iren
Member of DD Central
Posts: 302
Likes: 300
|
Post by iren on Dec 22, 2018 16:43:03 GMT
We might hold it in BDO’s favour that they don’t want to run a series of expensive lender votes every time any action is needed in the enforcement process. Or we might wonder what they are gaining on the other hand by avoiding this chargeable process.
On balance, I take it that it would be unfeasible to not only run the series of votes, but put in place the investor liaison team that would be necessary to handle the resulting enquiries from the lender base, without excessive cost.
I’ve sent my email agreeing to the resolution.
|
|
|
Post by waryinvestor on Dec 31, 2018 15:33:04 GMT
Does anyone know how BDO's Fees compare with others in the industry or against Refresh Recovery ?
|
|
radar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 106
Likes: 62
|
Post by radar on Dec 31, 2018 16:46:13 GMT
I would not worry about RR!
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Jan 1, 2019 18:41:05 GMT
[ Emailed Today, 1/1/19 @ 18:35 - I also acknowledge the use of another Lender's wording.] I agree to the Lender Resolution sent to investors on 21 December 2018, HOWEVER, I also refer to:- “ To enable the Joint Administrators to take enforcement action as quickly and efficiently as possible,” - are you having a laugh? In approximately nine months it seems to me that you have achieved virtually nothing whatsoever of benefit, except to & for yourselves. Retrieving the Collateral data has been a joke, are you using part time high school students?! When are you going to start repaying Lenders Capital & Interest, even via interim payments? How much longer are you going to rack up your substantial fees whilst seemingly achieving nothing and all the while keeping Lenders completely uninformed? I am utterly disgusted with BDO’s inefficient & ineffective recovery actions & Lender communications to date. Yours, One Very Urinated Off OzBoy [ EDIT / PS - I shouldn't have been so polite and used stronger wording, I know. ]
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Jan 1, 2019 20:21:09 GMT
I am with your sentiments on this one. Originally I had pencilled in a 50% haircut on my £3k investment but am becoming resigned to the idea that a 70 -90% loss is looking increasingly on the cards. Initially I thought BDO should be given a chance to move forward but my patience has run out. If this situation is not cleared up fairly pronto I am going to pull out completely from peer to peer lending. The financial services industry is simply throwing small investors to the wolves. Government, the City, the Judiciary - none of them seem to have a moral compass to steer by. For small investors read suckers.
|
|
dApps
Posts: 91
Likes: 80
|
Post by dApps on Jan 1, 2019 21:03:50 GMT
Does anyone know how BDO's Fees compare with others in the industry or against Refresh Recovery ? Need to ensure that any comparison is on an 'apples-with-apples' basis. In this case, BDO are charging for not only their IP experience but also their FCA status. Mazars (who are FCA approved, but weren't the FCA's preferred IPs) 'pitched' for the role during the April (2018) court hearing. When blended hourly rates were compared, Mazars were marginally cheaper by about 4% or so. Personal opinion I was disappointed that BDO's current billables have been approved by the Creditors Committee when there was no indication of what the revised estimated total cost might be. It seems a bit like handing over 60% of the quoted amount for a whole house to your builder when only the foundations have been laid with no idea as to how much will ultimately be needed to get the job finished. Furthermore, I don't see how BDO could have declined to provide the revised estimate had they been pushed for it, but I wasn't in the meeting, so don't know how the conversation played out. They are the FCA-preferred 'experts' and, even allowing for the unique nature of this case, they had 6 months (and c. 1700 billed hours) to get a feeling for the final outcome, so I really don't see there's an excuse not to have had a revised estimate available either for the CC meeting earlier in December when sign-off was requested, or, preferably, to have been sent with the 6-month report. Following the CC meeting of 12th last, I'd hope to be receiving a revised estimate soon(ish) and it will be interesting to compare both the initial Estimate and the spend to date (as at 27th Oct '18) with that revised figure. I note that BDO agreed their hourly rates with the FCA prior to appointment and would it would be interesting to now just how closely the FCA are following this Administration.
|
|
|
Post by Butch Cassidy on Jan 2, 2019 10:07:06 GMT
[ Emailed Today, 1/1/19 @ 18:35 - I also acknowledge the use of another Lender's wording.] [ EDIT / PS - I shouldn't have been so polite and used stronger wording, I know. ] Happy New Year to everyone suffering under this prolonged farce & glad to be of service ozboy
With regards to BDO fees & FCA/legal court oversight it must now be fairly clear, even to those who were in support of their imposition, that BDO are treating this like any other commercial administration; that any remaining assets are there to be milked dry for their sole benefit & whilst I support the CC they are clearly pretty impotent to prevent it. As for the FCA's driving purpose to "protect lenders interests" clearly given where we are currently that is ironic in the extreme & as distasteful as it is insulting, given everything that they have achieved so far has resulted in the complete opposite! Anyone still pinning their hopes on a strong & even handed regulatory intervention must still be waving goodbye to Santa Claus.
It is fairly obvious that BDO believe that this very profitable saga has plenty milk & honey still left to give (at least to them) so expect no early conclusion & quite possibly we could all be welcoming another Xmas & New Year in this purgatory.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,978
Likes: 4,804
|
Post by adrianc on Jan 2, 2019 10:15:26 GMT
It seems a bit like handing over 60% of the quoted amount for a whole house to your builder when only the foundations have been laid with no idea as to how much will ultimately be needed to get the job finished. Furthermore, I don't see how BDO could have declined to provide the revised estimate had they been pushed for it... I'm really not convinced by that analogy. Building a house, the unknowns are below ground, and there's a lot of material costs. With this, the unknowns are in the future - Will borrowers repay? How much work will repayingment require? How much will ultimately be repaid?
|
|
ton27
Member of DD Central
Posts: 431
Likes: 267
|
Post by ton27 on Jan 2, 2019 13:06:38 GMT
[ Emailed Today, 1/1/19 @ 18:35 - I also acknowledge the use of another Lender's wording.] [ EDIT / PS - I shouldn't have been so polite and used stronger wording, I know. ] Happy New Year to everyone suffering under this prolonged farce & glad to be of service ozboy
With regards to BDO fees & FCA/legal court oversight it must now be fairly clear, even to those who were in support of their imposition, that BDO are treating this like any other commercial administration; that any remaining assets are there to be milked dry for their sole benefit & whilst I support the CC they are clearly pretty impotent to prevent it. As for the FCA's driving purpose to "protect lenders interests" clearly given where we are currently that is ironic in the extreme & as distasteful as it is insulting, given everything that they have achieved so far has resulted in the complete opposite! Anyone still pinning their hopes on a strong & even handed regulatory intervention must still be waving goodbye to Santa Claus.
It is fairly obvious that BDO believe that this very profitable saga has plenty milk & honey still left to give (at least to them) so expect no early conclusion & quite possibly we could all be welcoming another Xmas & New Year in this purgatory.
I agree totally - no-one with any experience of administrations/liquidations (and there are plenty of examples in P2P) should be in the least bit surprised about the fees. Whichever firm is appointed it appears they have only one interest to look after and it is not the creditors.
|
|
justme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 203
Likes: 89
|
Post by justme on Jan 2, 2019 17:22:33 GMT
It seems a bit like handing over 60% of the quoted amount for a whole house to your builder when only the foundations have been laid with no idea as to how much will ultimately be needed to get the job finished. Furthermore, I don't see how BDO could have declined to provide the revised estimate had they been pushed for it... I'm really not convinced by that analogy. Building a house, the unknowns are below ground, and there's a lot of material costs. With this, the unknowns are in the future - Will borrowers repay? How much work will repayingment require? How much will ultimately be repaid? What future ? The terms of all the loans would have been finished long ago by now.
|
|
gc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 152
Likes: 141
|
Post by gc on Jan 2, 2019 19:10:54 GMT
[ Emailed Today, 1/1/19 @ 18:35 - I also acknowledge the use of another Lender's wording.] [ EDIT / PS - I shouldn't have been so polite and used stronger wording, I know. ] Happy New Year to everyone suffering under this prolonged farce & glad to be of service ozboy
With regards to BDO fees & FCA/legal court oversight it must now be fairly clear, even to those who were in support of their imposition, that BDO are treating this like any other commercial administration; that any remaining assets are there to be milked dry for their sole benefit & whilst I support the CC they are clearly pretty impotent to prevent it. As for the FCA's driving purpose to "protect lenders interests" clearly given where we are currently that is ironic in the extreme & as distasteful as it is insulting, given everything that they have achieved so far has resulted in the complete opposite! Anyone still pinning their hopes on a strong & even handed regulatory intervention must still be waving goodbye to Santa Claus.
It is fairly obvious that BDO believe that this very profitable saga has plenty milk & honey still left to give (at least to them) so expect no early conclusion & quite possibly we could all be welcoming another Xmas & New Year in this purgatory.
Unfortunately, this is the way I see it also, though I really hope to be proven wrong. I may be wrong but unless I have missed the information, there are no data backups of the servers (databases etc available). It is taking forever to provide us with any meaningful information and the hours involved are beginning to go through the roof (and so will their expenses at this rate).
|
|
|
Post by waryinvestor on Jan 3, 2019 14:24:32 GMT
Thanks dApps. Although 4% seems reasonable, 1700 Hours ?
|
|
dApps
Posts: 91
Likes: 80
|
Post by dApps on Jan 3, 2019 15:35:42 GMT
Thanks dApps. Although 4% seems reasonable, 1700 Hours ? Same old conundrum on 'hourly rate' quoted work: supplier B may be half the cost of supplier A, but what if they take three times as long? (There's a lot to be said for 'set amount' agreements but, based on comments in their Proposal, I somehow doubt BDO would have continued with the case had they been constrained in such a manner.) In this situation, Mazars not being the FCAs preferred 'supplier' might have meant more involved liaison / communication between those two parties. Presuming such activity would likely take place at the most senior level, this could have rapidly exceeded any blended rate hourly saving.
|
|
travolta
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,458
Likes: 1,167
|
Post by travolta on Jan 3, 2019 18:51:09 GMT
Repeat performance of Bleak House CD.
|
|
|
Post by waryinvestor on Jan 5, 2019 10:51:32 GMT
Thanks dApps. Although 4% seems reasonable, 1700 Hours ? Same old conundrum on 'hourly rate' quoted work: supplier B may be half the cost of supplier A, but what if they take three times as long? (There's a lot to be said for 'set amount' agreements but, based on comments in their Proposal, I somehow doubt BDO would have continued with the case had they been constrained in such a manner.) In this situation, Mazars not being the FCAs preferred 'supplier' might have meant more involved liaison / communication between those two parties. Presuming such activity would likely take place at the most senior level, this could have rapidly exceeded any blended rate hourly saving. Totally agree that it might be a case of False Economy. But something needs doing to stop this bleeding further.
|
|