|
Post by multiaccountmanager on Nov 19, 2020 10:53:38 GMT
The last update on this loan was on 3rd April.
"Sale of the property has now completed and funds received. The loan will be closed with this payment, but a future payment to investors will be made once VAT has been reclaimed."
However the latest general update from the Administrators says the company was not registered for VAT.
Can anyone cast any light on this? Is there a further payment due?
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,652
Likes: 2,440
|
Post by iRobot on Nov 19, 2020 11:36:00 GMT
For these parts, my interpretation is: - Borrower company called in Admins
- That Administration - on behalf of the Borrower co - disposed of the security
- Costs with associated VAT were incurred during that disposal process (and possibly general VAT considerations incurred during the winding up of the Borrower co).
- The Borrower co is VAT registered and entitled to claim back VAT on those costs
- When that has completed and is credited to the Borrower co (ie: it becomes 'cash in the bank'), those returned VAT sums will become owing to FS as secured creditors
- Therefore there is a sum still due.
For this part: "the company" refers specifically to FS. FS themselves are apparently not VAT registered and therefore cannot claim back VAT on any invoices / bills that they incur which include a VAT element; just like you and I as Joe Public have to pay VAT, but can't (typically) get it refunded.
So when CG - or any of the many other VAT registered companies providing services directly in to FS - raise an invoice to FS, it has a VAT element which FS are not able to claim back.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Nov 20, 2020 15:50:41 GMT
As I said I am trying to work out what is going on here - companies, charges, administrations all over the places and seems to be a US holding company - early days but it looks to me as if FS or rather we investors have been well and truly had here ...surely not you cry. A certain Mr KT seems very prominent here - not only have CP put money against this one (question how long before they go belly up as well) but the company that owned Gainsb**** is also behind a building in Stoke funded by L***dy which seems to be a mega disaster and possibly the worse farce I have ever seen on p2p lending and that is seriously worrying Regarding the Stoke building Mousey said ring any bells? link to DD for the Stoke building herelink to forum for this building hereJust how much money have these lot borrowed- don't p2p do any DD on these characters - I am in one of their loans so goodness know where that one will end up There is talk so may or may not be true about serious design issues and even talk of demolition with this one so I hope we do not have the same with the Tower Block which was "developed" by a different borrower this just gets worse.
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Nov 20, 2020 16:06:41 GMT
I'm sure everyone has seen this but I didn't realise the borrower from the 1st failure, KT, at this site was connected to our FS borrower, should have guessed , same city, he's back on my blacklist.
Crowdproperty must be off their nut, it's the slippery slope. Wouldn't surprise me if there has been a few stipulations such as double monitoring surveys etc. Still no guarantee of no expensive issues, yet to be found or future.
EDIT: I'm guessing that CP said we're going to strip you, put you in a bath and give you a kettle full of hot water every so often and if there is any nonsense we're pulling the plug out and selling the bath.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Nov 20, 2020 17:30:46 GMT
As I said I am tryingn to work out what is going on here - companies, charges, administrations all over the places and seems to be a US holding company - early days but it looks to me as if FS or rather we investors have been well and truly had here ...surely not you cry. A certain Mr KT seems very prominent here - not only have CP put money against this one (question how long before they go belly up as well) but the company that owned Gainsb**** is also behind a building in Stoke funded by L***dy which seems to be a mega disaster and possibly the worse farce I have ever seen on p2p lending and that is seriously worrying Regarding the Stoke building Mousey said ring any bells? link to DD for the Stoke building herelink to forum for this building hereJust how much money have these lot borrowed- don't p2p do any DD on these characters - I am in one of their loans so goodness know where that one will end up There is talk so may or may not be true about serious design issues and even talk of demolition with this one so I hope we do not have the same with the Tower Block which was "developed" by a different borrower this just gets worse. You really dont want to start looking at Mr T - it would not be good for your health - trail of failures across platforms and beyond Edit - Stoke loan, actually Newcastle UL, is the one that hasnt had been a P2P disaster as that bullet was dodged.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 318
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Nov 20, 2020 18:28:21 GMT
For these parts, my interpretation is: - Borrower company called in Admins
- That Administration - on behalf of the Borrower co - disposed of the security
- Costs with associated VAT were incurred during that disposal process (and possibly general VAT considerations incurred during the winding up of the Borrower co).
- The Borrower co is VAT registered and entitled to claim back VAT on those costs
- When that has completed and is credited to the Borrower co (ie: it becomes 'cash in the bank'), those returned VAT sums will become owing to FS as secured creditors
- Therefore there is a sum still due.
For this part: "the company" refers specifically to FS. FS themselves are apparently not VAT registered and therefore cannot claim back VAT on any invoices / bills that they incur which include a VAT element; just like you and I as Joe Public have to pay VAT, but can't (typically) get it refunded.
So when CG - or any of the many other VAT registered companies providing services directly in to FS - raise an invoice to FS, it has a VAT element which FS are not able to claim back.
Does that mean that once the Borrower Co (or its Admin) claims the VAT back, that would be payable to FS and investors would get further returns ? There is at least another Loan (Dev Plo* Ca****le) in similar situation.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Nov 20, 2020 19:49:42 GMT
For these parts, my interpretation is: - Borrower company called in Admins
- That Administration - on behalf of the Borrower co - disposed of the security
- Costs with associated VAT were incurred during that disposal process (and possibly general VAT considerations incurred during the winding up of the Borrower co).
- The Borrower co is VAT registered and entitled to claim back VAT on those costs
- When that has completed and is credited to the Borrower co (ie: it becomes 'cash in the bank'), those returned VAT sums will become owing to FS as secured creditors
- Therefore there is a sum still due.
For this part: "the company" refers specifically to FS. FS themselves are apparently not VAT registered and therefore cannot claim back VAT on any invoices / bills that they incur which include a VAT element; just like you and I as Joe Public have to pay VAT, but can't (typically) get it refunded.
So when CG - or any of the many other VAT registered companies providing services directly in to FS - raise an invoice to FS, it has a VAT element which FS are not able to claim back.
Does that mean that once the Borrower Co (or its Admin) claims the VAT back, that would be payable to FS and investors would get further returns ? There is at least another Loan (Dev Plo* Ca****le) in similar situation. Yes, another £16k due back on this loan, with some likely to be paid to FS after costs Assuming I have identified the other loan you reference correctly (same borrower), the admin report has just been published and does indicate that there will be VAT to be reclaimed (c£10k AIUI) and some payment to the secured creditor ie FS lenders. However, it notes a backlog at HMRC due to staff being redeployed to CV19 support so wont be for a few weeks.
|
|
|
Post by timsykes on Jan 18, 2021 11:34:12 GMT
The reclaimed VAT in relation to this loan was distributed this morning. An extra £2 return on my £300 'investment'!
|
|
pfffill
Member of DD Central
Posts: 175
Likes: 206
|
Post by pfffill on Jan 18, 2021 12:19:32 GMT
The reclaimed VAT in relation to this loan was distributed this morning. An extra £2 return on my £300 'investment'! Nice!
|
|
mw
Member of DD Central
Posts: 177
Likes: 80
|
Post by mw on Jan 18, 2021 16:57:45 GMT
17p for me.. I cant withdraw it as there's a minimum of £1 in place 🤣😂
|
|
cwah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 949
Likes: 468
|
Post by cwah on Jan 19, 2021 13:11:07 GMT
£14 for me... i've had big loss on that one... 😭😭😭
|
|
|
Post by multiaccountmanager on Jan 20, 2021 12:13:47 GMT
The reclaimed VAT in relation to this loan was distributed this morning. An extra £2 return on my £300 'investment'! You did well . I received £2.28 but invested £1,000
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Jan 20, 2021 15:34:42 GMT
£14 for me... i've had big loss on that one... 😭😭😭 Not as big as mine x multiples..but you have what sympathies I have left to spare
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Jan 20, 2021 17:17:20 GMT
I have sympathy for the lot of you (I was in this one but ditched it) - this should never have happened and FS have been grossly incompetent at best and at worse would put me on the naughty step. FS either did no DD on maybe they did and just did not care - appalling.
|
|