mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 21, 2020 16:51:53 GMT
Loans that returned a loss of capital are few and far between. Historically and numerically accurate... I suspect that a lot depends on how you treat renewal loans for projects that eventually failed. If you consider those to be successes, then the success percentage will look pretty good.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 21, 2020 16:39:39 GMT
The 2.6% reduction is in line with the agreed Administrator's fee for managing a defaulted loan's redemption of 2.5%. Maybe it's a rounding thing, or maybe there were some minor costs which contributed an additional 0.1% to the deductions. iRobot : Unfortunately, I think the 2.5% and 2.6% amounts are not as close as the numbers might seem to indicate. AIUI, the 2.5% fee is supposed to be 2.5% of the amount of the loan. The 2.6% reduction in return for investors, however, was 2.6% per year.
Because I wasn't in these loans, I can't see the details, but it was reported above that the Room 4 and Room 6 loans had run for 566 days. If the return on those loans was reduced by 2.6% p.a. then the reduction actually was about 4% (being 2.6% x 566/365) of the amount of the loan.
Further thoughts...
1) The Room 79 loan appears to have been made about seven weeks after the other three loans that have just been settled. If the collection fees also reduced the return on that loan to 9.4%, then those fees would have been about 3.7% of the value of the loan. This suggests to me that the administrator is calculating the fee as a percentage of the accrued interest (charging 22%, being 2.6%/12%) rather than applying a fee that's a simple percentage the loan balance.
2) It's probably just be a coincidence, but I note that the partial recovery of loan 1274707089 -- in the system as 1274707089A -- a month ago, also reports the Actual Return as 9.4%. Another aspect of that recovery which I can't explain is that my return, based on the interest I actually received, was only 8.9%. Why didn't I earn 9.4%? I know that bonus interest can affect the Actual Returns reported, but that loan offered no bonuses, though it's always possible that FS made a deal with a large investor that wasn't disclosed.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 20, 2020 19:21:38 GMT
When was T8 originated? What was its expected end date at that time? For those with access to DDC it's in the third table of mrclondon 's thread - "FS INDEX - All active and past loans" here - p2pindependentforum.com/post/355515/thread
I'm not in FS, but assuming I have the correct loan, tranche 8 information is thus:
Id Title Updated Status Activated Amount Rate LTV Term Maturity
3100839414 C****s Quarry - Tranche 8. 30/07/2019 Active 30/07/2019 132800 13.00% 39.30% 6 months 29/01/2020
star dust: Thanks for the reminder that table exists.
However, I went to the table and tried the link to T8 and got "not available". I tried a few other links and found that links to loans I'm in work, and links to loans that I'm not in do not work. Has the system been modified to exclude investors from seeing info about loans they're not in?
Can anyone else see any loans they're not in?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 20, 2020 18:44:27 GMT
Right of access is for inspection not multiple viewers. All properties for sale must have Home Report in Scotland it highlights any major problems and gives indicative value/rent Wouldn't the right of access for inspection allow the agent to take photos of the interior that they could post with the listing to give potential buyers an idea of the property condition? The fact that there are none suggests to me that any interior photos would be rather depressing to potential buyers and prices.
Any why aren't there even any exterior photos? Surely you don't need access permission to take a picture of the building! Or is the neighbourhood so intimidating that you're risking your life just going there?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 20, 2020 18:22:51 GMT
I am in several tranches of this, my last being T8. I don't know how many came after T8, but they all rank first charge equally. I have a note on my tiny holding of T8, updated by CG in the last week or two, that the T8 loan is expected to end on 29/01/20. However, none of my other tranches, in which I am far more heavily invested, have been assigned similar end dates. Make of that what you will. When was T8 originated? What was its expected end date at that time?
With the FS 'All active and past loans' website page "currently down for maintenance" it's impossible to access info on loans other than those you are invested in unless you know the loan number. What's the number for T8?
How long has the All Loans page been down? Does anyone know if that's permanent, or whether it's expected to come back to life?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 20, 2020 18:14:27 GMT
This is one of a handful of loans I have. I have been trying to find any information on the situation with the build, but no luck. Can anyone help? For anyone in the loan(s) it might be worth keeping an eye on the construction company's FB page. They have a post for the Quarry from late November announcing commencement (ties in with the progress / billing paperwork) and it appears they are in the habit of posting progress updates and photos for (all?) their contracts. Does anyone know if the FB page mentioned above still exists? If so, has it been updated recently with any info about this project?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 15, 2020 23:26:02 GMT
Does anyone understand the PP situation for this property? I'm particularly confused by the following sentence from a FS update... From the word "additional", it looked to me as if the borrower had obtained PP and was trying to have if modified.
Did the borrower never have any PP granted?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Jan 15, 2020 19:16:39 GMT
what length are the Administrators prepared to go to to increase value? Apply for PP (Outline of Full)? I suspect the answer to the first question is 'pretty minimal'.
I presume that obtaining PP for a big project like envisioned here would require a fair amount of funding for design, etc. Where would that money come from? There'd obviously be a risk that PP wouldn't be granted quickly and that appeals, etc. would be needed by the proposers or result from unhappy objectors.
Administrators aren't known for happily letting administrations be extended for these sort of reasons or for taking risks like that. And I suppose creditors aren't too keen on long administrations either, since the longer they go on the more they cost.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 28, 2019 23:06:13 GMT
There are certainly a few investors in FS who could collectively come up with £40 Mil to buy the whole loanbook with an obvious return of cash to themselves and assets worth considerably more than their additional investment. Perhaps we should collectively offer to join them so that we can share in the spoils!
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Dec 28, 2019 22:14:36 GMT
I think the idea that there are two group of lenders 1) with great loans and 2) one with bad loans, is a myth. As the information in the prospectuses was no where near enough to make a valid judgement on the soundness of the loan, almost all investors will have a mixture of totally dud and very smelly loans. Even loans that repay are dodgy as no idea what deductions will make made before money can be withdrawn. I am not actually that fussed if the administrators want to use some intelligent formula to distribute the proceeds of selling the loan book off. I readily admit my loan book is a dogs dinner, however I suspect almost everybody else’s is too and if people are claiming theirs is a bed of roses I suspect they haven’t looked closely enough! I do think that people are getting too bogged down in not wanting to admit the failings of their own egos. I have sympathy for anybody claiming that their loans are good, they will get capital plus interest back etc....but people in this camp are in my opinion totally out of touch with the reality of the situation and how administrations inevitably lead to rich administrators and disappointed creditors. This is why I didn’t even want to recognise the authority of the administrators to manage to loan book but nobody listened. I totally agree , you may have done your DD and checked everything on the loan you invested in but that is worth nothing if FS have supplied duff information and highly optimistic valuations , which is more likely than not. While the idea of selling the whole loan book as a single lump and distributing the proceeds evenly to all investors sounds like a simple solution, I'm in the group that considers that to be a grossly unfair result. I accept that investors who selected which loans to invest in based on inaccurate or missing -- such as a failure to disclose connected loans -- info from FS may have made poor choices, selective investors also may have made some appropriate choices.
One area where FS seem to have made a reasonable effort at disclosure doesn't seem to have been mentioned in this thread, and that is loan priority where a borrower has multiple FS loans secured by a single property (or collection). At Formby and Lytham, for instance, there are first-priority loans, second-priority loans, and even lower-priority loans. (There are more examples as well.) To treat those loans as equal in distributing the proceeds from a loan book sale would be completely nonsensical. If the security itself were to be liquidated, the proceeds would go to the first-priority loan investors until they had received all their capital AND ALL THEIR ACCRUED INTEREST before a penny would go to the investors in the lower-priority loans. This has to be recognised when any proceeds are distributed.
I certainly don't claim to have done all the DD I could have, nor that the DD I did do was particularly thorough, but I did generally manage to avoid investing in lower-priority loans. As a result, I am hopeful that my FS loss will be a bit smaller (percentage-wise) than that of the 'average' FS investor. It still will be large, though, because I still had a significant sum invested in FS when the plug was pulled.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 14, 2019 18:29:19 GMT
I also wonder just how much all this legal action is costing FS and what damage it is doing to their balance sheet. Unfortunately, any impact the cost of the legal action might have on TF's balance sheet will be only temporary. When the property eventually is sold, FS will be entitled to recover all the costs they have incurred before we lenders get a look in. Which means that those costs ultimately are paid by FS's investors rather than by FS. Only in the unlikely -- and getting more so by the day -- case where the sale proceeds actually are sufficient to repay FS's lenders all that they are owed, would those costs come out of the borrower's share of the proceeds.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 5, 2019 21:39:39 GMT
Shall we run a poll regarding how much we think FS will be able to collect on the PG?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
FundingSecure (FS) in Administration
New Loans (FS)
Mar 17, 2019 4:22:10 GMT
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 17, 2019 4:22:10 GMT
Only 6 months ago that would have filled in 2 minutes. And with a limit of £25 per investor!
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
FundingSecure (FS) in Administration
New Loans (FS)
Mar 16, 2019 22:19:50 GMT
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 16, 2019 22:19:50 GMT
I received an email from FS at lunchtime today announcing that 2605785249 -- 1934 Ford Model B Classic Car, a Renewal of 1506940327, was going to go live at 1600 today. When I just went looking at the website, it looks like this loan is still on the Coming Soon list with a Planned Opening time of 1600 on 16/Mar.
Is my browser feeding me old data? Or have FS made a mess of things and failed to set this loan live when they said they would?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,452
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Mar 12, 2019 4:34:49 GMT
Godanubis : How can you be so certain this hasn't happened yet if Lendy haven't disclosed how recovery proceeds were calculated in the situations where lenders didn't receive 100% of their capital back? What loans did the lenders not get 100% paid to them that are compleated ?? Godanubis: I just looked at my 2018-19 tax statement, and it has an entry for "Total capital shortfall" of £63.90. Unfortunately, it doesn't identify the source, so I don't know which loan(s) produced that loss, but it does suggest strongly to me that Lendy have closed out one (or more) of my loans and did not return 100% of investors' capital.
Is there an easy way for me to find out the source of this amount?
|
|