mullet
Member of DD Central
Posts: 126 
Likes: 137
|
Post by mullet on Jan 16, 2019 12:36:43 GMT
Going live at 1pm today. Suggest you read the attached file rather than the FS description. - Guide price £65k ...very different to the £193k valuation
- significant structural movement, could need knocking down and rebuilding ...FS chose not to mention this
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jan 16, 2019 12:47:53 GMT
Going live at 1pm today. Suggest you read the attached file rather than the FS description. - Guide price £65k ...very different to the £193k valuation
- significant structural movement, could need knocking down and rebuilding ...FS chose not to mention this
Sold at auction for £183k - link on DDC shortly.
|
|
rs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 254
|
Post by rs on Jan 16, 2019 13:02:48 GMT
Going live at 1pm today. Suggest you read the attached file rather than the FS description. - Guide price £65k ...very different to the £193k valuation
- significant structural movement, could need knocking down and rebuilding ...FS chose not to mention this
Sold at auction for £183k - link on DDC shortly. Looks like FS are amending the information details hence why this loan is not available at 1.00pm today! FS have extremely good DD procedures, I hope!
|
|
rs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 254
|
Post by rs on Jan 16, 2019 13:04:19 GMT
Sold at auction for £183k - link on DDC shortly. Looks like FS are amending the information details hence why this loan is not available at 1.00pm today! FS have extremely good DD procedures, I hope!
Changed going live at 13.05pm today!
|
|
|
|
Post by beepbeepimajeep on Jan 16, 2019 13:11:46 GMT
FS have extremely good DD procedures, I hope! lol
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jan 16, 2019 13:16:03 GMT
Good Grief ... top five bids were £20,000 £17,000 £15,000 £7,250 and £5,000 for a loan secured against a building with major structrual issues. Presumably they failed to follow the advice of the OP to read the attached auction details.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jan 16, 2019 13:28:57 GMT
I've had a punt, I'm feeling brave/stupid. Yes, I did read the particulars.
My view:
1) Borrower clearly believes that there is hope beyond demolishing/rebuild. I sincerely hope that is well-founded (arf arf)
2) Borrower is presumably injecting a fair amount of their own funds into the purchase and the refurbishment - good.
3) In the worst case, I assume it's back to auction where it probably will sell for the guide price, or maybe a little less. So, the downside risk is maybe losing 40% of my investment (?). Is what it is.
Btw, I have noted a pending FS charge on number 19, but nothing on 21 as of yet. Re: borrower, this should probably be obvious to me but not sure who it is yet. That might change my view for better or worse, certainly.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jan 16, 2019 13:33:26 GMT
Btw, I have noted a pending FS charge on number 19, but nothing on 21 as of yet. Re: borrower, this should probably be obvious to me but not sure who it is yet. That might change my view for better or worse, certainly. Its 19 & 20 not 19 & 21 ... and there is a pending FS charge on 20 as well as 19.
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
Post by r1200gs on Jan 16, 2019 13:35:57 GMT
I've had a punt, I'm feeling brave/stupid. Yes, I did read the particulars. My view: 1) Borrower clearly believes that there is hope beyond demolishing/rebuild. I sincerely hope that is well-founded (arf arf) 2) Borrower is presumably injecting a fair amount of their own funds into the purchase and the refurbishment - good. 3) In the worst case, I assume it's back to auction where it probably will sell for the guide price, or maybe a little less. So, the downside risk is maybe losing 40% of my investment (?). Is what it is.
Btw, I have noted a pending FS charge on number 19, but nothing on 21 as of yet. Re: borrower, this should probably be obvious to me but not sure who it is yet. That might change my view for better or worse, certainly. Ok, maybe I'm being a bit thick and missing something, but why do you think that these would sell for so little having just sold for £183K? Am I missing something here? It's not unheard of. 
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jan 16, 2019 13:46:22 GMT
Ok, maybe I'm being a bit thick and missing something, but why do you think that these would sell for so little having just sold for £183K? Am I missing something here? It's not unheard of. Without knowing the actual dynamics of the auction it impossible to say, however IF for sake of argument there were just 2 bidders competing against each other this time, then on a future occaison no new bidder entered the fray, then it could sell to the one bidder for its resrerve.
|
|
lobster
Member of DD Central
Posts: 636
Likes: 467
|
Post by lobster on Jan 16, 2019 14:05:32 GMT
Good Grief ... top five bids were £20,000 £17,000 £15,000 £7,250 and £5,000 for a loan secured against a building with major structrual issues. Presumably they failed to follow the advice of the OP to read the attached auction details.
Must have been a very competitive auction to get all the way up to 183k from the guide price, - surely all the bidders can't be so naive ? My guess is that the bidders, or at least most of them, were fully aware of the structural issues and believe them to be manageable, and that there is still a profit to be made. Personally, given the low ltv and the good borrower history, I would like to have had a slice of this,and am disappointed to have missed it. Doubtless plenty on here will disagree - ozboy is probably sharpening his pencil as I speak 
|
|
copacetic
Member of DD Central
Posts: 306
Likes: 667
|
Post by copacetic on Jan 16, 2019 14:13:56 GMT
I missed out on this but I would probably have invested if I'd gotten the email a bit sooner.
Often structural defects are overblown and cracks in a wall or ceiling can just be filled and papered over while the valuer or auction house states the worst case scenario to cover themselves from liability. Hopefully the borrower has done their own survey to check the structure is not in imminent danger of collapse.
What really helps the security though imo is it's not based on a valuation by RICS (!), it's based on an actual market sale. That and the fact the borrower has put at least £100k of their own money into it and have further funds of their own for development means it's not the borrower risk free model that so many p2p borrowers use and they'll have a good incentive to complete the development.
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
Post by r1200gs on Jan 16, 2019 14:21:28 GMT
Ok, maybe I'm being a bit thick and missing something, but why do you think that these would sell for so little having just sold for £183K? Am I missing something here? It's not unheard of. Without knowing the actual dynamics of the auction it impossible to say, however IF for sake of argument there were just 2 bidders competing against each other this time, then on a future occaison no new bidder entered the fray, then it could sell to the one bidder for its resrerve. I see what you're saying. I've been looking at auctions myself recently and two things stand out - The guide prices are frequently ludicrously low and the reserve is higher than the guide price. On the auction site I have been using the reserve usually seems to be around 20 percent higher than the starting bid/guide price. But yes, a different auction on a different day might produce a very different result, but I suspect the guide price here was nonsense. As much as I'm seething at FS over losses, I decided to take a punt here partially because of the borrowers history and his skin in the game. Anyway, I reckon it will sell on the SM like the proverbial hot cake.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on Jan 16, 2019 14:35:24 GMT
I've had a punt, I'm feeling brave/stupid. Yes, I did read the particulars. My view: 1) Borrower clearly believes that there is hope beyond demolishing/rebuild. I sincerely hope that is well-founded (arf arf) 2) Borrower is presumably injecting a fair amount of their own funds into the purchase and the refurbishment - good. 3) In the worst case, I assume it's back to auction where it probably will sell for the guide price, or maybe a little less. So, the downside risk is maybe losing 40% of my investment (?). Is what it is. Btw, I have noted a pending FS charge on number 19, but nothing on 21 as of yet. Re: borrower, this should probably be obvious to me but not sure who it is yet. That might change my view for better or worse, certainly. Filled very quickly. Considering overall slowdown in FS lending, I thought it will stay there for a couple of hours. I've had a little punt. In my opinion this loan is somewhat less risky than majority of FS property loans. As you mention, borrower injecting their own funds (if it's true) gives an extra comfort. I also look at it from selling point of view, I do attempt to sell when loans are reaching certain age. This practice has become rather unsuccessful, but I still managed to sell few loans in past 6 months. This is a small loan without any indication for future multiple tranches and facilities so I assume it shouldn't be too difficult to sell with discount in April.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Jan 16, 2019 16:18:09 GMT
Interesting one this one - wish my properties went for nearly 3 time over estimate!
Wonder if this was bought by somebody who did not realise it had problems - just because somebody may possibly have paid over the odds for it does not mean anybody else will.
I guess the auction buyer completed the sale ?
Houses look to have very serious issues to me - large cracks in walls and the roof looks stuffed. Granted it may not be too expensive to underpin with modern foam injection. Yet again FS have lent against a property with no detailed structural report - the area is good so this one may come out well but I am not risking it. I have taken on similar properties but would not touch this one as demolishing a terrace house with a party wall makes me weak at the knees...
|
|
