|
|
Post by royevans586 on Nov 14, 2019 20:47:15 GMT
The administrators appear to me to have a pragmatic plan, it is not perfect but they have a way forward that contains, checks and balances as well as limits with identified methods to deal with the uncertainties. Currently no one else does, they have elements, concerns etc, but no working plan or overall strategy. The administrators appear to have done more work in the last 3 weeks than has been done in the last year. They are also governed by a stronger set of rules and regulations that we as investors have hitherto enjoyed. The administrators to date appear to have: 1. Assessed the business, its liabilities and assets. 2. Assessed the entire loan book 3. Identified the contractual uncertainties and proposed a means of reducing / mitigating these. 4. Proposed a means to redeem the investments, including a pragmatic limit on there own fees and hence timescales involved 5. Set up a way forward. Considerations: No one is going to redeem our investments for free, a price needs to be paid. None of us has the experience, knowledge or ability to take on this work. The FCA will not help us, they have no knowledge or experience only policy and most definitely will not part with any money. Time is not on our side, action is required to take control of assets. Given the administrators actions to date and stated plan they have my support. Are you sure you ain't one of the Administrators, sent in here undercover 
|
|
|
|
Post by sirpercyblakeney on Nov 14, 2019 20:54:06 GMT
I have many faults, but being an Administrator is not one of them. I will admit to investing a substantial amount in FS however. May I learn from it.
I will explain my reasoning. I am an engineer by training. Everything I do I try to do by analysis, in my world only a fool makes a change randomly, I see many fools. A plan even if it is wrong is generally better than no plan, as any valid plan has a means of change and adaption. Note I know that all my plans are wrong but I try to correct for them, hopefully.
Consequently, the administrators have a plan, given the evidence we have been supplied it is not mad, it is not the best and it allows for adaption. I have seen lots of other discussions but no plan, strategy or direction. The discussions are valid, but they are different from a plan of action as they lack focus and direction. I have made that mistake.
Debate is good, but action is better!
|
|
sb
Posts: 166 
Likes: 118
|
Post by sb on Nov 14, 2019 21:33:08 GMT
I have many faults, but being an Administrator is not one of them. I will admit to investing a substantial amount in FS however. May I learn from it.
I will explain my reasoning. I am an engineer by training. Everything I do I try to do by analysis, in my world only a fool makes a change randomly, I see many fools. A plan even if it is wrong is generally better than no plan, as any valid plan has a means of change and adaption. Note I know that all my plans are wrong but I try to correct for them, hopefully.
Consequently, the administrators have a plan, given the evidence we have been supplied it is not mad, it is not the best and it allows for adaption. I have seen lots of other discussions but no plan, strategy or direction. The discussions are valid, but they are different from a plan of action as they lack focus and direction. I have made that mistake.
Debate is good, but action is better!
For me the proposed plan doesn't make sense, based on information contained in the admin report/proposal. My proposal is 1) Fix docs 2) change T&Cs to provide a way for paying the Administrator for unwinding our loan book Are you one of those privileged investors who has access to information other investor don't have?
|
|
|
|
Post by sirpercyblakeney on Nov 14, 2019 21:56:42 GMT
I am not a privileged investor, I am just assessing the information which we all have to the best of my ability.
The plan my not be perfect but in your proposal:
1. Fix doc how, they are wrong, but to change them will require cash, who is to pay and someone might lose there rights and may require recompense and it will take time. Time however in my view is not on our side.
2. Change the T&C will require legal approval and costs, what are the details? how do we change them, who is going to approve them and at what costs and timescale and impacts?
I agree that both of these are valid details but they are parts or should be parts of an overall strategy and plan, weighted up and used as necessary.
In my view we are in danger of being lost in the detail at the expense of the overall.
|
|
|
|
Post by dan1 on Nov 14, 2019 22:06:22 GMT
|
|
mullet
Member of DD Central
Posts: 126
Likes: 137
|
Post by mullet on Nov 14, 2019 22:24:14 GMT
Apologies if this has already been asked, but given FAQ 36 below has now been added, please can FSAG Admin advise how to fill in the Proxy Form?
36. What should Investors do to participate at the forthcoming Creditor’s Meeting on 28 November?
Investors are requested to:-
a. Complete the appropriate forms indicating the total value of their investment in the Company (as at
the date they complete the forms);
b. Indicate on the Voting Resolution Form whether they wish to approve the Proposals or otherwise;
c. State whether they intend to attend the meeting or complete the Proxy Form appointing the Chairman
or a named third party to vote as the Investor instructs (or at their discretion); and
d. Please return these forms to CG&Co as soon as possible by email (info@cg-recovery.com) or via
post to Stephanie Adams, CG&Co, Greg’s Building, 1 Booth Street, Manchester M2 4DU
|
|
sb
Posts: 166
Likes: 118
|
Post by sb on Nov 14, 2019 22:33:16 GMT
I am not a privileged investor, I am just assessing the information which we all have to the best of my ability.
The plan my not be perfect but in your proposal:
1. Fix doc how, they are wrong, but to change them will require cash, who is to pay and someone might lose there rights and may require recompense and it will take time. Time however in my view is not on our side.
2. Change the T&C will require legal approval and costs, what are the details? how do we change them, who is going to approve them and at what costs and timescale and impacts?
I agree that both of these are valid details but they are parts or should be parts of an overall strategy and plan, weighted up and used as necessary.
In my view we are in danger of being lost in the detail at the expense of the overall.
It is definitely much cheaper and quicker than going through selecting committee, getting an advice, approving it, fixing docs, changing T&Cs. The committee decision is not binding for investors, so changing docs and T&Cs is required in both scenarios.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirpercyblakeney on Nov 14, 2019 23:33:49 GMT
In an evidence based approach you need to define the costs and timescales. Otherwise it is conjecture. What are the timescales, who is going to provide the advice, what is it going to cost, where is the liability, who is going to approve, etc. What are the real cost, changes,etc between the approaches? Sorry to be difficult but talk is cheap! No offense meant. We are in a hard nosed business environment.
The administrators have laid out costs and percentages, etc. to evaluate we need equivalents. I.e. a plan, and I admit I have not got a better one. But only a fully fledged plan will do., and it needs to be quick and complete, time is short so get thinking!
|
|
sb
Posts: 166
Likes: 118
|
Post by sb on Nov 15, 2019 0:13:32 GMT
In an evidence based approach you need to define the costs and timescales. Otherwise it is conjecture. What are the timescales, who is going to provide the advice, what is it going to cost, where is the liability, who is going to approve, etc. What are the real cost, changes,etc between the approaches? Sorry to be difficult but talk is cheap! No offense meant. We are in a hard nosed business environment.
The administrators have laid out costs and percentages, etc. to evaluate we need equivalents. I.e. a plan, and I admit I have not got a better one. But only a fully fledged plan will do., and it needs to be quick and complete, time is short so get thinking!
It is obvious that timescales and costs are lower in my proposal as it is a subset of the administrators' proposal. It also exclude a possibility that we are treated as creditors, which is a bad outcome for us. The administrator price is reasonable for me. They are in much stronger position to dictate us how much they charge for their services as we can't easily terminate our contract with FS. Anyway their proposal is an unnecessary distraction but as long as it leads to a confirmation we are investors I am ok. My worry is that they are going to use the proposed process to try to legitimise seizing my assets.
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Nov 15, 2019 0:27:29 GMT
As it happens..just PM'd you on this..they haven't gone into Administration by any chance ? ..cant beat the old uns eh !
|
|
|
|
Post by sirpercyblakeney on Nov 15, 2019 0:36:10 GMT
Sorry to be difficult but it is not obvious as you have not defined any costs. As I said before someone has to pay and why is anyone going to do this at a loss. A definitive proposal needs to define costs, assumptions, risks, liabilities etc. Mine is better does not. FS said many things, we all had contracts (costs, assumptions, risks, liabilities, etc) this has not played out. However, my point is that the administrators or others can use this, they just need a well thought out plan and to my mind the only viable plan is the administrators, if only because no one else has produced one. Ideas are not plans.
My suspicion is and I can't prove or disprove this is that the administrators have a preformed process that they they are held to (admin) it defines what they can and can't say. We are all worried about how our investments will turn out, we don't know. But all I know and I am going to repeat myself is that a thought out plan is better than no plan. And much like investing in FS we are going to have some faith, somethings we will like, some we won't, we will understand little. Personally, I don't like this but needs must. After all I am no expert in this, however the administrators are experts in there field and what is the point in paying good money if you are going to ignore expert opinion (even if we have little choice).
|
|
sb
Posts: 166
Likes: 118
|
Post by sb on Nov 15, 2019 9:16:07 GMT
Sorry to be difficult but it is not obvious as you have not defined any costs. As I said before someone has to pay and why is anyone going to do this at a loss. A definitive proposal needs to define costs, assumptions, risks, liabilities etc. Mine is better does not. FS said many things, we all had contracts (costs, assumptions, risks, liabilities, etc) this has not played out. However, my point is that the administrators or others can use this, they just need a well thought out plan and to my mind the only viable plan is the administrators, if only because no one else has produced one. Ideas are not plans.
My suspicion is and I can't prove or disprove this is that the administrators have a preformed process that they they are held to (admin) it defines what they can and can't say. We are all worried about how our investments will turn out, we don't know. But all I know and I am going to repeat myself is that a thought out plan is better than no plan. And much like investing in FS we are going to have some faith, somethings we will like, some we won't, we will understand little. Personally, I don't like this but needs must. After all I am no expert in this, however the administrators are experts in there field and what is the point in paying good money if you are going to ignore expert opinion (even if we have little choice).
I said that my plan is a subset of the administrators' plan. All relevant costs, assumptions, risk and liabilities are inherited from their plan, so in that area my plan is no better or worse than theirs. To be honest I don't regard the administrators' proposal to be well thought. The document is quite messy and vague. The plan to have the committee to approve their lawyer advice has no merit as we investors are not bound by it. As someone said it is a folly. What is more it is an dangerous folly for us as it could be a way for them to seize control of our assets, which I am strongly against. I hope you agree that this outcome would be quite bad for us. I agree that a thought out plan is better than no plan but unfortunately, for the reasons mentioned above, I don't think it is a sensible plan. It seems without a purpose unless you assume that the whole exercise is to take control of our assets. In this life by trusting experts you are often lead down the garden path as their primary objective is their own interest. FS directors were supposed to be experts, to some extend they were in lining their pockets and leaving a company with no money to fulfill its obligations. FCA are supposed to be experts, they are in covering their backs and collecting big salaries and bonuses. What does it make you think that the administrators are different? They are vultures living off any bit of meat left of fallen businesses.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,920
Likes: 4,145
|
Post by adrian77 on Nov 15, 2019 10:37:07 GMT
totally agree with the above comments - looks to me as if several of these borrowers engineered plans to borrow money and then engineered things so that they would not have to pay the money back! FS totally and utterly failed to plan for being duped and their supreme incompetent has cost us all dear! As to what the directors did actually plan I am open-minded but I think all their financial and management dealings need extremely close scrutiny.
|
|
|
|
Post by FSAG Forum on Nov 15, 2019 20:06:16 GMT
Apologies if this has already been asked, but given FAQ 36 below has now been added, please can FSAG Admin advise how to fill in the Proxy Form? 36. What should Investors do to participate at the forthcoming Creditor’s Meeting on 28 November?
Investors are requested to:-
a. Complete the appropriate forms indicating the total value of their investment in the Company (as at
the date they complete the forms);
b. Indicate on the Voting Resolution Form whether they wish to approve the Proposals or otherwise;
c. State whether they intend to attend the meeting or complete the Proxy Form appointing the Chairman
or a named third party to vote as the Investor instructs (or at their discretion); and
d. Please return these forms to CG&Co as soon as possible by email (info@cg-recovery.com) or via
post to Stephanie Adams, CG&Co, Greg’s Building, 1 Booth Street, Manchester M2 4DUPlease join FSAG & guidance will be given, once we have finalised a plan.
|
|
p2ploser
Member of DD Central
Posts: 163
Likes: 221
|
Post by p2ploser on Nov 18, 2019 18:47:35 GMT
Sorry if this has been covered already but does anyone know if you need to complete the proof of debt form if you aren’t planning to attend the creditors meeting? Thanks.
|
|
