damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jul 7, 2017 12:56:16 GMT
just at the last minute, the rug was pulled from underneath us, and there are now more queries, its almost as though they are stringing FC along, but that can't be the case surely..................
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jul 4, 2017 11:44:51 GMT
1 -2 weeks will be up this Friday, so I am sure they will have drawn down the funds and we will all be repaid...................
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jun 19, 2017 14:21:06 GMT
good, we can be paid out.
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jun 18, 2017 21:18:32 GMT
40%
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jun 18, 2017 21:13:10 GMT
I have funds in four loans in Tewkesbury ranging from 114 to 141 days late. I believe the interest is charged at an extra 2% for these types of loans, is that collected on settlement or paid monthly as I can't find it on the transaction statement.
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Property Moose
SPV 70
May 23, 2017 7:01:51 GMT
Post by damar on May 23, 2017 7:01:51 GMT
Hi,
Has anyone heard anything about SPV 70, last update I got was 11th April, saying Tennant had to vacate in two weeks, not a dicky bird since then.
Sadly I have come to expect no better.
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Mar 13, 2017 8:33:32 GMT
I am also disappointed with the long vacant periods, luckily I managed to sell all mine, at a loss of course, my biggest complaint is SPV 45, the bank of three terraced houses, supposedly rented at 425 per month each, this has never been reached.
A message was received, telling me that the rent would be increased in January, but for two weeks I have been waiting for someone to come back and confirm this.
Property moose could and should be really good, but the voids are not what I have experienced in letting houses personally.
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Feb 8, 2017 21:52:48 GMT
The email, if you didn't get it
Hope you've had a good day so far.
I wanted to get in touch as a follow up to our email sent last week, which has raised some interesting questions around values and culture within the business.
As many of our members know, Property Moose was founded in 2013 as a platform of transparency and opportunity for anyone to invest in property in a diversified way. Since then, we have grown to over 20,000 members in 67 countries around the world and have funded over £8million of property.
All this has been achieved with a very minimal budget and small team of dedicated and passionate individuals – many of who are very close with our members and speak with them regularly.
From an early stage, we focused on working closely with our members and listening to suggestions as to how we can improve. This has led to developments such as our improved dashboard reporting and, soon to be released (tomorrow!), statement of returns for your tax calculations. By listening, we quickly learn what is important and what can wait.
Last week, we announced that each SPV would need to start paying for accounting and book-keeping services as a result of the increased volume of SPVs. This was already included in the calculations on all investments from SPV 59 (as is clearly stated on the description for each of the listings and will continue to be charged). However, before SPV 59, we had relied on our terms and conditions which stated that third party costs attributable to the SPV could be charged as applicable. This was always intended to be outsourced once the scale was there, however, upon assessing the market, it was clear that pricing was high (the cheapest quote we had was £53 +VAT per month and the dearest £500 +VAT).
As a result, we went to the effort of assessing the market and working out how much it would cost us to provide that service in house – the figure came to c.£39 p.m. which led to our decision to charge £30 - £40 p.m. on SPVs 59+ for accounting services. Our view was that it was better to provide these services at cost rather than go to an outsourced provider and pay more.
To date, we have done this work for free but this is not sustainable as a business as everyone will appreciate.
A handful of our members have raised the question as to whether it is right for us to now start charging SPV 2 – 58 for accounting fees when it was not shown in the original calculations. Our view is that legally it is, and is in accordance with our terms of investment, as outlined on our terms and conditions.
However, as a business that is very close to its members, I feel that a different approach is warranted here and that Property Moose should continue to take the cost as a business. This will have an impact on our own cash-flow but I do believe is the right thing to do and more in line with the culture of the business that our members have learnt to love – one of transparency and fairness.
For those SPVs that incurred the £30 cost in January (SPV 2- 58), next month and until the end of the initial term there will be no accounting and corporate governance fee charged.
SPVs 59 and onwards will continue to be charged an accounting fee of £30 - £40 p.m. (+VAT) to cover the costs of providing those services, as was disclosed in the listing description. In accordance with our terms, you can vote on the appointment of Moose Services for SPV 59 onwards HERE.
If you have any questions on this or anything else, please do get in touch.
- Andrew Gardiner, Founder & CEO
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jan 31, 2017 21:02:12 GMT
Thanks for all the feedback,
I will go with Hor's suggestion and try the secondary market for a while, to see how that goes.
Happy investing
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Jan 19, 2017 11:53:57 GMT
Hi everyone,
I have been using FC for about two and a half years, and I have been very happy with it, I have had a few losses, but not much as I always try and stick to my £20 max rule.
Over the last 4 months I have made very little, as the number of defaults has gone up, obviously I expect to have more defaults the more was invested, but I expected it to be roughly in line with the interest gained.
I have some funds in saving stream, the pay a good rate of 12%, however this is only on property so there is no principal repayment.
This is where my problem lies, if I leave FC who do I use, I like the FC model with the principal and interest payment, as it generates more monies to reinvest.
SO, who else are you good people using instead of, or maybe as well as FC.
Thanks
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Property Moose
SPV 47
Jan 3, 2017 8:07:03 GMT
Post by damar on Jan 3, 2017 8:07:03 GMT
The reason for hands off, is I recently started my own company, so I am unable to get a good BTL mortgage deal until I had two years worth of accounts, So I dipped my toe into the crowd funding scene.
The property I had, where this was an issue, I dropped the rent, as paying the mortgage and 150% council tax, plus minimal utilities, was not ideal, and a reduction of £30 (6%) in the rent, seemed a better option.
It may well be that councils implement this to keep the rents low in that area, I would always advocate lowering the rent, and receiving a return, than holding out and paying out.
In my case, the outgoings, were £260 a month (council tax and mortgage) so it would of taken nine months of the original rent, to cover just one month of void.
After dropping the rent the property rented, within two weeks, and the loss turned into a profit.
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Property Moose
SPV 47
Jan 2, 2017 7:20:47 GMT
Post by damar on Jan 2, 2017 7:20:47 GMT
The reason I ask, is because in one of the areas where I rent out property the local council charge a 50% premium on the council tax for empty properties, when a property is empty for any length of time, it takes a very long time to claw that money back with the rental income.
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Property Moose
SPV 47
Dec 27, 2016 7:50:12 GMT
Post by damar on Dec 27, 2016 7:50:12 GMT
Hi,
This property has been empty since purchase, what generally happens with this scenario? do we keep advertising until the term ends, look to sell ?
Any ideas
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Sept 16, 2016 12:40:34 GMT
Hi,
Just to be clear, my issue is (or was) the poor performance of the letting agent, and the poor communication from property moose about the situation.
I would of expected that as PM has already experienced late payment from the agent, the pertinent investors would be notified, informing them of the situation and saying if it happened again, the rent would not be paid until they received it. That way everyone is kept in the loop.
I have been renting property privately for over five years, and so far I have had experiences of three letting agents, one bad, two ok. I have never experienced a letting agent withholding rent, so my opinion, which is based on my experiences and my own view of how a letting agent should work, is that the letting agent is performing poorly.
This is why, I feel we should see the intended letting agent, so that we can decide if that is an agent we want to mane a property we invest in. At no point have i suggested that the property management is taken away from PM.
Have a good weekend
|
|
damar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 110
Likes: 47
|
Post by damar on Sept 13, 2016 20:14:45 GMT
Hi,
I am sure everyone who invests in this one has now had the email, I got some more information for the property that I am interested in.
SPV 45- Unfortunately, as you are aware, we have experienced some problems with the management agent in recent weeks. They are going through some personal issues and an accumulation of understaffing and family illness has meant a few delays. We appreciate that this is inexcusable and as a short term solution, Property Moose are making payment of the late rent today and will deduct this once the agent sends over the true amount.
I have asked again about knowing the name of the agent, and the same for future properties, but I have still had no response.
If collectively, we own the property, surely we can decide or at least have a say in the agent, and I can see no reason why we cannot insist on a change if we feel the agent is not working in our best interest.
We are the customer of the managing agent, not the other way around.
|
|