|
Post by michaelrebs on Mar 23, 2017 17:25:54 GMT
Hi All,
Whilst we believe that we had addressed any confusion about the distribution of the recovered funds on this loan on several occasions, it has come to our attention that there remains a certain amount of confusion surrounding H***** D***********.
Firstly, we have and will always aim to exhaust every available means to recover every penny of lenders' funds from defaulted borrowers, the unfortunate commercial reality is that this is not always possible for every default. We will continue to do so, and we can appreciate the frustration that lenders feel in this case and any others where a full repayment is not possible.
In this instance, with the business wound up and liquidated with no dividend to unsecured creditors from the liquidation of the business, lenders were asked to decide between whether to accept a negotiated settlement figure from the loan guarantors or instead to proceed to take a chance on the possible returns from bankruptcy. The expected bankruptcy returns were low to nil as estimated by the debtor's insolvency practitioner and our legal agents' investigation into the guarantors estates.
Every penny received from the borrower has been distributed to lenders.
As a reminder, whilst the legal expenses are normally taken from the settlement amount, in this case ReBS elected to pay all legal and court fees on behalf of the lenders.
Each lender’s individual return may vary based on factors, such as when they purchased/sold their individual MLs and the rate. If any lender does want a breakdown of their individual figures, please email support@rebuildingsociety.com and the accounts team will provide an individual breakdown.
Best Regards,
Michael
The ReBS Team
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,426
Likes: 1,211
|
Post by sqh on Mar 24, 2017 1:30:48 GMT
Firstly, we have and will always aim to exhaust every available means to recover every penny of lenders' funds from defaulted borrowers,...... ....... Michael The ReBS Team michaelrebs When are you going to exhaust every available means to recover every penny from the borrower of Heath Insurance ?You allowed the borrower to state their wealth at multiple times the loan value. You allowed the borrower to sell the company, without repaying the debt. The borrower immediately stopped payments, and you got outmanoeuvred by the borrower's legal team and accepted a pathetic settlement of 24%, we didn't even get to vote. How can you possibly say you exhaust every possible means.
|
|
|
Post by oppsididitagain on Apr 26, 2017 6:10:50 GMT
Hi Michael,
You have not answered any confusion in relation to this recovery. The answers given to my support ticket in relation to outstanding debt, do not match what was stated to us on the lenders voting poll.
A few things are very confusing :
As you state: In total, of the original £35,000 loaned we have converted £1,7542.14 to Bad Debt. This represents 50.12% of the capital loaned Even though the OUTSTANDING DEBT at the time was £22,465 as at May 2016 (according to your E mail)
According to ReBS my outstanding capital at time of default was approx £423. so according to your statement
In short, the guarantors have offered to pay £8,000.00, payable 21 days after the acceptance of the offer. As the debt (as of 10th May 2016) was £22,465, this offer would represent a default return of approximately 35.61%. This figure was then revised to £10,000.00 in full and final settlement. This figure would represent an approximate default return of around 40%. (10k of an outstanding amount of £22.5k)
Of £423 - You have posted £340 to the deductions and £90 to the loan redemption on my statement. This doesn't seem to be a 40% recovery as per your statement . I would expect to see something like £160 posted to redemptions and £265 posted to deductions. This is why its causing me confusion. I have responded to your personal E mail and called many times but still get no response or explanation to your workings.
|
|
|
Post by rb5286 on Apr 26, 2017 13:35:40 GMT
these are sub-prime junk bond like iinvestments - dump them. The team don't seemed to be experienced, nor skilled enough in this particular field to be effective IMHO.
|
|