|
|
Post by overthehill on Mar 31, 2020 18:55:05 GMT
Should be a full recovery, offer accepted pre-auction well above FS valuation and loan amount, maybe work had been done on it, shout out to Keppie Massie for a 'restore faith in RICS accreditation' valuation.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Mar 31, 2020 19:33:39 GMT
I'm only in the first loan so can't see/remember how large the supplemental loan was. Does the picture look good for those investors too? Accrued interest on the first loan plus receivers costs always takes out a fair chunk...
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Apr 1, 2020 8:22:00 GMT
Likewise. There are 3 more development tranches totalling 150k, I'm assuming these are second charge but I don't know for sure. Assuming the receivers fees are within the guidelines, and we have proof that isn't a foregone conclusion , then I still reckon the second charge loans will still return between 75-100% of capital but no interest. The receiver fees are the big unknown here as some of them obviously think they are untouchable by the regulators, FCA , ombudsman or whoever has power to take action.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Apr 1, 2020 10:30:04 GMT
Likewise. There are 3 more development tranches totalling 150k, I'm assuming these are second charge but I don't know for sure. Assuming the receivers fees are within the guidelines, and we have proof that isn't a foregone conclusion , then I still reckon the second charge loans will still return between 75-100% of capital but no interest. The receiver fees are the big unknown here as some of them obviously think they are untouchable by the regulators, FCA , ombudsman or whoever has power to take action.
I remember the additional loans were definitely subordinate to the first loan (so still a first charge legally, but from the perspective of investors akin to a second charge). I recall that as when those loans were listed is the moment I jumped into the first loan on the secondary market (quite heavily by my standards). Compared to other second charge loans this one should have a much better result than others, but I think your estimate of capital return is at the upper end.
|
|
sundown
Member of DD Central
Posts: 80
Likes: 103
|
Post by sundown on Apr 3, 2020 16:52:15 GMT
Certainly not a good result for the linked loan at Nos 1-3 in the same avenue!
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Apr 3, 2020 17:56:38 GMT
Certainly not a good result for the linked loan at Nos 1-3 in the same avenue! I'm not in those, mainly as I'd already invested at (beyond) my appetite limit with these at number 9 and assumed those loans were to the same borrower. What was the update if you don't mind me asking?
|
|
sundown
Member of DD Central
Posts: 80
Likes: 103
|
Post by sundown on Apr 4, 2020 10:37:54 GMT
Certainly not a good result for the linked loan at Nos 1-3 in the same avenue! I'm not in those, mainly as I'd already invested at (beyond) my appetite limit with these at number 9 and assumed those loans were to the same borrower. What was the update if you don't mind me asking? Offer accepted of £415k. All tranches ranked equally, not sure what total lending was as only in tranche 1, but think will be lucky to get 40% back.
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on May 30, 2020 14:16:00 GMT
Likewise. There are 3 more development tranches totalling 150k, I'm assuming these are second charge but I don't know for sure. Assuming the receivers fees are within the guidelines, and we have proof that isn't a foregone conclusion , then I still reckon the second charge loans will still return between 75-100% of capital but no interest. The receiver fees are the big unknown here as some of them obviously think they are untouchable by the regulators, FCA , ombudsman or whoever has power to take action.
This thread was meant to be about no.9 only.
primary loan capital repaid in full + 9.9% interest three supplemental loans paid back 68% capital + no interest
full cost details have been added by the administrators at a standard investors should expect. I've not read them yet though!
bad news for the supplemental loans but I think this is going to be the high bar for almost all 2nd charge loans, probably a decent result.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,842 
Likes: 2,757
|
Post by michaelc on May 30, 2020 14:46:30 GMT
Should be a full recovery, offer accepted pre-auction well above FS valuation and loan amount, maybe work had been done on it, shout out to Keppie Massie for a 'restore faith in RICS accreditation' valuation.
You're kidding right ? I'm not in this one so haven't looked at the details but it looks like people did lose capital. If the valuation was correct then there'd be enough for all. Even if I've made a mistake here (because I'm not in it I haven't done any research on it) and even if Keep it Massive did produce a reasonable valuation on this loan how can that possibly offset all the hundreds of others that were way off ?
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
Member is Online
|
Post by adrian77 on May 30, 2020 14:54:20 GMT
totally agree - yes this was a relatively good result which is good as it shows the housing market may be standing up well to Covid19.
I don't know the Liverpool market but I know it shot up and then pulled back and Liverpool has vastly differing local market prices - I really don't think this one would have raised this sum at auction - so no free toaster coupons to Keep it Massive.
We still have to see what is going to happen with the tower block at New Brighton and the flats at Formby - will be very interesting to compare them with this one.
I am in both of these other 2 - seems like I have been waiting since Maggie Thatcher got elected!
|
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on May 30, 2020 17:20:11 GMT
Should be a full recovery, offer accepted pre-auction well above FS valuation and loan amount, maybe work had been done on it, shout out to Keppie Massie for a 'restore faith in RICS accreditation' valuation.
You're kidding right ? I'm not in this one so haven't looked at the details but it looks like people did lose capital. If the valuation was correct then there'd be enough for all. Even if I've made a mistake here (because I'm not in it I haven't done any research on it) and even if Keep it Massive did produce a reasonable valuation on this loan how can that possibly offset all the hundreds of others that were way off ?
When I wrote that comment I don't think I realised there were 3 supplemental loans.
Total loans amounted to 221+100+40+10=371k and given the sale price of 425k you would still expect a better result from that pie until you add up the interest and the large slices of charges that have been consumed.
Keppie Massie valued the security at 340k and there is no evidence in the primary loan updates any work was done to the property, just a mention of putting in a planning application. Not sure how FS justified the supplemental loans, presumably the valuation was increased but by who and how.
It was either incompetence or normal practice not to make the same updates to all loans connected to a property. I remember them doing it for same priority tranches most of the time.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
Member is Online
|
Post by adrian77 on May 30, 2020 19:41:50 GMT
interesting - I wonder just wonder if the original borrower bought it back either directly or indirectly and rolled over the "loss" against his tax liability - when I go to auction it is true some houses do go way above valuation but I sure as hell don't bid on them unless they are grossly undervalued which is my experience is rare.
|
|
benaj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,855
Likes: 1,591
|
Post by benaj on Jun 11, 2020 11:00:31 GMT
Not too bad. Full capital repayment and 730+ days interest.
|
|
arby
Member of DD Central
Posts: 910
Likes: 959
|
Post by arby on Jun 11, 2020 11:41:29 GMT
Not too bad. Full capital repayment and 730+ days interest. ....on the primary loan only, supplementals experienced a capital loss.
|
|
