|
Post by ablrate on Oct 11, 2019 14:39:17 GMT
Is there tranche draw downs against the £3.11m P-----n first charge loan, or has it been taken in full ? Ablrate. Can I please request an answer to this question, as you appear to be answering other questions after this one. Sorry - assumed that answer was clear. There is a site advance against the £3.1 million, but the majority of the money is drawn down over the period of the development against reports submitted against targeted progress by a surveyor acting on behalf of the first charge lender.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 11, 2019 15:33:16 GMT
Ablrate. Can I please request an answer to this question, as you appear to be answering other questions after this one. Sorry - assumed that answer was clear. There is a site advance against the £3.1 million, but the majority of the money is drawn down over the period of the development against reports submitted against targeted progress by a surveyor acting on behalf of the first charge lender. Thanks. Assumed your original reply referred to the Ablrate only. Would appreciate how much of both loans will be provided as the initial advance at the start, so that we know how it compares with the £1.57m valuation & can draw our own conclusions as to LTV.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 11, 2019 17:08:08 GMT
Criston, all the ablrate money is drawn down at the start, but you only need worry about £500k of it. The borrower will not wish to draw down more than needed of the primary funding, because they will have to pay interest on it.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 11, 2019 17:23:34 GMT
Criston, all the ablrate money is drawn down at the start, but you only need worry about £500k of it. The borrower will not wish to draw down more than needed of the primary funding, because they will have to pay interest on it. As it's a second charge, I want to know how much of that & of the first charge will been drawn down, to see if the total exceeds £1.57m, & if so will be a negative LTV.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 11, 2019 18:41:21 GMT
Criston, all the ablrate money is drawn down at the start, but you only need worry about £500k of it. The borrower will not wish to draw down more than needed of the primary funding, because they will have to pay interest on it. As it's a second charge, I want to know how much of that & of the first charge will been drawn down, to see if the total exceeds £1.57m, & if so will be a negative LTV. To be a bit pedantic Ablrate does not have a second charge, but is certainly behind the first charge. I can see your concern when you consider loans 67&68, but there much of the cash was used to acquire the property/business and part-demolish the building/business, which is the very worse point to have it as security. Those loans are being supported. At least here the cash gets used to increase the value of the property, but it does have to be drawn down first. At the point of initial draw down there are cash assets to consider as well as the site value, and if you are thinking of something like FS Whitehaven where the cash disappeared, I rather think we are in a more professional and genuine set up here and ablrate seem to have a determination to control our risk. We also have a larger lender in the driving seat, who will effectively be working for us (I think).
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Oct 11, 2019 22:03:56 GMT
Criston, all the ablrate money is drawn down at the start, but you only need worry about £500k of it. The borrower will not wish to draw down more than needed of the primary funding, because they will have to pay interest on it. As it's a second charge, I want to know how much of that & of the first charge will been drawn down, to see if the total exceeds £1.57m, & if so will be a negative LTV. criston, you can't have a negative LTV (well, technically you could if the security was in fact a liability as opposed to an asset, but that's not what you're talking about here). What I presume you are trying to describe is an LTV of over 100%, i.e. the Loan is larger than the Value of the security, and hence the ratio of Loan:Value is greater than 100%.
|
|
|
Post by df on Oct 11, 2019 23:35:28 GMT
As it's a second charge, I want to know how much of that & of the first charge will been drawn down, to see if the total exceeds £1.57m, & if so will be a negative LTV. criston , you can't have a negative LTV (well, technically you could if the security was in fact a liability as opposed to an asset, but that's not what you're talking about here). What I presume you are trying to describe is an LTV of over 100%, i.e. the Loan is larger than the Value of the security, and hence the ratio of Loan:Value is greater than 100%. And many of us, who invested with Lendy, FS etc., have learned that this is the reality I first learned it when Lendy's Welsh Castle was recovered and then there were many to follow. Since then I've stopped paying attention to LTV's... I'm more interested in likelihood of repayment. I've invested in 133.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 12, 2019 6:41:30 GMT
Without any further information on the initial draw down total for both loans & assuming the GDV is correct, I am sceptical this is an unsecured loan, until the development reaches it's later stages.
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 12, 2019 8:16:15 GMT
Without any further information on the initial draw down total for both loans & assuming the GDV is correct, I am sceptical this is an unsecured loan, until the development reaches it's later stages. That's quite a good way of approaching the proposition - do I like it or not, assuming that if it goes wrong the security may prove to be inadequate? I tend to agree with df - we want returns from successful projects, not recoveries from security. This is a normal development of desirable residential property, imo, and the developer is, presumably, just lowering overall finance costs by getting the primary finance rates for a lower LTV. We are a top up at greater risk and a higher rate. Personally I am not at all worried about the LTV at the start, as long as the cash is sufficient and used for the intended purpose. However, I would not put money in this, or any Ablrate loan, which I may need quickly for other purposes.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 12, 2019 8:39:52 GMT
I will have to concede I have convinced myself, only.
|
|
macq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,923
Likes: 1,189
|
Post by macq on Oct 12, 2019 9:33:21 GMT
I will have to concede I have convinced myself, only. Not sure about that i still have issues as to why they seem to run an bonds/IFISA platform but are borrowing from another platform(but like a lot of Abl loans is above my knowledge base so thinking of running down) But without speaking for others and its probably to Abl credit but i don't think any other platform would have people putting the project,how they perceive the borrowers or the location of property etc over security - i think its known as the Abl effect
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 12, 2019 12:34:58 GMT
I will have to concede I have convinced myself, only. Not sure about that i still have issues as to why they seem to run an bonds/IFISA platform but are borrowing from another platform(but like a lot of Abl loans is above my knowledge base so thinking of running down) But without speaking for others and its probably to Abl credit but i don't think any other platform would have people putting the project,how they perceive the borrowers or the location of property etc over security - i think its known as the Abl effect I think that's right. It's a different model. For 8% you might get good security. For 13% you just can't, and you rely on the platform doing a good evaluation and curation job for their extra 5%. Ablrate do not walk away, even when I think they should. They have made some mistakes, but not many. When a platform offers you say 12% and does very little DD and supervision on high volumes of loans, then you are on your own and in trouble.
|
|
criston
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 628
|
Post by criston on Oct 12, 2019 12:45:08 GMT
Not sure about that i still have issues as to why they seem to run an bonds/IFISA platform but are borrowing from another platform(but like a lot of Abl loans is above my knowledge base so thinking of running down) But without speaking for others and its probably to Abl credit but i don't think any other platform would have people putting the project,how they perceive the borrowers or the location of property etc over security - i think its known as the Abl effect I think that's right. It's a different model. For 8% you might get good security. For 13% you just can't, and you rely on the platform doing a good evaluation and curation job for their extra 5%. Ablrate do not walk away, even when I think they should. They have made some mistakes, but not many. When a platform offers you say 12% and does very little DD and supervision on high volumes of loans, then you are on your own and in trouble. Ablrate offer reasonable security on many of their loans at 13%
|
|
blender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,719
Likes: 4,272
|
Post by blender on Oct 12, 2019 15:53:24 GMT
I agree.
|
|
|
Post by oktaeder on Oct 13, 2019 12:37:16 GMT
Ablrate offer reasonable security on many of their loans at 13% Such as containers? SCNR
|
|