radar
Member of DD Central
Posts: 106
Likes: 62
|
Post by radar on Jul 11, 2020 18:56:06 GMT
So if there is £1.4 million in the bank that is almost enough money to keep them going for another 3 years !
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,614
Likes: 4,189
|
Post by agent69 on Jul 11, 2020 19:49:43 GMT
Does anyone know if the costs of administration are allocated to individual loans (for example based on the cost of legal recovery) or are the costs just allocaated on a pro rata basis based on the total amount recovered accross the whole platform?
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jul 11, 2020 20:41:49 GMT
Does anyone know if the costs of administration are allocated to individual loans (for example based on the cost of legal recovery) or are the costs just allocaated on a pro rata basis based on the total amount recovered accross the whole platform? I think I'm right in saying that they haven't been explicitly clear yet about exactly how they're going to charge fees (and I'm very interested to know this), but they do seem to be recording their time both generally and re specific 'trust' assets (i.e. our individual loans), which suggests that, at the very least, some of their charges will be attributed to specific loans and paid for by holders of those loans only. There is, though, the potential for this to get messy. If a loan didn't recover enough money to pay for its specific fees (hopefully unlikely/rare!), then this cost would need to passed on to others - I assume on a pro rata basis. There will also be complications in loans with different priority-level tranches and, therefore, different levels of recoveries for different investors. Will they pay proportionate to their original holding or to their recovery? If the former, if some receive nothing, will they get off making any contribution to the fees for that loan at all (with these fees paid for only by those who did make a recovery), or will their fees be deducted from recoveries from other loans? Messy indeed. My assumption has always been that this mess is in part what is delaying the payment of interim distributions, but I don't think BDO have actually cited this as a reason yet IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by df on Jul 11, 2020 21:13:52 GMT
Does anyone know if the costs of administration are allocated to individual loans (for example based on the cost of legal recovery) or are the costs just allocaated on a pro rata basis based on the total amount recovered accross the whole platform? I think I'm right in saying that they haven't been explicitly clear yet about exactly how they're going to charge fees (and I'm very interested to know this), but they do seem to be recording their time both generally and re specific 'trust' assets (i.e. our individual loans), which suggests that, at the very least, some of their charges will be attributed to specific loans and paid for by holders of those loans only. There is, though, the potential for this to get messy. If a loan didn't recover enough money to pay for its specific fees (hopefully unlikely/rare!), then this cost would need to passed on to others - I assume on a pro rata basis. There will also be complications in loans with different priority-level tranches and, therefore, different levels of recoveries for different investors. Will they pay proportionate to their original holding or to their recovery? My assumption has always been that this mess is in part what is delaying the payment of interim distributions, but I don't think BDO have actually cited this as a reason yet IIRC. I assume that there are also other (non loan specific) administration costs that will need to be shared. My guess is they will have to put a significant proportion of recovered money aside prior to first distribution.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jul 11, 2020 21:16:37 GMT
I think I'm right in saying that they haven't been explicitly clear yet about exactly how they're going to charge fees (and I'm very interested to know this), but they do seem to be recording their time both generally and re specific 'trust' assets (i.e. our individual loans), which suggests that, at the very least, some of their charges will be attributed to specific loans and paid for by holders of those loans only. There is, though, the potential for this to get messy. If a loan didn't recover enough money to pay for its specific fees (hopefully unlikely/rare!), then this cost would need to passed on to others - I assume on a pro rata basis. There will also be complications in loans with different priority-level tranches and, therefore, different levels of recoveries for different investors. Will they pay proportionate to their original holding or to their recovery? My assumption has always been that this mess is in part what is delaying the payment of interim distributions, but I don't think BDO have actually cited this as a reason yet IIRC. I assume that there are also other (non loan specific) administration costs that will need to be shared. My guess is they will have to put a significant proportion of recovered money aside prior to first distribution. Yes indeed, this was the 'generally' part of my first para - but I didn't make that very clear! And, agreed, they'll likely have to massively overestimate just to be safe (god knows how an attempt at 'clawback' could work otherwise...). But, when we factor in the unique portfolios that each investor has, this will surely be a very tricky task. As I said above, it surprises me that BDO haven't already cited this as a reason for the delay in paying distributions (unless they have and I missed it!). Edit: Just realised that maybe you meant administration costs other than BDO fees, in which case my 'generally' did not cover this and you're right that obviously this applies more broadly to all administration costs! Sorry!
|
|
|
Post by 101proof on Jul 12, 2020 17:52:22 GMT
Cant BDO bypass the directors if they are uncooperative and just pursue the valuers of the chattels ?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,867
Likes: 11,096
|
Post by ilmoro on Jul 12, 2020 18:22:08 GMT
Cant BDO bypass the directors if they are uncooperative and just pursue the valuers of the chattels ? Assuming that one of the questions isn't who were the valuers.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jul 12, 2020 21:04:25 GMT
It also depends on the terms the valuers were operating under. I'm not familiar with what their contracts look like, but property surveyors often have so many get-out clauses for residential purchases that it's very hard to pursue them. (If there even were any valuers... )
|
|
TitoPuente
Member of DD Central
Posts: 623
Likes: 655
|
Post by TitoPuente on Jul 13, 2020 8:35:06 GMT
Cant BDO bypass the directors if they are uncooperative and just pursue the valuers of the chattels ? It's been reported in this forum that COL did not engage professional valuers for the chattels. This is anecdotal and was reported by a lender that visited the premises and asked the question.
|
|
starfished
Member of DD Central
Posts: 296
Likes: 216
|
Post by starfished on Jul 13, 2020 9:28:56 GMT
It also depends on the terms the valuers were operating under. I'm not familiar with what their contracts look like, but property surveyors often have so many get-out clauses for residential purchases that it's very hard to pursue them. (If there even were any valuers... ) Even if they can't pursue the valuers indemnity, for completeness and covering their own back from disgruntled lenders I could see why they would want confirmation from the original valuer that a significantly lower value is within the range of possibilities. If they don't and BDO sells something that was valued for £50k for £500, some might accuse them of not trying hard enough to find an appropriate buyer... The usual property valuation caveats probably help BDO in this particular circumstance.
|
|
chris1200
Member of DD Central
Posts: 827
Likes: 508
|
Post by chris1200 on Jul 13, 2020 9:42:18 GMT
It also depends on the terms the valuers were operating under. I'm not familiar with what their contracts look like, but property surveyors often have so many get-out clauses for residential purchases that it's very hard to pursue them. (If there even were any valuers... ) Even if they can't pursue the valuers indemnity, for completeness and covering their own back from disgruntled lenders I could see why they would want confirmation from the original valuer that a significantly lower value is within the range of possibilities. If they don't and BDO sells something that was valued for £50k for £500, some might accuse them of not trying hard enough to find an appropriate buyer... The usual property valuation caveats probably help BDO in this particular circumstance. They can also receive such a valuation from other valuers, of course. Which appears to be what they've already done based on their reports. The problem, as I understand it, is the mis-match between these obtained valuations and those that Collateral were operating with.
|
|
squid
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 204
|
Post by squid on Jul 13, 2020 10:16:10 GMT
There was also the promoted buy-back assurance for the chattels..
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,873
Likes: 7,918
|
Post by SteveT on Jul 13, 2020 11:35:04 GMT
There was also the promoted buy-back assurance for the chattels.. Surely it must be clear by now that past assurances made by Collateral are worthless.
|
|
|
Post by spareapennyor2 on Jul 13, 2020 11:40:31 GMT
don`t forget the garnet on Fiddling valued (retail) 90 K (pick a figure ) not trade value when sold to a dealer 12 K (OK ill take off your hands)
|
|
squid
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 204
|
Post by squid on Jul 13, 2020 12:10:38 GMT
There was also the promoted buy-back assurance for the chattels.. Surely it must be clear by now that past assurances made by Collateral are worthless. That is not the point. It was not clear at the time of investing that the buy-back - as promoted by what appeared to be a FCA regulated firm - was worthless.
|
|