ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,838
|
Post by ozboy on Aug 7, 2017 10:55:58 GMT
Whatever happens it's patently clear that the boat should, at the very least, be immediately removed from The Borrower's possession.
Talk about Taking The Urine.
PS: Such an action would also focus the alleged "Sponsor/s" too I'd have thought?
|
|
hendragon
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 619
|
Post by hendragon on Aug 7, 2017 11:47:43 GMT
I rather think I should have considered the following BEFORE making my small investment in the power boat loan,but if FS do take possession of the boat they will need to keep it somewhere (cost) probably insure it (more cost) and then find someone to buy it, which may take a long time. All of which eats into the security value. FS have probably decided that the best hope of recovery is to get the borrowers to cough up eventually. In fairness the FS any loss for me has been minimal so far. I am however getting a litte tired of the "jam tomorrow" updates that seem to be happening for some loans.
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 857
|
Post by 09dolphin on Aug 7, 2017 20:22:17 GMT
I've just reread the T@Cs of my FS agreement. In 6.2 it states that the asset will be sold if the debt is not repaid - although in 6.5 it does state that FS may elect to delay enforcement of the default procedure if it believes the debt will be repaid by the borrower and that by not enforcing the default procedure a better outcome will be achieved for investors.
I will be asking exactly why FS believe 6,5 applies and for them to provide evidence as to why they believe this applies.
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Aug 10, 2017 16:48:20 GMT
Any sign of our money fundingsecure ? If not when will you be taking the boat into your possession?
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,838
|
Post by ozboy on Aug 10, 2017 17:11:34 GMT
Any sign of our money fundingsecure ? If not when will you be taking the boat into your possession? Yep, well past time to take the toy back. As I've said, bet that will focus the Borrower's mind. Why should he repay the Loan when he's got full use of his toy without paying a penny. We're all well aware of storage costs, etc, etc, but I'm tired of being shafted and we need to close this down now.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Aug 11, 2017 9:30:24 GMT
Update just in. A notable part of which is:
"The equity partner has reconfirmed their intention to provide substantial funding to enable the expansion and growth of the borrower's company, but they themselves are waiting for funds from a third party which were due to them more than three months ago."
Super, now we're in a chain. I wonder what the equity partner's funds are dependent on, a court case perhaps? A Swiss money transfer?
Seriously though, this (lack of) equity partner has been in this for 4 months now. In housing terms, that's not very much. In the hi-octane world of powerboat racing, this is presumably somewhat affecting our rapidly depreciating asset. Presumably once they're in funds, they'll be asking for a discount as it's an old boat?
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Aug 11, 2017 10:48:28 GMT
Update just in. A notable part of which is: "The equity partner has reconfirmed their intention to provide substantial funding to enable the expansion and growth of the borrower's company, but they themselves are waiting for funds from a third party which were due to them more than three months ago."Super, now we're in a chain. I wonder what the equity partner's funds are dependent on, a court case perhaps? A Swiss money transfer? Seriously though, this (lack of) equity partner has been in this for 4 months now. In housing terms, that's not very much. In the hi-octane world of powerboat racing, this is presumably somewhat affecting our rapidly depreciating asset. Presumably once they're in funds, they'll be asking for a discount as it's an old boat? We've gone from "they have confirmed initial payment will be made this weekend" and " the funds will be with us after the weekend - with a swift transfer number to confirm" which are statements that would imply that they actually have the funds, back to " they themselves are waiting for funds from a third party which were due to them more than three months ago".So essentially.... the equity partner doesn't actually have any money yet and these "assurances" of payment were empty promises. Unbelievable.
|
|
merlin
Minor shareholder in Assetz and many other companies.
Posts: 902
Likes: 302
|
Post by merlin on Aug 11, 2017 11:48:27 GMT
Update just in. A notable part of which is: "The equity partner has reconfirmed their intention to provide substantial funding to enable the expansion and growth of the borrower's company, but they themselves are waiting for funds from a third party which were due to them more than three months ago."Super, now we're in a chain. I wonder what the equity partner's funds are dependent on, a court case perhaps? A Swiss money transfer? Seriously though, this (lack of) equity partner has been in this for 4 months now. In housing terms, that's not very much. In the hi-octane world of powerboat racing, this is presumably somewhat affecting our rapidly depreciating asset. Presumably once they're in funds, they'll be asking for a discount as it's an old boat? We've gone from "they have confirmed initial payment will be made this weekend" and " the funds will be with us after the weekend - with a swift transfer number to confirm" which are statements that would imply that they actually have the funds, back to " they themselves are waiting for funds from a third party which were due to them more than three months ago".So essentially.... the equity partner doesn't actually have any money yet and these "assurances" of payment were empty promises. Unbelievable. No not unbelievable the equity partner has been informed by his clairvoyant that he will win the National Lottery big time, shortly!!!
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Aug 11, 2017 13:47:11 GMT
''unbelievable''
Monetus - you have just summed up nicely FS updates
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,838
|
Post by ozboy on Aug 11, 2017 14:24:55 GMT
To be fair, according to the latest Update today, FS DO seem to have "control" of the boat, whatever that may mean. I vaguely recall The Borrower is allowed to "Exhibit" the toy or some such in order to gain the required sponsorship: " The current positiion (sic) remains the same - the boat is under our control, not being used by the borrower."This Loan however, like so many others in FS, does expose their very weak and ineffective lending model. With no monthly payments or anything else, if The Borrower can get away with borrowing what the Asset is worth (or more!) via an easily inflated "Valuation" there's no incentive whatsoever to ever pay the Loan back. And that, is a recipe for disaster.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 11, 2017 15:09:19 GMT
I rather think I should have considered the following BEFORE making my small investment in the power boat loan,but if FS do take possession of the boat they will need to keep it somewhere (cost) probably insure it (more cost) and then find someone to buy it, which may take a long time. All of which eats into the security value. FS have probably decided that the best hope of recovery is to get the borrowers to cough up eventually. In fairness the FS any loss for me has been minimal so far. I am however getting a litte tired of the "jam tomorrow" updates that seem to be happening for some loans. My bold. No cost to store it, they have a boatyard in scotland somewhere, which they have had for years. . edit. I Think its in a town called earNose, no not earnose, maybe nostril-lip, oh i remember now it's in E******h.
|
|
09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 857
|
Post by 09dolphin on Aug 12, 2017 20:44:07 GMT
Can anyone honestly say they are surprised by the latest update. I know I'm not.
I was just waiting to enjoy the next excuse FS would use to explain why the promises previously made couldn't be honoured. What does surprise me is the actual excuse used. Is it me misunderstanding "normal" business practice but I always thought that a contract was binding - obviously I was wrong and contract law has changed, or perhaps it was a letter of intent and it wasn't a contract that FS saw. I do hope FS know the difference.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Aug 13, 2017 7:31:29 GMT
Can anyone honestly say they are surprised by the latest update. I know I'm not.
I was just waiting to enjoy the next excuse FS would use to explain why the promises previously made couldn't be honoured. What does surprise me is the actual excuse used. Is it me misunderstanding "normal" business practice but I always thought that a contract was binding - obviously I was wrong and contract law has changed, or perhaps it was a letter of intent and it wasn't a contract that FS saw. I do hope FS know the difference. Being realistic for a second, what would you have the powerboat company do if their saviour investor has signed a major investment agreement with them but has not yet been able to come up with the promised funds to fulfil it? Sue him? Notify him that the contract is void? If FS were confident in being able to recover the loans in full by defaulting them and selling the boats then I'm confident they'd already have done so (they do it quickly enough with smaller pawn loans). That they haven't tells me that a shortfall is thought very likely / inevitable, hence the continued hope that the white knight will ride into view bearing cash. The same applies to a long list of heavily overdue FS loans. The core issue is that the original valuations that were used to raise the loans bear no relation to the sums now thought likely to be recovered in a fire sale.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 13, 2017 7:56:17 GMT
Can anyone honestly say they are surprised by the latest update. I know I'm not.
I was just waiting to enjoy the next excuse FS would use to explain why the promises previously made couldn't be honoured. What does surprise me is the actual excuse used. Is it me misunderstanding "normal" business practice but I always thought that a contract was binding - obviously I was wrong and contract law has changed, or perhaps it was a letter of intent and it wasn't a contract that FS saw. I do hope FS know the difference. Being realistic for a second, what would you have the powerboat company do if their saviour investor has signed a major investment agreement with them but has not yet been able to come up with the promised funds to fulfil it? Sue him? Notify him that the contract is void? If FS were confident in being able to recover the loans in full by defaulting them and selling the boats then I'm confident they'd already have done so (they do it quickly enough with smaller pawn loans). That they haven't tells me that a shortfall is thought very likely / inevitable, hence the continued hope that the white knight will ride into view bearing cash. The same applies to a long list of heavily overdue FS loans. The core issue is that the original valuations that were used to raise the loans bear no relation to the sums now thought likely to be recovered in a fire sale. Which raises another question, Why are Fundingsecure and other platforms offering loans on assets that are over valued and loans that they have no confidence in? I agree that a period of measured assessment of the asset is crucial when a borrower does not meet their obligations, but past loans are showing that when the silly borrower excuses start, the inevitable asset seizure eventually happens, what bothers me is the how easily Fundingsecure are 'Led up the garden path' by borrowers and take month's/years to take positive action. Personally i do not want my money tied up for years while Fundingsecure Fanny around pretending to be taking positive action, i would rather they move in quickly and get the outcome resolved, if that means a loss of interest and some capitol, then so be it.
|
|
kaya
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,150
Likes: 718
|
Post by kaya on Aug 13, 2017 8:17:22 GMT
. The core issue is that the original valuations that were used to raise the loans bear no relation to the sums now thought likely to be recovered in a fire sale. That might be construed as a deception. Or maybe the valuers/FS just had their happy goggles on.
|
|