ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168 
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Oct 23, 2018 17:55:26 GMT
Agree samford71, the Borrower apparently has form in mounting frivolous or vexatious legal actions and is only trying it on. |
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Oct 23, 2018 18:10:46 GMT
How can an investor be accountable full stop, particularly if they never get to see the loan contract? Unfortunately, this is how, per Lendy T’s&C’s... Appointment of the agent and security trustee
When you agree to lend money using the Lendy Platform you:
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Lendy to act as agent on your behalf in relation to the loan and instruct Lendy to sign and/or approve the Loan Contract, any novation, and any Finance Documents as agent on your behalf;
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Saving Stream Security Holding to act as security trustee on your behalf in relation to the security documents set out in clause 12 and instruct Saving Stream Security Holding to sign such security documents as agent on your behalf using Lendy’s standard form security documents;
irrevocably and unconditionally, authorise Lendy to instruct Saving Stream Security Holding in relation to the Finance Documents, including without limitation the security documents and their enforcement; and
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Lendy to act as attorney on your behalf for all matters in connection with any novation and/or any Finance Documents
While I also think that the claim is likely vexatious, Lenders have certainly given Lendy fully authorisation to drop them right in it!
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Oct 23, 2018 18:26:40 GMT
How can an investor be accountable full stop, particularly if they never get to see the loan contract? Unfortunately, this is how, per Lendy T’s&C’s... Appointment of the agent and security trustee
When you agree to lend money using the Lendy Platform you:
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Lendy to act as agent on your behalf in relation to the loan and instruct Lendy to sign and/or approve the Loan Contract, any novation, and any Finance Documents as agent on your behalf;
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Saving Stream Security Holding to act as security trustee on your behalf in relation to the security documents set out in clause 12 and instruct Saving Stream Security Holding to sign such security documents as agent on your behalf using Lendy’s standard form security documents;
irrevocably and unconditionally, authorise Lendy to instruct Saving Stream Security Holding in relation to the Finance Documents, including without limitation the security documents and their enforcement; and
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Lendy to act as attorney on your behalf for all matters in connection with any novation and/or any Finance Documents
While I also think that the claim is likely vexatious, Lenders have certainly given Lendy fully authorisation to drop them right in it! Lots of ifs coming up:- 1. If the borrower's claim has merit, and2. If Lendy's Ts & Cs allow such an enforcement, and3. If Lendy so choose to enforce ...... then Lendy can kiss their business goodbye. Are they likely to go that route? One would hope not. But personally I doubt it has merit, doubt it could be enforced, and doubt it could not be overturned even were it to be enforced. All said as a non-lawyer who is not in this loan. If nothing else this will have focused yet more lender (and regulatory?) eyes on Lendy's Ts & Cs, and platform risks more generally.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Oct 23, 2018 19:40:37 GMT
A few hundred Ccjs sent out might be one way to bring people to their scamming senses. I understand this is probably part jest, part frustration. But one problem with CCJs for lenders is the cost; The reality is it just isn't worth the cost. Why pay up front £1,000s when it is just throwing good money after bad. And once the CCJ is registered, the "threat" of the CCJ action has gone. This is actually a serious point, and why very few lenders actually implement CCJs. It would be really hand if you Just get my defaulted money on TheMoneyPlatform back. 
|
|
Jeepers
Member of DD Central
Posts: 818
Likes: 721
|
Post by Jeepers on Oct 23, 2018 21:26:31 GMT
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,168
Likes: 4,859
|
Post by ozboy on Oct 23, 2018 22:03:18 GMT
And taken from the report, Lendy said in a statement:- “Lendy is an asset-based secured lender. All Lendy loans are secured on UK property at conservative loan-to-values."Well, that's a relief.
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Oct 23, 2018 23:25:21 GMT
Re: P2P Finance News article,
Oh dear. That's not good publicity for the LY brand.
One thing that I was surprised to read in the article was the comment about "the benign economic environment".
With Brexit potentially/probably only 5 months away and all the uncertainty around that, plus the political uncertainty, I wouldn't describe the economic environment as particularly benign. It all seems to me to be stalled and on hold until things are clearer, and businesses and individuals are evidently delaying making financial decisions and investments. It's one reason why the land and property market has stalled with very few deals being done and transaction numbers at a long time low and in London and the SE, why values are now falling. Surely that economic backdrop can't be benign for a property based P2P platform, especially one with a lot of overdue land and property based loans?
More generally, the continuing negative publicity and sentiment surrounding Lendy seems to me to have almost turned the Lendy brand a bit toxic. It's rare that businesses can turn reputation around without a major re-brand and change of direction and/or management.
It seems apparent that LendyWealth is the new business model, and there are few, if any, new, self select P2P loans being originated through the LY platform, but LendyWealth still has Lendy in the name. Which seems to me to be a problem going forward.
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Oct 23, 2018 23:49:28 GMT
Many write the Borrower off as a delusional btch from hell,
but I doubt her legal team's calculus the claim against Lendy & lenders will win the day in Court
rather Borrower's calculus may be that the life of the legal case can be made longer than the life of LY as a solvent company
certainly they have £8.2m of lenders money to string the legal process out with, while Lendys balancesheet is doubtless heading south faster than icarus sans feathers
so its a strategy that does have legs,
in fact IMO quite likely to succeed unless Lendy get alot more agressive than they have been & bring this to a legal conclusion fairly promptly
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Oct 24, 2018 0:43:48 GMT
Many write the Borrower off as a delusional btch from hell,
but I doubt her legal team's calculus the claim against Lendy & lenders will win the day in Court
rather Borrower's calculus may be that the life of the legal case can be made longer than the life of LY as a solvent company
certainly they have £8.2m of lenders money to string the legal process out with, while Lendys balancesheet is doubtless heading south faster than icarus sans feathers
so its a strategy that does have legs,
in fact IMO quite likely to succeed unless Lendy get alot more agressive than they have been & bring this to a legal conclusion fairly promptly
I don't know all the details here - thankfully - but I have learned a lot more this week including identity of borrower.
I have noted that LY have described the action/claim as "vexatious". I'm tempted to misquote Mandy Rice-Davies and say "well they would say that, wouldn't they". However, I understand that LY have given the borrower the personal details of their investors/lenders. And I'm sure LY wouldn't have given over that information unless they had been ordered to by a Court (Surely anything else would be a major and actionable data protection breach). So that suggests that to me that this borrower has had some success against LY in the Courts in the early rounds and that the claim can't be as crazy as LY might like to make out. Also, this sort of legal action doesn't come cheap and l doubt this borrower, with these reportedly complex offshore financial arrangements, has got where they are today without being a pretty smart, well advised and cunning cookie.
It seems obvious the end game is to walk away with the £8.2m loan, having turned LY over and taken advantage of their inexperience. Based on some of LY's other cock-up loans like tin shed, river, wolves and south coast cliff top land, that outcome would sadly not surprise me. But the reported claim for £10m extra in damages sounds to me like a negotiating starting point with a view to settling at keeping the £8.2m. I cant see how LY lenders, some of whom bought in on the SM in a nano second, could be further liable unless LY have committed the mess up of all mess ups. The unfair contracts act etc. is one thing but being contracted to a terrible contract you've never even seen seems to me to be the ultimate try on in terms of tenuous responsibility, regardless of what small print LY investors have inadvertently clicked their acceptance to, as mentioned in Mary's earlier post.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 24, 2018 1:44:19 GMT
How can an investor be accountable full stop, particularly if they never get to see the loan contract? Unfortunately, this is how, per Lendy T’s&C’s... Appointment of the agent and security trustee
When you agree to lend money using the Lendy Platform you:
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Lendy to act as agent on your behalf in relation to the loan and instruct Lendy to sign and/or approve the Loan Contract, any novation, and any Finance Documents as agent on your behalf;
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Saving Stream Security Holding to act as security trustee on your behalf in relation to the security documents set out in clause 12 and instruct Saving Stream Security Holding to sign such security documents as agent on your behalf using Lendy’s standard form security documents;
irrevocably and unconditionally, authorise Lendy to instruct Saving Stream Security Holding in relation to the Finance Documents, including without limitation the security documents and their enforcement; and
irrevocably and unconditionally, appoint Lendy to act as attorney on your behalf for all matters in connection with any novation and/or any Finance Documents
While I also think that the claim is likely vexatious, Lenders have certainly given Lendy fully authorisation to drop them right in it! You’d almost hope that Ly subrogate so much power as ‘agent’, making sole decisions at their own discretion on their direct loan dealings with the borrower, that a judge wouldn’t allow individual lenders to be sued for decisions they played no part in and were effectively only passive possessors of debt .
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Oct 24, 2018 1:48:01 GMT
First, I’m only in this loan for a negligble sum and had already written in down, so I’m not up to date with the specific sorry story. I think, however, that the above posters have already pointed out some very solid reasons why the lending syndicate cannot be held liable to fund further tranches. I would add that these are not bilateral loans but were tradeable loans. I know of no precedent where someone who bought a loan in a secondary market via a novation or tear-up/replacement contract has ever been made liable to fund further tranches. This clearly would make no sense. Moreover, such as strange condition, if required, would need to be very clearly identified at the point of sale. I see this as a complete nonsense brought by the borrower to attempt to scare lenders. Ignore it. They echo my thoughts and I have updated my details to make ignoring it easier. However, lenders served with a claim should be aware that doing so would expose them to a judgment in default.
|
|
quidco
Member of DD Central
Posts: 295
Likes: 361
|
Post by quidco on Oct 24, 2018 6:03:16 GMT
I understand that LY have given the borrower the personal details of their investors/lenders. And I'm sure LY wouldn't have given over that information unless they had been ordered to by a Court (Surely anything else would be a major and actionable data protection breach). So that suggests that to me that this borrower has had some success against LY in the Courts in the early rounds and that the claim can't be as crazy as LY might like to make out. I can see that a borrower may have the right to know the identities of its lenders but that right can also have no bearing on anything else.
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Oct 24, 2018 6:51:49 GMT
The P2P article is far worse than the FT one - I wonder if Lendy are going to write a reply to that on their site.
It points out declining profits and Liam making a loan to the company, mass dissatisfaction within the customer base, other people in the industry slagging it off, making it sound like it is on its last legs.
I do think quite a few borrowers are stringing it out in the hope that something happens and it all went pear-shaped.
The Twitter thing bothers me quite a lot. It would not surprise me if Lendy were to simply abandon the business and make Wealth the black-box model going forward and the default that people see, with the current loans only being made visible to those who are invested in them. Currently the loan portfolio can be seen with anyone even without a login, and it just looks awful - nothing in the pipeline, and almost as much non-performing loans as there are live ones.
Such a move would be better for the newbies but worse for existing lenders, as they could conduct recoveries even further from public scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Oct 24, 2018 7:53:58 GMT
I've said before that with Lendy's miserable track record for dealing with pretty much everything, any borrower would be a mug not to try it on. I had my concerns in March 2017 and started moving out. I said here in September 2017 that they had all the hallmarks of a company circling the drain. I think we're getting to the point now where we can hear the gurgling. Fortunately, the funds I moved out have already earned me more than I have stuck in DFLs 004/5. They're only there due to the outright lies, origins unknown, we were fed about them. It looks like feet will be held to the fire now and questions will be asked that won't be so easily fobbed off by platitudes. Hopefully minds will be focused on results more than obfuscation now.
|
|
jeremy12
Member of DD Central
Everything's frozen
Posts: 83
Likes: 38
|
Post by jeremy12 on Oct 24, 2018 8:53:45 GMT
Lendy may have to weigh up the cost time and effort of pursuing this action against the reputational damage of this lingering in the media and the impact it has on the lenders. It may result in a free exit for the borrower which is what is intended from their point of view.
|
|
