|
Post by tackerbear on Jun 29, 2018 5:06:10 GMT
Wow! Finally, finally an “update” from MT! At least that is what they called it. Sort of like the update you give when you don’t want to provide an update but time is slipping away so as to make it impossible to say “nothing”!
So no line of sight on a date for bringing this outstanding loan interest up to date other than in effect an estimate that IF all goes well, then April, May and June’s overdue interest might just be paid by mid July and only then IF a whole bunch of talk about improbable refinancings of present loans actually come to fruition!
And NO update on progress towards completion of the property and commencement of trading said by Moneything to be so critical to the much anticipated revaluation of the property so that the Borrower can persuade some undisclosed lender to provide a loan of sufficient size to fund the cost of refinancing the 2nd mortgage and outstanding loan interest as well.
But the best part of this implausible story is that when good old UBS comes to the rescue and facilitates the “liquidation of a Trust” ( of what size who knows) everything will be just fine and dandy. Is this the same Trust that has been blamed for the long delays in receiving interest payments that are now almost 3 months overdue and seems to have the world’s slowest online banking system?
Excuse me for being a sceptic but last time I checked there was no such thing as the “Tooth Fairy” !
Hardly confidence inspiring and nothing I have seen or heard here portends of a happy outcome at least for lenders and investors in this loan where more than £930,000 of the loan is mownup for resale or being dumped by unsettled lenders/investors!
Maybe Toto has the contact details of a friendly Administrator to help this Borrower slide sideways and out of this mess?? They do of course have that sort of “form”...so caveat emptor I say!
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Jun 29, 2018 6:26:01 GMT
This loan will work out fine. Not sure what else you want MT to do?
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 1,461
|
Post by jlend on Jun 29, 2018 8:24:45 GMT
I must say I liked the recent update from MT. It is what is it with this loan now...
I don't blame them for not including a date when the site will open. I don't think MT should bother releasing an updated date, until the borrower publishes a date in public on their website/twitter/facebook presence.
|
|
|
Post by tackerbear on Jun 29, 2018 8:29:43 GMT
I am astonished that as security trustee for theinvestors in this loan(s) MT has not shown anything like he diligence and intellectual curiosity about the seemingly endless broken promises and commitments made by this Borrower!
At its most basic, first and foremost, MT owes each and every investor in these loans a fiduciary duty to act to protect the interests in the loans for which it is a trustee.
Each decision to “allow” the Borrower to further charge the secured property required the trustee (MT) to exercise a judgement as to whether it was in the best interests of the investors to grant that approval(s). The best interests of investors....not anyone else!
Self evidently exercising that professional judgement must have included a requirement to review (each time) the value of the property and the fundamental assumptions underlying the valuation (there must be real doubts that the valuation remains accurate as it’s now a long time since it was done), assessing the accuracy of the financial information and personal assurances that supported the loan application and the reliability of subsequent commitments (seemingly none of which have been met) and generally an assessment of the continued viability of the underlying assumptions upon which investors were offered and would continue to be offered investments in the loans.
So simply put....as an investor offered a participation in this loan(s) I expected MT to do the sort of professional job for which it is FCA registered and regulated.
What I have witnessed on the other hand doesn’t come close to what I believe I am entitled to expect of a FCA regulated security trustee to do in the circumstances!
|
|
cedarcourtcapital
Member of DD Central
Listening is not the same as understanding
Posts: 190
Likes: 316
|
Post by cedarcourtcapital on Jun 29, 2018 9:00:47 GMT
I am astonished that as security trustee for theinvestors in this loan(s) MT has not shown anything like he diligence and intellectual curiosity about the seemingly endless broken promises and commitments made by this Borrower! Blah blah...... So simply put....as an investor offered a participation in this loan(s) I expected MT to do the sort of professional job for which it is FCA registered and regulated. Why make your, in my opinion extremely weak, 'point' here? If you feel so strongly why not write directly to Monething, unless of course the public argument is what you enjoy most. Going direct to the source will always provide better, but of course less public answers.
|
|
jlend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,832
Likes: 1,461
|
Post by jlend on Jun 29, 2018 9:21:15 GMT
I am astonished that as security trustee for theinvestors in this loan(s) MT has not shown anything like he diligence and intellectual curiosity about the seemingly endless broken promises and commitments made by this Borrower! Blah blah...... So simply put....as an investor offered a participation in this loan(s) I expected MT to do the sort of professional job for which it is FCA registered and regulated. Why make your, in my opinion extremely weak, 'point' here? If you feel so strongly why not write directly to Monething, unless of course the public argument is what you enjoy most. Going direct to the source will always provide better, but of course less public answers. +1 It is fair to say that MT do have a duty and there are at least question marks about the level of oversight up to this point on a few loans. I am not making a judgement either way on this loan in making this statement. To be fair it is not limited to MT though, there are similar concerns with specific loans on other P2P platforms. I am involved in a non P2P case where there FOS has issued a Provisional Decision of Merit against a Security Trustee in an ongoing case following complaints from a majority of the circa 900 investors. As you say, there is nothing stopping p2p lenders complaining to MT and if they are still not happy following up with the FOS etc. Of course that does not mean the complaint will be upheld :-)
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jun 29, 2018 9:27:00 GMT
It is highly likely that with this loan, and indeed most of the others on the loanbook, that MT have significant additional information compared to lenders, and will be using said info in making their decisions.
However, for reasons I've not yet fathomed most p2p platforms (with the notable exception of AC) publish the absolute minimum of information they feel they can get away with, and that published is often simplified beyond the point where it becomes essentially meaningless. Apparently illiquid SM markets flooded with sell orders from lenders who lack the information to make reasoned investment decisions is prefered to a transparent market where all data needed for ongoing investment risk analysis is presented as soon as the platform is aware of it.
I find it immensely frustrating. I could invest in many more p2p loans than I do, if only the p2p platforms would provide full data to support the loans. On this particular loan, for example, a current breakdown of floor space sold, a MS report on work outstanding, a preview of the marketing plan, etc are all needed to make rational investment decisions. Maybe some larger lenders have been given access to that level of detail, and hence are able to say with confidence "This loan will work out fine", I certainly don't have access to such information, and have never felt this to be anything other than a high risk of default AND high risk of loss on default loan based on the information MT have released.
|
|
jsmill
Member of DD Central
Posts: 100
Likes: 114
|
Post by jsmill on Jun 29, 2018 9:43:32 GMT
This loan will work out fine. Not sure what else you want MT to do? Any evidence for this? Do you have up to date information on the tenant situation that MT haven't provided or that the borrower still has sufficient funds, even with the recent additional release, to complete the project? He may have the funds and there may be still sufficient tenant interest to build a trading history before the borrower collapses under interest payments but there simply isn't enough evidence either way. No basis at all on which to pronounce "this loan will work out fine". In terms of what MT could do, they could address these points in the update. Have they analysed the borrowers finances and outstanding work required on the premises and concluded completion is a realistic prospect; and what basis do they have for assuming that a successful trading history can be built up to provide an exit? On this second point in particular there doesn't need to be granular detail at a tenant level but some indication it is feasible proposition. Incidentally I take my share of the blame as an investor for going in for this one. Unlike B*llington or south coast student digs where I would do the same thing again on the information available this one had too many red flags I ignored. Offshore borrower, large loan, incomplete business plan and limited market for property in the event that build runs into difficulties.
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 784
Likes: 781
|
Post by eeyore on Jun 29, 2018 10:31:11 GMT
Why make your, in my opinion extremely weak, 'point' here? If you feel so strongly why not write directly to Monething, unless of course the public argument is what you enjoy most. Going direct to the source will always provide better, but of course less public answers. I think you misunderstand the value of members of the forum posting critical questions on this public forum. There are many reading this forum to enlighten themselves on peer-to-peer lending, so it is invaluable to see comments on the specific dangers to our capital in p2p lending. You might not gain any value but I'm sure I can't be alone in appreciating the contributions of others with greater knowledge and experience. I also query your claim that "Going direct to the source will always provide better .... answers". Is that *always* true? In a cosy world where the answers from financial institutions to individual investors are not open to public scrutiny, is there not the temptation to conceal and mislead? By its very nature, a public question-and-answer process is likely to be more honest and through a review by those with specific knowledge and even by those with an axe to grind, ultimately more enlightening. That is why I applaud not only the direct involvement of Moneythings executives in this forum but also the contributions of the forum members. I deplore any attempt to stifle discussion.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Jun 29, 2018 10:47:59 GMT
This loan will work out fine. Not sure what else you want MT to do? Any evidence for this? Nope, just intuition
|
|
|
Post by medelm on Jun 29, 2018 17:18:21 GMT
While I have no further information than anyone else here, as an Investor in this loan its obvious that it could have gone better/more to plan and MoneyThing could share more information.
For a counter argument, some of the positives reasons I got into this loan which are good to keep in mind:
- Owner has owned the asset for 10+ years (very uncommon in this world of bridge lending). This shows repayment history, again something we never have the ability to see. - Valued at less than purchase price. Yes it was brought at a peak in the market but I'm sure other valuers could have valued it purchase price. - Actual revenue stream with plausible exit. Rental income on these loans, almost non existent. Refinancing requires sets of books, legitimate. Some of the stories on loans are totally made up, this one has clear exits.
We are in the world of 13% loans, it's not going to be straight forward but compared to land with planning brought right now with no income in sight or long developments with huge capital required and unlimited tranches, I know what loan I would prefer to be in.
|
|
stokeloans
Member of DD Central
Posts: 402
Likes: 485
|
Post by stokeloans on Jun 29, 2018 17:22:57 GMT
While I have no further information than anyone else here, as an Investor in this loan its obvious that it could have gone better/more to plan and MoneyThing could share more information. For a counter argument, some of the positives reasons I got into this loan which are good to keep in mind: - Owner has owned the asset for 10+ years (very uncommon in this world of bridge lending). This shows repayment history, again something we never have the ability to see. - Valued at less than purchase price. Yes it was brought at a peak in the market but I'm sure other valuers could have valued it purchase price. - Actual revenue stream with plausible exit. Rental income on these loans, almost non existent. Refinancing requires sets of books, legitimate. Some of the stories on loans are totally made up, this one has clear exits. We are in the world of 13% loans, it's not going to be straight forward but compared to land with planning brought right now with no income in sight or long developments with huge capital required and unlimited tranches, I know what loan I would prefer to be in. What revenue stream ? The property has no income and the lender is clearly out of funds. Why don't they open ? That is the real question here
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 784
Likes: 781
|
Post by eeyore on Jun 29, 2018 18:27:49 GMT
some of the positive reasons I got into this loan: - Owner has owned the asset for 10+ years (very uncommon in this world of bridge lending). This shows repayment history, again something we never have the ability to see. It takes all sorts! This was one of the primary reasons I did not invest! I took the view that if the borrower had bought this property ten years earlier how many ideas had already been tried and failed? This project seemed to be a last gasp attempt to make something, anything, of a bad buy.
|
|
78
Posts: 76
Likes: 83
|
Post by 78 on Jun 29, 2018 18:47:02 GMT
Some of the questions we asked MT before drawdown of the second loan. We didn't get any satisfactory answers and sold out of the loan:-
1. I can find no record of any planning consent capable of implementation for the intended use.
A third party made a planning application *******
I understand from reading the above planning application that the application was for and consent was granted for change of use of 800sm on floors 1 and 2 to antiques market and for the retention of the existing restaurant allied to the above use
I understand that the current owner ***** has then signed a lease of self contained office accommodation let at £12,000 per year to ****** who occupy part of the first floor and that the lease expires 31st December 2023.
Further I understand that the owner is actively trying to lease 50 retail units on the basement/lower ground floor, 124 retail units on the ground floor and 226 retail units on the first and second floor on gross internal area of 3,437sm not the 800 sm for which consent was sought.
The owner by letting the office (on 1st January 2017) has, I suspect, chosen to implement another (unauthorised) use (as unconnected offices) and unless there is evidence to the contrary which has not been disclosed, this renders the above consent incapable of implementation.
2. The applicant also failed to disclose the presence of hazardous materials (asbestos)on his planning application as evidenced by the HSE notice which was served on the premises. Notice ******** served against ************ on 19/01/2016
5. As explained the valuation provided assumes that vacant possession would be available and you (MT) were unaware of the intricacies of the 1954 L&T act and security of tenure. The existing lease at £12k per year to a tenant of poor covenant without personal guarantee would, in my opinion, only sell on a yield of about 12% so be worth about £100,000. Having this lease in existence (and/or other leases) without the ability to terminate the leases upon appointing a receiver will mean that vacant possession will not be available and any valuation based on unobtainable vacant possession is meaningless. If (as I understand) the current B1 office use are unauthorised (not having passed planning or building regulations) this further devalues the building as does the existence of asbestos which was not revealed to the valuer.
6. The first loan was stated as being subject to a first charge on the property. Any second loan should not share the first charge security with the consent of the existing first charge holders.
7 As per the planning consent a licence to operate a market has to be obtained from the city council has this been obtained?
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on Jul 9, 2018 12:11:06 GMT
We must be due a substantive update on this loan. No more updates that claim the borrower, despite being wealthy, is trying to raise some funds. Come on MT, you guys were the platform that aimed for transparency and empathy and won the hearts and minds of investors, it seems those days are gone?
|
|