|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 5, 2020 15:48:41 GMT
The unfinished story is The Mystery of Evermore Deductions.
If that doesn't get me a 1000th like, then my talents are wasted here!
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 5, 2020 16:07:00 GMT
Thank you very much, jontyab. Now you're stuck with me! |
|
jontyab
Member of DD Central
Posts: 117
Likes: 79
|
Post by jontyab on Feb 5, 2020 16:07:49 GMT
Thank you very much, jontyab . Now you're stuck with me!  You owe me one (1) Like!
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Feb 5, 2020 16:17:49 GMT
Now, or would you like to invest it for 12% extra like in a years time with my Likey scheme?**
**Subject to competent administration
|
|
sam i am
Member of DD Central
Posts: 697 
Likes: 555
|
Post by sam i am on Feb 5, 2020 18:26:54 GMT
The court case is primarily for LAG to challenge the waterfall process in the context of the administration.
Does anyone know what happened to loans which were repaid before the administration? What charges were taken by Lendy before the repayment to lenders?
Assuming the court finds in favour of lenders, will the administrators be required to re-evaluate earlier loans and make further payment to lenders where it is found that unlawful charges has been applied? This should be taken from the company funds before any payment to creditors.
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Feb 5, 2020 21:09:08 GMT
I imagine that defaulted loans recovered by Lendy sometime before the administration have had the waterfall taken by LB and thats it. Lenders in those loans can claim for the shortfall as a debt (ie claim they are creditors of Lendy), i'm not sure how many loans there are that fall into that category. Not many .
In the instance of defaults recovered but not paid out at the point of adinistration, with funds still on account - the waterfall balance for these is being held by RSM until court directions w/ref the waterfall, eg H********** Q***.
It won't be Jarndyce vs Jarndyce! This will be decided by the Court,, and I think the waterfall will be set aside FWIW.
I am annoyed by the time and expense that has been devoted to this when it should have been dealt with in a much more prudent and efficient way from the outset of the administration. But professionals have their boots to fill....
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,055
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 5, 2020 22:05:28 GMT
I imagine that defaulted loans recovered by Lendy sometime before the administration have had the waterfall taken by LB and thats it. Lenders in those loans can claim for the shortfall as a debt (ie claim they are creditors of Lendy), i'm not sure how many loans there are that fall into that category. Not many .
In the instance of defaults recovered but not paid out at the point of adinistration, with funds still on account - the waterfall balance for these is being held by RSM until court directions w/ref the waterfall, eg H********** Q***.
It won't be Jarndyce vs Jarndyce! This will be decided by the Court,, and I think the waterfall will be set aside FWIW.
I am annoyed by the time and expense that has been devoted to this when it should have been dealt with in a much more prudent and efficient way from the outset of the administration. But professionals have their boots to fill....
I assume which ever way it goes there will be an appeal?
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Feb 6, 2020 0:07:37 GMT
I imagine that defaulted loans recovered by Lendy sometime before the administration have had the waterfall taken by LB and thats it. Lenders in those loans can claim for the shortfall as a debt (ie claim they are creditors of Lendy), i'm not sure how many loans there are that fall into that category. Not many .
In the instance of defaults recovered but not paid out at the point of adinistration, with funds still on account - the waterfall balance for these is being held by RSM until court directions w/ref the waterfall, eg H********** Q***.
It won't be Jarndyce vs Jarndyce! This will be decided by the Court,, and I think the waterfall will be set aside FWIW.
I am annoyed by the time and expense that has been devoted to this when it should have been dealt with in a much more prudent and efficient way from the outset of the administration. But professionals have their boots to fill....
I assume which ever way it goes there will be an appeal?
If the directions are based on solid reasoning by the judge, I don't see why there would be an appeal. I woud expect RSM to follow the courts directions, the judgement indemnifies them, which is what they want.....
|
|
|
|
Post by queenvictoria on Feb 6, 2020 13:21:27 GMT
I assume which ever way it goes there will be an appeal?
If the directions are based on solid reasoning by the judge, I don't see why there would be an appeal. I woud expect RSM to follow the courts directions, the judgement indemnifies them, which is what they want.....
Although presumable RSM has a responsibility to defend the action in the best interests of creditors. Dont they? And if they are advised by their lawyers that there may be decent prospect of success in an appeal would they not be bound to consider this?
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Feb 6, 2020 14:28:58 GMT
RSM rubbing hands together,happy days with plenty more plundering to be done whatever the outcome it should keep them feeding for the forseeable.
|
|
quidco
Member of DD Central
Posts: 295
Likes: 361
|
Post by quidco on Feb 6, 2020 14:55:06 GMT
If the directions are based on solid reasoning by the judge, I don't see why there would be an appeal. I woud expect RSM to follow the courts directions, the judgement indemnifies them, which is what they want.....
Although presumable RSM has a responsibility to defend the action in the best interests of creditors. Dont they? And if they are advised by their lawyers that there may be decent prospect of success in an appeal would they not be bound to consider this? The creditors would have to appeal I assume. "Your honour I want to make a profit from someone else's loss and it's not fair that I can't"
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,055
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 6, 2020 16:39:33 GMT
I assume which ever way it goes there will be an appeal?
If the directions are based on solid reasoning by the judge, I don't see why there would be an appeal. I woud expect RSM to follow the courts directions, the judgement indemnifies them, which is what they want.....
I can think of about 20m good reasons (or is it 40m, LAG seeem to move the goal posts).
If LAG lose, will they take it lying down, or will they try to fund an appeal (given that it will cost a lot more than the £25k baseline of the currnt appeal). If it goes in LAG's favour and RSM say fair enough, will any of the creditors pony up the cash for an appeal?
Interesting times ahead (just glad I was out of Ly a long time ago).
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Feb 7, 2020 9:20:38 GMT
I have got a bit lost now in all of this and I know model 1 lenders are classed as creditors but who are the rest of of the creditors and what for and what amounts are they talking. why isn't LB sorting out creditors instead of everything coming out of lenders miserly returns. p2p secured lending yea really.
|
|
one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Feb 7, 2020 9:48:22 GMT
So to recap, Model 2 T&Cs is the P2P standard authorised by the FCA? Therefore Lenders in other P2P platforms would encounter similar disadvantages in the event of an administration occurrence?
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Feb 7, 2020 11:09:25 GMT
So to recap, Model 2 T&Cs is the P2P standard authorised by the FCA? Therefore Lenders in other P2P platforms would encounter similar disadvantages in the event of an administration occurrence? Yes it's fair to say that is the standard/requirement as determined but not policed by the FCA. The reality is though that administrators are top of the food chain and if there are any tiny cracks then they will find them and lenders/investors are effectively at their mercy.
I applaud the efforts of action groups but also worth remembering that costs incurred by administrators will be borne by the lenders/investors irrespective. It's injustice at it's finest in my view.
Forget the shenanigans of the previous Directors, they will have moved on and without doubt have their a***s well and truly covered.
It doesn't matter how small or large a P2P platform is or the sometimes smug reassuring comments made by those still operating, in effect lenders/investors are on their own. A sad state of affairs which needn't have been the case if the FCA were genuinely doing their job rather than just box ticking.
|
|
