Why is it so hard for Lendy to reclaim defaulted loans?
Jan 15, 2019 9:03:12 GMT
captainconfident, TitoPuente, and 2 more like this
Post by adrianc on Jan 15, 2019 9:03:12 GMT
Lendy seems very inconsistent. For example, look at “the castle” and “borrower in receivership” loans. From memory, these loans were dealt with relatively swiftly, the assets were taken over and were sent to auction, a sale was achieved and investors had an end.
Castle
Jul 2017 - receiver instructed
Feb 2018 - auction
Norfolk
Oct 2017 - declared in default
Aug 2018 - receiver instructed
Oct 2018 - auction
This course of action delivered substantial losses to investors but it’s the course Lendy chose to execute (they still don’t call a loss a loss as they call it claims underway).
Because there isn't - yet - a final loss figure. The borrower/guarantor is being pursued through the courts for the shortfall.
Conversely, look at “Gloucester” loans, these loans are 852 days in default and Lendy has just perpetually kicked the can down the road and taken no action. My question is, why are Lendy so inconsistent in their approach.
Let's look at the timeline of updates for one of those loans at random, shall we?
Dec 2016 - receiver "supervising" sale
Mar 2017 - default declared, receiver "continues" sale
Aug 2017 - "new offers received"
Oct 2017 - awaiting court date for vacant possession, rejected inadequate offer
Dec 2017 - accepted offer sufficient to repay capital and interest, expected completion Jan 18
Feb 2018 - completion slipped
Mar 2018 - buyer pulls out, receiver gone back to previous buyer
Apr 2018 - heads of terms agreed
Through summer 2018 - several other offers seemingly agreed then fallen through, resi PP applied for
Sep 2018 - offer accepted sufficient to repay capital, expected completion Nov 18
Nov 2018 - buyer failed to pay deposit
Dec 2018 - offer accepted
That doesn't sound like "kicked down the road, no action" to me. That sounds like a lot of attempting to get a sale together. Would putting that particular unusual and rather specialist property in an auction make any sense? Probably not.
Isn't half of the problem with the castle that the auction didn't result in as high a sale price as was hoped, for a similarly unusual and specialist property? Was it too quick, and would it have been better to go for a more protracted sale there? The Norfolk properties were much more vanilla, so an auction would have been an easier decision.