|
Post by gramsky on Dec 20, 2019 17:41:53 GMT
Financially there is not a lot in it, if we vote 'A' we lose most of our money over a period of several years, if we vote 'B' we lose most of our money in say a year. It just depends how long you are willing to wait to lose it. I just want to get it over with and am voting 'B'
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,524
Likes: 2,667
|
Post by cb25 on Dec 20, 2019 17:46:47 GMT
gramsky If I'm going to lose a big chunk of my holding in this loan (and that seems certain), the least I can do is make the Borrower suffer as well.
|
|
|
Post by gramsky on Dec 20, 2019 17:49:24 GMT
gramsky If I'm going to lose a big chunk of my holding in this loan (and that seems certain), the least I can do is make the Borrower suffer as well. They will not suffer, they will be living off the proceeds of this somewhere. Did Robert Maxwell suffer, not until he fell of his luxury yacht. Has Philip Green suffered, no. Tell me anyone who has.
|
|
|
Post by roandy55 on Dec 20, 2019 18:25:03 GMT
The inescapable truth is, I'm afraid, is that the vote is controlled by a bloc of I'm guessing, around a dozen or so institutional investors with large holdings (possibly with a nod and a wink from Assetz) who are unlikely to be adversely affected by the loan not being repaid either.
Still democracy and that. It's what we voted all for, innit.
|
|
|
Post by madmitch on Dec 20, 2019 18:25:18 GMT
An "...immediate..." payment of £1.5m!......... and more to come!
I wonder what "immediate" means in AC speak?
I wonder what "more" means in AC speak?
Faster/more than the Administrator?
As time goes by, AC have given us all an ever increasing insight into their internal 'workings'. Don't they realise that actions always speak louder than words. (should that be inaction?)
Full repayment in 24 months..........but only if we relinquish a chunk of our security! You can't make this stuff up.
On yer bike AC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
cb25
Posts: 3,524
Likes: 2,667
|
Post by cb25 on Dec 20, 2019 19:01:22 GMT
The inescapable truth is, I'm afraid, is that the vote is controlled by a bloc of I'm guessing, around a dozen or so institutional investors with large holdings (possibly with a nod and a wink from Assetz) who are unlikely to be adversely affected by the loan not being repaid either. Still democracy and that. It's what we voted all for, innit. I also think that might be the case and asked AC about that in the Q&A (8 Sept 2019):
"How many lenders are eligible to vote on this Lender Vote?
Allowing for the fact that lenders contribute differing percentages of the final vote due to different size loan holdings, what is the minimum number of lenders that could generate a majority (50.1%+) of the vote?"
They struck the question out.
AC's position seems to be "the borrower is still engaging with us, so they can post any text and any figures that they choose in the Lender Vote(s) and it's nothing to do with us, we don't fact-check anything (even though Lenders are in no position to do it themselves)".
Falls well short of the position of 'honest middleman' that I expect from them. Unfortunately I believe AC's Ts&Cs support this one-sided approach.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Dec 20, 2019 19:10:26 GMT
From the Q&A:
Answer: No Directors or employees of Assetz hold a substantial investment in this loan.
Well I can't help wishing that they did.
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Dec 20, 2019 20:17:19 GMT
Whether they did or didn't is not of that much interest. The concerning thing is that AC is unwilling to sort out this borrower. It doesn't need a lender vote to rubber stamp whatever action AC wants to take. it landed me in a small way and many others in this dire loan via GBBA1 which itself was a stinker. For the sake of the financial health of AC everyone wants to move on. It is loans like this that have brought down other platforms. I do wish AC would extract a digit to avoid further reputational damage.
|
|
|
Post by df on Dec 20, 2019 20:37:48 GMT
This loan constitutes 3% of my AC funds. Large chunk for me, but still only a drop in the ocean to have much influence on the outcome. All of it is in GBAA1 (not counting access accounts). No vote from me - I don't know what option is best. Will shortfall be covered by PF? I doubt it. Option A sounds a bit more promising to me, but I'd rather let those with more expertise to decide.
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 476
Likes: 257
|
Post by tonyr on Dec 21, 2019 16:47:34 GMT
'nother vote coming soon ....Christmas Special? Any ideas for presents? DM want an early Christmas present - another 12 month extension.
Quick recap: Aug 2017 - requested and got 3 month extension Dec 2017 - requested and got 3 month extension
Apr 2018 - requested and got 6 month extension Dec 2018 - requested and got 3 month extension Mar 2019 - requested and got 3 month extension Jun 2019 - requested and got 9 week extension Sep 2019 - requested and got 6 week extension Nov 2019 - requested and got 5 week extension
I guess DM think it only 'fair', what with Lenders past generosity in granting extensions and the fact Christmas is coming soon (money will be tight, none going spare for Lenders), that they ask for another 12 months.
So what's the feedback/complaints process here? We've been pressing for progress with extensions every few months, I may well have voted A if we could keep doing this. What's the rational for a 12 month extension - I can't see on except to keep the default off AC books. Surely lender are better served with the A option being shorter? EDIT: I've read again and AC very clearly state that all the options wording wasn't written by them. I guess they have an obligation to put forward whatever the borrower suggests, which isn't a strong position for them or for us. I can see why the borrower wants 12 months - I can't see why I should agree to it even if the alternative is administrators.
|
|
dermot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 862
Likes: 517
|
Post by dermot on Dec 21, 2019 17:26:24 GMT
I was previously a fairly heavy investor in GBBA-1 and a bit of PSA, so have ended up owning 0.1% of DM; there are likely to be a number of us in DM in the same way.
I do have some sympathy with AC as regards confidentiality - should a court case ensue, the lawyers would have a field day about what could be construed as undue influence if much in the way of specific information is passed around.
In that case, the only people walking away with pots of cash would be the lawyers - and doubtless huge delays to any settlement. If I have any questions for AC that might be 'sensitive', I email AC directly.
Yes, I know the cathartic value of having a good rant in public, but I'd rather deny the lawyers their megatons of flesh if possible.
|
|
pikestaff
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,136
Likes: 1,484
|
Post by pikestaff on Dec 22, 2019 7:41:54 GMT
I've voted A, again. Despite the inevitable delays all seems sensible and far better than pulling the plug.
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Dec 22, 2019 10:13:35 GMT
I can't imagine your vote will make a jot of difference. Certainly mine never has.
|
|
jfh82
Posts: 77
Likes: 99
|
Post by jfh82 on Jan 3, 2020 20:48:22 GMT
Really annoyed - I missed the email on this one as I'd have certainly liked the option to call this in. Annoyingly I can't even see the proposal text now the link seems to point to standard loan info. A 12 month extension appears to be the the table from comments. Seriously? Please can't we just wind this up and move on? We'll be in the same situation in 12 months time 100%.
|
|
Mick
Be nice... People respond.
Posts: 138
Likes: 93
|
Post by Mick on Jan 8, 2020 18:01:31 GMT
Looking forward to getting a sizable portion of my money back, really quickly he promised..... Birds fell out of the trees in shock....
|
|