copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 306 
Likes: 667
|
Post by copacetic on Oct 29, 2019 20:48:21 GMT
The most likely outcome in my opinion is
1. When the borrower's bankruptcy has progressed and all assets sold we will get a repayment of a portion of the debt shared between other unsecured creditors. If the house sold for £60k but the borrower is £300k in the red we'd get 20p in the pound.
2. FS's promise to repay us for this loan will at best be considered a FS company debt and we'll be lumped in with the rest of FS's unsecured creditors. Many years from now when FS has been almost wound down the administrators will declare a dividend of x pence in the pound for unsecured creditors. FS did have £770k of assets on their balance sheet in 2018 but I suspect most of this will disappear on administrator costs if it's actually still there.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,598
Likes: 6,768
|
Post by Mousey on Oct 29, 2019 20:51:11 GMT
...and don't forget Raj has a charge over all the assets of FS
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,680
Likes: 2,477
|
Post by iRobot on Oct 29, 2019 21:15:09 GMT
...and don't forget Raj has a charge over all the assets of FS 'Tis a floating charge though. From DLA Piper again: So whilst there may be Administrator costs in dealing with loan redemptions / recoveries which may be deducted from the returns to lenders, there will costs associated with running the platform which will come out of FS' funds and ahead of Raj's charge. (Not least, the employees - both those with money owing but given their papers and those that remain to provide services at a (presumably) considerably lower cost than the Administrator would need to charge.) As for FS' pledges to make good on some loans, I wonder if those pledges - in writing and publicly verifiable - can be deemed contractual obligations which the Administrators - as acting officers of the Company - are duty-bound to make good on?
|
|
pip
Posts: 542
Likes: 725
|
Post by pip on Oct 30, 2019 6:04:32 GMT
I wonder if those pledges - in writing and publicly verifiable - can be deemed contractual obligations which the Administrators - as acting officers of the Company - are duty-bound to make good on? I think the answer to this is a definite no. The company is in administration.
|
|
bulletbill
Member of DD Central
Posts: 90
Likes: 223
|
Post by bulletbill on Oct 30, 2019 11:23:01 GMT
I wonder if those pledges - in writing and publicly verifiable - can be deemed contractual obligations which the Administrators - as acting officers of the Company - are duty-bound to make good on? I think the answer to this is a definite no. The company is in administration. I wonder why the new owners took this on presumably knowing it was a sinking ship and that lenders were disillusioned and unwilling to throw good money after bad. Having taken it on they did absolutely nothing to fix matters. I suspect an ulterior motive.
|
|
|
|
Post by tigerbalm on Oct 30, 2019 11:40:10 GMT
"I suspect an ulterior motive"
Do you mean something like buying distressed assets with insider info ultra cheap ?
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
Post by r1200gs on Oct 30, 2019 12:08:07 GMT
I think the answer to this is a definite no. The company is in administration. I wonder why the new owners took this on presumably knowing it was a sinking ship and that lenders were disillusioned and unwilling to throw good money after bad. Having taken it on they did absolutely nothing to fix matters. I suspect an ulterior motive. This has baffled me all along. They must have known what they were buying into and yet did very little to improve the situation. I have always wondered why.
|
|
pip
Posts: 542
Likes: 725
|
Post by pip on Oct 30, 2019 13:03:09 GMT
I wonder why the new owners took this on presumably knowing it was a sinking ship and that lenders were disillusioned and unwilling to throw good money after bad. Having taken it on they did absolutely nothing to fix matters. I suspect an ulterior motive. This has baffled me all along. They must have known what they were buying into and yet did very little to improve the situation. I have always wondered why. Probably the logic was that the funding circle IPO had recently valued the company at £1.5bn, if new management can buy FS for next to nothing, sort out existing loans and improve loans going forward then in a few years the company could have a serious valuation. Upside: potentially hundreds of millions, downside: a year of their lives, the tiny amount they paid for it and probably few grey hairs. Clearly didn't work out but as a speculative buy seen worse.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 30, 2019 13:07:43 GMT
I agree with Pip - guess they thought they would float as did FC - wrong!
I just can't see what assets they have to be bought on the cheap (granted a lot of these properties are going into a fire sale but that property hunters will already have their eye on them).
|
|
|
|
Post by ron on Nov 1, 2019 8:05:46 GMT
The most likely outcome in my opinion is
1. When the borrower's bankruptcy has progressed and all assets sold we will get a repayment of a portion of the debt shared between other unsecured creditors. If the house sold for £60k but the borrower is £300k in the red we'd get 20p in the pound.
2. FS's promise to repay us for this loan will at best be considered a FS company debt and we'll be lumped in with the rest of FS's unsecured creditors. Many years from now when FS has been almost wound down the administrators will declare a dividend of x pence in the pound for unsecured creditors. FS did have £770k of assets on their balance sheet in 2018 but I suspect most of this will disappear on administrator costs if it's actually still there.
I agree. Yet I wonder whether investors in those loans where the charge was not registered can ask for FSCS compensation: www.fscs.org.uk/news/protection/peer-to-peer-lending-coverage/It seems to me that we would at least have a chance... any thoughts?
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Nov 1, 2019 8:48:54 GMT
I guess the question is : have FS insurance against gross negligence?
If not then I wonder where we stand with regard to compensation - if we take the Barnoldswick cottage it strikes me FS are in clear breach of contract as they stated they had a first charge on the asset when they clearly didn't. A moral case is one thing but getting the readies as compensation is another...
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Nov 1, 2019 10:03:00 GMT
I guess the question is : have FS insurance against gross negligence? If not then I wonder where we stand with regard to compensation - if we take the Barnoldswick cottage it strikes me FS are in clear breach of contract as they stated they had a first charge on the asset when they clearly didn't. A moral case is one thing but getting the readies as compensation is another... Well I think you could level that assertion against more than a few loans..Art & Lytham for starters
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jul 30, 2021 16:03:33 GMT
Update 30/07/21
The litigation in this matter is ongoing. (cant find the farmhouse but same update applies)
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 740
Likes: 863
|
Post by 11025 on Apr 12, 2024 8:02:59 GMT
Morning ,
I had not been following this loan and notice I have a very small amount showing on this loan 1079396222. Is this dead and over - another victim off the FS skulduggery ?
|
|
