michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,866
Likes: 2,762
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 19, 2020 17:24:28 GMT
I'll reserve judgement until the outcome of this latest deal is known. I'm a lot happier with this administrator than I am with the one at COL.
I do have money to lose here but I feel little anger at the borrower. We were allowed to swim in a pool of sharks because one of them wore an FCA badge.
If you lend money to a shark, you might or might not get it back. You won't get it back if the shark thinks he doesn't need to repay it. In his eyes that's simply his job - to eat other fish like us. No law broken perfectly legal.
|
|
foolsgold
Member of DD Central
Posts: 159
Likes: 194
|
Post by foolsgold on Jun 19, 2020 19:31:10 GMT
Why would you give up the right to chase the borrower for a personal guarantee if he is known to have other assets that can be seized and go on to accept a global offer at a fraction of the original loan?
Even if the second highest offer is accepted the administrators could sell litigation on to a no win no fee solicitor to chase the PG
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Jun 19, 2020 20:14:04 GMT
Why would you give up the right to chase the borrower for a personal guarantee if he is known to have other assets that can be seized and go on to accept a global offer at a fraction of the original loan?
Even if the second highest offer is accepted the administrators could sell litigation on to a no win no fee solicitor to chase the PG
A consideration of the extra time and costs, added to the uncertainty of what, if any additional return can be made all goes into that decision.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 19, 2020 20:49:28 GMT
Not sure if we have all the offers as part of this global offer - using my 4 figures it appears this character is offering to repay about 70%-80% of OUR money - this is appalling for 2 reasons
1) FS should never have lent any money to such people let alone over £6m as he is clearly a paper shuffler for want of a better term such as ****** *********!
2) This chap is having a laugh - FS have clearly been had (unless they were complicit) and I don't believe all this twaddle about arranging finance - in my book he never intended to repay - as I said at the time he suddenly opened a lot of dormant companies which he clearly did not do out of boredom. I think he sussed out FS for the clowns they were and planned how to fleece them and just look where we are now.
No I am not happy about this global offer- how do we know if he has any relationship with his administrators - we don't!
I did not invest my honestly earned money with FS for them to give £2m or whatever to this chap who recently bought a £100K racehorse but lost an industrial case regarding not paying holiday pay to one of his poorly paid staff. He can afford a 6 figure nag but not to honour his contracts - yeah right!
I am not sure if the CC can have any influence here but I say we should consider each asset on its own - e.g. I think the Greenwich offer is far too low and also his Georgian Farmhouse so I say tell this clown to either increase his offer or the adminstrators will default the second loan on his house - that should concentrate his mind and hopefully return our money!
Looks like even more 100% losses are on the cards - unbelievable!
Stay healthy all
|
|
|
Post by highroller1 on Jun 20, 2020 9:09:16 GMT
I too am in the Liverpool Development Plot Loan (1st charge, which FS later turned into a 2nd charge) which has no update since March. You feel that the 2nd charge (becoming 3rd charge) are likely to see little to no returns but what about us lenders who were in the first loan? Surely the admins can't expect us to be taking a big hit on any deal when there is a personal guarantee involved.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 20, 2020 19:11:13 GMT
Agree with above post - I have checked and I don't recall being asked about this- not sure if this was hidden away in the smallprint but it looks like a breach of contract to me. Wonder if his kind and generous offer on this one will be more than the first charge whatever that is - I don't think we know? It may be the amount we got refunded or maybe a lot more - any maybe just maybe part of the new first charge (as well as part of our money) went straight into buying a £100K racehorse or whatever and has been lost (in accounting terms) down a black hole.
I wish I had never heard of these muppets - only invested with them after I ditched *unding *ircle.
Stay healthy all.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Jun 21, 2020 21:56:28 GMT
Agree with above post - I have checked and I don't recall being asked about this- not sure if this was hidden away in the smallprint but it looks like a breach of contract to me. Wonder if his kind and generous offer on this one will be more than the first charge whatever that is - I don't think we know? It may be the amount we got refunded or maybe a lot more - any maybe just maybe part of the new first charge (as well as part of our money) went straight into buying a £100K racehorse or whatever and has been lost (in accounting terms) down a black hole. I wish I had never heard of these muppets - only invested with them after I ditched *unding *ircle. Stay healthy all. Anyone know what happened to the powerboats?
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 22, 2020 9:47:46 GMT
Damn good question - I think we are due an update on this one - I mean both loans are now over 4 years late! We all know how much the average family car would depreciate over 4 years so goodness know how much these boats have depreciated - also we don't know how much maintenance has been done - in fact we are not even sure how many boats there are and if they still have the original engine! I think these boat(s) are over 5 years old now so not exactly a large market for them is there...well done FS another almighly c*ck up and don't blame it on Covid 19 as we raised this one as problematic years ago. Don't forget "organic growth - it's a process"!
Stay healthy all
|
|
|
Post by highroller1 on Jun 30, 2020 10:47:46 GMT
Update on the Liverpool Development Plot this morning.
The way I read it, the borrower's administrators have stated the borrower will not even be able to pay the first charge holder therefore FS loans (which FS made into 2nd and 3rd charges) are worthless. FS administrators have decided not to press the borrower on the personal guarantee, instead accepting £50k in cash. This is on a £322k capital loan.
Therefore a further 10-15% of outstanding capital for this 2nd charge will be paid back despite the loan being backed by a personal guarantee. Overall, this charge will have incurred somewhere around a 50% capital loss. 3rd charge will get nothing and a 100% loss.
Please correct me if I'm wrong on the above.
|
|
morris
Member of DD Central
Posts: 261
Likes: 149
|
Post by morris on Jun 30, 2020 11:49:24 GMT
'The borrowers professional advisers have submitted a statement of the guarantors assets and liabilities which supports acceptance.'
Has the borrower and/or his advisers not been economical with the truth in the past? Can this statement be verified or do we just roll over and accept what his advisers say.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 2,450
|
Post by iRobot on Jun 30, 2020 12:14:52 GMT
Restructuring the agreement with the borrower resulting in the security being demoted from 1st charge to a junior ranking 2nd charge, was one thing. Doing so without restructuring the loan to the lenders was a big failing on FS' part, in my opinion.
Given the change in security, the whole deal should only have gone ahead if the existing loan (2355178947) was put up as a renewal, and that renewal had the new terms indicated. Incentives such a cash back or increased interest to help 'justify' the change in security could have been offered, but at least investors in that new listing could / should have been able to make an informed choice as to whether the risk justified the reward.
If it filled, the restructure could have gone ahead. If it didn't, a different solution would have been needed, but at least FS would have retained first charge.
Instead, FS effectively painted existing lenders into a corner - and then stepped out of the room.
As an aside, my notes from a November update on this one recorded at the time: "As the loan has not been completely repaid, FS will not be taking any fees at this stage." That's certainly changed since then ...
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 30, 2020 12:32:40 GMT
don't believe a damn word of what this character says - he is clearly a "clever sod" and a paper shuffler and that is being generous. if he is so short of money then how come he can afford a £100K racehorse - however much do they cost to feed and house. He is clearly taking the hydrated urea acid. He has numeroud shell companies . family members as directors and companies registered overseas - I say he reject his "having a laugh" offer and threaten to call in he second charge on his very nice and large family home. Wonder if he would just happen to find more cash in such a scenario?
That's what I make it - well done FS another mega disaster - thank goodness I was not in the third charge! Will add the third charge to my list of 100% losses viz number 15! 15 "Secure" loans with 100% wipeout and I have a further 5 to date to watch out for!
How the hell can anybody lose money at this rate ? Unbelievable
Stay healthy all
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 2,450
|
Post by iRobot on Jun 30, 2020 14:44:44 GMT
<snip> FS administrators have decided not to press the borrower on the personal guarantee, instead accepting £50k in cash. This is on a £322k capital loan. Therefore a further 10-15% of outstanding capital for this 2nd charge will be paid back despite the loan being backed by a personal guarantee. Overall, this charge will have incurred somewhere around a 50% capital loss. 3rd charge will get nothing and a 100% loss. Please correct me if I'm wrong on the above. <snip> That's what I make it - well done FS another mega disaster - thank goodness I was not in the third charge! Does the update make it clear if the £50k is for the Liverpool loan(s) only or relates to a PG which is likely to the the same PG across all this borrowers loans - both on FS and elsewhere. Based solely on the table on the OP of this thread (which I know no longer accurately reflect the current situation, but not to what degree), this borrower has/ had c. £6M of loans at FS. If that £50k offer is against general PG across all FS loans, that equates to less than a penny in the pound returned via the PG. That Liverpool loan (2nd charge, 1st ranking) for £322k would get a little over £2.5k on that basis. Forget lambasting FS for a minute (or longer if physically possible); this is a classic example why: a) Dev loans and P2P aren't typically a great mix b) 2 nd / 3 rd / x th charge loans on dev loan and P2P are typically a very bad mix c) PGs are absolutely not worth the paper they are written on.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Jun 30, 2020 15:20:50 GMT
Still not clear to me - whatever I think totally unsatisfactory - as I said default the family house and go after the racehorse(s) if possible...
absolutely!
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,866
Likes: 2,762
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 30, 2020 16:14:03 GMT
<snip> FS administrators have decided not to press the borrower on the personal guarantee, instead accepting £50k in cash. This is on a £322k capital loan. Therefore a further 10-15% of outstanding capital for this 2nd charge will be paid back despite the loan being backed by a personal guarantee. Overall, this charge will have incurred somewhere around a 50% capital loss. 3rd charge will get nothing and a 100% loss. Please correct me if I'm wrong on the above. <snip> That's what I make it - well done FS another mega disaster - thank goodness I was not in the third charge! Does the update make it clear if the £50k is for the Liverpool loan(s) only or relates to a PG which is likely to the the same PG across all this borrowers loans - both on FS and elsewhere. Based solely on the table on the OP of this thread (which I know no longer accurately reflect the current situation, but not to what degree), this borrower has/ had c. £6M of loans at FS. If that £50k offer is against general PG across all FS loans, that equates to less than a penny in the pound returned via the PG. That Liverpool loan (2nd charge, 1st ranking) for £322k would get a little over £2.5k on that basis. Forget lambasting FS for a minute (or longer if physically possible); this is a classic example why: a) Dev loans and P2P aren't typically a great mix b) 2 nd / 3 rd / x th charge loans on dev loan and P2P are typically a very bad mix c) PGs are absolutely not worth the paper they are written on.It may only represent 1% but fifty grand is still a lot of cash for a piece of paper.
|
|