sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Jan 13, 2018 10:48:00 GMT
I'm not in the MT loan that this borrower has "technically defaulted" on but I think the situation with that loan is better than read of this thread would suggest. In general, I'm comfortable with the idea that many development loans overrun. That said, I don't understand why regulation hasn't forced the platforms to divulge what they reasonably know about a borrower. Any other loans he has is highly relevant as is his track record. An existing loan that is in default ("technical" or otherwise) should really not be hidden. Anyone else out there interested in starting a new platform that puts lenders interests above all else?Great idea m ichaelc.
Do you have any relevant experience yourself? I have to admit that I do not, although I would be willing to invest as a sleeping (retired now) partner. Any thoughts from other investors?
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Jan 12, 2018 21:12:31 GMT
I pulled out 8 or 9 months ago when the writing was obviously on the wall. Early adopter and made the 12% and no capital losses and nothing tied up now. And I made well over a six figure sum on interest for the couple of years I was in. For me clearly the due diligence was all over the place. They lent to pretty much anyone, no restraint. That is naff for 12%. There are respectable lenders off market paying more for less risk. Why anyone would want to lend in the current state baffles me. Of course they will paint a pretty picture. Maybe they will improve but for me the apparent historical disregard for investors funds and risk awareness has put me off permanently. Hi mackWho are these lenders off market paying more for less risk, pretty please.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Jan 12, 2018 12:38:31 GMT
Having looked at the costings for this one, it appears yet another VR set up to achieve a wanted result.
The contingency is only 5% and the finance has been calculated at 8%!!
Make that 15% for the former and 20% for the latter, adding a further cost of c.£800k, will reduce the current MV to c.£2,850,000 and the 90 day to c. 2,450,000.
'Real' LTV then c. 88%, or 102% against the 90 days.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Jan 11, 2018 9:12:12 GMT
My gut feeling is to steer well clear of this one.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Jan 7, 2018 9:33:51 GMT
Has anyone had time to do any detailed DD on this one? My brief digging around shows planning was granted in 2013 & a trench was dug to comply with commencement within 3 yrs of approval. Nothing more has happened. There is lengthy & detailed valuation report, mostly based upon the potential of a successfully operated nursing home but also highlighting the risks of local competition in an area where NH beds seem oversupplied. I don't think this one is for me but I am getting itchy fingers with lots of un-invested FS monies. Is it just me becoming more risk averse or is the pipeline coming with higher risks? Is ther a timing factor here with fewer quality offerings over Xmas & into early New Year? You may have since read FS DD..there is some more info Likewise woodland. It definitely appears that the pipeline is coming with higher risks as i am refusing far more loans, percentage wise, than i did a year ago when i started out with P2P, when i was 'wet behind the ears', but very, very cautious.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
FundingSecure (FS) in Administration
New loan emails
Dec 19, 2017 20:57:13 GMT
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 20:57:13 GMT
Intermittent this morning, then nothing since. Hotmail too.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 13:22:26 GMT
mrclondon
We appear to be on the same page, as my calculations for the GDV came out at £4.7m which is just about the average of your last three calculations.
The 2 beds appear to be c.£15-20k overpriced.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 12:53:30 GMT
I urge you all to take a look at the 'valuation' for the' two pubs into a hotel' on FS as the 'best' VR I have read since I started P2P a year ago. (I was not interested in investing as it is a second charge, but I do like to read fiction).
The valuer gives absolutely nothing tangible, not even comparables, as to how they came to the valuation.
"We are of the opinion due to location and potential of projected cleared site, taking account of the present economic climate and factors (sic) as outlined above, we are of the opinion that the value be to the order of £550,000".
That is it! Other than 5 pages of the usual padding and waffle.
A classic, even by FS standards!
Edit: The valuer has had 45 years 'experience', so I guess he will be looking to retire at any moment!
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 12:29:55 GMT
Part of the loan description addressing the exit issue states "loan agreements carry covenants with sales milestones which will be monitored as well as requirement for the redevelopment to be complete in good time to allow for the legal completion of the sales" Something I'd quite like to see is a development schedule, and as there are apparently contractual sales milestones it would be good to have an idea of the scale and time frame around these too. I appreciate that there are few capital developments that ever complete on time and within budget, and you can virtually guarantee the unexpected, but it would give me a better idea of the feasibility of the project and more information to access progress during the course of the loan. Is there any information on an expected purchase completion date or refurbishment start date at least MoneyThing ? Just realised it's gone live as I'm writing this - nearly 25% gone in the first 5 minutes. Yes, this loan gets more 'interesting' the more one looks into it. A lack of clear, unambiguous and meaningful information. As you rightly state, not even a development schedule. Nothing to give one any confidence that the project is at all feasible.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 11:21:37 GMT
If I'd waited for the perfect loan I'd still have the cash in the bank account. Safe but no interest. I agree, but something tells me that even if I took a punt to resell this loan before the end, others will be doing the same and many of us may well get stuck with it.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 11:05:48 GMT
The niggles are more than enough to put me off investing in this. May I ask, what niggles have you identified? In response to slush
sannytwistCash revenues seen, new planning visible as option is exercised, city centre location, expected to be a self-funded development (ie borrower/buyers will improve value of our 1C as it progresses beyond the initial gutting); main niggles are size of the residual value uplift above 90% LtPP (toppy sales psqf, lowish build cost pspf & contingency etc) plus couple of the director associations.sannytwist has identified in his post (shown above) most of those that I found too.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 19, 2017 8:45:14 GMT
Whats the general consensus then , are people going to dip their toes like me or does it look tasty enuff to put a few bob in.
Somewhere inbetween, so 'dip a few bob' perhaps.
Cash revenues seen, new planning visible as option is exercised, city centre location, expected to be a self-funded development (ie borrower/buyers will improve value of our 1C as it progresses beyond the initial gutting); main niggles are size of the residual value uplift above 90% LtPP (toppy sales psqf, lowish build cost pspf & contingency etc) plus couple of the director associations.
*Dipping a Few Bob means double my other serviced by borrower/filtered by MT loans but less than my LStA default and half my retained interest loans. The niggles are more than enough to put me off investing in this.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 18, 2017 22:30:26 GMT
It is stated that, "The property is a development site that has full planning in place for the construction of 15 residential dwellings comprising of 1 x detached house, 6 x townhouses and 8x semi-detached houses."
"Construction had already begun on the site with a pair of semi-detached houses already built and one set of foundations for a semi-detached property finished to ground level."
HOWEVER
**Update 18/12/2017**
Work has been on going on the site with the following having been carried out:
Roadway in has been dug out and stoned.
Foundations and footings complete for 4 houses.
Sewer and storm pipes have been laid.
The clients have already pre-sold 2 semi detached and 2 detached houses.
.....................................
What happened to the two semis that were 'built'?
Where has the other detached house appeared from?
I was not in the original loan so can someone who is help me out please?
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
MoneyThing (MT) in Administration
Valuations
Dec 18, 2017 20:18:24 GMT
Post by sirius on Dec 18, 2017 20:18:24 GMT
What's your view on the new MT Bradford loan where the valuation is £1.5 million yet it changed hands for £1 million only last year and was up for auction this year with a £900,000 reserve. How does that fit in with the valuation ? I would be interested in the £0.5m uplift figure. Maybe there's been some extensive work done since being sold and now perhaps. It's interesting that VR's tend to omit relevant recent purchase prices but spend considerable time investigating and subsequently presenting what they feel are similar properties sold for even though many are several miles away. It would be most unusual that MT would omit the fact that work had been done to enhance the 'new' price.
|
|
sirius
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 141
|
Post by sirius on Dec 18, 2017 16:37:48 GMT
Working the costings backwards from Developers profit, and adding in 15% for contingencies rather than a meagre 5%, (which is just one of the tricks ways to inflate the site's worth), I cannot see that the borrower paid more than £1m for the property.
Also, the sale prices quoted are a lot higher than comparables when compared by size, even allowing for difference in time scale.
Any thoughts?
|
|