MTBC888 - Residential development in E****** B*** REPAID

MoneyThing, the updated VR for the 2nd tranche of this development (going live tomorrow) mentions "Works have now commenced on site and a monitoring report has been provided to you in respect of progress with the development and expenditure."

Will this monitoring report (& others issued on other loans) be made available to lenders, or will we have access only to the (maybe 2 line) result indicated in the VR updates? Or will your decision be taken case-by-case (in which event may we know what your criteria for deciding this will be)?

I would imagine this might be an important point for many lenders.

I didn't realise the valuer on this loan and Lendy's castle were the same until I saw this post. I didn't invest in the castle and didn't like this one either for various reasons.

While I agree that leveling accusations at a valuer could end up in court there is a great opportunity for a thread containing factual information linking particular valuers to loans that failed to recover at or near the restricted 90 day market value.

e.g.


If platforms were able to see this they might avoid particular valuers and valuers themselves would see the risk of losing business for 'optimistic' valuations. P2P perhaps has an advantage over high street lenders in this respect as the banks may not share this information about their defaults with competitors.

Of course this isn't to say that this loan will default but it's good to have knowledge of how other properties valued by the same person did in recovery when you're reading their valuation report.

not just the valuation but the ongoing monitoring in the hands of those who so covered themselves in glory
in the Welsh castle.
interesting coincidence of connected parties between the two loans - makes you wonder

another that's going to need lubing up with cashback innit

In addition to cooling_dude 's elloquently agrued post, it is worth remembering that a different firm of surveyors engaged by AC valued the apartments part of the "Large Fortified House" marginally higher than Lendy's valuer did.

A firesale realisation of a unique one off asset is likely to realise (after costs) 40% to 60% of the open market value given in a RICS red book valuation, and perhaps even less if its based on a residual land value.   Lending at 70% LTV is pretty much guaranteeing a loss on default, apart from on mass market residential property, or other mass market asset (e.g. cars).

In most cases blaming the valuer is futile, they are carrying out the instructions given to them. Yes, they may be being influenced by the platform/borrower to some extent to produce the "right answer", but personally I feel this is on the margins and might account for a 10% or 20% over valuation of OMV, but not a 100% plus over valuation.

It was only a matter of time.

I suspect a bit like the cashback on the other unfilled loan, it will make precious little difference in the current climate. Maybe its time for a bit of 'out of the box' thinking by moneything. A loyalty card scheme type arrangement giving buyers into these unpopular loans extra dibs on the 'good stuff'.

And there was me thinking the suggestion that there may actually be 'good stuff' was the controversial bit.

Why are idiots  people putting money in the first tranche ?