Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179 
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Jul 16, 2019 12:39:24 GMT
Any idea why they forced a meeting? As someone with zero experience of this type of thing it seems like a large expense that will simply be deducted from our recoveries... I don't suppose RSM will reveal any more in a meeting than they have on paper. I think LAG want the meeting to vote for a creditors committee, but that doesn't seem to have altered the course of events, or the administrators fees on Collateral. And that committee was arranged easily enough through email voting, which was probably more democratic as I doubt a lot of lenders will be able to attend in person to put themselves forward, or to vote. Actually RSM proposed the meeting it wasn’t forced by LAG. They just asked LAG to assist with gathering the necessary votes in order for it to be called. An “in person” initial creditors meeting is very common in situations where a large number of creditors are involved who are spread across the UK.
|
|
averageguy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,188
Likes: 895
|
Post by averageguy on Jul 16, 2019 12:48:24 GMT
In point 5.3.1 where it talks about how credit balances ....as regards to the H********** proceeds it refers to “waterfall” costs ...excise my ignorance but what does this mean exactly First pay administrators, whatever's left flows down the waterfall to pay Lendy's costs, whatever's left flows down the waterfall to repay investor capital, so on and so forth. The issue with the model seems to be that, without a service agreement, Lendy could claim costs to be any amount, leaving less for those further down the waterfall. At least that's my understanding. Thank you ..it’s as I thought ..given that the sale predated their appointment I wouldn’t expect RSM to take any significant amount
|
|
nsinvestor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 105
Likes: 110
|
Post by nsinvestor on Jul 16, 2019 13:03:10 GMT
First pay administrators, whatever's left flows down the waterfall to pay Lendy's costs, whatever's left flows down the waterfall to repay investor capital, so on and so forth. The issue with the model seems to be that, without a service agreement, Lendy could claim costs to be any amount, leaving less for those further down the waterfall. At least that's my understanding. Thank you ..it’s as I thought ..given that the sale predated their appointment I wouldn’t expect RSM to take any significant amount Except that RSM also have a duty towards Lendy creditors, so may argue that any penalty fees and overdue interest should be reclaimed first into the general Lendy 'pot' which may be used to pay out creditors of the company (e.g. trade creditors and potentially model 1 investors)
|
|
borofan
Member of DD Central
Posts: 65
Likes: 13
|
Post by borofan on Jul 16, 2019 15:00:28 GMT
I'm away at the moment and having issues accessing the investor update.
Is there anything there I need to act on?
Any papers to sign and return?
Or is it just more guff?
Thanks.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Jul 16, 2019 15:19:56 GMT
I'm away at the moment and having issues accessing the investor update. Is there anything there I need to act on? Any papers to sign and return? That depends in part on whether you intend to attend the creditors' meeting.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Jul 16, 2019 15:35:00 GMT
I'm away at the moment and having issues accessing the investor update. Is there anything there I need to act on? Any papers to sign and return? That depends in part on whether you intend to attend the creditors' meeting. So all those forms, just if you want to vote or attend the meeting? Sorry for the silly question.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,027
Likes: 5,152
|
Post by adrianc on Jul 16, 2019 17:04:37 GMT
Do you think the mechanic at your local franchised premium-brand car dealership gets paid the £100+/hr that's being charged for labour...? That's not the point though, is it. Seems to be precisely as relevant as assuming the charge-out rate is the same as take-home pay, yes.
|
|
|
|
Post by zee on Jul 16, 2019 17:23:31 GMT
I've a few questions if anyone knows the answers, answers as opposed to opinion, cheers.
Are we as investors in loans offered through Lendy being treated as creditors of Lendy or the owners of those Loans under the Loan terms (as the FCA rules for P2P entities stipulate, that is complete separation of vehicle and loans offered through vehicle, a condition intended to protect us in these very circumstances)?
Does Lendys provisions under the FCA rules for P2P companies in ensuring 'such funds are available to exercise loans to completion in the event of the vehicle company failing' (as Lendy has done) cover the 1.025 million plus VAT which the administrators have set as the upper limit of costs they will bill in the first year?
With reference to previous comments on this thread: If loans are separate entities to the vehicle, i.e. Lendy, then how can any interest due on loans after Lendy going into administration be used to first service 'creditors' rather than 'investors', if those loans, after the vehicle has failed, are separate legal entities?
On the same point, if it is the case that some portion of interest, monthly or otherwise, was 'Lendys share' for services, rather than 'all' just servicing the loan itself, then why is it so many comments on here suggest Lendy took all of their interest up front?
Has anyone been able to access the website - https:llrsm.insolvencypoint.com, and if so, is there anything there worth reading which wasn't in the PDF associated with today's email? As of writing this post I'm still getting 'website can't be reached'.
Thanks,
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Jul 16, 2019 17:42:03 GMT
I've a few questions if anyone knows the answers, answers as opposed to opinion, cheers. <snip> Has anyone been able to access the website - https:llrsm.insolvencypoint.com, and if so, is there anything there worth reading which wasn't in the PDF associated with today's email? As of writing this post I'm still getting 'website can't be reached'. Thanks, Just answering this bit - it looks like you've done a cut and paste from the pdf the correct website portal url is
Note it does not have two ll's in front of rsm instead of two backslashes as you posted https:llrsm.insolvencypoint.com.
Entering the case number and password you will see a downloadable pdf of the Joint Administrator's Proposals and Report dated 15 July 2019 in full.
|
|
|
|
Post by zee on Jul 16, 2019 17:57:22 GMT
Cheers,
|
|
|
|
Post by zee on Jul 16, 2019 18:53:02 GMT
Thanks to Star dust I think I've answered some of my own questions.
With regards to our status, it seems clear that throughout the document 'investors' and 'creditors' are separate, so it appears we are 'investors' not creditors, unless we are 'model 2' investors, in which case WE MAY ALSO qualify as creditors. Anyone know how the 'model' investor categories relate to the various Lendy businesses?
Either way, 3.1.4 allows for potential claims arising from a breach in company obligations/duties to investors, I don't see why such wouldn't equally apply our Loan by Loan arrangements.
Clearly the Insolvency act legislation wasn't written with P2P in mind, under 4.0 RSM identify that their role aligns with option b (insolvency act 1986 P3 B1) -
(b) achieving a better result for the Company's creditors as a whole than would be likely if the
Company were wound up (without first being in administration);
As I said, it wasn't written with P2P in mind and so RSM's own comments beneath it appear to clarify our status as 'investors' -
The Joint Administrators consider that objective (b) is achievable as the controlled wind down of the
Company's loan book and retention of key staff and systems will achieve a significantly greater value for
the assets for the benefit of Investors and creditors than would have been achieved in a 'shut down'
liquidation scenario.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jul 16, 2019 18:53:42 GMT
I've a few questions if anyone knows the answers, answers as opposed to opinion, cheers. <snip> Has anyone been able to access the website - https:llrsm.insolvencypoint.com, and if so, is there anything there worth reading which wasn't in the PDF associated with today's email? As of writing this post I'm still getting 'website can't be reached'. Thanks, Just answering this bit - it looks like you've done a cut and paste from the pdf the correct website portal url is
Note it does not have two ll's in front of rsm instead of two backslashes as you posted https:llrsm.insolvencypoint.com.
Entering the case number and password you will see a downloadable pdf of the Joint Administrator's Proposals and Report dated 15 July 2019 in full.
Interestingly when I copy pasted from the pdf provided by RSM I picked up the two "l"s as well, in addition to // so I suspect something may be a little off with that document.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jul 16, 2019 18:57:43 GMT
I've just read through the Joint Administrators Proposals doc, I wouldn't like to be the former employee who is also a creditor of Lendy to the tune of £6m.
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Jul 16, 2019 18:59:44 GMT
I've just read through the Joint Administrators Proposals doc, I wouldn't like to be the former employee who is also a creditor of Lendy to the tune of £6m. You mean liam? what's proposed?
|
|
mikeh
Member of DD Central
Posts: 499
Likes: 370
|
Post by mikeh on Jul 16, 2019 19:32:10 GMT
I've just read through the Joint Administrators Proposals doc, I wouldn't like to be the former employee who is also a creditor of Lendy to the tune of £6m. You mean liam? what's proposed? Not Liam. Kieron O'Connor
|
|
