|
Post by timsykes on Sept 28, 2020 16:21:30 GMT
Valuation of the collection was £300,000. Loan of £102,000. Settlement reached with owner for £60,000. Payment of £43,545 to lenders, 42.7% of loan. I must have misread the loan details on here so we are paying negative interest rates to this kind borrower lend 102K get back 60K.
I wasn't in this one luckily but I assume CG took their 2.5% and the FS 5% of the 102K not the 60K? They should have shown their true colours and just asked for 7.5% back !!!
Confirmed - FS helped themselves to £5100.
|
|
taffy
Posts: 148
Likes: 359
|
Post by taffy on Sept 28, 2020 16:26:13 GMT
Valuation was £300 to 400K. Loan was 102K. Returned £60K FS received £5,100, which is 5% of the loan!! (5% of 60K would be £3,000). No win no fees lawyers will love the details being kept on these crooked loans. Thank the Lord for the FCA oversight?
|
|
taffy
Posts: 148
Likes: 359
|
Post by taffy on Sept 28, 2020 16:32:37 GMT
I`m also in with Lendy, clever me! I think FS members will be interested in this post from the Lendy Site, hope it`s ok to do this.
The hearing concluded at 13:55 and started late due to connection issues by the Judge.
Some key dates:
2nd CMC: 23rd October 2020 @ 12.00 Via Skype
3rd CMC: 21st Dec 2020 @ 11.00 Via Skype
Pre-trial review window: 1st June 2021 - 11th June 2021
Trial window: 28th June 2021 - 30th Sept 2021
Trial Estimate: 2 weeks although subject to review
I understand this judge is retiring so this matter will be reserved to a different judge.
I won't mention the issues raised at this early stage suffice to say there was considerable discussion whether the FCA (who were represented today) should be joined to the hearing.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Sept 28, 2020 16:35:14 GMT
I must have misread the loan details on here so we are paying negative interest rates to this kind borrower lend 102K get back 60K.
I wasn't in this one luckily but I assume CG took their 2.5% and the FS 5% of the 102K not the 60K? They should have shown their true colours and just asked for 7.5% back !!!
Confirmed - FS helped themselves to £5100. Probably time for a few Jam songs..... I will start it off with 'Thick as Thieves' and 'We've only started'
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,664
Likes: 2,988
|
Post by IFISAcava on Sept 28, 2020 16:45:30 GMT
Confirmed - FS helped themselves to £5100. Probably time for a few Jam songs..... I will start it off with 'Thick as Thieves' and 'We've only started' down in the tube station at midnight 10pm
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Sept 28, 2020 16:50:11 GMT
There was a typo in the updates, it was valued by Alan Partridge auctioneers. FS weren't half hearted about ripping people off, they certainly had a comprehensive network of friendly cooperative contacts who were willing to come up with floaty valuations to make a loan look attractive and feasible. I'm glad he made a £1000 out of it, more than any lender.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,618
Likes: 4,191
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Sept 28, 2020 17:05:50 GMT
Probably time for a few Jam songs..... I will start it off with 'Thick as Thieves' and 'We've only started' down in the tube station at midnight 10pm Shame it wasn't memorabilia from the Who, or we could have had 'won't get fooled again'.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Sept 28, 2020 18:49:05 GMT
I will check but I am sure I was "told" on this forum this rip-off fee only applied to sales and not settlements which I presume is the case here? Yet again forum members called this one correctly e.g. Was the valuer Adam Perdix Perdix the auctioneer or the comedian ?
So this chap borrows £102K and makes some interest repayments and then repays £60K - not very rock and roll is it! Sort of thing you would expect a US politician called Donald to do...well done FS yet another complete Horlicks
My point is how the hell can FS justify this and other fees when ,at best, they have been totally incompetent and played fast and loose with our money - as per above I don't even think this particular fee is covered in their T&Cs?
I originally said I expected the loan book to realise about 50% - the results to date are not exactly convincing me that this is too negative an opinion.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Sept 29, 2020 6:06:28 GMT
Below is from a recent post I am now genuinely confused - if this one was a settlement then the above is either incorrect or this fee should not have been charged
Could anybody with relevant experience in this field possibly comment - I thank you
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 945
Likes: 1,632
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Sept 29, 2020 21:51:03 GMT
Below is from a recent post I am now genuinely confused - if this one was a settlement then the above is either incorrect or this fee should not have been charged Could anybody with relevant experience in this field possibly comment - I thank you Administrators playing it safe for themselves (and secured creditors, not us!) and taking the highest amount possible, regardless even if its a settlement of the loan – inconsistent implementation, and daylight robbery in my opinion. That is why they are being challenged in court.
|
|
kielbasa
Member of DD Central
Posts: 246
Likes: 411
|
Post by kielbasa on Oct 2, 2020 21:09:19 GMT
Valuation of the collection was £300,000. Loan of £102,000. Settlement reached with owner for £60,000. Payment of £43,545 to lenders, 42.7% of loan. Did the wording of the update say "owner" rather than "borrower"? I wonder what are the facts behind CG & Co agreeing to such a settlement.
|
|
morris
Member of DD Central
Posts: 261
Likes: 149
|
Post by morris on Oct 3, 2020 7:28:22 GMT
Valuation of the collection was £300,000. Loan of £102,000. Settlement reached with owner for £60,000. Payment of £43,545 to lenders, 42.7% of loan. Did the wording of the update say "owner" rather than "borrower"? I wonder what are the facts behind CG & Co agreeing to such a settlement. I t does say borrower. It also says the settlement was reached resulting in a higher return than if the items had gone to auction.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 3, 2020 8:24:56 GMT
how do they know - given this is very much a niche market with a dedicated fan base I would have thought it was worth a try just setting up a dedicated auction site and just shifting the lot - oh well maybe too much like hard work - write and couple of letters and just let the money keep pouring in - too late now the damage and I mean damage has been done
what a pathetic result (yet again!)- how the hell did FS come up with 34% LTV?
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 945
Likes: 1,632
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 3, 2020 8:39:18 GMT
I would rather have put the entire collection on Ebay, and let the borrower buy it back that way if he wanted it that much! If I am to lose capital on this one, so the owner can also lose parts of his collection!
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Oct 3, 2020 9:51:46 GMT
The whole thing stinks like a pile of rotten fish. We were the fish, the loans were the bait and FS were the fishermen landing the huge catch.
The same auctioneer who valued it at 300k then tells the administrators it wouldn't fetch the 60k offered by the borrower in an auction. His auction or any auction is the question ? It's not gary glitter or a band whose legacy has faired badly over time we're talking about , I don't believe there wasn't someone out there willing to cough up more than 60k. That is the cost of a pair of nike trainers in some auctions. Where was it advertised or marketed , Farmers Weekly? The alternative view is that the collection is worth 60k , not 100k , not 300k.
|
|