zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Aug 11, 2018 10:57:25 GMT
When I was applying for mortgages, the bank valuers provided valuations in a much more conservative way. When they are not confident they would down value the property. And it felt that if it was going to go to auction it would sell close to valuation price. Lendy (and other P2P valuers) do the exact opposite. They wildly overvalue assets. I think it's because valuers need to do that in order to be hired.... And there are no downside from a overvalued report. So there are upside for them to overvalue (likely to be hired) and not downside if it fails... That's completely crazy Shame this isn't up for discussion with Ly. My neighbours couldn't sell their house for months because the estate agent insisted on it being listed at 9.5% higher value than the most recent similar sale in the road, and what it eventually sold for. They seem a profession prone to using over-valuation as a tool.
|
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Aug 11, 2018 11:43:07 GMT
When I was applying for mortgages, the bank valuers provided valuations in a much more conservative way. When they are not confident they would down value the property. And it felt that if it was going to go to auction it would sell close to valuation price. Lendy (and other P2P valuers) do the exact opposite. They wildly overvalue assets. I think it's because valuers need to do that in order to be hired.... And there are no downside from a overvalued report. So there are upside for them to overvalue (likely to be hired) and not downside if it fails... That's completely crazy Shame this isn't up for discussion with Ly. My neighbours couldn't sell their house for months because the estate agent insisted on it being listed at 9.5% higher value than the most recent similar sale in the road, and what it eventually sold for. They seem a profession prone to using over-valuation as a tool. I guess you win some and you lose some. I bought my first house for £3050 in 1971. It was a two year old 'chalet bungalow'. The seller was very impressed with the estate agent because they had an established reputation for achieving quick sales. There was much local interest shortly afterwards when someone broke ranks and on finding a different agent had their house valued and sold for 20% more.
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949 
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Aug 14, 2018 10:00:29 GMT
Shame this isn't up for discussion with Ly. My neighbours couldn't sell their house for months because the estate agent insisted on it being listed at 9.5% higher value than the most recent similar sale in the road, and what it eventually sold for. They seem a profession prone to using over-valuation as a tool. I guess you win some and you lose some. I bought my first house for £3050 in 1971. It was a two year old 'chalet bungalow'. The seller was very impressed with the estate agent because they had an established reputation for achieving quick sales. There was much local interest shortly afterwards when someone broke ranks and on finding a different agent had their house valued and sold for 20% more. Some 20% difference would be ok... But what we see here is not 20% difference between valuation and sales. We see 50% or even 80% difference. The sold price could be (much) less than half the valuation. Imagine if that was to happen to you selling your house and neighbour with valuation suddenly doubled or halfed their sold price? That's what happening now with the RICS valuer. It constantly miss the number by an enormous amount... And not only that, it also ONLY over value. I think something's not right in the way the profession is done. I'm thinking to list out the defaulted loan and see what's the typical difference between valuation and sold price!
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Aug 14, 2018 11:49:50 GMT
I guess you win some and you lose some. I bought my first house for £3050 in 1971. It was a two year old 'chalet bungalow'. The seller was very impressed with the estate agent because they had an established reputation for achieving quick sales. There was much local interest shortly afterwards when someone broke ranks and on finding a different agent had their house valued and sold for 20% more. Some 20% difference would be ok... But what we see here is not 20% difference between valuation and sales. We see 50% or even 80% difference. The sold price could be (much) less than half the valuation. Imagine if that was to happen to you selling your house and neighbour with valuation suddenly doubled or halfed their sold price? That's what happening now with the RICS valuer. It constantly miss the number by an enormous amount... And not only that, it also ONLY over value. I think something's not right in the way the profession is done. I'm thinking to list out the defaulted loan and see what's the typical difference between valuation and sold price! pre internet so people couldn't compare and contrast, loads of money around (middle class very much declined since then), property prices low multiples of salary. Although your described outcome sounds also down to individuals and personalities, much like Ly outcomes are. The valuation problems people have seen as 'acceptable' or rational here, are things like 'no other similar to compare it to'. The max LTV of GDV is 70% which should cover valuation discrepancies, but it isn't. Eg the S********h security is much nearer to social housing than the comparison property... This could be immaterial in hyper trendy areas, but if it's not and the security is worth less, the 30% should easily cover it... Shouldn't it...??
|
|
crazi
Posts: 41
Likes: 62
|
Post by crazi on Sept 10, 2018 15:35:56 GMT
Nobody seems to sue RICS valuers for their fictional valuations. So if you were one you would do the same. No repercussions - it must be great.
LTV's need to drop to 50% and less and valuers held to account - or this market will eventually be Lender free...
The other grudge I have with Lendy is this never ending "Loan Extension". 1 Year loan becomes a 2 year loan and as a lender I have no input. I can't opt out. Then If I want to sell out after the original loan period I lose all rights to my interest while sitting in a long queue to sell. I see this as a serious conflict of interest on Lendy's part.
You support the loan - Lendy choose to extend - You have no opinion - they steal your interest on the secondary market! I'm going to approach the FCA and ask if that is ethical...
Selling out my loans and moving on as I don't like this approach...
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Sept 10, 2018 19:41:25 GMT
I don't think the FCA would involve itself in ethics unless unethical behaviour broke their Regulations.
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Sept 10, 2018 23:20:31 GMT
There should be some safeguard against opportunistically valuations we see so often in p2p world.
We shouldn't see frequent under valuations when they've been hired by banks and frequent over valuations when hired by P2P platforms or borrowers.
It completely decribilise the profession but they probably don't care much as all they want are clients asking for MORE valuations!
So a very simple safeguard would be to have the valuer liable for large discrepancies between valuation and sold price. It should be on the contract with associated insurance on it.
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,422
Likes: 333
|
Post by zlb on Sept 12, 2018 17:46:07 GMT
There should be some safeguard against opportunistically valuations we see so often in p2p world. We shouldn't see frequent under valuations when they've been hired by banks and frequent over valuations when hired by P2P platforms or borrowers. It completely decribilise the profession but they probably don't care much as all they want are clients asking for MORE valuations! So a very simple safeguard would be to have the valuer liable for large discrepancies between valuation and sold price. It should be on the contract with associated insurance on it. Nice. In fact can they be asked to place a deposit which they only get back in the event that the valuation was realistic? The valuer's insurer can then pay for any legal expenses to claim any of that money back if the valuation difference is high.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Oct 9, 2018 11:24:01 GMT
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Oct 9, 2018 16:57:31 GMT
There should be some safeguard against opportunistically valuations we see so often in p2p world. We shouldn't see frequent under valuations when they've been hired by banks and frequent over valuations when hired by P2P platforms or borrowers. It completely decribilise the profession but they probably don't care much as all they want are clients asking for MORE valuations! So a very simple safeguard would be to have the valuer liable for large discrepancies between valuation and sold price. It should be on the contract with associated insurance on it. Nice. In fact can they be asked to place a deposit which they only get back in the event that the valuation was realistic? The valuer's insurer can then pay for any legal expenses to claim any of that money back if the valuation difference is high. Or can we just give them review them like we do when buying online... So all the corrupted valuer would be flagged as non trustworthy
|
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Oct 9, 2018 17:41:07 GMT
Or can we just give them review them like we do when buying online... So all the corrupted valuer would be flagged as non trustworthy Good point, the valuations are usually downloadable in full, so it would be easy to provide a TP review, and also provide backup information if the review was challenged. Probably a better use of TP than tracking the fake Lendy reviews. Maybe the Valuers will then take their jobs a little more seriously? Similarly for other platforms, Lendy are not the only one with serious valuation issues. Where to start? The fortified house? The farm? etc, etc.
|
|
Garage246
Member of DD Central
Posts: 116
Likes: 209
|
Post by Garage246 on Oct 9, 2018 18:25:50 GMT
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Oct 9, 2018 19:38:37 GMT
VERY interesting Garage246, thank you. Unfortunately, I don't think Valuers will ever get real until one or more of them swings for their numerous, grossly inaccurate "Professional" valuations (or should I say Overvaluations). I get the feeling they are quite arrogant and cocksure about their position and "untouchableness" in all this and I hope they remain so, for it will undoubtedly be the cause of their ultimate downfall. When a complete numpty like me can calculate a valuation and/or LTV that is far more accurate than that provided from these "Professional" Valuers then something is clearly very, very wrong with what is an oh so obviously not fit for purpose system.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Oct 9, 2018 19:48:32 GMT
I was enthusiastically agreeing with you cwah , I had quickly scan read the "a" as an "o"!!!  Or can we just give them review them like we do when buying online...
So all the corrupted valuer would be flagged as non trustworthy |
|
sarahcount
Member of DD Central
Posts: 359
Likes: 815
|
Post by sarahcount on Oct 9, 2018 19:58:32 GMT
Interesting scenario raised here that all the investors on a platform make a class action and the surveyor has a potentially disastrous 'per claimant' excess on their PI. insurance policy. We can dream. "Class actions are a real possibility, subject to the corporate structure of the P2P platform and/or the rules governing investor membership. In terms of PII, given the possibility of actions by numerous claimants, substantial risks arise around aggregation and the policy excess structure (e.g. a “per claimant” excess could be disastrous for an insured surveying practice, although it could potentially increase the indemnity available)"
|
|
