Are Collateral (UK) Ltd undertaking developments themselves?

As the company has only been used to put through planning permission it has no impact on the companies cash other than costs. What col decide to do with their own companies money is their choice.
If, however, there was a charge in favour of col on CH, suggesting funds had changed hands, then that would be a "bet the company" issue.
I hope that Peter and Gordon do come onto forum and clarify for all.

"Am I alone in wondering if the thread title verges on inflammatory or even libelous?"<sup>1


1</sup>Quote from a forum member from 2015/ name will be withheld.

You think it is too?

Tagging mrclondon

Coming late to this thread but as a Col investor I'm slightly confused.

Whilst I am not a member of DD Central (so have no idea what lurks there) but my own research shows who owns the land and we have an explanation from Gordon as to why this confusion has arisen.
If this thread should stand due to something in DD Central so be it but from my research I can't find any skeletons.

Whilst I now have things clear in my brain I'm wondering if that will be the case for any future readers of this thread. Not everybody reads threads fully often just the headline or first post.

Can I suggest that as a minimum the first post is amended with strike through used where necessary and the title changed?

I'm fairly new to all platforms but Collateral are one of my largest and growing. What am I missing here?

Many thanks for your detailed reply Collateral Rep . It has taken me a few days to review and seek opinions regarding the issues raised in this thread.

Another forum member has, as noted above, made me aware of the company over whom Collateral have a charge on the site which has been noted at CH since April 2016, and has confirmed via the post immediately above this one that the CH record matches the land registry records. This information has now been posted onto the DD Central thread to allow a larger number forum members to review. As such, the site owner appears to be unconnected to Collateral (UK) Ltd.

However, what I didn't make clear in my OP (and should have done to avoid potential confusion) is that the section on the planning application form declaring the ownership of the land (Certificate A) has been signed by the agent (architect) on behalf of the planning applicant, i.e. Collateral (UK) Ltd, declaring that no one other than the planning applicant was the owner of the site 21 days before 14th December 2017. Certificates B and C which are used to declare any (additional) owners other than the planning applicant have been left blank.

My understanding is that if Collateral (UK) Ltd are not the owners of the land, then any planning consent gained through this planning application will be invalid, and could cause major valuation issues for the site going forward if development is undertaken with invalid planning consent. Whilst this is most likely an administrative slip by the agent which has not been picked up by Collateral, it is one with potentially serious consequences.

Collateral Rep Is my understanding of the potential implications of the failure to declare the actual owner of the site on this planning application wide of the mark ?


The implication of the Racefields listing for this loan is that Collateral are attempting (admittedly only as part of a trial of Racefields) to "sell" an existing £1.71m loan secured against this site. The company identified as the owner of this site has filed dormant company accounts for y/e 30th Nov 2016, which is six months after the loan is presumed to have drawn down. The balance sheet shows the share capital of £1. There is no asset (the site book value), nor any creditor (the loan balance). My understanding is that mainstream lenders expect financial accounts that "make sense", and as such these accounts may hinder future attempts to refinance the debt.

The most recent accounts for Collateral (UK) Ltd for y/e Nov 2016 show debtors increasing from just £25k in Nov 2015 to £1.9m in Nov 2016. Creditors increased by c. £2.5m, and fixed assets remained under £100k.

I'm not an accountant but to my untrained eye it is conceivable that the £1.71m loan that is listed on Racefields is contained within the £1.9m debtors on the Collateral (UK) balance sheet. Collateral Rep am I right in thinking that the £1.9m debtors on the Collateral (UK) balance sheet as at 30th Nov 16 predominately represents "off platform" loans ? Is the £1.71m loan listed on Racefields funded via the Collateral (UK) balance sheet ? If it is, why not use COL lenders to fund the loan and repay the COL balance sheet ?

My specific concern remains the stress this particular transaction might (currently and in the future) be placing on the balance sheet of Collateral (UK) Ltd, if (and I stress if) planning consent issues and/or clarity of financial accounts on the part of the borrower and/or valuation issues were to impact on the ease of refinancing this loan. If the £1.71m loan is indeed on the Collateral (UK) balance sheet, then it dwarfs the rest of the company's figures.

My understanding is the FCA have quite wide reaching concerns about p2p platforms using their balance sheets to fund activities that could place excessive risk on the balance sheet. Collateral Rep has there been any impact on Collateral's application for full FCA authorisation as a result of this transaction ?



Finally, in my opinion the "noise" associated with activities other than the core business of running a p2p platform which are being undertaken by Collateral (UK) Ltd and other companies owned by, and/or operating out of offices associated with, senior Collateral employees and directors is distracting to serious investors, and is a severe hindrance to the growth of the platform. I am aware of a number of potential lenders who have not signed up with Collateral as a result of the perceptions gained after picking through CH records. For myself, I could, if I had the confidence, increase my account balance at COL by tens of thousands of pounds by participating in far more than the very few (property) loans I currently am. However, I'm unlikely to gain such confidence prior to full FCA authorisation.