Print

[weiszguy]

I didn't get any messages.  But this morning there is an unexplained deposit in my account.

[searaylover]

I didn't get any messages.  But this morning there is an unexplained deposit in my account.

+1

[zapp05]

I didn't get any messages.  But this morning there is an unexplained deposit in my account.

+1

+2

[yankeefan]

The Messages were sent to e-mail, not to your Prosper inbox.

On your "Account Transaction" page on .com, the line looks like

Jun-29-2010 3:37 PM  Jun-30-2010  Deposit  Other   049546150 

all 4 of my credits had the same transaction Id (049546150)

[zapp05]

The Messages were sent to e-mail, not to your Prosper inbox.

On your "Account Transaction" page on .com, the line looks like

Jun-29-2010 3:37 PM  Jun-30-2010  Deposit  Other   049546150 

all 4 of my credits had the same transaction Id (049546150)

For me, no message anywhere.

[pioneer11]

I didn't get any messages.  But this morning there is an unexplained deposit in my account.

+1

+2

+3
No message or email, just $5.79.

[nonattender]

so what really happened here? what led up to this? this seems to be out of left field.

All the records show is that pursuit of all of these cases just kind of stopped all of a sudden at one point.

I don't think there's ever really been an explanation, but I'm very happy to see Prosper do this.  It's more
than they're legally obligated to do, given that those who opted in took a risk that they might see zero...

Kind of a nice thing - though I'm sure someone will give me a forum beating for saying something positive.

-t

[112233]

so what really happened here? what led up to this? this seems to be out of left field.

All the records show is that pursuit of all of these cases just kind of stopped all of a sudden at one point.

I don't think there's ever really been an explanation, but I'm very happy to see Prosper do this.  It's more
than they're legally obligated to do, given that those who opted in took a risk that they might see zero...

Kind of a nice thing - though I'm sure someone will give me a forum beating for saying something positive.

-t

it's a positive development for sure, but Im curious about the gears that put this motion. Eg, change of heart, a new VP of something came on board, advice from lawyer, etc.

I dont know about the legally part. If prosper was negligent in this process, then I can see them being potentially liable (eg, if 20% of their borrowers could not be found due to bad record keeping or no verification).

Because the results of the legal test were adversely affected by factors you could not have anticipated at the time you elected to participate

what are these factors? were they the result of prosper's own actions?

[yankeefan]

Prosper interpreted "Quiet period" to mean they couldn't talk to the judge.

[ira01]

I don't think there's ever really been an explanation, but I'm very happy to see Prosper do this.  It's more
than they're legally obligated to do, given that those who opted in took a risk that they might see zero...

But they didn't assume the risk that Prosper and/or its selected collections counsel (contrary to Prosper's hyping of the NAT) would perform in an atrociously inadequate manner.