adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 7, 2019 6:27:07 GMT
Have had a quick look at these excellent index-xx posts
If we take C***kerne + Str***d+ Wi**al + G**p***t I make that 4.3m +1.8m +5.4m +6.1m (if not more?) outstanding = £17.6m
£18m (rounded) lent to 4 people - I don't believe it!
I would never have invested in some of these loans if I had known they were linked.
Looking at all the loans included in the above there are about 2 which I think may come good but overall they strike me as a total disaster e.g. Ch**erho***. Ang*** Lo*** For**y.
All these loans are very late and clocking up interest at a rate of knots so that is looking extremely bad for the 2nd and 3rd charges - there are clearly going to be some mega losses here so if we take an overall loss of 33% that is £6m lost - fantastic!
If we take £6m here (I maybe wrong but I doubt it) plus speedboat(s) of £1m plus art of £2.3m then that is about £9m lost over 6 lenders - do I think this validates the PR spin rubbish about the "property expertise" of the directors - answers on a digital postcard...
I am still waiting for proof there are 2, rather than 1, boats and any evidence of an audit trail for any of our money which FS seem to have showered on these lenders like confetti. I thank you.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 15, 2019 10:10:40 GMT
I will be very annoyed if FS are playing with weasel words here (as if) : I have checked "await" in the OED - "to wait for (an event)" ,"(of an event or circumstance) be in store for (someone)"
last time they "awaited" a signed contract it never turned up! I think "we are hoping and praying he has found somebody stupid enough to fund this lemon" may possibly be more accurate...
I don't think given this director's history and what appears to be lack of funds (on paper anyway) it is going to be exactly easy for him to borrow 7+ m smackers to repay capital and interest. This seems to me to be a vastly overvalued portfolio which is only bleeding rather then generating money - I also wonder what the developer's original game plan was here...
Well I wonder what next week will bring - possibly - "slight delay/hopefully end of November"; "slight delay due to run-up to Saturnalia", blah , blah
Prove me wrong FS.
|
|
|
Post by crystal on Oct 15, 2019 15:20:56 GMT
Procedurally given the default - is FS's option to either 1) accept what sounds like a reduced "offer" via refinancing or 2) call in the receivers who at significant additional cost would attempt (1) before putting the properties on the open market?
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 15, 2019 15:40:15 GMT
The below relates to the development plot in Liverpool
Well the spelling ain't arfe bad!
Well FS please tell me where your optimism comes from as the only change I can see is that the planning needed to be resubmitted and the lender seems to be have defaulted on £6m of our money and owes well over £1m in interest which ,at 20%, I make over £3K per day. Am I missing something or is this yet another one that has gone horribly wrong - answers on a digital postcard (sadly I am in some of these)
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 15, 2019 18:39:13 GMT
Today's update failed to tell us a crucial bit of info ... administrators were appointed on 9th October 2019 over the borrowing companies for the following four loans.
Angle**y L*dg*, G*sp*rt, Hampshire
Property in Southampton W*** D**** Road, Liverpool D**w**t Road, Liverpool
Note that the Greenwich borrowing company is off-shore, and the Farnham loan is in the borrower's personal name ... so its hard to deduce what the legal status of these two is at present.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 15, 2019 19:12:33 GMT
I'm afraid the only conclusion I can come to is that there is something seriously amiss here.
As a reminder, this is the wording of the update FS released today against all this borrower's loans:
"As part of the ongoing refinance application the valuations were carried out last week and we are now awaiting confirmation of the refinance offer which we expect by the beginning of next week."
The administrators were appointed on the 9th, which was last Wednesday. It would have been completely irrational to appoint administrators on at least some of the loans if there was evidence that a refinance application was in progress, with valuation visits (in 3 geographically distinct and distant areas) booked.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 15, 2019 20:06:00 GMT
.Totally agree - overseas companies, chap seems unsure of his surname, charges all over the place, holding companies with debentures that seem very well written to me (I hope they don't have precedence over FS charges). When I see such complicated company structures I get worried and looking at this chap I am very worried - but hey FS are optimistic so no problem!
|
|
sundown
Member of DD Central
Posts: 80
Likes: 103
|
Post by sundown on Oct 16, 2019 10:24:01 GMT
One of the lessons I’ve learnt from investing in p2p is not to take things at face value. On the face of it, based on the actual development project, some of these loans look pretty good. But it’s the hidden, unknown, facts that completely change things. Had I known the borrower had other loans with FS then I would never have invested in the loans I did because they considerably increase the risk. And as the excellent mrclondon has revealed there are lots of other factors which make these loans problematic.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Dec 7, 2019 12:52:28 GMT
Administrators proposals are documents now available at CH for G*sp*rt, Southampton, W*** D**** Road, Liverpool and D**w**t Road, Liverpool. They do not make for pleasant reading with estimated recoveries of 50% or less of the oustanding capital. All 2nd (and later) ranking tranches on these loans face a wipeout. Brief extracts and links to CH are on DD Central for those with access.
Yet more evidence that lending at high LTVs against residual value valuations was foolhardy and reckless.
|
|
kielbasa
Member of DD Central
Posts: 246
Likes: 411
|
Post by kielbasa on Dec 8, 2019 12:53:45 GMT
Yet more evidence that lending at high LTVs against residual value valuations was foolhardy and reckless.
Do you mean FS was foolhardy and reckless, or lenders (or both)?
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Dec 8, 2019 13:20:46 GMT
Yet more evidence that lending at high LTVs against residual value valuations was foolhardy and reckless.
Do you mean FS was foolhardy and reckless, or lenders (or both)? In general, both .... and all similiar platforms. But not with any malicious intent ... simply lack of knowledge / experience on the part of all involved, and too much in the way of trust (both lenders of platforms, and platforms of borrowers).
A key line in the administrators proposals documents for these loans is that the valuations they have commissioned are on a forced sale basis. That is of course the inevitable circumstance if the loan has defaulted, and should have been considered when deciding whether to proceed with a loan.
I posted on DDC yesterday a link to the marketing of Lendy's DFL010 site. I was never in this loan, but the first thing that struck me looking at the aerial photos of the site .... who on earth would lend on this .... its 90% water !! Sometimes common sense has gone out the window in the chase for 12% (or whatever).
That said, i think it is valid to level a charge of recklessness at FS with respect to the 2nd and subsequent ranking tranches on loans ... the rate offered was sometimes the same, or at most 1% more than the 1st ranking loan. Totally inadequate (future) compensation for the risk both in monetary terms, and in flagging up the level of risk being accepted.
|
|
|
Post by highroller1 on Dec 9, 2019 10:11:07 GMT
Administrators proposals are documents now available at CH for G*sp*rt, Southampton, W*** D**** Road, Liverpool and D**w**t Road, Liverpool. They do not make for pleasant reading with estimated recoveries of 50% or less of the oustanding capital. All 2nd (and later) ranking tranches on these loans face a wipeout. Brief extracts and links to CH are on DD Central for those with access.
Yet more evidence that lending at high LTVs against residual value valuations was foolhardy and reckless.
how do i read the proposals and what is CH?
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Dec 9, 2019 10:32:41 GMT
CH refers to Companies House.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,786
Likes: 2,733
Member is Online
|
Post by michaelc on Dec 10, 2019 14:59:46 GMT
....
A key line in the administrators proposals documents for these loans is that the valuations they have commissioned are on a forced sale basis. That is of course the inevitable circumstance if the loan has defaulted, and should have been considered when deciding whether to proceed with a loan. ......
Yes made me think about that too. It also made me wonder, why is it then that residential mortgage valuations for major banks are NOT done on a forced sale basis?
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Dec 10, 2019 15:12:49 GMT
....
A key line in the administrators proposals documents for these loans is that the valuations they have commissioned are on a forced sale basis. That is of course the inevitable circumstance if the loan has defaulted, and should have been considered when deciding whether to proceed with a loan. ......
Yes made me think about that too. It also made me wonder, why is it then that residential mortgage valuations for major banks are NOT done on a forced sale basis? I think the reasoning is that for most bog standard residential properties the forced sale valuation can reliably be assumed to be 15-20% beneath OMV with a buyer at thise levels pretty much guaranteed. Lend at 85-90% LTV and your loss will be minimal. The issue we face is that on the whole we are not dealing with desirable resi properties but one off assets for which there may be no buyer at a sensible price.
|
|