izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 27, 2017 16:59:39 GMT
Technically, yes, but it would not be a problem if it was the developer (or his son) who was selling the house. What if the two fell out? And to spite Darth Vader, Luke decided not to give permissions? Based on this 'access' threat, it is clear that the borrower has no regards to the Lenders but his interests alone. I expect Lendy to go in with full legal force in order to recover the due monies as borrower can't fulfil the obligations at the end of the term.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 27, 2017 16:13:33 GMT
The main access is controlled by the Developer's son. And the latter will not be allowing access to the site?!? Does that mean we are properly and utterly shafted? As a lender, you should have an email explaining Lendy's view on the (alleged) access restriction. (It's a copy of the content on the loan's most recent website update also issued today.) I would post that email content here, but understandable uncertainty exists around sharing lender-specific comms, so won't. I did get an email but it is just the update that they have posted on their site too. No more information. I'm just finding it hard to believe I understand what's being said. So for example, if someone were to have bought one of the houses. Then does it mean they would have needed the developer's son's permission to access their house?
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 27, 2017 13:52:47 GMT
The main access is controlled by the Developer's son. And the latter will not be allowing access to the site?!?
Does that mean we are properly and utterly shafted?
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 27, 2017 1:27:44 GMT
I've cancelled all the parts for sale and it has gone through without any problems. I just don't see the point of this being being left for sale if no one can buy them. Plus I don't believe this is a loan that will come back as it is.
Lendy has changed beyond recognition. I find myself asking if this really is a platform worth investing through? They should have allowed it to grow organically rather than forcing through the growth that it deserved (the 'past tense' being ominous here). I think the greed of their ambition may have allowed them to naively ignore alarm bells in this loan and DFL001. Despite my irritation, I can only wish them good luck though, as they need it to get back my money. Arrrrghh!!!
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 22, 2017 21:00:42 GMT
My recent naive question here has been met with some good replies, so thanks to all. Now I have more silly questions. I've read ilmoro's message above three times (more really, I just don't want to sound too thick) and I do not comprehend. Silly questions list (no obligations to answer but would be grateful for any): 1. "A new charge was registered against the borrower in June on behalf of SSSH" - where would you get that kind of information and who/what is SSSH? 2. "which may indicate the loan has migrated to the new T&CS" - ok, I'm not great at reading the small prints but I know I should. However would you mind saying what impact, worry or opportunity are you pointing to here please? 3. "Lendy have a new one too, both are fix & float debentures" - I have a feeling that if I knew what you were referring at, for number two, then I'd understand this bit too. 4. The rest of the message. I regret I don't have the brain cells and the lingo to understand it. I know there's some interesting information but not sure what you are getting at I have large sums of money in DFL001 and DFL002 (when I say large here, it is to my poor standards, and getting poorer by the looks of it. So it's probably peanuts for most of you guys). So that's why I'm keen on any scrap of information relating to it. Thanks. 1. Companies House record of the borrowing company. SSSH is Saving Stream Security Holdings the company that holds security on lenders behalf in the new structure loans. 2. New T&Cs/structure mean lenders are lending direct to borrowers, under the old T&Cs/structure Lendy leant the money to the borrower and then refinanced through SS meaning that Lendy was responsible for repayment of loans to SS lenders not the end borrower. In theory, Lendy not being the borrower means that lenders dont have recourse to Lendy for any shortfall whereas previously it could be argued they had. So in the case of DFL020 Lendy covered the interest even after a recovery shortfall as they were the borrower. Downside was that with Lendy liable, major defaults put the platform at risk. 3. Under the new structure charges are in favour of SSSH on lenders behalf, under the old structure in favour of Lendy themselves. The appearance of the new charges in favour of Lendy/SSSH agrees with the recent update saying they had lent additional sums ranking behind lenders. The original loan is secured by the new charge in favour of SSSH, the extra top up by the Lendy cha. The assumption is that the new SSSH charge replaces the old Lendy charges (unconfirmed)rge 4. The further charges against a new company support news that the borrower has leased the commercial units on the ground floor via new company but lender security is still maintained by the creation of the additional charges over this company. If this hadnt been done the creation of the leases would have diluted lender security as they would have been owned by a company that couldnt have been pursued in the event of a recovery. The fact that they are to both SSSH & Lendy is in line with point 3 ... lenders are secured through SSSH charges, Lendy extra loan through their own lower ranking charge. I am making some assumptions here but it all confirms that as far as the security goes it is all present & correct. Whether it will be sufficient in the event it is called upon is another matter ilmoro, I appreciate the patience, time and effort for your response, thank-you. I've only had to read it twice this time and now I see what you are saying . Perhaps I should start sleeping again, things may not be as bad as it seems? I suppose for now, the lease money is going to the borrower not SSSH?
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 22, 2017 16:10:12 GMT
Hadnt noticed until doing a bit of poking about today. A new charge was registered against the borrower in June on behalf of SSSH which may indicate the loan has migrated to the new T&CS (previous Lendy debenture/mortgage are unsatisfied though) Lendy have a new one too, both are fix & float debentures. Additional charges (mortgage/debenture) have been registered against a further company (same principal director) in respect to the leasehold of the two commercial units in favour of both SSSH and Lendy. All this ties in with additional funding advanced in June referenced in the update at that time My recent naive question here has been met with some good replies, so thanks to all. Now I have more silly questions. I've read ilmoro's message above three times (more really, I just don't want to sound too thick) and I do not comprehend. Silly questions list (no obligations to answer but would be grateful for any): 1. "A new charge was registered against the borrower in June on behalf of SSSH" - where would you get that kind of information and who/what is SSSH? 2. "which may indicate the loan has migrated to the new T&CS" - ok, I'm not great at reading the small prints but I know I should. However would you mind saying what impact, worry or opportunity are you pointing to here please? 3. "Lendy have a new one too, both are fix & float debentures" - I have a feeling that if I knew what you were referring at, for number two, then I'd understand this bit too. 4. The rest of the message. I regret I don't have the brain cells and the lingo to understand it. I know there's some interesting information but not sure what you are getting at I have large sums of money in DFL001 and DFL002 (when I say large here, it is to my poor standards, and getting poorer by the looks of it. So it's probably peanuts for most of you guys). So that's why I'm keen on any scrap of information relating to it. Thanks.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Sept 8, 2017 12:07:42 GMT
Hi guys, does anyone have any new information on this loan?
I have noticed that on a fair number of loans, there are people who are able to act before news are made public. I therefore believe insider information is shared to some investors (unfairly I'll add). Unfortunately for me, I don't have this privilege, but the queue seems to have moved in the past few days ... anyone have any ideas if something's going on?
No doubt, I'm just having a mirage while clutching at straws
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 12, 2017 19:12:21 GMT
Paul64, thanks for the update. It isn't the ideal news we wanted to hear, but it is better than no update. At least we know what's going on (or what's not going on). However, can you at least give us an indication on whether Lendy still has the principle as pointed out by cooling_dude. I.e, if there is the chance, then Lendy "to step in wherever necessary to complete these schemes to maximise the value at all stages subject to available funds"? It is important for us to know what's going on, so I hope you will continue to feed us more of that kind of update. But as above, we also do need to know that you are the type of company which stands up to its principle rather than chop and change at every corner. Thanks again.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 10, 2017 4:46:33 GMT
Hi all, this is a very complicated loan, so please give me until the end of the week for me to respond. Paul "complicated" indeed, I think we've worked that part out. Personally, from what I understand so far "buggered" would be the adjective I would choose but then I'd probably be describing my mood rather than the loan itself. Looking forward to your update on this, thanks for the effort.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 7, 2017 5:25:09 GMT
The payment is at the end, but it is 0.5% per month, right? so 18% per annum (12% + 0.5%x12). That's how I've understood it, but please let me know if that's definitely not the case and I'll triple check it to be sure. I thought that was the case, although I'm still a bit confused And if they can pay 18%pa, I wonder how much the borrower is paying in "default" interest to Lendy. Well the borrower don't pay interest while in default. They either make settlements (of capital + interest) or Lendy repossesses the security and sell them to recover the monies. It is from this sale that all the capital + interest (original + 18%) + fees are recovered.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 6, 2017 23:37:14 GMT
No you don't, the bonus is a one off payment at the end, not per month (assuming they receive enough to cover it of course... The payment is at the end, but it is 0.5% per month, right? so 18% per annum (12% + 0.5%x12). That's how I've understood it, but please let me know if that's definitely not the case and I'll triple check it to be sure.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 6, 2017 20:30:59 GMT
You now have the possibility of getting less than 12% interest. So best to keep an eye on that, especially on pre-funding. However, on the other hand you can get more than 12% too. For example on DFL001, you get an extra 0.5% interest per month, so that's equivalent to 18% per annum.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 4, 2017 17:30:46 GMT
So with latest updates, I am currently deducing the following:
1. The first 4 units are NOT yet complete. (So the 'showhouse' isn't finished at all unlike what the estate agent stated?) 2. Lendy won't be lending the money because there's no security available from the borrower to lend against (So how is the borrower going to get extra funding) 3. As explained above, I don't believe the borrower has any chance of getting extra funding, so recovery is imminent. 4. The money is gone, What we will recover is an unfinished job which therefore isn't going to be per development value. 5. Therefore there is a possibility we are not going to get all the money back, unless Lendy get the project developed under their own initiative (Tell me I'm wrong please).
So please tell me if I am correct above Sherlocks? Because I'm going Ele'MENTAL!!
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 2, 2017 19:48:02 GMT
Yes, I'm sure this matter won't sail past Paul's attention and he will bow to the request for a full update ASAP. Indeed, I'm sure he will drop anchor at his desk and make this loan his first port of call upon his return to the office. No doubt he will make some very stern enquiries and if he doesn't get satisfactory answers he will not keel over and if necessary he will deck the borrower. Let's hope it doesn't turn out there's not a yacht Lendy can do and they take whatever steps they mast to bring this loan to a satisfactory conclusion. At some point I stopped reading and started looking for the sea-sailing references instead. I then started reading again only to get fixated to the references once more like a ship heading towards the lighthouse. I gave up after the fifth attempt.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Aug 1, 2017 13:42:28 GMT
Well, magically, since my last message here, my cashback has appeared and one of the loan parts on sale has now been sold. So new2p2p, seems like my rant here has worked wonders ;-).
I did chuckle with your reply, but seriously (since I'm naive like that), is there really such a thing as a rant channel at Lendy? I don't mean a feedback channel, I mean a proper rant. Because the neighbour next door has started chicken rearing and that's doing my head-in. By next door, I mean a few hundred metres away but the morning walk to get the newspaper isn't the breath of fresh air it used to be.
|
|