Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
Member is Online
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Nov 28, 2019 9:56:36 GMT
Even if they are good for us LAG is very bad at communicating them with the rest of the investors. And how would you propose they do that? If you don't join their facebook or their forum on proboards then they don't know who you are?
(I'm in no way defending RSM here, who are utterly beyond the pail)
They don't know who you are if you do join. 
|
|
toffeeboy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 538 
Likes: 385
|
Post by toffeeboy on Nov 28, 2019 10:59:05 GMT
Even if they are good for us LAG is very bad at communicating them with the rest of the investors. And how would you propose they do that? If you don't join their facebook or their forum on proboards then they don't know who you are?
(I'm in no way defending RSM here, who are utterly beyond the pail)
The problem isn't LAG it is RSM contacting LAG and not the Lendy investors as a whole, it is then LAG taking advantage of this to get their five guys onto the CLB. LAG are a group of investors but there are a lot of members who aren't part of LAG. RSM should be dealing with everyone not just LAG especially on issues like forming the CLB
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Nov 28, 2019 11:12:05 GMT
I think the question most of us are asking is what voting form? I never received one, the only email I received asked for volunteers to form the CLB and the biggest 5 investors that volunteered would be selected. Nothing mentioning a vote at all. It was on the LAG facebook
Now I know you could argue that it's an LAG conspiracy. I prefer to see it as an example of the utter hopelessness of the administrator. The only hope is that they are not bad at getting money in. My personal view is that from what I have seen they should probably be sacked
From what I can gather (have never seen a voting form nor been informed of any change to procedure by RSM), this was a LAG-created voting form distributed only to members of LAG as part of a campaign to have the CLB completely dominated by LAG members.
It seems to have been a (seemingly successful) bid from LAG to change the rules of the selection process without non-members having been properly informed of this (note that on this thread, referring back to the original source material from RSM, it was supposed that LAG were mistakenly invoking a process of their own making and that these "votes" would be meaningless).
RSM etc. told us specifically that one particular selection criterion would be used, and instead have chosen to exclusively select LAG members following a process seemingly of LAG's making that only LAG members were able to participate in. I see no reason to consider it any kind of "conspiracy" - a more likely explanation seems to me that faced with a deluge of "voting forms" from LAG members who had been told it was a vote, they figured it was easier to run with that rather than push back and use the originally-stated selection criteria.
I think this will be a significant loss to the CLB who will now only be consulting members who are aligned with, and possibly coached by LAG, and as such will miss out on valuable input from investors who are not fully aligned with LAG's views on various matters.
|
|
shimself
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,563
Likes: 1,171
|
Post by shimself on Nov 28, 2019 11:30:54 GMT
It was on the LAG facebook
Now I know you could argue that it's an LAG conspiracy. I prefer to see it as an example of the utter hopelessness of the administrator. The only hope is that they are not bad at getting money in. My personal view is that from what I have seen they should probably be sacked
From what I can gather (have never seen a voting form nor been informed of any change to procedure by RSM), this was a LAG-created voting form distributed only to members of LAG as part of a campaign to have the CLB completely dominated by LAG members.
It seems to have been a (seemingly successful) bid from LAG to change the rules of the selection process without non-members having been properly informed of this (note that on this thread, referring back to the original source material from RSM, it was supposed that LAG were mistakenly invoking a process of their own making and that these "votes" would be meaningless).
RSM etc. told us specifically that one particular selection criterion would be used, and instead have chosen to exclusively select LAG members following a process seemingly of LAG's making that only LAG members were able to participate in. I see no reason to consider it any kind of "conspiracy" - a more likely explanation seems to me that faced with a deluge of "voting forms" from LAG members who had been told it was a vote, they figured it was easier to run with that rather than push back and use the originally-stated selection criteria.
I think this will be a significant loss to the CLB who will now only be consulting members who are aligned with, and possibly coached by LAG, and as such will miss out on valuable input from investors who are not fully aligned with LAG's views on various matters.
From the LAG website forum Nov 25
LAG is reaching out to LAG members /lenders with significant balances – please PM me if you would like to be involved with key initiatives about to start….
It is important we have a broader base of experienced interested people with skin in the game… so particularly people with commercial / financial acumen who can see the agendas of the various stakeholders.
BTW anybody interested can PM me, but I suggested those lenders with what YOU consider a siginificant balance, rather than any particular amount because that is the basis of your interest for helping….
thanks for interest, in anticipation….
|
|
garfield
Member of DD Central
Posts: 490 
Likes: 268
|
Post by garfield on Nov 28, 2019 11:54:10 GMT
From the LAG website forum Nov 25
LAG is reaching out to LAG members /lenders with significant balances – please PM me if you would like to be involved with key initiatives about to start….
It is important we have a broader base of experienced interested people with skin in the game… so particularly people with commercial / financial acumen who can see the agendas of the various stakeholders.
BTW anybody interested can PM me, but I suggested those lenders with what YOU consider a siginificant balance, rather than any particular amount because that is the basis of your interest for helping….
thanks for interest, in anticipation…. The same was also posted on this forum on the same day. LAG are reaching out to all investors.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Nov 28, 2019 16:17:53 GMT
Quiet possibly, but part of the problem is knowing what has actually happened. Information from RSM was that there were merely going to be self-nominees. <snip> I have asked for clarification. <snip> After two goes at trying, this is the most I'm going to get from RSM I think. At least they did respond I guess, minor miracle as I'm not in the LAG.
This was not something I ever understood from the RSM email of the 8th November, and I believe there is evidence of further communication from RSM to the LAG Admins before the nomination deadline.
|
|
quidco
Member of DD Central
Posts: 295
Likes: 361
|
Post by quidco on Nov 28, 2019 17:25:47 GMT
Quiet possibly, but part of the problem is knowing what has actually happened. Information from RSM was that there were merely going to be self-nominees. <snip> I have asked for clarification. <snip> After two goes at trying, this is the most I'm going to get from RSM I think. At least they did respond I guess, minor miracle as I'm not in the LAG. This was not something I ever understood from the RSM email of the 8th November, and I believe there is evidence of further communication from RSM to the LAG Admins before the nomination deadline. Bit disingenous this reply. Originally they said if more than 5 nominations was received "the five investors with the largest investment will be invited to form the CLB." so the number of times each nominee was nominated was irrelevant, you could have a thousand nominations and only £5 in model 2 loans. What LAG did was get them to agree that if you nominated someone your model 2 would be added to theirs in the final reckoning. That wasn't communicated to anyone outside of LAG as far as I'm aware. I was expecting a reply where they said "we've had more than 5 noninations, how much model 2 you got?" this of course never came instead they just announced the 5.
|
|
toffeeboy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 538
Likes: 385
|
Post by toffeeboy on Nov 29, 2019 16:13:11 GMT
After two goes at trying, this is the most I'm going to get from RSM I think. At least they did respond I guess, minor miracle as I'm not in the LAG. This was not something I ever understood from the RSM email of the 8th November, and I believe there is evidence of further communication from RSM to the LAG Admins before the nomination deadline. Bit disingenous this reply. Originally they said if more than 5 nominations was received "the five investors with the largest investment will be invited to form the CLB." so the number of times each nominee was nominated was irrelevant, you could have a thousand nominations and only £5 in model 2 loans. What LAG did was get them to agree that if you nominated someone your model 2 would be added to theirs in the final reckoning. That wasn't communicated to anyone outside of LAG as far as I'm aware. I was expecting a reply where they said "we've had more than 5 noninations, how much model 2 you got?" this of course never came instead they just announced the 5.
Precisely my understanding of what has occurred and also the reason that I have no faith in any of these groups now. LAG are working too closely with RSM from what I can see and undermining anyone that isn't in their clique whether it is better or worse for our recovery.
|
|
|
|
Post by samford71 on Nov 29, 2019 19:11:24 GMT
Precisely my understanding of what has occurred and also the reason that I have no faith in any of these groups now. LAG are working too closely with RSM from what I can see and undermining anyone that isn't in their clique whether it is better or worse for our recovery. I don't agree with all of LAG's aims. Nor do I like it that the head of LAG seems seems to want to blame everybody in the financial services (including myself) for what Lendy became, despite the fact that many of us (including myself) did warn investors to be be cautious about taking concentrated risk to SS/Lendy as early as 2015.
Saying that, however, for most investors the critical factor will be the quantum of their recovery. That wil depend of two factors. First, realisations made by RSM, control over which neither the CC or CLB can have much influence. Second, the issue of whether the fee waterfall as defined in the March T&Cs can be considered a valid SLA between SSSH Ltd and Lendy Ltd or whether this should be set aside. As a creditor, including those with model 1 loans, you want that SLA to stand. As an investor, in model 2 loans, you want the SLA set aside. At this time, it's prudent that RSM retain a proportion of the realisations until legal clarity on this issue is achieved, albeit they should be more transparent about the precise amount and their calculation.
It should be clear that if you are an investor with mainly model 2 loans, having both the CLB and CC controlled by LAG is probably aligned with your interests, even if you don't like the way it happened or all of LAG's other aims. Conversely, if your recovery position is dominated by model 1 loans, so that you are a creditor, you would be rather perturbed to find out that the CC has 5 LAG aligned members on it! Now, whether the CC or CLB will have any real influence I'm somewhat sceptical on. In all probability, this will eventually be decided in a court when a large creditor or a large investor (or a syndicate of either) decides to challenge whichever side of the fence RSM and Grant Thorton come down on.
|
|
wuzimu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 236
Likes: 735
|
Post by wuzimu on Nov 29, 2019 19:25:52 GMT
FWIW I sit on the CC and I think Court needs to decide. Don't think Samfords calculus is quite right with regards to LAG, but there you are.
We can't control recoveries much.
We can try and contain costs and encourage vigorous efforts on recovery beyond the trust assets. We are approaching.... a juncture.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Dec 20, 2019 1:21:58 GMT
In light of todays release of RSM's progress report, and the additional detail regarding how the recoveries waterfall has been applied now in the public domain so no longer covered by the NDA the CLB members will presumably have signed, does anyone know if the CLB members are now actively engaged in formulating a plan to challenge this, or have my fears of the CLB being a rubber stamping exercise come to pass ?
(I'm not a member of LAG so I am not expecting any detail which LAG may feel is reserved for their members not the wider lender base, just some pointers that having ensured they have all 5 seats on the CLB that they are using the opportunity to do more than rubber stamp the siphoning off of funds from model 2 loans to the benefit of the creditors).
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
Member is Online
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Dec 20, 2019 7:45:34 GMT
In light of todays release of RSM's progress report, and the additional detail regarding how the recoveries waterfall has been applied now in the public domain so no longer covered by the NDA the CLB members will presumably have signed, does anyone know if the CLB members are now actively engaged in formulating a plan to challenge this, or have my fears of the CLB being a rubber stamping exercise come to pass ?
(I'm not a member of LAG so I am not expecting any detail which LAG may feel is reserved for their members not the wider lender base, just some pointers that having ensured they have all 5 seats on the CLB that they are using the opportunity to do more than rubber stamp the siphoning off of funds from model 2 loans to the benefit of the creditors).
You're not missing anything at present on the lender facing LAG site (I have no idea what if anything is going on privately), just annoyed/worried lenders posting occasionally.
|
|
quidco
Member of DD Central
Posts: 295
Likes: 361
|
Post by quidco on Dec 20, 2019 8:43:28 GMT
In light of todays release of RSM's progress report, and the additional detail regarding how the recoveries waterfall has been applied now in the public domain so no longer covered by the NDA the CLB members will presumably have signed, does anyone know if the CLB members are now actively engaged in formulating a plan to challenge this, or have my fears of the CLB being a rubber stamping exercise come to pass ?
(I'm not a member of LAG so I am not expecting any detail which LAG may feel is reserved for their members not the wider lender base, just some pointers that having ensured they have all 5 seats on the CLB that they are using the opportunity to do more than rubber stamp the siphoning off of funds from model 2 loans to the benefit of the creditors).
You're not missing anything at present on the lender facing LAG site (I have no idea what if anything is going on privately), just annoyed/worried lenders posting occasionally. I'm not even sure if I'm a "member" of LAG I'm in the Facebook group, I don't see any leadership there just defeatist posting.
|
|
Garage246
Member of DD Central
Posts: 116
Likes: 209
|
Post by Garage246 on Dec 20, 2019 11:04:29 GMT
In light of todays release of RSM's progress report, and the additional detail regarding how the recoveries waterfall has been applied now in the public domain so no longer covered by the NDA the CLB members will presumably have signed, does anyone know if the CLB members are now actively engaged in formulating a plan to challenge this, or have my fears of the CLB being a rubber stamping exercise come to pass ?
(I'm not a member of LAG so I am not expecting any detail which LAG may feel is reserved for their members not the wider lender base, just some pointers that having ensured they have all 5 seats on the CLB that they are using the opportunity to do more than rubber stamp the siphoning off of funds from model 2 loans to the benefit of the creditors).
The CLB has yet to meet, as GT haven't called a meeting or formally constituted the group. The CLB members are taking the initiative and pressing GT for a meeting in early January to understand the remit of the group, roles, authority etc. Representations have been made to GT that things need to happen and the current vacuum is not acceptable in this respect. No NDA has been signed at this stage.
|
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Jan 16, 2020 0:17:27 GMT
In light of todays release of RSM's progress report, and the additional detail regarding how the recoveries waterfall has been applied now in the public domain so no longer covered by the NDA the CLB members will presumably have signed, does anyone know if the CLB members are now actively engaged in formulating a plan to challenge this, or have my fears of the CLB being a rubber stamping exercise come to pass ? (I'm not a member of LAG so I am not expecting any detail which LAG may feel is reserved for their members not the wider lender base, just some pointers that having ensured they have all 5 seats on the CLB that they are using the opportunity to do more than rubber stamp the siphoning off of funds from model 2 loans to the benefit of the creditors).
The CLB has yet to meet, as GT haven't called a meeting or formally constituted the group. The CLB members are taking the initiative and pressing GT for a meeting in early January to understand the remit of the group, roles, authority etc. Representations have been made to GT that things need to happen and the current vacuum is not acceptable in this respect. No NDA has been signed at this stage. Lisa Taylor from the Lendy Action Group is mounting a legal challenge to the unfair waterfall mechanism whereby everyone gets paid before the actual lenders. She is asking for £1 for every £1000 invested. I have offered my pledge. We need all the people we can get behind this! Not sure who the LAG legal action will be against but does this imply that the LAG controlled CLB will not be (or has not been successful in) challenging the waterfall? Can anyone from the LAG /CLB clarify/update? And just to pre-empt, I'm not a member of the LAG and I've never been on and have no intention of joining Facebook.
|
|
