them back, that's my problem and I ahve to deal with it.

I do buy that Amigo perhaps have not asked enough questions, but trust me, I own a company with a very goood reputation, I pride myself in the quality and price competitiveness of my products (and the quality of my customer service), yet if you read some of the reviews on Trustpilot you would think I was (almost) as bad as amigo, but when it comes to an FCA regulated companies, people will say anything when they think they think there is money in it.....

GLA

The reality is you should not of borrow what they could not afford to pay back

Why did we receive this RNS? The advisor has not changed (see previous RNS's). Morgan Stanley used to be their joint broker so the 2 brokers have become one broker but the advisor remains the same...

Slightly misleading I would suggest, unless I am missing something!

Sounds like something the FCA would asked for as part of the VREQ - all negotiations in which ones hopes Restarting lending is part of

Surely we will get one today, there has been so much volume of the last couple if weeks, I am amzed we have not had one already

Soletrader - you have to buy millions, to sell millions, you have clearly done neither. None of your buys ever appeared because you did not make them.

Complete overreaction this morning, but interesting to see how quickly the MM's dropped the share, and how ferocious the buying was to get it back up to nealry 10p all in an hour. No idea what will happen for the rest of the day and suspect the RNS this morning was part of FCA negoations to get new Directors approved and lending restarted, but you do not often see a share drop 30% on news and recover in an hour...

Did the buyers know the drop was coming... sorry for all those who had stop losses kick in and happy for those who managed to buy in the 8's

GLA

Can anyone tell me are there any similar priced but better L2 to LSE. the details below are far more useful than we see, but I think another poster (kingtrader?) was talking about OTC/Off book trades yesterday, again does anyone know which platforms show more detail. I think LSE2 is a waste of time (and addictive to watch!!)

There does not need to be an RNS yet, he lock in RNS was on Monday evening and its thursday morning.

Its just a theory and obviously might be wrong - the selling happening now looks clumsy not well worked and its almost as if theres another irrevocable sell order forcing a certain amount of sells a day regardless of the price.

I think whoever is selling, it will end soon and we'll see a bounce.

A nice RNS would help of course

Seriously? you become worth millions by making good financial investments, not throwing money away in an aim to mislead stock markets...

IT's not PI's there is too much of a pettern to the selling, i.e. regualr chunks of £20K sells mixed in with some very large worked sells (as per yesterday).

Its either of of the II's that hold or the directors, and my money would be on the directors, as I would be surprised if the board could not dissuade II's from selling. This could also be a part of director divorce settlements in the CFO and Chairman (already confirmed) leaves which seems likely after the comments in the post vote RNS

Thats extremely unlikely on ther basis that the new CEO has just bought 500K shares. Reputation (as well as personal wealth) alone would ensure he would not do that.

When the directors negotatied the end of the lock in period is it possible that as part of this they agreed to sell all of their shares immediately, therefore not being able to influence any votes in the future. Its the word negogiate that makes me consider this.

Normally if you negogiate, you agree for an event to happen in return for something else. So if all the directors have negogiated the end of the lock in what have they agreed in return? I could be barking up the wrong tree, but on the face of it, big sellers normally do their best to avoid impacting the sp in order to get the best VWAP for their shares, but in this instance sells are being thrown in regularly without giving the sp a chance to recover - take the last hour of trading as an exampe - the sp was 9p at 4.20 yesterday and noyw is as low as 8.3 to sell.. seems madness for the big seller(s) to not slow down.

This demonstrates how useful PI's were to JB. Had he not persuaded so many to buy his shares, he would nt have managed to get anything like the SP he managed for all those shares.

Not commenting on his intentions which seem good, but if you work out how many £1M's he is better off than selling 1% per day @ say under 5p, he was clearly hedging.

Another 500K sale gone through @ 9p, definetely a big seller at these low prices, which is slightly concerning.