metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Nov 3, 2021 14:18:46 GMT
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Oct 28, 2021 17:22:21 GMT
Administration/Liquidation is outside the FCA's 'perimeter' so they tend to wash their hands the moment Administrators are called in. Their involvement is limited to ' Guidance' * and is process driven. In one of their recent 'Dear CEO' letters to P2P heads the FCA pressed the need for comprehensive wind down plans (inside the perimeter) but this misses the point. 'Administration' is the trump card. At the moment administration is called the wind down plan can be worthless, the vultures can start stripping the carcas. As ilmoro has pointed out 'Berkley Applegate' is being used (not aware that this has been quoted wrt Col) but as I have said many times BDO will be claiming fees for work carried out on worthless 'assets' and other 'difficulties' and these will be reclaimed from recoveries on other loans. The perimeter is and has been a great topic of debate at the FCA (and in Parliament) for a long time, their latest annual ' Perimeter Report' was published 4 days ago. I have had the 'pleasure' of reading several of these and have not come across any suggestion that the FCA wants to get involved in Administration/Liquidation processes. *Note This might be an angle in FS / LY but not applicable wrt Col since the FCA maintain they were not regulated. They did of course use those powers (FSAM, 362A) when they intervened in the Collateral case to change the administrator. Arguably if the company wasnt carrying out a regulated activity then the FCA didnt have those powers. Cake & eat it. I am not sure BDO will be charging for work on worthless loans. I think they will be charging for work, on a loan by loan basis, on loans that do have recoveries, and charging for general work on the admin/liquidation. Yes, the FCA used FSMA s362A, absolutely on the basis that Collateral had been carrying out regulated activities. The FCA statement on Collateral (which dances around the truth about their protracted involvement with Collateral, omitting most of it) says "In fact, none of the Collateral Companies held any valid authorisation or permission to carry on regulated activities." The key word is "valid".
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Oct 28, 2021 4:39:45 GMT
Back now.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Sept 28, 2021 12:08:17 GMT
I was sure we were promised that it would be easier to get money in and out of ISAs 'later this year'. Or maybe I fantasised that. It's somewhere on the to do list.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Sept 20, 2021 0:00:18 GMT
Does anyone know how to make a withdrawal from the CP IFISA? Is it necessary to send a message? Can you confirm it is a flexible ISA, I'm pretty sure it is?
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Aug 19, 2021 18:31:49 GMT
Needs the interview. Hopefully just a summer blip.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Aug 5, 2021 18:28:48 GMT
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Aug 1, 2021 17:54:15 GMT
That's very positive. Possibly wishful thinking as things do crop up as we saw with TC & MT starting as orderly wind downs*. I'm now paying 25% trust assets to administrators for a TC loan whose recovery had already been agreed upon beforehand - after about 2 years & whose receivership/platform fees are already being deducted - but whose 12m repayments just happen to overlap with TC hiding behind administrators! (*tbf OC are doing so & LC unless they start retail again.) Much has to depend on the quality of the loan book, whether the security is good enough eg for refinance with another lender, or for the borrower to execute their plans. MT was pushed into admin by a legal dispute with a borrower aiui. There are so many lousy loans there that it is costing a lot of time to unravel them. LC is/was still lending but in CBILS loans, only allowed to be funded by institutions, so not in wind down. Whether they return to offering retail investments, time will tell. It was said to be temporary. See the 2020 Outcomes Statement on the stats page. Default rates have been better than expected, likely due to govt support measures.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Jul 28, 2021 1:00:57 GMT
The fact you did not bid in the previous loan previous should have increased your chances. I believe the loan token position just rotates through the lender ID numbers. If so, that means that if it was your turn and you did not bid, you just miss out on that round. I do not believe bidding or not bidding alters the chances that your account is in the right part of the cycle for the next loan. On the other hand, receiving an allocation does mean you would be less likely to get an allocation in the next loan, because it means your account was in line last time. Likewise, bidding and not receiving suggests your chances are higher next time, because it means your account was not in line last time.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Jul 22, 2021 0:27:43 GMT
My understanding is that CrowdProperty tranches can be funded on the platform in advance and held by CP on account, but payments to the borrower for construction costs are only made after the MS report approves that the costed works have been done.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Jul 8, 2021 23:46:46 GMT
It states on the new fundraise page that the current share price is "£21.78". How can one determine what the shares were worth in the two previous fundraises please? It doesn't give a share price on the two previous fundraises' pages (e.g. this, the second one, from March 2019). Is it on the basis of the equity percentage being offered as a proportion of the amount being raised? Is there an iron-clad guarantee that one's share holdings won't be diluted? www.seedrs.com/businesses/crowdpropertyClick "View price history". R1 20 Dec 2017 £5.90 £5.9M pre-moneyR1 29 Apr 2019 £13.68 £15.7M pre-moneyR3 now £21.78 £29.4M pre-money
Shares issued are new shares. There is therefore some dilution of existing shares. The equity percentage shown will change as the funded amount changes.
Clearly the business has grown over that period.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Jun 10, 2021 18:06:58 GMT
If lenders choose to fund a new loan, then it is a new loan, just as much as it would be if refinanced by another institution. I don't see that as fiddling the statistics.
If a project takes longer for whatever reasons, but remains financially viable, it is not an issue. Typically extending a term makes a project more marginal for the borrower, and more difficult to extend finance unless cash is injected, but in some cases enhanced planning may be obtained during the loan that make it more profitable. Even if profit is eroded, if the loan was not too large to begin with it doesn't matter. It may make sense to market properties for longer rather than sell them at a knocked down priced just to repay the loan during the original term. Then an exit bridge can make sense. Other times, genuine issues arise on the site. Provided it can be managed financially, there is not a problem.
The issue in development lending is when a project becomes unviable. If the LTV is getting to high with rolled-up interest then a refinance is not an option. Then with a sensible project and good management it is usually still possible to exit successfully.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on May 14, 2021 23:03:13 GMT
Without direct FCA involvement Collateral could never have sold regulated investments.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Apr 13, 2021 4:08:30 GMT
It's not the case that all loans are bullet loans. Many do pay monthly interest, mostly the first tranche of multi-tranche loans. Loans that repay principal only at term or in lump sums on partial sales are bullet loans. So far as I know, all CP loans are bullet loans, though some have retained interest paid out monthly.
|
|
metoo
Member of DD Central
Posts: 540
Likes: 410
|
Post by metoo on Mar 30, 2021 22:15:26 GMT
c64 may I ask your view on SoMo investments as unregulated loans to Social Money Ltd, which are said to be held in trust for individual lenders, rather than being regulated investments like P2P lending? I assume you feel comfortable with SoMo investments being unregulated (as Zopa was in the beginning, before P2P became a regulated activity in 2014). I appreciate platform risk and other issues have seen several P2P platforms fail.
|
|