sl75
Posts: 2,092 
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Oct 20, 2017 20:58:35 GMT
I don't really understand, given the exceptionally low remaining LTV, why they aren't even considering a refinance to a longer-term low risk loan (albeit at a lower rate) with repayments that the business should be able to easily afford if it's still a going concern, and/or which will still leave the borrower with plenty of equity should they decide to sell up. The ongoing cost would surely be a fraction of even the amount the borrower was previously demonstrating an ability to pay (and can/should be set up to allow overpayments if the borrower wishes to eventually become debt free whilst keeping the hotel).
It's not like the security is likely to evaporate overnight if the borrower doesn't settle immediately... there's plenty of time to wait for the remaining monies to be repaid. Regularising it with a fresh agreement should also allow those who no longer want to be a part of it, who wish to have their monies returned within (say) 60 to 90 days, or who have other reasons for needing to liquidate to trade loan parts with others who are happy to hold for as long as the borrower needs/wants the funds.
|
|
trouble
Member of DD Central
Posts: 127
Likes: 97
|
Post by trouble on Nov 8, 2017 11:32:36 GMT
AC have rejected second offer and suggested another loan with AC to clear debt (sorry interest), update due tomorrow from AC, all whilst no further interest accrues, a nice interest free/capital free loan at the moment, long may they prevaricate.
Wonder how they are presenting this 'interest' in their Balance Sheet?
|
|
kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 691
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Nov 8, 2017 12:26:07 GMT
thanks, trouble for the update - I keep forgetting to look on the loan page because it is "repaid". A quick sum of the outstanding interest payments (approx £75k) reminds me just how daft the haircut debate is - against security of way over £500k+....LTV very low indeed. A refinance should not be hard to achieve. I'd be really very saddened if AC needed to remind the borrower that we can appoint a receiver/administrators, but if the threat is what is needed to wake the borrower up...so be it. I hope the borrower's personal loss is not clouding their judgement. |
|
puddleduck
Member of DD Central
Posts: 537
Likes: 489
|
Post by puddleduck on Nov 9, 2017 9:40:13 GMT
if the borrower comes up with a semi-serious proposal then AC are obliged to put it to a lender vote. This leads to a clear method of exploitation, just keep making slightly better offers until the vote just passes. I'm not sure that a 20p/£ settlement should be considered a serious proposal. And if the strategy suggested above wasn't already obvious to the borrower, AC seem to be encouraging them to try it! Which part of Option B don't you understand? "- Asking lenders to vote on a number of potential interest discount alternatives." We already said no to this. Is there no value in the assets? I really was upset by this suggestion from AC.  On other loans in recovery situations, AC make a point of not putting their negotiating position where the borrowers could see it, yet here they seem to be making suggestions to the borrower regarding how they could cut AC investors out of the interest they've accrued. And that, as already has been pointed out, is reduced from what the borrower agreed to pay in the first place. Conspicuous by its absence from the list of possibilities suggested by AC was a settlement in full! It's particularly absent considering how emphatic the vote result was. It's not likely to happen, but what I'd really like to see is a slightly improved offer that's turned down even more emphatically by investors. Without that, all we'll see is a string of slightly improved offers until one reaches the 50% approval level. And if it isn't already obvious, since the capital of this loan has officially been repaid, no further interest is accruing, so it is costing the borrower absolutely nothing at all to take their time before making another settlement proposal. While this might wear down some investors, the longer this carries on, the less sympathetic I feel toward the borrower and the more I'm inclined to call in receivers to obtain all that we're owed. Rather like recent referendums and the US election, people are not voting the way they are supposed to be...so just have another vote (neverendums) until you get the vote you want seems to be the order of the day! Best out of 3, anyone? If platforms present a soft touch to the outside world, savvy borrowers will seek to exploit it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Nov 9, 2017 11:24:37 GMT
I voted B as the offer is clearly a "first offer" to see where the land lies. As AC have received the offer I doubt they could progress without allowing for a vote which they know will be rejected. The next step will hopefully be to take the situation to a more fairer conclusion which might be either a new, smaller loan or a slighter larger chunk of the interest. I would probably vote for a 50% return of interest.How about 77.5% to settle? New proposal to vote on for those still interested
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Nov 9, 2017 11:26:23 GMT
Revised offer vote now arrived by email. 77.5% of outstanding interest to be repaid, via a loan offered by a family member. Seems reasonable to me (although my exposure is pretty minimal) so I voted A. I can understand, in the circumstances, why the surviving partner wants to avoid getting entangled in another P2P loan.
|
|
kmac
Member of DD Central
Posts: 73
Likes: 73
|
Post by kmac on Nov 9, 2017 11:28:08 GMT
Another Vote. A much better offer. I am inclined to accept this and move on
Crossed with Stevet
|
|
gibmike
Member of DD Central
What is a cynic? A man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Posts: 256
Likes: 160
|
Post by gibmike on Nov 9, 2017 11:29:01 GMT
I voted B as the offer is clearly a "first offer" to see where the land lies. As AC have received the offer I doubt they could progress without allowing for a vote which they know will be rejected. The next step will hopefully be to take the situation to a more fairer conclusion which might be either a new, smaller loan or a slighter larger chunk of the interest. I would probably vote for a 50% return of interest.How about 77.5% to settle? New proposal to vote on for those still interested i hit "A" faster than you could draw your plastic replica gun Butch Cassidy :-)!
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Nov 9, 2017 11:31:20 GMT
Yes.
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 638
Likes: 659
|
Post by warn on Nov 9, 2017 11:31:55 GMT
I'm in a bad mood today (broke BOTH my eggs in the frying pan), so I'll probably wait a day or two and then vote 'A'.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Nov 9, 2017 11:35:04 GMT
Another Vote. A much better offer. I am inclined to accept this and move on Crossed with Stevet I still can't see why they are unable to raise the entire amount even including the unsecured creditors they apparently have, as others have pointed out a new secured loan would be perfectly feasible. Nonetheless, I'm inclined to agree, the offer has been significantly improved and if the deadline of 31 December 2017 is specified (and adhered to) as part of the deal then I think it's time to move on too.
|
|
|
|
Post by jevans4949 on Nov 9, 2017 11:37:48 GMT
Voted B again.
I'm happy for priority to be given to trade debtors, to help the business recover.
However, if the business is still struggling to make ends meet, it might even be a kindness to pull the plug. Although in that case the sale of the property probably wouldn't achieve the valuation it was given at the beginning.
|
|
misscas
Member of DD Central
Posts: 64
Likes: 55
|
Post by misscas on Nov 9, 2017 11:45:30 GMT
My involvement is also minimal but FWITW I have also voted A. I'm an aged cynic who is inclined to be hard-lined about most reduced offers but in this case I think the circumstances warrant acceptance and it is time to put this ongoing saga to bed.
|
|
tonyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 477
Likes: 258
|
Post by tonyr on Nov 9, 2017 12:15:59 GMT
I'm voting B.
AC could set up another loan (that's what they are good at), the borrower could afford the repayments (if not they should sell up now).
The only reason to vote is A it may reduce the time to get some of our money back. It may well not do so of course. AC have started the vote and they haven't committed to the end of 2017, we may well find that the majority voted A and we are waiting for very many months, or even years. If we vote A then the whole process is out of our hands, AC will just wait for the money to come in (or not).
|
|
misscas
Member of DD Central
Posts: 64
Likes: 55
|
Post by misscas on Nov 9, 2017 12:57:37 GMT
I read it that payment by 31 December would be a condition of acceptance of offer. I still have faith in Assetz but if this proves not to be this case and your concerns well founded than I will be disappointed in more ways than the obvious.
|
|
