adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,594
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 6, 2019 19:48:11 GMT
i am sure i read somewhere in the T@Cs that you can purchase a copy of each of your loan agreements from LENDY FOR £100.00 each to cover admin costs ,might be wrong here.anybody else any the wiser know? lendy.co.uk/termsSo - kinda but no. What you can cheerfully pay a hundred quid for is a copy of the "transfer agreement", the contract between you and the person you bought a pre-loved loan part from (or sold to). Quite why you'd want that, or what you'd do with it, is another question entirely.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Apr 6, 2019 19:54:50 GMT
i am sure i read somewhere in the T@Cs that you can purchase a copy of each of your loan agreements from LENDY FOR £100.00 each to cover admin costs ,might be wrong here.anybody else any the wiser know? lendy.co.uk/termsSo - kinda but no. What you can cheerfully pay a hundred quid for is a copy of the "transfer agreement", the contract between you and the person you bought a pre-loved loan part from (or sold to). Quite why you'd want that, or what you'd do with it, is another question entirely. So that is how much it costs someone to go to a filing cabinet, dig out a loan, photocopy it, place in an envelope, some stamps, and into the post box. Maybe 15 mins work altogether. Seems like a bit on the greedy side, or is this how Lendy are keeping afloat?
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,132
Likes: 1,951
|
Post by rocky1 on Apr 7, 2019 4:31:38 GMT
I totally agree with you that Lendy should be claiming the legal costs from the borrower. And they will. If the borrower has sufficient assets to repay the principal, the back interest, AND the legal costs. If not, then pick which of them falls short first. Clue: It isn't the legal bills, because there wouldn't be any money to repay anything at all if they hadn't been incurred. Lenders have not got any legal costs for this case,it was lendy and receivers defending themselves.we were told you are on your own.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,594
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 7, 2019 7:10:48 GMT
And they will. If the borrower has sufficient assets to repay the principal, the back interest, AND the legal costs. If not, then pick which of them falls short first. Clue: It isn't the legal bills, because there wouldn't be any money to repay anything at all if they hadn't been incurred. Lenders have not got any legal costs for this case,it was lendy and receivers defending themselves.we were told you are on your own. If we'd actually been joined to the case, though, which we never were...
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Apr 7, 2019 8:11:49 GMT
Doesn't mean we won't be sued separately (as suggested by Lendy and H**) in which case Lendy has clearly stated "you're on your own".
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,594
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Apr 7, 2019 8:55:33 GMT
Doesn't mean we won't be sued separately (as suggested by Lendy and H**) in which case Lendy has clearly stated "you're on your own". ...and if we ever are (vanishingly unlikely) and win (dead cert), then any legal costs incurred by our side would almost certainly be awarded against the plaintiff. Whether they would be able to cover those costs is, of course, the pertinent question.
In fact, the plaintiff would almost certainly have to lodge an amount to cover costs with the court before the case proceeded beyond the very first stages. And we all know how willing (and able?) this particular plaintiff is to do that...
If the plaintiff DOES launch a case against you and I (but not Lendy), then why on earth should Lendy cover our legal costs? They won't be part of the case, same as we aren't part of the recent case.
As for H** - well, woo. "Scaremongering ambulance chasers suggest continuing to pay retainer"
|
|
|
Post by robberbaron on Apr 7, 2019 9:32:31 GMT
Any case against lenders can only be a consequence of Lendy's actions. Lenders had no control over the loan agreement, the background checks on the borrower or the decision to default the loan. That Lendy refuses to defend lenders from the consequences of its own actions is appalling and demonstrates a complete lack of care for its customers.
|
|
gc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 152
Likes: 141
|
Post by gc on Apr 7, 2019 12:13:24 GMT
Any case against lenders can only be a consequence of Lendy's actions. Lenders had no control over the loan agreement, the background checks on the borrower or the decision to default the loan. That Lendy refuses to defend lenders from the consequences of its own actions is appalling and demonstrates a complete lack of care for its customers. We will have to wait and see what happens as too many "ifs" and "buts" as to what the borrower is going to do.... It may be that they try to take on a handful of the lenders and I would imagine that the courts would want them to stump up some funds up front if they did. Regarding Lendy, they may wash their hands from their actions on all consequences on their Lenders (or they may not), we will have to wait to see, though probably a bad business move on their behalf if they did as the lack of trust from lenders working with them may prove to be more damaging.
|
|
|
Post by masquedefer on Apr 7, 2019 13:59:42 GMT
Any case against lenders can only be a consequence of Lendy's actions. Lenders had no control over the loan agreement, the background checks on the borrower or the decision to default the loan. That Lendy refuses to defend lenders from the consequences of its own actions is appalling and demonstrates a complete lack of care for its customers. We will have to wait and see what happens as too many "ifs" and "buts" as to what the borrower is going to do.... It may be that they try to take on a handful of the lenders and I would imagine that the courts would want them to stump up some funds up front if they did. Regarding Lendy, they may wash their hands from their actions on all consequences on their Lenders (or they may not), we will have to wait to see, though probably a bad business move on their behalf if they did as the lack of trust from lenders working with them may prove to be more damaging. If ever an individual lender is sued by the borrower they will simply join all the other lenders to the action and more importantly have Lundy joined to the action too as it can be established that they were acting ultra vires the remit of their power of agency. The judge will then have to decide if the borrower not only has a case but also whether Lendy is liable (and not the borrowers) on the grounds that the unfair contract clauses act applies to our agency contract and Lendy are clearly not acting as agent and merely following our instructions.
|
|
ben
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 589
|
Post by ben on Apr 7, 2019 15:52:18 GMT
Doesn't mean we won't be sued separately (as suggested by Lendy and H**) in which case Lendy has clearly stated "you're on your own". I think a lot of us on here feel quite negatively against Lendy but I do not remember them actually saying that. Lendy had no legal way of stopping the borrower for adding us to the complaint if they so wanted. So to be fair all they basically said it would be prudent for us to take our own legal advice as our defence would naturally be different to theirs. Although why they choose a company that basically tried to bully people to signing up to them I have no idea.
|
|
zlb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 332
|
Post by zlb on Apr 7, 2019 17:07:19 GMT
Doesn't mean we won't be sued separately (as suggested by Lendy and H**) in which case Lendy has clearly stated "you're on your own". I think a lot of us on here feel quite negatively against Lendy but I do not remember them actually saying that. Lendy had no legal way of stopping the borrower for adding us to the complaint if they so wanted. So to be fair all they basically said it would be prudent for us to take our own legal advice as our defence would naturally be different to theirs. Although why they choose a company that basically tried to bully people to signing up to them I have no idea. I personally wouldn't want a demure personality (individual or company) representing me in a legal scenario. Their wording was suspect, but on the other hand, I wouldn't expect otherwise from any other companies. In my experience in the English legal system, tactics play a large part, and these tactics become a normal way of doing, perhaps?
|
|
tommytaylor
P2P - The new wild west
Posts: 234
Likes: 375
|
Post by tommytaylor on Apr 7, 2019 17:15:32 GMT
Doesn't mean we won't be sued separately (as suggested by Lendy and H**) in which case Lendy has clearly stated "you're on your own". I think a lot of us on here feel quite negatively against Lendy but I do not remember them actually saying that. Lendy had no legal way of stopping the borrower for adding us to the complaint if they so wanted. So to be fair all they basically said it would be prudent for us to take our own legal advice as our defence would naturally be different to theirs. Although why they choose a company that basically tried to bully people to signing up to them I have no idea. I think thats an understatement. Cant stand them myself.
|
|
|
Post by banffy on Apr 8, 2019 16:11:48 GMT
So what is exactly gonna happen now? Ae Lendy preparing the two properties for sale to get recoveries moving or is it just wait for an update by 12 Apr or sooner exactly what is going on.
|
|
|
Post by gaza77 on Apr 8, 2019 16:12:56 GMT
Doesn't mean we won't be sued separately (as suggested by Lendy and H**) in which case Lendy has clearly stated "you're on your own". I think a lot of us on here feel quite negatively against Lendy but I do not remember them actually saying that. Lendy had no legal way of stopping the borrower for adding us to the complaint if they so wanted. So to be fair all they basically said it would be prudent for us to take our own legal advice as our defence would naturally be different to theirs. Although why they choose a company that basically tried to bully people to signing up to them I have no idea. I think you are right and actually well said. Lendy haven't actually done anything wrong yet (well,.... may be they should be a bit more choosey in the future who they lend customer’s, hard earned, money to) or used our funds for their own legal defence (this would be despicable). Let us give them the benefit of the doubt for the time being. I remember when I first joined SavingStream all those years ago, SS were a fantastic company with a clever business model that I thought couldn't go wrong! The only risk as far as I could see was a drastically undervaluation of the security item. I CAN see Lendy being fairly reasonable in this case, after all, it is in their own interest to be reasonable as the negative publicity would be devastating for them (ie BBC watchdog, Martin Lewis, FCA, financial newspapers etc etc). I would also add that if I get a reasonable amount of my funds back (>70%), I will seriously consider investing a modest amount with them again - surely they have learned their lesson by now? The losses can be offset against tax, if Lendy ever admit that the funds are lost!!
|
|
|
Post by timm2006 on Apr 8, 2019 23:16:02 GMT
Hi
So today have had some clarification of the Lendy and H** update regarding the current situation, which has cleared up some confusion in my mind:
1. The 1/4 expired deadline now means that the claim against Lendy/receivers is now invalid and has been struck out but for Lendy/receivers only. 2. The 1/4 expired deadline for lenders, just means that they can not be served on the existing claim. 2. As it stands, there is still a possible chance (although slim) the borrowers can make a new fresh claim against the lenders (albeit unlikely) any time for the next 5 years. Although highly unlikely, it is still possible. 3. H** clients will have an application submitted to prevent the borrowers raising any new fresh future claim against them, therefore the application from the court will be to remove them as named parties from any joint liability of any claim against lenders as a whole so will bring closure to these particular lenders. In addition a default judgement will be made against the borrowers for the legal costs incurred. 4. The above will be instructed clients only.
Personally, I treat this as a sort of "legal insurance policy" to protect against highly unlikely but a possible situations.
Hope this helps clarify for some who were not sure of the situation as I have been over the last couple of updates
|
|