Sean Murray is the President and Chief Editor of deBanked and the founder of the Broker Fair Conference. Connect with me on LinkedIn or follow me on twitter. You can view all future deBanked events here.
Articles by Sean Murray
WebBank Alleged to be “Sham Pass Through Bank” in New Lending Club Usury Class Action
April 15, 2016
A new class action lawsuit filed on April 6th alleges that Lending Club and WebBank among others, violated state usury laws, consumer protection laws and the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”).
Plaintiff Ronald Bethune, a New York resident, is arguing that his 29.97% APR loan through Lending Club violated the state’s 16% interest cap.
While the Second Circuit’s ruling in Madden v. Midland Funding, LLC is cited, the complaint focuses more on WebBank’s role in carrying out a collaborative fraud scheme.
Defendants associated together for the common purpose of limiting costs, eliminating oversight, and maximizing each members’ profits by engaging in the fraudulent conduct described herein. Specifically, the members of the Enterprise enticed tens of thousands of consumers to sign up for loans through LCC [LendingClub Corporation], hoping that enough consumers would select LCC for their loans without the fact that WebBank was a “pass through” sham party to the transaction being brought to light making the loans illegal and usurious. The purpose was to allow Defendants to charge, and profit from, usurious interest rates to Plaintiff and members of the Class, and to do so without regulatory oversight.
The plaintiff acknowledges that Lending Club recently adjusted its relationship with WebBank and the class seeks to recover damages for all loans made prior.
WebBank’s parent company, Steel Partners Holdings LP, who is also named as a co-defendant, has barely registered any movement in its stock price.
Lending Club by contrast, is down almost 10% since the complaint was filed.
YOU CAN DOWNLOAD THE FULL CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT HERE
This case is unrelated to another pending class action against Lending Club.
Square Capital’s Jackie Reses Reveals Why They Really Gave Up Merchant Cash Advances
April 14, 2016
At Lendit, Bloomberg Reporter Emily Chang asked Square Capital head Jacqueline Reses to explain the real reason behind Square’s shift from merchant cash advances to loans.
Reses said that it was not a customer issue, but an investor one. “This industry and this conference more than anyone understands the nuance between MCAs and loans,” she said. “From an investor side, that’s really where the savings are between the form of an MCA and the form of a loan, in that there’s an actual repayment date.”
Reading between the lines, she seemed to be saying that investors like certainty and exact terms whereas the traditional merchant cash advance product was harder to sell off or securitize because they lack a defined element of time.
Fast loan approvals shouldn’t be criminalized
Referring to the criticism that online lenders have been getting recently for their fast approvals, Chang specifically asked if companies like OnDeck were approving loans too quickly.
Reses responded, “I don’t think the ability to execute something quickly, smoothly, transparently, should be criminalized as something that requires oversight, and so I think being good at something should be well regarded.” She later added, “I think the notion that credit decisions being swift is a problem is just misguided.”
Transparency
Reses used the word “transparency” several times but in explaining such did not reference the disclosure of Annual Percentage Rates even once. Instead she mentioned the importance of spelling out the total dollar cost to the merchants, subtly reconfirming the findings that are coming from many other alternative lenders.
Was the move from MCA just about investors though?
Read our initial assessment and expanded theory.
Watch the full “fireside chat” video below:
Funding Circle Still Focused on “Marketplace” and Small Business
April 13, 2016
At Lendit, deBanked asked Funding Circle co-founder and US market head Sam Hodges if the company’s domestic loan volume would eventually outpace originations in the UK. Hodges expressed optimism that it would and explained that the company’s UK origins had simply given that operation a 12-24 month head start.
The company has originated more than $2 billion in loans since inception. A page on their UK site specifies that 1,212,223,380 pounds have gone to british businesses, the equivalent of about $1.7 billion.
Asked if the company would branch out into other types of lending such as consumer, Hodges responded that the company remains dedicated to two principles, “marketplace and small business.” On that note however, he said their UK branch already engages in commercial property loans and didn’t rule out that such a product could eventually be made available in the US.
Small Business Finance Association Releases Best Practices Just in Time
April 13, 2016
The Small Business Finance Association (SBFA) has finally released their long awaited best practices guide. The four overarching principles are transparency, responsibility, fairness and security.
Unlike other organizations that have called for APR disclosures, the SBFA believes that the total dollar cost of the transaction is the most important way to achieve that goal. It’s also because the organization’s core members are engaged in a form of factoring most often referred to as merchant cash advances. Those transactions don’t have interest or interest rates and thus no way to ascribe an APR.
As part of the announcement, SBFA VP and RapidAdvance Chairman Jeremy Brown said, “Small business owners are a powerful constituency and we want to give them the utmost confidence in the alternative finance industry. These best practices are our way to prove to small businesses that our industry will consistently offer transparent, fair, and responsible choices to meet their needs.”
The timing could not be better. Earlier this morning, Stephen Denis, the executive director of the SBFA, testified in an Illinois State Senate hearing to protest a controversial bill that would effectively outlaw nonbank business lending under $250,000.
Among the bill’s strangest rules, is the restriction on monthly loan payments to being no more than 50% of a business’s net income, which would cause all businesses breaking even or reporting a loss to be prohibited from obtaining a loan from a nonbank or nonprofit source by law.
Why Marketplace Lending Euphoria Has Really Ended – It Was Lust not Love
April 13, 2016
“The honeymoon is over,” said Peter Renton at Lendit. He was speaking in reference to the media’s shifting coverage of marketplace lending. Some professionals throughout the conference said the excitement had faded because venture capitalists had already gotten their fill or that there was economic uncertainty or that assets could potentially underperform.
Fitch for example, attributes the euphoria-ending reality check to a lack of available data to support sustainability throughout credit cycles, in addition to regulatory interest.
Those theories aren’t wrong, there’s just not much new about them. These same concerns were raised at length two years ago.
Here’s why the euphoria has really ended:
The unknowns are now known
Two years ago, investors wanted to know who you were, what you did, and how you did it. They wanted to know if it was legal, what you valued yourself at, and how big you thought the market was for that product or service. To investors, these fintech startups were both mysterious and seductive. They were changing the world, uberizing lending, disrupting banking, and showing huge potential for scale. One might say, it was euphoria-inducing.
Calling what happened next a honeymoon implies that there was a marriage. Instead, investors became lust-fueled suitors chasing after The It Girl, confusing their infatuation for real romantic feelings. But like all relationships that start out this way, the investors freaked when their marketplace lender partners admitted they were looking for something long term.
Baby, you know I like you but we haven’t even been through a full credit cycle yet
Marketplace lenders started to talk about marriage, a honeymoon, kids, and heck even moving out to the suburbs to launch a brick and mortar location to complement their online businesses. Maybe they’d even one day accept deposits and become banks themselves.
It’s the kind of talk that can cause an investor to rethink everything.
OMG, are these companies all just banks? Should we be valuing them as banks?!
Suddenly they’re starting to look at their partners in a whole new light. Those once cute flaws are now annoying quirks. And so it’s time to decide if they’re really the one or just another relationship that was fun while it lasted.
Dating the same people
Lending Club’s CEO Renaud Laplanche has been a keynote speaker at Lendit for four years in a row. His company originates more than $8 billion a year in loans. What they do, how they do it, and how much it’s worth, is all disclosed in their quarterly earnings reports.
There’s Lending Club’s competitors, OnDeck, OnDeck’s competitors, SoFi, SoFi’s competitors and so on. Every little sector of marketplace lending has a benchmark. It might be bond ratings, annual origination volume, securitization appetite, public valuation, default statistics, investor base or something else. So even if an investor doesn’t know YOU, they probably know a lot about someone like you. This puts them in a position of power and thus the opportunity to play hard to get.
They still like marketplace lenders, that much was obvious by Lendit’s record attendance this year. They just might be entering a point in their lives where they want a partner they can actually take home to meet their mothers.
If that sounds serious, it’s because it is. Could there be wedding bells in the industry’s future? The real honeymoon has yet to come.
The Top 10 Alternative Small Business Funders
April 12, 2016At Lendit yesterday, I learned the 2015 origination volume of two additional small business funders that I was not able to ascertain previously. They are CA-based National Funding and GA-based Kabbage. Below is a list of the original top 8 funders that has been amended to form the top 10.
RANKINGS
| Company Name | 2015 Funding Volume | 2014 Funding Volume |
| OnDeck | $1,900,000,000 | $1,200,000,000 |
| CAN Capital | $1,500,000,000 | $1,000,000,000 |
| Funding Circle | $1,200,000,000 | $600,000,000 |
| Kabbage | $1,000,000,000 | $400,000,000 |
| PayPal Working Capital | $900,000,000 | $250,000,000 |
| Bizfi | $480,000,000 | $277,000,000 |
| Fundry (Yellowstone Capital) | $422,000,000 | $290,000,000 |
| Square Capital | $400,000,000 | $100,000,000 |
| Strategic Funding Source | $375,000,000 | $280,000,000 |
| National Funding | $293,000,000 |
An even larger list exists in the current issue of our magazine. To subscribe to future issues for free, click here.
SCORCHED EARTH – Controversial Bill Could Eliminate Marketplace Lending, Merchant Cash Advance and Nonbank Business Loans in Illinois (and starve small businesses in the process)
April 9, 2016
The State of Illinois wants to make it a Class A misdemeanor for providing small businesses with quick, easy working capital.
The world’s strangest bill, dubbed the Small Business Lending Act, could send marketplace lenders, nonbanks, and merchant cash advance companies to prison for up to 1 year if applicants don’t submit at the very least, their most recent six months bank statements, the previous year’s tax return, a current P&L, a current balance sheet, and an accounts receivable aging.
Loans in which the monthly payments exceed at least 50% of the business’s monthly net income would be illegal, which implies that any business that is either breaking even or running at a loss would be banned from obtaining a loan from alternative sources.
This is not an April Fools’ prank. Not even preemption granted under the National Bank Act or Federal Deposit Insurance Act is safe.
Introduced into the State Senate under the pretense that it would squash predatory lenders, the bill’s licensing and compliance proposal would also effectively outlaw marketplace lending and securitizations by making the sale of loans illegal unless it’s to a bank or another state-licensed party. Even merchant cash advances are referenced specifically but almost as an afterthought and defined in such a way that even traditional factoring companies may be in jeopardy.
No licensee or other person shall pledge, assign, hypothecate, or sell a small business loan entered into under this Act by a borrower except to another licensee under this Act, a licensee under the Sales Finance Agency Act, a bank, savings bank, community development financial institution, savings and loan association, or credit union created under the laws of this State or the United States, or to other persons or entities authorized by the Secretary in writing. Sales of such small business loans by licensees under this Act or other persons shall be made by agreement in writing and shall authorize the Secretary to examine the loan documents so hypothecated, pledged, or sold.
At a time when most fintech lenders are advocating for smart regulation, the State of Illinois apparently wants to end all nonbank commercial finance under $250,000 completely, with the exception of one organization (which we’ll get to shortly).
There are some exemptions granted under this proposal of course. Loans over $250,000 aren’t subject to it, nor are any loans made by Illinois-based banks or credit unions, that is unless they are acting as the agent for another party like say perhaps a marketplace lender.
Hidden inside is also an exemption for nonprofit lenders, a loophole left open for Accion Chicago, the nonprofit masterminds behind the bill who seem to want the entire state’s lending market all for themselves.
Illinois State Senator Jacqueline Collins Introduced This Bill
Senator Collins introduced the legislation as an amendment to Senate Bill 2865 on April 6th. A former journalist, she’s now the chairwoman of the Illinois Senate Financial Institutions Committee. Among her self-professed accolades is that she “has played a key role in addressing predatory lending and high foreclosure rates in Chicago through legislation that protects homebuyers and homeowners with subprime mortgages.” She lists the Mortgage Rescue Fraud Act, the landmark Sudan Divestment Act and the Payday Loan Reform Act among her major legislative accomplishments.
It’s no surprise then that sections of the bill are borrowed straight out of the Payday Loan Reform Act. Collins isn’t acting on her own however…
Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers
In January, Senator Collins joined Chicago City Treasurer Kurt Summers in a call for “new legislation to protect small business owners from misleading and dishonest predatory lenders.” In a closed-door hearing, the committee supposedly heard from business owners, advocates and elected officials on predatory lending.
“Chicago’s small business community deserves protection from the unchecked greed of predatory lenders,” Treasurer Summers said. “While access to capital is the number one concern of small business owners across the state, bank and commercial loans continue to decline, steering them to underhanded lenders. As we continue to urge banking partners to increase their local investment, this new, common-sense legislation would ensure transparency in lending that so often puts our entrepreneurs at risk.”
Of note is his use of the phrase “banking partners” since this bill has bankers all over it, as we’ll get into shortly. Summers represents the Chicago Mayor’s office and the Mayor’s office says they’ve launched this campaign thanks to partners like Accion Chicago.
Hon. Kurt Summers, Treasurer, City of Chicago from City Club of Chicago on Vimeo.
Accion Chicago and the Mayor’s Office
Last year, Mayor Rahm Emanuel announced a joint campaign with Accion Chicago to help small businesses avoid predatory lending.
Accion Chicago, ironically makes business loans themselves, having originated 535 loans totaling $4.8 million in 2014 with a maximum loan size of $100,000.
Who is Accion Chicago really?
The Small Business Lending Act virtually ensures that small business loans under $250,000 only be facilitated by banks and nonprofits. Isn’t it convenient then that Accion Chicago is not only a nonprofit, but also funded and staffed by banks?
According to their 2014 annual report, Citibank and JPMorgan Chase were two of their three largest supporters (the third was the US Treasury!). Below are some of the figures:
$100,000+
- Citibank
- JPMorgan Chase
$50,000 – $99,999
- Bank of America
$20,000 – $49,999
- Fifth Third Bank
- PNC Bank
- U.S. Bank
$5,000 – $19,999
- American Chartered Bank
- Alliant Credit Union
- BMO Harris Bank
- First Bank of Highland Park
- First Eagle Bank
- First Midwest Bank
- Ridgestone Bank
- State Bank of India
- The PrivateBank
- Wells Fargo Bank
About a dozen more banks gave less than $5,000.
JPMorgan Chase has also been a partner of the annual Taste of Accion fundraising event, and was the lead sponsor in 2014, a spot that costs $30,000. Benefactor sponsorships which cost $20,000 each were comprised of American Chartered Bank, Capital One, Northern Trust Company, and Wintrust Bank. And the lesser sponsorships? Again, mostly banks.
You know who hasn’t donated to Accion Chicago? Marketplace lenders and merchant cash advance companies.
Accion Chicago raised only $1.4 million in 2014 from public support, the bulk of which came from banks or related traditional financial institutions. So is it just a coincidence that this predatory lending bill they’re supporting grants exemptions to all the banks from compliance?
Accion Chicago’s 2014 Board of Directors includes executives from:
- American Chartered Bank (chairman)
- First Eagle Bank
- JPMorgan Chase
- Ridgestone Bank
- MB Financial Bank
- Talmer Bank & trust
- Citibank
- First Midwest Bank
The 2014 committees were made up almost entirely of bank executives from:
- First Eagle Bank
- The PrivateBank
- Ridgestone Bank
- U.S. Bank
- JPMorgan Chase
- Forest Park National Bank & Trust Co.
- MB Financial Bank
- FirstMerit Bank
- Wintrust Bank
- Standard Bank & Trust Co.
- First Midwest Bank
- Wells Fargo Bank
- Seaway Bank & Trust Co.
- Metropolitan Capital Bank
- Evergreen Bank Group
- First Financial Bank
- PNC Bank
Thanks to the impartial work of these good citizens, they have discovered that small businesses should only be working with banks or nonprofits funded and staffed by banks and have craftily devised a bill to legislate all the alternatives out of existence.
If this was really about predatory lending, then they screwed up big time
All coincidences aside, some of the bill’s rules have nothing to do with protecting borrowers, like the required $500,000 surety bond to become licensed for example. Compare that to California’s $25,000 licensed lender surety bond. And the restriction on being able to sell or securitize a loan, how does that help small businesses?
These requirements and others suggest that it’s about preventing all alternatives from existing in the marketplace, rather than predatory alternatives. The losers would undoubtedly be small businesses and the Illinois job market. Senator Collins and Treasurer Summers, both of whom have a strong track record of empowering their constituents financially, may have underestimated or overlooked the likely negative consequences of this bill.
The nonbanks
Several nonbank trade groups are reportedly in the process of formulating a response.
The Commercial Finance Coalition for example, a nonprofit coalition of financial technology companies, told deBanked that they are concerned about the impact this will have on the Illinois job market and will indeed have representatives on the ground in Illinois.
They also wanted to make known that they welcome support from marketplace lenders, nonbanks and merchant cash advance companies in these efforts and that interested parties should email Mary Donahue at mdonohue@commercialfinancecoalition.com
To contact Senator Jacqueline Collins who introduced the bill, call her at 217-782-1607.
LendingRobot is Now Your On-The-Go Marketplace Lending Robo-Advisor
April 8, 2016
Checking your marketplace lending portfolio is now as easy as checking a stock quote
Marketplace Lending just became a little bit more friendly for investors thanks to LendingRobot’s new mobile app. The app allows investors to track the daily performance of their Lending Club, Prosper and Funding Circle portfolios all in one place. Its utility valued is bolstered by the fact that none of the three integrated platforms have published their own investor-oriented mobile apps, which came as a surprise even to LendingRobot CEO Emmanuel Marot.
The app complements the existing web service where investors can set custom filters to automatically buy notes that meet their criteria from the platforms whenever they become available. To date, more than 5,000 investors have signed up to use LendingRobot and more than $80 million of their collective investments are being measured by the service. Most of those users have only integrated their Lending Club or Prosper portfolios as of now, and not just because Funding Circle is a new addition, but also because their model is slightly different. “You have to be an accredited investor,” Marot said of using Funding Circle. There is no such requirement for the other two platforms.
The app is unique because it makes your aggregate marketplace lending portfolio data as handy as the latest stock quote. “It was kind of surprising actually for us to see that we have about 30% of our clients coming several times per week just to check it,” Marot said.
But perhaps as adoption of marketplace lending continues to catch on as part of a normal everyday diversified investment strategy, this will become more of a trend. For investors with large portfolios for example, the robo-advisor is likely acquiring notes for them multiple times per day every day, increasing the likelihood an investor will want to check in regularly to see how they’re doing.
Along with calculating the aggregate and individualized returns based on formulas that LendingRobot devised themselves, users can quickly refer to a baseline value known as their “portfolio health.” This number is not based on some proprietary advanced formula, Marot explained, but is rather the straightforward percentage of notes that are in good standing relative to all “live” notes. Charged-off notes are no longer considered live, Marot said.
Users can also check their portfolio composition, the average time to maturity and the average interest rate being assessed, in addition to being able to review raw figures such as how many notes became late in the last week or paid in full, for example.
Lending Club, Prosper and Funding Circle are just the beginning, Marot said, while expressing optimism about adding other platforms in the future. They saw the original three platforms they’re integrated with now as being a good fit because they are “safe.” “We are very cautious,” he said. Notably, those companies are also the three founders of the newly formed Marketplace Lending Association, of which he voiced support for.
Michael Raneri, a PwC Managing Director and Fintech Advisory Lead, wrote on Forbes that millennials will serve as early adopters for robo-advisors. “The next generation of investors has been quick to embrace new technologies and experiences, and this should apply to robo-advisors,” he wrote. “Furthermore, millennials have a general mistrust of large financial institutions, particularly in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008. Unlike their parents, who forged close relationships with advisors—even using their phones to have conversations with them, as primitive as that sounds—millennials are equally comfortable with making digital connections. They’ve been conditioned to accept that technology can match the performance of its human predecessors, while offering reduced fees and providing greater convenience.”
