|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 21, 2019 17:46:49 GMT
There’s no point going after LY. LY is a Limited Company and I’m quite sure that whilst Liam has personally made millions, LY’s liquidation value is near zero. We Lenders are on the hook personally therefore there’s more financial value in pursuing Lenders. My fear was that any individual Lender is liable for the full value of the claim and can be hauled in front of the court where the borrower can use her financial muscle and manipulation of the legal system to destroy that individual. I imagine most lenders are the “average Joe” without the finances or the aggressive nature to fight back. I admire the people who say there’s nothing to fear, I do hope they’re right. Charlie, please read my further PM to you. Thanks, Mucho 🙏
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 20, 2019 20:54:46 GMT
When LY gave our email addresses did they also give the amounts we’d lent?
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 20, 2019 4:24:27 GMT
Wall of silence again
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 18, 2019 16:28:49 GMT
Whos the clown on the left. Taking it all very serious I believe that’s Paul, the spin doctor. He’s long since parted ways with LY, thankfully. His drivel and over exaggerated positivity when there’s nothing to be positive about was tiresome.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 18, 2019 8:31:02 GMT
The worst decisions were not made by investors. First, the FCA deliberately forcing COL into Administration. This was such a destructive act by the FCA. Completely reckless. Just because COL didn’t have accredition the action taken by FCA was completely disproportionate to the problem. LY has full accreditation and look at the damage being caused by LY. Not having accreditation is no big deal, a tap on the shoulder and a bit of supervision would have been more appropriate, not throwing COL and all investors under the bus. Second, the complete farce regarding appointment of receivers, culminating in BDO being appointed. BDO are totally incompetent and a disgrace to a profession that’s already a disgrace. Decision 2 rubs salt in the wounds of decision 1. Investors themselves cannot be blamed. Not how I heard it. Didn't Col claim they didn't need authorisation, then removed their (supposed) interim permission from their web site (without telling lenders they were not authorised), these actions putting themselves in direct conflict with the FCA (and lenders). And when the FCA reacted they put themselves into Administration, using their, now pretty discredited buddies RR. I’m not saying COL was being well run but my point is there are FCA accredited platforms that are not being well run. I think Administration was destructive and unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 18, 2019 5:14:03 GMT
Some of my loans have had no update since before Christmas. Not sure whether the change of ownership can turn FS around or whether it’s the next LY on an irreversible downward spiral.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 18, 2019 4:54:05 GMT
The worst decisions were not made by investors. First, the FCA deliberately forcing COL into Administration. This was such a destructive act by the FCA. Completely reckless. Just because COL didn’t have accredition the action taken by FCA was completely disproportionate to the problem. LY has full accreditation and look at the damage being caused by LY. Not having accreditation is no big deal, a tap on the shoulder and a bit of supervision would have been more appropriate, not throwing COL and all investors under the bus. Second, the complete farce regarding appointment of receivers, culminating in BDO being appointed. BDO are totally incompetent and a disgrace to a profession that’s already a disgrace. Decision 2 rubs salt in the wounds of decision 1. Investors themselves cannot be blamed.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 18, 2019 4:12:26 GMT
Is the fairly obvious typo the line that should actually say The next report covering the period up to 27 April 2019 (sic) will be sent to creditors before 27 May 2019
as pointed out by another credit committee member? Can Monetus confirm? Yes correct. I believe it should say that the next report is due before 27th May 2019. Can’t wait for the next report showing further hundreds of thousands have disappeared in fees and zero progress has been made. How can this be allowed to continue.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 17, 2019 5:29:25 GMT
FS are in dangerous territory. After Whitehaven and Art for Art’s Sake you’d have to be extremely brave and confident to trust FS with your money. As we’ve seen with LY once confidence is lost it’s a fairly rapid downward spiral. FS has a similar relationship with investors as LY, treat them like idiots, don’t engage, keep them guessing.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 17, 2019 4:50:02 GMT
It’s an interesting question as to why LY is still trading. One can only assume, as Jeepers said, that it’s to squeeze every last drop of blood from investors. LY’s business is damaged beyond repair and Liam doesn’t seem like the type of guy who would do anything for any reason other than his own personal gain. Since things started spiraling downwards, LY has done nothing to try to reverse the situation. I think Liam decided a long time ago that this is how things would play out and realised that there’s as much money to be made on the way down as there was on the way up.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 16, 2019 16:53:02 GMT
Perhaps the boss no longer cares. Did he ever care?
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 15:04:41 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 ?? I’d say any where the asset has been sold. PBL068 for example. Unless you are saying you have faith in “claims underway” to address the shortfall, which I think is extremely optimistic. They haven’t even explained what claims underway even means.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 14:54:30 GMT
Much of this may have been prompted by the collapse of LCF. Investor's looking at possible huge losses there. I’ve just read about LCF on the BBC website, article from 2 days ago. Parallels with Lendy in that investors will lose millions but Directors have walked away with millions. You have to ask why when these companies are regulated is it so easy to fleece investors for millions. And why do Directors of failed companies always walk away with millions, if the company failed so badly why were they allowed to profit so handsomely.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 12:55:45 GMT
It may work on PBLs but not at 12%. I presume new loans stopped originating because Lendy knew investors appetite was shot. If they could have got some defaults pulled in then they may have had a chance of keeping investors half onside. It appears they made most effort in avoiding this hence why we are here. At the point investor sentiment had started to spiral downwards LY could have focussed on turning things around. They should have looked to focus on recoveries, improve communications and engage investors. Honesty goes a long way as does empathy. Most people, even facing losses, would keep their faith if they could see that Lendy were fighting tooth and nail to recovery our money and fighting for every penny of our money as if it were their own. Instead, they seemed to take the attitude that if investors want to complain let’s really give them something to complain about. It’s so sad as they could have had a really great business if they took a long term view of things rather than a get rich quick view.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Mar 11, 2019 12:26:28 GMT
I don’t think posters (including myself) are venting. I think there’s some important points being made here.
6 months in fees were 350k with no visible outcome or progress for investors.
12 months in we might assume fees are 700k? with no visible outcome or progress for investors.
When I think about the work I’ve done for my customers over the last 1 year, I’ve engineered solutions, I’ve delivered change, I’ve delivered outcomes. I can’t get away with telling my customers I’ve achieved nothing but here’s a big bill because I’ve been trying.
It’s not about whether they charge 500 quid per hour or 5000 quid per hour, it’s about us being 1 year down the track and all they’ve come up with is an incorrect total (for some) of what they think we’re owed. Most people know what they’re owed so in that respect we know more than they do and it hasn’t taken a year and 2,000 man hours.
|
|