michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,707 
Likes: 2,983
|
Post by michaelc on Apr 19, 2018 13:28:03 GMT
Its all in the subject really. I don't think I have a problem with the extra loan but interested in other folk's opinions.
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 638
Likes: 659
|
Post by warn on Apr 19, 2018 13:49:32 GMT
My inclination is to let RT do as he proposes, though I'd be happier if I could be sure the April repayment will come in on schedule. Unfortunately, the timing of the vote won't allow that.
|
|
niceguy37
Member of DD Central
Posts: 504
Likes: 254
|
Post by niceguy37 on Apr 19, 2018 14:17:47 GMT
I voted "Yes", as I thought it a very reasonable request.
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Apr 19, 2018 15:29:06 GMT
First vote I have Bern involved in. Can anyone answer why the original loan term should be shortened by 3 months?
|
|
|
|
Post by danielbird193 on Apr 20, 2018 9:10:40 GMT
It's the first vote I've been involved in as well. I assume that AC think that shortening the loan term by three months 'de-risks' the loan from a lender's point of view, although this is all based on the assumption that RT is able to re-finance with an alternative lender by April 2019.
The real risk with this loan is that the main tenant, DS S****, is on an informal tenancy arrangement (tenancy at will) and could leave at any time without notice. This would seriously impair the ability of the borrower to service the interest costs of the loan. We have some vague assurances that DS S**** have spent £500k in capex on the site which means they will remain. That capex could well be portable to another site, and even if it's permanent, that level of investment is relatively small compared to the £220k annual rent. We also have some assurances that the valuation of the site has increased, but the reference is to a valuation report that we have not seen and cannot rely on in any case.
With the borrower's poor financial history and track record of late payments, I am not inclined to show any flexibility in terms of the security offered for his loan (and most definitely not in order to fund his daughter's wedding!). I have voted for option B.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Apr 20, 2018 9:44:50 GMT
RT's track record of payments is not poor. Earlier financial issues appear to have been in respect of a generally declining sector rather than mal-practice by the borrower. This single delayed payment has been explained and formed part of the negotiations with AC in preparing this request. Daughters? Who'd have 'em?  The security has (apparently) increased to £3.75M making our LTV near 46%. I voted A. |
|
|
|
Post by df on Apr 20, 2018 18:30:02 GMT
A from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Apr 20, 2018 18:56:04 GMT
It is in the best interest of lenders that borrowers remain in the best possible financial health. That goes along with less rather than more indebtedness. Self-interest is best served by vote B.
|
|
|
|
Post by honda2ner on Apr 23, 2018 20:54:00 GMT
Too many 'rent payments not filtered through' & 'situation should improve' but no concrete evidence of anything getting better but wants to do the house up and have an expensive wedding... Really? I voted B.
|
|
ceejay
Posts: 975
Likes: 1,149
|
Post by ceejay on Apr 24, 2018 9:35:54 GMT
Some interesting comments here which show the quite different considerations which lenders are bringing to bear - and which, for me, serve to reinforce the principle that AC don't really have any choice but to put this sort of question to a vote and go with the result.
Although, IIRC, most votes seem to have quite low turnouts, which are not good conditions for a healthy democracy.
In case it matters, I'm an A on this one. I will generally vote against a proposal which significantly worsens my terms or risk, unless it appears that the borrower is already in trouble and we are looking for the least bad exit route. But in general I'll recognise that borrowers' circumstances change and that on the whole we are all better off just going with the flow, which is how I see this one.
|
|
