logo

Teya to offer SMEs Flexi-Loans from iowoca

Finextra2 days ago
iwoca, one of Europe's leading SME lenders, announces partnership with Teya, the growing all-in-one financial services platform built for small businesses.
0
This partnership will bring iwoca's Flexi-Loan to thousands more business owners, seamlessly integrated into Teya's digital platforms.
Fast and flexible finance
Teya customers can now apply for iwoca's Flexi-Loan directly within their Teya app or web portal, unlocking sums from £1,000 to £1 million, with flexible terms from just 1 day up to 60 months. The application is 100% paperless, with zero early repayment fees, and approved funds typically land within minutes.
As demand for speedy, hassle-free finance accelerates, iwoca's SME Expert Index reveals that 73% of SME finance brokers say faster decisions are their clients' top priority. iwoca's digital lending at scale enables UK businesses to access working capital without the red tape.
Surging SME demand for finance
This collaboration launches at a crucial moment: iwoca's SME Expert Index also shows that 76% of UK finance brokers predict that small and medium-sized businesses' demand for finance will rise in the coming months. iwoca and Teya are rising to this challenge, embedding ultra-fast, flexible lending directly into everyday business finances — helping close the funding gap and empowering entrepreneurs across the nation.
'This partnership is another step in our journey to build truly useful financial services for small businesses,' said Siddhartha Ram, Product Director at Teya. 'Whether it's payments, accounts or funding - our aim is to give business owners the tools they need to thrive, with none of the complexity.'
Colin Goldstein, Chief Commercial Officer at iwoca, added: 'Teya shares our belief that small businesses should have quick and uncomplicated access to the finance they need to grow. Working together, we can reach even more business owners and ensure that capital is available when and where it's needed most.'
The Flexi-Loan is available now to eligible Teya customers across the UK.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Russian energy export disruptions since start of Ukraine war
Russian energy export disruptions since start of Ukraine war

Reuters

time7 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Russian energy export disruptions since start of Ukraine war

Aug 15 (Reuters) - When U.S. President Donald Trump meets Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, one of his bargaining chips to encourage Putin to make progress toward a ceasefire in Ukraine will be to ease U.S. sanctions on Russia's energy industry and exports. Trump has also threatened tougher sanctions if there is no progress. Here is how sanctions have impacted Russian energy exports since the start of the conflict. Russia was the top supplier of natural gas to Europe before the war. Most gas travelled through four pipeline routes: Nord Stream running under the Baltic Sea, the Yamal line crossing Poland, transit via Ukraine, and the Turkstream line. Europe also imports Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG). In 2021, total Russian gas imports to the EU totalled 150 billion cubic metres (bcm) per year, or 45% of its total imports, and have fallen to 52 bcm or 19% since, according to the European Commission. While the EU has not imposed sanctions on Russian pipeline gas imports, contract disputes and damage to Nord Stream caused by an explosion, have cut supplies. As part of a fresh round of sanctions announced in July, the European Union has now banned transactions including any provision of goods or services related to Nord Stream, which albeit damaged could be revived as a gas supply route. Transit via Ukraine ended at the end of 2024, leaving just Turkstream as a functioning route for Russian pipeline gas to Europe. The European Commission has also proposed a legally binding ban on EU imports of Russian gas and LNG by the end of 2027, but this has not been passed into legislation yet. The U.S. in 2024 imposed sanctions on companies supporting the development of Russia's Arctic LNG 2 project, which would become Russia's largest plant with an eventual output of 19.8 million metric tons per year. The U.S., UK, and EU all prohibited the import of seaborne crude oil and refined petroleum products from Russia during the first year of the war in Ukraine. In addition to the embargoes, the G7 group of countries (including the US, UK, and EU) imposed a price cap on Russian seaborne crude oil for third countries at $60 per barrel in December 2022, and a cap on fuels the following February. The EU and UK altered the crude price cap level in June 2025 to $47.60, or 15% below the average market price, but the U.S. did not back the move. The price cap aims to reduce Russia's revenues from oil sales by prohibiting shipping, insurance and reinsurance companies from handling tankers carrying crude traded above the cap level. Western powers have also imposed sanctions on more than 440 tankers belonging to the so-called shadow fleet that transports sanctioned oil outside of Western services and the price cap. Russia's leading shipper Sovcomflot is also under sanctions in the West. The U.S. has also sanctioned major Russian oil companies including Gazprom Neft ( opens new tab and Surgutneftegaz ( opens new tab. The measures banning Russian oil imports in the west and restricting Russian oil trade elsewhere have redirected Russian oil flows towards Asia, with China, India, and Turkey emerging as the major buyers for Russian crude. The price cap was meant to keep Russian oil flowing to prevent a spike in global oil prices which would have followed a halt or severe drop in Russian exports. Trump has, however, signalled a change in policy in recent weeks by threatening to impose secondary sanctions on India and China for buying Russian oil to put pressure on Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine. The European Union banned imports of Russian coal in 2022, seeing volumes drop from 50 million metric tonnes in 2021 to zero by 2023, according to data from Eurostat.

Dublin City Council refuse planning retention to 10 apartment Airbnb operator
Dublin City Council refuse planning retention to 10 apartment Airbnb operator

BreakingNews.ie

time7 minutes ago

  • BreakingNews.ie

Dublin City Council refuse planning retention to 10 apartment Airbnb operator

Dublin City Council has refused planning retention to a significant Airbnb operator close to Dublin Castle and Temple Bar to continue offering its apartments for short-term letting to tourists. Dublin Castle Suites advertises its 10 apartments on the Airbnb platform and can earn up to €350 per night per apartment on busy weekends. Advertisement The owner of the apartments facing onto Parliament Street and Dame Street would earn only a fraction of its current rental income if the apartments are to be rented for long-term letting only. A question mark has now been put over the lucrative enterprise following the City Council's decision to refuse planning retention to allow the apartments to continue to be used for short-term letting. Applicants, Olympia Real Estate Limited, now have the option of appealing the decision to An Coimisiún Pleanála, which may reverse the council's planning refusal. However, in its decision, the city council pointed out that there is a general presumption in the Dublin City Council Development Plan against the provision of dedicated short-term tourist rental accommodation in the city due to the impact on the availability of housing stock. Advertisement In refusing planning permission, the Council stated that Olympia Real Estate Ltd has not provided a sufficient justification for the provision of short-lease apartments at this location. The Council found that the proposal to continue the apartments for short-term letting 'would create an undesirable precedent for similar type development and would devalue property in the vicinity'. The planners concluded that the proposed retention of short-term residential use is not compatible with the architectural character, historic fabric and special interests of the protected structure. The Council planning report which recommended a refusal concluded that the continued use of the apartments for tourist accommodation 'would result in existing residential stock being lost to the residential housing system, meaning less long-term and secure accommodation will be available to the growing number of families and people who need it'. Advertisement Olympia Real Estate Limited lodged the planning application after the Council issued it with a Warning Letter over the use of the apartments for short-term letting. Planning consultants for the applicants, Cunnane Stratton Reynolds (CSR) state that 'enabling housing as short-term let accommodation in this instance redirects such demand away from mainstream housing'. The consultants state that 'the proposed tourism accommodation will assist in the attractiveness of the area for tourists and will promote a continued busy and vibrant city centre'. CSR states that its client's ability to acoustically meet the standards of normal accommodation is not available, given the protected status of the subject premises. Advertisement They state, 'in a period of substantial housing crisis these units cannot remain vacant'. Objecting to the planned retention, Fiachra Brennan of Oakcourt Park, Dublin 20 and who works on Parliament Street, said that 'these are high-quality urban apartments which should be available on the long-term rental market'. He said: 'The applicant has pointed to issues with regards to soundproofing and insulation – this should not preclude the use of the property for its intended purpose. He added: 'I work on Parliament Street – it is a vibrant area with a range of commercial and hospitality businesses but is also an important urban, residential city neighbourhood. This status should be protected.'

US sues California to block tough emissions standards for trucks
US sues California to block tough emissions standards for trucks

Reuters

time7 minutes ago

  • Reuters

US sues California to block tough emissions standards for trucks

Aug 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. government said on Friday it sued Californiato stop the state from enforcing stringent emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks that President Donald Trump recently declared void. In complaints filed this week in two federal courts, the U.S. Department of Justice said federal law preempts the California Air Resources Board from enforcing various emissions rules governing heavy-duty trucks and engines. These include the Clean Truck Partnership, a 2023 initiative with manufacturers designed to advance California's goal of lowering emissions, while giving the truckmaking industry flexibility to meet emissions requirements. The Justice Department sued after a House of Representatives committee said it recently learned that staff at the California Air Resources Board won't let auto manufacturers bring vehicles to market unless they comply with California's preempted standards. "This ongoing defiance of federal law must stop," the department said. California's rules governing light-duty vehicles are also preempted, the department added. The California Air Resources Board declined to comment, while the office of California's Governor Gavin Newsom did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Newsom, a Democrat, has long promoted tough emission standards, as well as the sale of electric vehicles, to help fight climate change. California has long had power under the federal Clean Air Act to set tighter pollution limits than federal law requires, and received more than 100 waivers under that law since 1970. But the Justice Department said the Republican Trump's signing in June of congressional resolutions curbs California's power, including by voiding a waiver allowing the Clean Truck Partnership. "President Donald Trump and Congress have invalidated the Clean Air Act waivers that were the basis for California's actions," said Adam Gustafson, acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's environment and natural resources division. "CARB must respect the democratic process." The new lawsuits are intended to help Trump end California's push for electric vehicles, level the regulatory playing field and promote consumer choice, the department added. Both lawsuits were filed as motions to intervene in existing federal cases challenging California's emissions standards, including the Clean Truck Partnership. One case was filed on Monday in Sacramento, California by four large truck makers--Daimler ( opens new tab, International Motors ( opens new tab, Paccar and Volvo ( opens new tab. The other was filed in December in Rockford, Illinois by the American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store