|
|
Post by investorni on May 10, 2019 16:31:53 GMT
I have just went over my loans to try and assess the likelyhood of making a loss or gain. There is a minority that state an offer has been made but it is not sufficent to cover the loan about, and there is a greater number of loans where it states there is an offer of repayment, or refinance or sale of security. So based on the numbers when all these finally finish I expect MOST of the loans to be full repayment with a smaller number resulting in a loss of capital. Potentially interest to date and bonus interest on repaid loans will offset any losses.
This is based on the assumption that where it says an offer has been accepted and it does not explicitly state that the offer is not sufficent to cover the loan then the offer WILL cover ALL the capital. Is this a fair assumption? Does this full value of the loan cover the interest? Would lendy refuse or stop to consider a loan if it DOES cover the capital but not the out standing interest?
Does anyone know if the offers being recieved come even close to the valuations in general (No specific properties), are we talking about a small loss ~10% below valuations or are we talking about sharks offering ~20% of the valuations?
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612 
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on May 10, 2019 16:39:08 GMT
I think you are being a bit optimistic.
The elephant in the room seems to be the fees that are deducted from the sales. Money, and lots of it seems to have disappeared from recent sales and we are waiting for Lendy to creatively explain where it went. On the big DFLs I think the deductions will be substantial, not least because they need the cash to carry on.
My best guess is that many loans will be looking at a 50% or worse capital loss by the time they are concluded (I am estimating this level of loss for my shambles of a portfolio). Some might be even worse.
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on May 11, 2019 21:47:49 GMT
Interest will be taken 100% first before capital returned. Such states 13.3 of the T&Cs. Lendy makes its money from fees and interest and takes no benefit from returning capital to lenders. Such is the business model.
All losses will come out of capital and, from the experience of security sold so far, they will be large where security is sold.
|
|
Godanubis
Member of DD Central
Anubis is known as the god of death and is the oldest and most popular of ancient Egyptian deities.
Posts: 2,011
Likes: 1,013
|
Post by Godanubis on May 11, 2019 22:38:12 GMT
Interest will be taken 100% first before capital returned. Such states 13.3 of the T&Cs. Lendy makes its money from fees and interest and takes no benefit from returning capital to lenders. Such is the business model.
All losses will come out of capital and, from the experience of security sold so far, they will be large where security is sold. Lendy still to show a capital loss that it did not creatively cover 
|
|
|
|
Post by p2plender on May 12, 2019 0:12:34 GMT
Brooke needs some nice carp to fill that lake so yes, I think you're being a tad optimistic.
Don't forget it's all about how much he and others can extract from the dregs he/they have created.
DFL004 prime example of the way they are screwing investors. I think we were offered around 82% back before Brooke took it upon himself to cancel the outcome of the vote.
You are effectively relying on people working tirelessly to right their wrongs, but it's not happening.
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on May 12, 2019 15:57:56 GMT
Interest will be taken 100% first before capital returned. Such states 13.3 of the T&Cs. Lendy makes its money from fees and interest and takes no benefit from returning capital to lenders. Such is the business model.
All losses will come out of capital and, from the experience of security sold so far, they will be large where security is sold. Lendy still to show a capital loss that it did not creatively cover True. To be fair, I should give them another, say, 50yrs to recover the capital outstanding after security sale before being cheeky enough to suggest there might be a loss.
Seriously, though, I thought DFL025 and DFL035 crystallised losses through acceptance of redemption offer(s)?
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on May 12, 2019 17:25:53 GMT
Seriously, though, I thought DFL025 and DFL035 crystallised losses through acceptance of redemption offer(s)?
The losses were engineered (by use of the provision fund) to be equivalent to interest already earned and paid, so that they could still argue that you'd had all your money back, albeit some of it "mis-labelled" as interest.
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on May 12, 2019 18:11:18 GMT
Seriously, though, I thought DFL025 and DFL035 crystallised losses through acceptance of redemption offer(s)?
The losses were engineered (by use of the provision fund) to be equivalent to interest already earned and paid, so that they could still argue that you'd had all your money back, albeit some of it "mis-labelled" as interest. Thanks. So DFL025 and DFL035 were paid back in full for both capital and interest owed (after using the provision fund)?
I thought they created a new line in the tax statement called 'capital shortfall' as a result of these loans. Do DFL025 and DFL035 lenders, as with everyone else, still have 0.00 on this line of their tax statement?
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on May 12, 2019 18:58:45 GMT
The losses were engineered (by use of the provision fund) to be equivalent to interest already earned and paid, so that they could still argue that you'd had all your money back, albeit some of it "mis-labelled" as interest. Thanks. So DFL025 and DFL035 were paid back in full for both capital and interest owed (after using the provision fund)?
I thought they created a new line in the tax statement called 'capital shortfall' as a result of these loans. Do DFL025 and DFL035 lenders, as with everyone else, still have 0.00 on this line of their tax statement?
The "Capital shortfall" is not zero, but (at least for most investors) is equal or less than the interest already paid on those loans, so by a certain interpretation investors "had all their money back".
|
|
