|
Post by gaspilot on Mar 31, 2019 18:49:09 GMT
Do you think Lendy provided the email addresses in electronic form or as a list on paper? Hopefully, the latter as it would require considerable time and effort to transcribe these. Also, the risk of a typographical error on one or more of these addresses is considerable.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Dec 12, 2018 17:46:59 GMT
'Provided the formalities are satisfactory, we expect the refinance to complete with the next few days.' Can anyone define few? Or are the formalities unsatisfactory?
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Dec 4, 2018 18:47:46 GMT
No, it's okay guys 'the borrower anticipates being in funds within the next ten days' - Hurrah! Seriously, do they expect us to believe this absolute nonsense? He used the same sort of phrase years ago!
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Oct 16, 2018 8:16:12 GMT
I didn't get the email. I think I should have.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Sept 27, 2018 17:13:26 GMT
I think the loan that mentions a bankruptcy and the other property has the same borrower. The update in June on the smaller property said 'As the refinance of loan ref 8010286828 does not appear to be happening, we are defaulting this loan.'
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Aug 23, 2018 15:21:36 GMT
All in good time. I've got a lot in both DFL1+2. Will be concluded very soon. Let's just say the English legal system doesn't tolerate Lendy's BS. Will this be concluded satisfactorily? I too have a lot in these.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jul 27, 2018 5:58:14 GMT
"....... it is anticipated by our appointed experts that this option (option2) will result in significantly less capital (than the c.84% return set out in Option 1) being available to investors following the recovery and sale of the security property."
A vote was taken showing a 3:1 majority in favour of option 1. Ly then decides to go with option 2. What a waste of time having a vote. They haven't got a clue what they are doing.
|
|
|
Lendy (L) in Administration
Cowes week
Jul 8, 2018 12:17:09 GMT
Post by gaspilot on Jul 8, 2018 12:17:09 GMT
Does anybody know roughly how much Lendy will have paid to sponsor this event? I've no idea but I can't imagine it's a small sum.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jul 6, 2018 18:03:33 GMT
Cut and paste update. No information whatsoever. Unbelievable!
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jul 3, 2018 6:00:55 GMT
I'm very fond of my stepladder. I never really knew my real ladder. Sorry, couldn't resist.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jun 28, 2018 10:57:01 GMT
So, what is actually going on with this loan? Is it going to auction or not? The updates are just repetitions of previous updates that didn't provide any usual information at the time.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jun 13, 2018 19:03:35 GMT
Do we have any more information on this loan? I'm a bit confused with the updates.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jun 11, 2018 13:48:42 GMT
Update: Funds have been raised to cover the interest on this loan. However, loans in prior tranches must be renewed first.I read this on the 1st facility, 1st tranche loan so not sure if there can be any prior tranches. What they mean is that some tranches are prior chronologically e.g. next up for renewal should be this one: 1046662257, a 3rd facility loan, as it's the oldest active tranche. So, are they getting their tranches and facilities mixed up?
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on May 31, 2018 8:51:17 GMT
So, did the original buyer sign the papers? If not, has the new buyer signed the papers? Come on FS give us an update on the situation. This could be concluded in three weeks if you believe the last update.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on May 26, 2018 11:36:53 GMT
Today's Update"We spoke with the borrower this morning. The purchaser has still not exchanged contracts. Post auction viewings were held this week and a serious offer of £1.3m including freehold has been made with immediate exchange and completion in 21 days. The borrower has given the first purchaser an ultimatum of Tuesday next week to exchange" From one of the previous updates, I'm assuming this is sufficient to repay at least the first and second loans. Am I correct in that assumption?
|
|