eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 746
Likes: 737
|
Post by eeyore on Jan 4, 2018 11:02:44 GMT
I presume it should really read "Rou****e is a new SPV set up by the contractor to build out the sites specific to our client". Rou****e B**** C****** Limited was incorporated on 29th August 2017 and has one Director, A****** Rou****e, who was appointed the same day and controls at least 75% of the shares. Quite why he feels the need to conduct this particular development through a limited company is unclear (he appears to have no other Directorships). That's what I feared! I'm not surprised when property developers, sharing the same sort of reputation as estate agents, isolate themselves from the financial obligations when a project fails, but when the contractors do it too, I get worried. The contractor clearly doesn't have much confidence in the project and who's going to compensate the sub-contractors who do the actual work and don't then get paid?
|
|
oik
Member of DD Central
Posts: 254
Likes: 349
|
Post by oik on Jan 4, 2018 11:35:42 GMT
I'm confused by these sentences in Moneything's description of the proposed loan: "The works are being carried out by a third-party contractor, Rou****e B**** C****** Limited, on a fixed price JCT and work has begun at site. Rou****e is a new SPV set up by the developer to build out the sites specific to our client. The contractor has been working in construction since 1980 and has completed numerous projects for third party developers as well as building their own projects."
Are "Rou****e" (the new SPV) and "Rou****e B**** C****** Limited" (the third-party contractor) the same entity? Surely they can't be if one has only been set-up recently and the other has been in existence since 1980? And the former has been set up by the developer whilst the latter is stated to be a "third party"? I'd like to see much more precise details of the proposal before I invest. Including what "The contractor has been working in construction since 1980..." means. In what capacity? Was he the CEO of a successful construction company, or has he been a bricky, roofer, hod-carrier or something else? Doesn't look a straightforward build so would be helpful to know what experience a new SPV has of running a project of this kind. When there are so many complications, twists and ambiguities there could be a reason. MT say there will be further drawdowns to come so I'll be waiting to learn a bit more and see what happens to all the borrower's existing loans as listed earlier by CD.
|
|
|
Post by penguin on Jan 4, 2018 11:38:05 GMT
I presume it should really read "Rou****e is a new SPV set up by the contractor to build out the sites specific to our client". Rou****e B**** C****** Limited was incorporated on 29th August 2017 and has one Director, A****** Rou****e, who was appointed the same day and controls at least 75% of the shares. Quite why he feels the need to conduct this particular development through a limited company is unclear (he appears to have no other Directorships). That's what I feared! I'm not surprised when property developers, sharing the same sort of reputation as estate agents, isolate themselves from the financial obligations when a project fails, but when the contractors do it too, I get worried. The contractor clearly doesn't have much confidence in the project and who's going to compensate the sub-contractors who do the actual work and don't then get paid? Gives the contractor significant leverage to renegotiate the fixed price contract further down the line i.e. "otherwise I will walk away with no downside to me"
|
|
m2btj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 626
Likes: 749
|
Post by m2btj on Jan 4, 2018 12:11:27 GMT
Would have been good to see MT run a FAQ on this one....although 25% funded in 10 mins.
|
|
gustapher
Member of DD Central
Posts: 144
Likes: 267
|
Post by gustapher on Jan 4, 2018 12:25:24 GMT
I presume it should really read "Rou****e is a new SPV set up by the contractor to build out the sites specific to our client". Rou****e B**** C****** Limited was incorporated on 29th August 2017 and has one Director, A****** Rou****e, who was appointed the same day and controls at least 75% of the shares. Quite why he feels the need to conduct this particular development through a limited company is unclear (he appears to have no other Directorships). That's what I feared! I'm not surprised when property developers, sharing the same sort of reputation as estate agents, isolate themselves from the financial obligations when a project fails, but when the contractors do it too, I get worried. The contractor clearly doesn't have much confidence in the project and who's going to compensate the sub-contractors who do the actual work and don't then get paid? Bang on! I'm currently living in a flat where that exact thing happened and the contractor when bust. Everything, and I mean everything has been built in a dodgy amateurish way. The original developer got taken to court and blamed it on the contractor. The contractor closed the Ltd company and set up a new one. The judge called the developer "evasive" and knew they were scamming the Ltd company system, but he couldn't do anything. Everyone just shrugged and said "well it's legal". Anyway, I have invested but didn't think about the full implications of that sentence until reading your comments. Will probably avoid topping up tomorrow now - great post eeyore.
|
|
drgonzo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 82
Likes: 95
|
Post by drgonzo on Jan 4, 2018 12:44:51 GMT
Some FAQ info just posted as a loan update on MT.
|
|
|
Post by elephantrosie on Jan 4, 2018 13:11:23 GMT
Would have been good to see MT run a FAQ on this one....although 25% funded in 10 mins. i am impressed by how quickly it gets filled up
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Jan 4, 2018 13:19:58 GMT
Some FAQ info just posted as a loan update on MT. If only all platforms were as responsive to lender questions!
|
|
dovap
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 410
|
Post by dovap on Jan 4, 2018 13:32:04 GMT
true enough but then if the info provided was more comprehensive and accurate in the first place then they might not need to
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jan 4, 2018 14:07:41 GMT
Oh I'm sure we'd manage to find something to ask which had been omitted or mistyped, no matter how hard they try (heck, we're still picking the bugs out of the Magna Carta, aren't we?). I'll settle for 99% accuracy as long as the 1% gets the sort of rapid response we have seen on this occasion, rather than the fancy footwork and spin I have frequently seen elsewhere.
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 746
Likes: 737
|
Post by eeyore on Jan 4, 2018 15:04:09 GMT
Agreed! We'll have to accept that errors & omissions will happen until we move to the full-blown prospectuses we see for corporate takeovers which go through umpteen teams of lawyers.
Inevitably, the responses in FAQs will also contain their 1% of "issues", so let me be the first to contrast what SteveT told us earlier: "Rou****e B**** C****** Limited was incorporated on 29th August 2017 and has one Director, A****** Rou****e, who was appointed the same day and controls at least 75% of the shares" with the reference in the contractor's track-record in the FAQ to only J*** Rou****e!
(I'm not looking for an answer on this issue as I've seen enough to decline to invest even the balance of a few £tens in my MT account. I'm sure MT will be offering something more appealing to me soon.)
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jan 4, 2018 15:12:10 GMT
Would have been good to see MT run a FAQ on this one....although 25% funded in 10 mins. i am impressed by how quickly it gets filled up That’s with a limit too.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jan 4, 2018 15:13:51 GMT
Some FAQ info just posted as a loan update on MT. If only all platforms were as responsive to lender questions! Thanks MoneyThing, Very appreciated.
|
|
jjc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 414
Likes: 632
|
Post by jjc on Jan 4, 2018 21:25:06 GMT
Returning to the subject of the UNs MoneyThing, what isn't clear to me (even after reading your FAQs) is whether these have effectively jumped ahead of us on the transfer of the loan from FS to MT (& if so whether there is some way this leap-frogging could have been avoided before/during the transfer.) Here some long bumpf on UNs & related, which I haven't read or have any insights on (but presumably MT & their advisors are well-versed on, & amongst other things addresses the ways various applications should be made): www.gov.uk/government/publications/notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-register/practice-guide-19-notices-restrictions-and-the-protection-of-third-party-interests-in-the-registerRelated question - from a quick glance it would seem something in the order of £1.65m has already been taken in deposits by the borrower. What will/can/can't these sums be used for (I imagine some may be destined to funding the assured 8% 5Y yield offered to investors, but not sure whether that kicks in from completion or before? but maybe also the build or just cost-over-runs/contingencies etc? anything stopping it being used on other sites?). Where is that money being held & how much of it is still available for whatever uses it is intended for? Can the future loan updates include a brief running picture of these sums? It's a sizeable sum that might have important repercussions on this loan & on which we have very little visibility or understanding. Even before getting into the questions raised above it might pitch the borrower's skin in the game (point 5 of your FAQ) in a different light? I haven't formed a proper view yet on this loan & see some promising aspects, so look forward to your further thoughts MoneyThing. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by sirkillalot on Jan 5, 2018 15:57:18 GMT
All gone !
|
|