Lendy In Administration

This:  because they have a duty to provide 'best value' solutions to all stakeholders.  Implementing a process which leveraged a charge of £400/hr where a solution costing a fraction of that is available would open that organisation up to censure from stakeholders (via the courts) and their regulatory bodies.

This: The utilisation of an existing facility (low-cost) which can be accessed by a large percentage of stakeholders (at a low cost) and can be updated in near real time.  As communication methods go, the platform has very high bandwidth (lots of ears/eyes) with very low latency (compared to snail mail or even email, which can be problematic) and comes at a very low cost.  In using the platform for general comms, RSM are demonstrating their adherence to their duty as outlined in the previous point.

update email received

I haven't received anything beyond the one originating from Lendy providing the pdf file download link. Who was this recent update sent by?  Thanks.

Good news in the early communication is that £10m plus is held as cash surely that should signal cash repayments and significant repayment on HQ ?

The problem I feels were brought onto the platforms themselves and inadvertently by investors as well, because we funded the loans. With enough protest votes they would have changed. I remember loans not being drawn down because of a lack of interest. I feel like a bit of a mug being seduced by many of the large developments but larger size increases risk instead of reducing it and should have been priced accordingly. 

It seems quite clear to me that valuations were friendly and almost designed to secure business rather than act as a brake. Even in the most absurd cases it ended up being OK'd by the valuers. When using GDV almost anything is possible, because the works have not been done yet and it is easy to low-ball costs.

The structure of the loans meant that borrowers had little skin in the game, so when things go wrong it was easier to not bother any more and allow it to go bad. Lendy were then not able to sort it out, as the valuations meant that there was little point in carrying out the original plan.

To be honest I don't see much wrong in the smaller bridging loans like those on Kuflink (some of them, not all). Here the likely sold value is much easier to predict. Had been saying it for a long time but I can't see why Lendy did not simply change model and go for smaller developments and bridging in 2017/2018 as a heap of good loans at this time could have restored their reputation somewhat. Instead, they did nothing and it became too late, they wrote no new business and as a result their cash ran out. From the outside it seems really bemusing.