Bugs and New Repayment System - Q&A With Kiva CS

[Guest]

.

[wthepoo]

While I recently used Bismarck's sausage analogy here, I would like to politely but firmly object to your reference to the power users being where the confusion lies. 

I concur... we (and I include myself here even though I am fairly new and not a power lender by the standards many KFs are setting) are just

(1) noticing problems earlier because (a) we have more loans, (b) tend to visit Kiva more often, and (c) are more familiar with regular proceedings,

(2) voicing our concerns sooner and louder

and (3) have a platform for (2) here on KF where other "power users" can join us.

That it's not just us can be seen from the new members to join KF over the last weeks with just a couple of posts, from posts on Team messageboards, and I bet from quite some CS-inquiries as well.


Furthermore, we have not really asked how the sausage is made, at least not in the first place, but only for a consistent and understandable presentation of loans and accounting of repayments - or an explanation and/or remedy for lacks thereof.

Best wishes,
Wolfgang.

[waywardcats]

Obviously it would have been better to focus on explanations beforehand, which would have obviated the need for this thread, among other things. However, we didn't do that and we can't go back and change that now. All we can do is make sure we do a better job from here on out.

   Gerard,

Thank you very much.  I think we can all applaud  the commitment to better communication going forward.  Thank you very much.

-Kerry-

[AccountAbility]

Gerard - Hear this sincerely.  I really appreciate your willingness to conduct this dialogue even if you might be becoming impatient with what sounds like a steady stream of complaints.  You are hitting what may just be the tip of the iceberg.  Strategically, communication with lenders has not been a strong point for Kiva. So in a sense you are just the lightning rod at the moment.

Communication doesn't always have to be about the facts.  If Kiva staff expresses that an update about MIFEX will be forthcoming by the end of October, then by the end of October Kiva needs to say SOMETHING.  A communication might be as simple as , "I know I said that it would be by now, but things got more complicated, so please be patient a bit longer."

Dan

[Gerard]

And supporting what Kerry posted: Please remember that not all confused lenders are to be found here on KF - think of a good way of communicating what you have told us, now, to the whole lender community. The additions to the Help Center are a good thing, but IMHO they are not enough.

I also support Oli's and Odette's post: The "old-new system" (partial repayments released nightly "after Kiva has received them") was not only beneficial to us impatient lenders who don't want to wait for the 16th of the following month but also - I think - beneficial to overall lending activity. You explained Kiva's reasons for changing it (again), fine, and I get those, too - but there may be side-effects not properly considered (?).


Of particular importance, I believe, is Robert's post - also because it is mentioning another bug (or is it?) not yet addressed... the loan Robert mentioned is (obviously) a 16-weeks-loan but listed as 3 months instead of 4 months (why couldn't it just say 16 weeks, instead?). There are other loans where the repayment term listed obviously is 1 month too short (e.g. http://www.kiva.org/app.php?page=businesses&action=about&id=72697&_tpos=1&_tpg=1).

Another bug not mentioned in your post is the quite annoying delay / blockage of switching between pages on the "lender pages".


Lastly, and I hope I don't confuse things, yet again, but I don't get your explanation on why we will see repayments when... one reason for this is surely that I really don't think that under the old system the schedule was computed from the fundraising date... it's definitely not what the lenders saw, and IMHO it would also make no sense to (internally) "bill" the MFI/expect a repayment from them before the instalment is due for the borrower - and that due date is inevitably computed from disbursal.

And when you say:

, does this take into account that we (at least in most cases) have already been credited for actual early October repayments that under the new system the MFIs will only regularly be billed for on 15 November?

At least I don't understand why we should receive any repayments on 15 November if we are now in the transition period between old and new system...

On the communication point - agreed. We're working to put together more comprehensive updates for the broader Kiva community. I assure you that, as a person who responds to incoming inquiries, I have a vested interest in doing so, and so does the rest of the CS team!

The repayment term oddness that you mentioned and is in Robert's post has been filed with the engineers. They're aware of that one. I'd also appreciate a PM with a more detailed description of the lender page blocking/delay issue.

You're correct about the old system - that was a factual error on my part and a bad example. The gist of the example, however was trying to demonstrate a scenario where you won't receive a repayment on November 15th. The delay will happen in this scenario - there are more repayments marked as a result of the old system than the new system is expecting. This would be a result of disparity in old system repayment schedules and new system repayment schedules and no payment will be made until the next month when the new system will catch up with the old and sync up. We're working to get some good examples for you that would demonstrate the difference.

And yes - that takes into account October repayments that were marked early and then vanished from the repayment schedules. If our system calculates that the Field Partner should have collected a repayment in October, per the existing schedule and the Field Partner verifies that they've received this repayment, then we'll bill them for that repayment and, if they've fundraised enough to cover the bill, we'll settle that repayment into lender accounts.

[Gerard]

I concur... we (and I include myself here even though I am fairly new and not a power lender by the standards many KFs are setting) are just

(1) noticing problems earlier because (a) we have more loans, (b) tend to visit Kiva more often, and (c) are more familiar with regular proceedings,

(2) voicing our concerns sooner and louder

and (3) have a platform for (2) here on KF where other "power users" can join us.

That it's not just us can be seen from the new members to join KF over the last weeks with just a couple of posts, from posts on Team messageboards, and I bet from quite some CS-inquiries as well.


Furthermore, we have not really asked how the sausage is made, at least not in the first place, but only for a consistent and understandable presentation of loans and accounting of repayments - or an explanation and/or remedy for lacks thereof.

Best wishes,
Wolfgang.

The post in question wasn't meant as an attack at all - just an understanding of the communication challenges that are presented with the system. I wasn't trying to say that it was just you folks who are talking about the new system. That's certainly not the case. I believe in my post that I've said that the lion's share of confusion that we've seen has come from power lenders, not KivaFriends. I can't speak to what anyone else has seen - just what I've seen. This is a major change in the way we do business and, as such requires a thoughtful strategy as to the best way to communicate about it. Granted, up to this point and, arguably, at this point, we haven't done the best job, but we're working on it.

If people are contacting you confused, and you don't know how to respond, please point them to contactus@kiva.org and we'll do the best we can to help them understand what's up.

[Diane R]

A communication might be as simple as , "I know I said that it would be by now, but things got more complicated, so please be patient a bit longer."

I would like to reinforce Dan's point here; something along those lines would have been completely satisfactory.

And to reinforce the points many have been making, we are all just SO HAPPY to hear from you, Gerard, that we're smothering you with our questions.  Take it as a sign that we care and are really, really happy to have someone we can talk with about these things that we've been repeating to ourselves the last few weeks.  If we didn't care so deeply for this organization and the work it does and enables us to help with, we wouldn't be so sincere in wanting things to be clearer, smoother, and more reliable.

--Diane.

[wthepoo]

Thanks so much, Gerard,

for the quick, very patient and kind and informative reply.

Just a couple of remarks / questions:

On the communication point - agreed. We're working to put together more comprehensive updates for the broader Kiva community. I assure you that, as a person who responds to incoming inquiries, I have a vested interest in doing so, and so does the rest of the CS team!

Oh, I believe that, I do

The repayment term oddness that you mentioned and is in Robert's post has been filed with the engineers. They're aware of that one. I'd also appreciate a PM with a more detailed description of the lender page blocking/delay issue.

Done!

You're correct about the old system - that was a factual error on my part and a bad example. The gist of the example, however was trying to demonstrate a scenario where you won't receive a repayment on November 15th. The delay will happen in this scenario - there are more repayments marked as a result of the old system than the new system is expecting. This would be a result of disparity in old system repayment schedules and new system repayment schedules and no payment will be made until the next month when the new system will catch up with the old and sync up. We're working to get some good examples for you that would demonstrate the difference.

Understood in principle (I think) - but still: why would it make a difference if the borrower was paying back before or after the 15th? Under the new system lenders will never see repayments before the following month, I thought... so that there will be a delay of 1 - 1.5 months, and taking into account that there have been plenty if not all October repayments this should mean no repayments at all hitting our accounts in November... where am I wrong?

And yes - that takes into account October repayments that were marked early and then vanished from the repayment schedules. If our system calculates that the Field Partner should have collected a repayment in October, per the existing schedule and the Field Partner verifies that they've received this repayment, then we'll bill them for that repayment and, if they've fundraised enough to cover the bill, we'll settle that repayment into lender accounts.

Just as a clarification - connected with my last remark/question: The problem I see is that the lender accounts already have received these October payments - they have just vanished from the internal schedules and the loan pages. So where should the "new" money around 15 November actually come from if all (or most of) the October repayments already rest in our accounts?


Really sorry for bothering you again, but I do appreciate this dialogue today and feel soooo close to (almost) fully understanding what has happened, is happening and will (probably) be happening over the next days.
Best wishes, take care,
Wolfgang.

[RichardF]

With respect to the default policy - what I posted is what we try our best to adhere to. In the two cases that you're referencing in particular, it would be ill advised to default a loan when we're not sure what the eventual outcome of any investigation would be. There's no good answer here, but as soon as we have an update that we can provide, believe me, we will provide it.

Yes, there is a good answer here.  Tell the affected lenders the stated default procedure is being suspended pending the outcome of an ongoing review.  Give a timetable for the review procedure, give confirmations when review steps are completed and update the timetable whenever substantive adjustments are made to it. 

This "Say nothing" pattern is a major shortcoming of Kiva's issues resolution approach.

[P, B and J]

The problem here is the way we serve our images and the new multi-server configuration we just implemented. This is one of the bugs I forgot to mention in the first post. We're working on this one, and it shouldn't have any effect on repayments.

Thanks so much Gerard! 

[joanwilder]

If most of our partners are fundraising more than they owe in repayments, you'll see the repayments from those partners come in on the 15th and shortly thereafter. If some of our partners are in pilot mode or are raising less than they owe, you'll see the payments spread out more over the course of the month as they wire funds to us or otherwise make payments.

Hey Gerard,

Thanks for so patiently answering everyone's questions and addressing our concerns.  I fall into the category of those who started visiting Kiva less frequently as repayments stopped coming in...  And while I understood there was a change in the accounting system, I have only been following what has been going on in drips and drabs here in KF until today.  I just spent more than an hour reading this entire thread (and in some cases re-reading it) and I think I'm about as clear as I can be, but I do have one lingering question that had been in the back of my mind, but was pushed to the forefront by the above answer you had posted...

I have read in threads in KF that certain MFIs disburse their funds immediately after or in some cases before fundraising is complete (correct me if this is not true) meaning in advance of receiving the wired funds from Kiva's lenders.  This would mean they are using the money collected from repayments to lend out while waiting for the wire to come in from Kiva with the actual loan's funds.  In the spirit of transparency, how does this get shown and if, as you said above, there are MFIs doing more in the fundraising department than in repayments isn't this going to muddle the whole new repayment process up?  The delayed repayments give them more time to have the books be "off" during the days/weeks that they are "borrowing" money they haven't yet received, allowing funds to go unaccounted for rather than truly being transparent and  "marked to market" so to speak.... that's sort of fudging the books temporarily... I don't know if I have explained my concern clearly, but I just don't see how permitting MFIs to do this benefits timely repayments (because obviously they won't be as timely as they would be if they weren't doing this) to lenders or the whole transparency issue you are stressing as one of your objectives.  And as I said, this may just be a misunderstanding on my part, or misinformation be passed around so please correct me if that is the case.

Thanks again!
Joan