maybe this is nothing, but...

There are 8 AA loans that are late. While looking at these earlier I noticed that 3 of them are for exactly the same amount ($2,550) and they are in Hi_Max's business group. That looked like an odd coincidence to me so I looked a bit deeper. These are the loans:

67940 1m late
61829 1m late
73132 late

As I looked at these I began to feel that there was an odd number of similarities. Apart from being AA and in business they're all for the same slightly unusual amount, the listing was at the same initial level (of 9.25%), the borrower name on each has a similarly feelgood property about it (happy202, smilingman, agentleman), the borrower location is the LA area, each has a generic photo that looks like it comes from a photo library and the description on each is well written, in an informal, prosey style with no spelling mistakes and few grammar errors. That last thing alone is enough to make them stand out.

It's early days, but none of these loans has made any payments. These loans account for 37% of all late AAs. How strange.

Widening my search a bit, but staying within loans in the business group I found this one:

67085 1m late

This one is actually a B, but otherwise it fits all the other criteria I listed above (borrower = magiclife, amount = $2,550, generic picture, location = la). What's particulary interesting about this one is that the last line asks "would 'Prosper Public Relations' be a good name [for my new business]?" That's interesting because loan #67940 finishes with "Perhaps I can call my publication 'Prospering Across America.'" (his punctuation's so good he even put the period inside the double quotes). This loan hasn't made a payment either.

Next I asked myself if there are any loans out there that haven't aged sufficiently to go late, yet fit this bill. I found these:

84719
87147
89548
93207

The MO is evolving slightly (e.g. some small variation in the amount of the loan), but there's still a lot of similarities. All are AA, all are in the 'business' group, generic photo, LA area. The last line on 84719 says 'Perhaps I could even name my company "Prosper Publishing."' Sound familiar?

Taking all 8 togther the similarites in the descriptions are uncanny. Most talk about working in media, all are similarly enthused about Prosper, none have any concrete details or information on budget.

My hypothesis, therefore, is that these loan requests have all been placed by the same person, and that they are all fraudulent. If I had access to lots of peoples' credit information and I wanted to rip you off this is not far off how I would do it. Low amounts to guarantee funding and avoid the scrutiny that goes with larger amounts; join a group for some respectability; join a big group so your loans don't stand out; join 'business' because the GL does no vetting and doesn't answer to lenders.

I'll wager a large amount that none of these loans listed make any payments.

The final question is: are there any loan requests out there now that follow this pattern?

100081

Looks like some further evolution, but there's still too many similarities. I'm glad I'm not bidding on that one.

Anyway, as I said at the top, maybe I'm wrong (and I hope I am). But this all looks way too fishy.

Isn't it sad that good grammar is distinctive and suspicious?

It just don't do no good to right write, do it? :P

I wish lenders could have these meaningful chat w/o borrowers knowledge.

Be Prosperous
Ms. Ava

We can on Prospers.org

ETA: Oops...this was meant to be a response to MsAva's "I wish" post.

Prosper Andrew and Prosper Brian: I've noticed a lot more presence of Prosper Employees on the boards since Prosper Days, which is A Very Good Thing! Thanks so much. This thread presents some data that you might consider digging into. Granted, these loans could all be legitimate, but after reading all the similarities among them, I agree that something might be amiss. Not that you'll get much out of Hi_Max, though!

Interesting work. Have you reported this listing to Prosper?

Most of the listings you cited were closed early by the borrower, many on the first or second day. Not typical AA behavior.

Yes

I agree 100%. I did think for a while about the best way to deal with my suspicions, and I was concerned about 'tipping off' the wrong people. In the end I felt that this was the only place to warn fellow lenders. After all, I have nothing concrete to go on.

Sad that it's distinctive, yes. I did get a bit carried away with my comments on the grammar and punctuation, but these only stood out because there's such consistency across these listings. These may be the best 8 descriptions (stylistically) that I've seen on Prosper.

I hadn't noticed that but it's interesting. It avoids the negativity that many lenders feel towards autofunded loans. A sophisticated Prosper user, I think.

Good thing Prosper has the identity theft guarentee. ;)

Good detective work!

Too bad we can't do more to establish a felony case.

If you are going to loan money to somebody in Arizona or California, make sure you verify the person is who they say they are before you bid.

That should be done regardless, but most especially in those two states. High incidence of identity theft.

Do you have numbers to back that statement up?

Reliable source?

...Gulp

Just pop it into Google and you'll get all sorts of relevant results.

Here is one:

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/Bankin...acy/P125094.asp

If you're bidding on loans without talking to borrowers, I would just avoid California/Arizona entirely. No point risking it. (edit: that's a general statement; not directed at you Gulp).

I am still at the kids table.

It is frustrating because there are things I'd like to post about borrower behavior, but since I don't want borrowers to see it, I normally don't.

Thanks.

I was just looking for stats, wasn't trying to force the issue.

No harm/intent taken/given.

:P

...Gulp

Scary

:(

Hey Everyone,

I'm a newbie... that said, how can you tell that those loans are late? When I click the links, it basically takes me to the loan listing, but doesn't give any current info about the loan.

Or am I missing something?

Thanks for the help!

Here check out this page on Lendingstats.com
Late Loans - sorted by credit grade

Lendingstats lists 7 delinquent loans for AA borrowers and 3 of them come from this one group? Origination dates of 11/21, 12/01, and 12/18. Hmmmmm.

I can't say what I want to say, but I will say "wow".

Nicely spotted, Polonius.

-t

Its Gulp..... :P his new car was to good to be true needs to make double payments. J/K gulp. But yeah wow you know some of the people here on the forums stand a better chance of solving crime then alot of agencies. Good lookin out. It never stops amazing me the things that get turned up.

Article on major news services a few days ago, NY and CA highest for ID theft...

The ten states with the highest rates of identity fraud according to 2nd article are:
1. New York
2. California
3. Nevada
4. Arizona
5. Illinois
6. Hawaii
7. Oregon
8. Michigan
9. Washington
10. Texas

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7021400562.html

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....04527311&EDATE=

Here's a forum posting that deals with one of the suspect loans:

http://forums.prosper.com/index.php?showtopic=19306

Then remove states like mine with joke cap rates and what area we left with? :blink:


:D

B

I wonder if these identities are linked to UCLA?...

UCLA Hacker Steals Info on 800K

I'd say it's entirely possible. The alert went out on the UCLA identity theft on December 12th, but the date that the info was stolen is not mentioned. Correction: UCLA noticed the crime on November 21, 2006.

Looks like the earliest late loan funded on November 30th. Right in that date range.

Someone needs to double check with UCLA on this.

I PM'ed Prosper Brian, but not sure if this is the best way to contact Prosper...

Hi guys,

Thanks for the sleuthing... we'll look into it.

Best regards,
Andrew

edit: nevermind

Hiya,

I didn't see the result of the sleuthing, but I can add my CSI 2? to this 'fishy' trend.

California has a minimum amount of $2550, so I don't think there is actually anything magic about the number, really. It only looks unusual until you look at the State Minimum constraints.

Hi_Max also has the group with the 2nd most loans on all of Prosper, and I don't think has the best reputation either. So, I don't think it is surprising that it has the worst AA late performance on Prosper either.

I think that if you purely look at the statistics, you might miss the context. I don't think there is anything actually fishy here. It's just the law of numbers, along with the CA state minimum.

That's my opinion...

LendingAngel

Have you seen his listing for a loan? It was pulled without any bids. His credit rating was HR with five current delinquencies. If Prosper is going to exclude some HRs from borrowing, it might be wise to exclude them from being Group Leaders -- especially if they have current delinquencies.

We can take a careful look at the numbers. There have been 717 loans to AA borrowers. Business had 31 of them, so there were 686 in other groups on in no groups at all.

Business had 3 out of their 31 go delinquent: 9.68%

Other AA loans had 4 out of 686 go sour: 0.58%

That is over 16 times worse than other AA loans. This appears to be more than a fluke to me.

Yes, it is certainly a double standard.

I wonder if this trend is found in the other grades. If so, I might suspect a ghost writer. There have been several people who have posted in the past offering their services to write borrower listings for a fee. Maybe someone was successful.

In addition, there are only 3 AA loans in the whole of Prosper that have not made any payments at all. The 3 in Business.

The reason the NCs and lower HRs aren't allowed to list is a financial one (Prosper was spending proportinally too much time one those loans) that doesn't translate to groups.

Now personally I think GLs should have to be C or better (if a GL drops below C then suspend the ability to create listings in the group and take away the ability to approve new members). But that's neither here nor there.

Prosper Andrew,

I've posted on the fora already about how you guys seem to have an increased presence in here since Prosper Days, and I applaud that. Please keep it up. I look forward to the day when you and Prosper Brian and Prosper Whoever can be counted upon to unleash your thunderbolts from on high with great regularity, even if no crisis is simmering down in the hinterlands of...gosh...the USERS!

Here is the breakdown of the loans from Business: Rating, number of delinquencies, number of loans, and % of delinquencies, and Experian projected rate.

observed Experian
AA 3 31 9.68% 0.20%
A 2 35 5.71% 0.90%
B 3 86 3.49% 1.80%
D 6 75 8.00% 3.30%
E 18 99 18.18% 6.20%
HR 2 11 18.18% 9.10%

When you consider what Polonius brought to our attention that these three are the only three that never made even one payment, the situation is grim.

The rates at B and below are poor; but at A and AA, they are overwhelming.

Some standard would be nice. I won't argue over details. :D

There *is* one interesting coincidence about this. California small claims court has a limit of $7500. However, one can only be a plaintiff for an amount greater than $2500 twice in a calendar year. The CA minimum means that a lender can't make a business out of suing deadbeat Prosper borrowers.

I don't know if this is anything more than a coincidence, but it sure is an interesting one.

Ms Ava anyone can register to be a lender so I doubt that will ever happen.

Here is a new loan I thought kind of fits this thread.

https://www.prosper.com/public/lend/listing...istingID=101838

Amount is the same, in la as well so the state min loan amount may have something to do with it.

The Business "373 Supporting Lenders" group seems to be a bad deal for both borrowers and lenders. Although Hi_Max claims "LOWER interest than in ANY other group" (sic), the historical group rates are actually considerably higher than average, so borrowers are losing (at least, those who pay). It also has much higher default rates than average, so lenders lose. It looks like the only winner is Hi_Max.

Prosperlenders.com is a lender/GL only discussion board. One must have at least one verifiable originated loan to join.

Prospers.org allows lenders, borrowers & GLs but there are restrictions as to which areas one can visit. Prosperlenders is nearly as old as this forum.

Prospers., which has been around a few months, has 2 level of lenders. Those who have less than $500 invested are restricted to the new lender forum , general and borrower forums. Lenders with more than $500 invested can pretty much roam at will except the group forums that are private.

Group Leaders can have a forum specific to their group and they have the choice to restrict it to their members only or open it to lenders as well.

There is also a borrower forum that can be used by both borrower and lenders.

I'm surprised to read that California has a state minimum loan amount of $2550. Is there a list of state minimums somewhere?

A number of states do. See the link at the bottom of the page titled "States & Licences". You can see a list of all the states and what the various limits apply for borrowers from each state. Prosper has a state license with each state that shows a flag. The rest are based on various state laws.

Edit: I see you edited your post that I quoted after I quoted it.

I've found the list of state lending limits:

http://www.prosper.com/public/legal/states_and_licenses.aspx

Thanks.

I'm not so sure. The phone number on his business card matches that on his Resume which can be found on the Berkeley Alumni site here.
It'd be much easier to verify this borrower, and there's a lot more detail in the listing.

Also, Berkeley is not in the LA area.