registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,163
Likes: 5,977
|
Post by registerme on Dec 29, 2016 16:38:21 GMT
ablrate, what is the value of the rest of the SIPP portfolio?
|
|
stevio
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 894
|
Post by stevio on Dec 29, 2016 17:39:05 GMT
ablrate , what is the value of the rest of the SIPP portfolio? I'm guessing they won't tell us, but will say that there is more than enough to cover the loan (this is what they did with the last SIPP loan) As your SIPP can borrow up to 50% of the value of the SIPP to buy commercial property, I'm guessing 50% is coming from a loan from the SIPP and the other 50% from Ablrate Which would mean there is at least 50% retained within the SIPP, so 50% LTV at least Its unclear whether this is a pooled investment with the other SIPP loan/ other SIPPs/ other people The pub is likely to be quite profitable, as there would be no benefit to doing it else, as would need to cover the costs of buying, loan interest, SIPP admin etc
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,789
Likes: 11,009
|
Post by ilmoro on Dec 29, 2016 18:13:44 GMT
Possibility, same name as principal entity director, that this might have a link to a company borrowing on Ablrate (Uk entertainment & leisure) & Crowdstacker. A speculative thought
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,163
Likes: 5,977
|
Post by registerme on Dec 29, 2016 18:47:37 GMT
hmmm, regardless of the legal merits (or otherwise), why do I get the feeling that trying to claim against a SIPP is as likely to succeed as a claim against a PG of the family home?
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,063
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Dec 30, 2016 1:06:10 GMT
Per homepage over last couple of days: Coming soon £180,000 First Charge Property Loan, 10%.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,560
Likes: 1,169
|
Post by shimself on Dec 30, 2016 11:13:31 GMT
So does this rely on the solvency of the finance company, or do we lenders have a direct line of recourse to the poroperty and the SIPP?
|
|
|
Post by richardthe4th on Dec 30, 2016 12:17:56 GMT
On the details of the loans it says that Ablate investors will b assigned the security on the transaction....
|
|
|
Post by ablrate on Dec 30, 2016 13:09:18 GMT
Hi All
All the details are within the borrowing proposal and he docs. Including details of the SIPP portfolio.
Registerme... the trustees of the SIPP are signatories to the loan doc, should there be a default, they are bound by the terms to liquidate whatever part of the SIPP is required to be liquidated if there is a shortfall from the sale of the property.
Regards Ablrate
|
|
iren
Member of DD Central
Posts: 302
Likes: 300
|
Post by iren on Dec 30, 2016 18:44:26 GMT
All should be well then, provided we're sure for the purpose of loan documentation, whether there is one "L" or two in the SIPP holders first name.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,789
Likes: 11,009
|
Post by ilmoro on Dec 30, 2016 19:51:57 GMT
ablrate do you think in the interests of full and transparent disclosure it should have been highlighted (dont think Ive missed it) somewhere that lenders may already have lent against other assets contained in this SIPP through a previous APF loan #100040. Currently it is reliant on lenders to put 2 & 2 together. I know that the SIPP is not the main security. Other point of course is whether the SIPP counts as an asset of Mr H supporting the PG given by Mr H in support of loans to related companies on ABL/Crowdstacker.
|
|
ablender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 555
|
Post by ablender on Dec 30, 2016 20:15:14 GMT
All should be well then, provided we're sure for the purpose of loan documentation, whether there is one "L" or two in the SIPP holders first name. Do you mean S LIPP?
|
|
ablender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 555
|
Post by ablender on Dec 30, 2016 20:18:53 GMT
ablrate do you think in the interests of full and transparent disclosure it should have been highlighted (dont think Ive missed it) somewhere that lenders may already have lent against other the assets contained in this SIPP through a previous APF loan #100040. Currently it is reliant on lenders to put 2 & 2 together. I know that the SIPP is not the main security. Other point of course is whether the SIPP counts as an asset of Mr H supporting the PG given by Mr H in support of loans to related companies on ABL/Crowdstacker. Thanks ilmoro for pointing this out. A question to ablrate: If the same assets contained in the SIPP were used for #100040, which is the order of the charges?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,163
Likes: 5,977
|
Post by registerme on Dec 30, 2016 21:08:59 GMT
/mod hat definitely off I've bid on this, but there's a lot I don't like about how it's been presented. Whilst this is a dig at ablrate, it should not be taken as being solely directed at them because I think much the same criticism can be levelled at pretty much every other platform that I can think of. If we look at the proposal (and acknowledging ablrate 's responses to date), there are questions around / lack of clarity concerning:- 1. The assets held in the SIPP. 2. Legal recourse to those assets in the event of a default (I hear what ablrate has said on this but how much has something like this been tested in the courts?). 3. ilmoro 's point above about the possibility of an asset being used for security more than once - perhaps it's not the case here but it could have been made clear at the outset. 4. The valuation report provided.... prepared "by direction of the UK arm of a major international beverages group". Are lenders even meant to be able to see it / make use of it? 5. The applicant in the VR - presumably the seller to the purchaser we are lending to? 6. The VR, point 1.4, which might invalidate any claim lenders have against the valuer's professional indemnity insurance? 7. The VR is six months old (inspection carried out on the 29th June 2016 with terms of engagement November 2015). 8. The VR, point 6.3, "... refurbishment costs stated to be in the order of £100,000....". Stated? Is that it? Surely there's some documentary evidence eg receipts, tax returns etc that could help verify things like this? 9. The VR, point 6.5, "...historic structural instability...", who seems to be related to the organisation mentioned in point 5 above. We just accept that the valuer just accepted his word for it? 10. The VR, point 21.2 schedule of takings, so rather than extrapolating two weeks' takings from June 2016 would it be possible to get the last six months data? 11. The VR, point 21.4, is the same manager still employed, on the same deal? 12. The VR, point 21.6, how much does Sky TV cost for a pub installation / license? 13. The VR, point 21.8, was there any follow up on this? 14. The VR, point 23.3, no data, no detail, lots of assumption. I've lent on this because I trust ablrate, not because I trust the material presented to me, or can make informed judgements based on it. That places the platform in a position I suspect the regulators wouldn't be happy with. Now I know this is a relatively small loan, and I know that getting the above clarified before presenting a proposal to prospective lenders takes time and costs money, but the platform that gets the balance right will surely succeed where others fail. I also acknowledge that there are some people out there who think any regulation is too much regulation . Still, offerings like this, one day, are going to bite people in the proverbial and that may well attract regulatory attention and negative press comment which will harm the entire industry. To repeat, this should not be taken as criticism of ablrate alone, it's just a clear example of how much of the industry "could do better".
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Dec 30, 2016 21:45:16 GMT
Pub seems to get good reviews on its facebook site and people confirming they like the redevelopment of it.
The drinks seem very cheap. I don't go out much these days but when I have been out have usually paid double what this pub is charging.
My reading is that the valuation for the building, if all the stuff is removed from it and it is sold in a firesale is 225,000.
So that gives a LTV bottom case of 80%.
I haven't invested ( yet ) but that's only because I'm trying to stop investing in pretty much every loan I like and make sure I have enough money to invest in my ISA fully.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,789
Likes: 11,009
|
Post by ilmoro on Dec 30, 2016 22:18:46 GMT
/mod hat definitely off I've bid on this, but there's a lot I don't like about how it's been presented. Whilst this is a dig at ablrate, it should not be taken as being solely directed at them because I think much the same criticism can be levelled at pretty much every other platform that I can think of. If we look at the proposal (and acknowledging ablrate 's responses to date), there are questions around / lack of clarity concerning:- 1. The assets held in the SIPP. 2. Legal recourse to those assets in the event of a default (I hear what ablrate has said on this but how much has something like this been tested in the courts?). 3. ilmoro 's point above about the possibility of an asset being used for security more than once - perhaps it's not the case here but it could have been made clear at the outset. 4. The valuation report provided.... prepared "by direction of the UK arm of a major international beverages group". Are lenders even meant to be able to see it / make use of it? 5. The applicant in the VR - presumably the seller to the purchaser we are lending to? 6. The VR, point 1.4, which might invalidate any claim lenders have against the valuer's professional indemnity insurance? 7. The VR is six months old (inspection carried out on the 29th June 2016 with terms of engagement November 2015). 8. The VR, point 6.3, "... refurbishment costs stated to be in the order of £100,000....". Stated? Is that it? Surely there's some documentary evidence eg receipts, tax returns etc that could help verify things like this? 9. The VR, point 6.5, "...historic structural instability...", who seems to be related to the organisation mentioned in point 5 above. We just accept that the valuer just accepted his word for it? 10. The VR, point 21.2 schedule of takings, so rather than extrapolating two weeks' takings from June 2016 would it be possible to get the last six months data? 11. The VR, point 21.4, is the same manager still employed, on the same deal? 12. The VR, point 21.6, how much does Sky TV cost for a pub installation / license? 13. The VR, point 21.8, was there any follow up on this? 14. The VR, point 23.3, no data, no detail, lots of assumption. I've lent on this because I trust ablrate, not because I trust the material presented to me, or can make informed judgements based on it. That places the platform in a position I suspect the regulators wouldn't be happy with. Now I know this is a relatively small loan, and I know that getting the above clarified before presenting a proposal to prospective lenders takes time and costs money, but the platform that gets the balance right will surely succeed where others fail. I also acknowledge that there are some people out there who think any regulation is too much regulation . Still, offerings like this, one day, are going to bite people in the proverbial and that may well attract regulatory attention and negative press comment which will harm the entire industry. To repeat, this should not be taken as criticism of ablrate alone, it's just a clear example of how much of the industry "could do better". Some comments/further observations 1. Shouldnt the assets include this pub with all associated benefits/liabilities as AIUI from the write up the purchase has already been made? (Or has it - Tense seems to change from page to page) What are the creditors, further loans against assets? 4. What is nature of the 'major beer company's involvement? Is it a tied house which permits the very cheap beer prices 'major pub group buying power' or is that related to the operating coy. 5. Applicant is the operating company for Mr H business, 100% owner by the holding company BN of which he is the major shareholder, so a related party transaction. Will the pub still operated by current owner/operator? Is there a lease to the operating company if the SIPP owns the freehold? Terms? 7. Pub has already been purchased? so valuation reflects price paid. 12. BAsed on rateable value, location, drinks offers etc, hiked 10% in Aug. Close to 20k pa for Sky with £5-6k for BT 15. 23.7 would have thought operating costs would have been important thing to ascertain, staff, beer, utilites, sky 16. 23.5 -23.8 seems to raise questions about ease of realising the security/valuation, 23.9 seem to be missing the key appendix detailing comparisons which are the entire basis for the valuation. I would assume alot of this has been covered by legal duedil by APF/ABL, shame we cant see it. One thing I like about AC is all the legal checks are detailed in the CR. So far Ive just parked a modest sum (peanuts) while I consider my exposure to this borrower/underlying borrower.
|
|