Nothing specified what would happen in the event of a coordinated payback (everybody paid their loans back to Patrick, giving him more profit than he expected). Thus, in this hypothetical case, Patrick should equitably split all profits with his depositors (above and beyond the stated rate)?
I've never heard of equitable mistake being applied to an unforeseen boon. If you think equitable mistake should apply to a boon, then you could make this argument. Though I'm not sure how it would result in more profit than expected, but if you accept that for the sake of argument.
Patrick guaranteed his deposits and did not place any conditions on that guarantee. Obviously one of the risks to Patrick is that many loans default at the same time, possibly because they are correlated. That is an obvious risk that a lender faces.
I don't agree that that's an obvious risk. In fact, I can show you places where many people (including people who invested with Patrick) denied that such a risk existed.
Patrick is one of the few people trying to make good on his obligations. I respect Joel, but I don't see why he is now encouraging Patrick to turn into a scammer. Even Patrick hasn't suggested that he should renege on his guarantee.
I'm not sure what you're arguing here. Are you saying I should keep my mouth shut and not say what I honestly believe because it might cost people money? I'm not telling Patrick what to do.
I think it's time for Patrick to respond. Patrick, are you going to stand by your guarantee and be the honest person most people believe you to be, or are you going to let Joel turn you into a scammer?
It's not scamming for Patrick to equitably allocate an unforeseen risk. I'm going to go out on a limb here and speculate that you have some connection to someone Patrick owes money to.