rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048 
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 7, 2020 23:00:14 GMT
When time permits...could someone from Admin/CC explain why FS, who through a combination of incompetence, mismanagement, malfeasance and other irregularities, all contrary to their FCA accreditation, seem to be making a packet out of this Administration ?
Ive no doubt this has all been endlessly discussed before via all the channels available (Indy..FSAG & FB) but were the CC fully in agreement with what seems a disproportionate dispersal of recovered funds ?
I don't begrudge CG & Co of their 2.5% (+VAT) one iota. In fact I think that's extremely reasonable. But the 5% that the directors of FS 'appear' to be getting is beyond insulting, its a disgrace.
In the case of Gainsborough House, as funds have now been distributed to those lenders unfortunate enough to be caught up in it, have the c£60K "FEES" also been distributed to those directors ?
Why were'nt the CG & Co's fees taken out of FS's 5%...if they must have anything ..at all ?
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Apr 8, 2020 7:20:01 GMT
Exactly - surely FS failed to set-up a proper winding up procedure either by incompetence or a premeditated move which is in clear breach of FSA guidance if not legal requirements. Surely there is a legal case here for reclaiming every damn penny out of these muppets - if they get away with it then what sort of message will that send!
I find this whole damn tawdry affair both annoying and extremely depressing.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Apr 8, 2020 8:59:15 GMT
The real issue is that the law seems to allow what has happened. Loan platforms with large weak loan books are built in which large sums accrue to platform operators in the event of defaults . Expressions of concern from investors are fended off. Eventually the platforms enters Administration. The Administrators act as debt collectors. Everything above board as Regulated by the FCA. Unfortunately by the time the Coronavirus pandemic has played out all these dodgy platforms -Collateral, Lendy, Funding Secure to name a few - will be water under the bridge. The law needs to be changed so that miscreants do not benefit from their own 'mismanagement'.
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,426
Likes: 1,211
|
Post by sqh on Apr 10, 2020 20:25:34 GMT
It appears to me that the receivers (Avison Young) are not getting the best price for lenders. One of the borrowers has now launched a claim against the appointment of the receivers and I agree with that challenge, I visited that site (loan 2175354900) last summer and thought it was worth at least 50% more than the receivers achieved. Avison Young were also appointed to dispose of the Dell 1 & 2, and acheived a miserable result, with the land being rapidly sold on within a few hours for over £500k more. Now we have Gainsborough House, Abergele (Receivers unnamed) sold back to the original borrower for a fraction of the site valuation. There appears to be no accountability, why aren't these sites being put into auction with a reserve that reflects the valuation.
On the other hand I see LPA Receivers, Cowgills Business Recovery LLP were appointed to deal with loan 2764887514 and achieved £425k prior to auction with an auction guide price of £250k.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 945
Likes: 1,632
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Apr 11, 2020 9:36:41 GMT
When time permits...could someone from Admin/CC explain why FS, who through a combination of incompetence, mismanagement, malfeasance and other irregularities, all contrary to their FCA accreditation, seem to be making a packet out of this Administration ? Ive no doubt this has all been endlessly discussed before via all the channels available (Indy..FSAG & FB) but were the CC fully in agreement with what seems a disproportionate dispersal of recovered funds ? I don't begrudge CG & Co of their 2.5% (+VAT) one iota. In fact I think that's extremely reasonable. But the 5% that the directors of FS 'appear' to be getting is beyond insulting, its a disgrace. In the case of Gainsborough House, as funds have now been distributed to those lenders unfortunate enough to be caught up in it, have the c£60K "FEES" also been distributed to those directors ? Why were'nt the CG & Co's fees taken out of FS's 5%...if they must have anything ..at all ? Hi Roger, Firstly, please tag me, or I will never see all the messages. It’s just me attending to all the lenders queries on multi-platforms, amongst liaising with the guy handing the legal side and providing advice and tactics, gathering evidence, in comms with CG….the list is endless. I was alerted to this post from another lender. No, I can not explain, they are twisting the contract to the extreme, legal yes, ethical, no way. Wait till you see my post on FB in the next few days or so. Having discussed the matter with lenders who have had experience of administrations (again more time…) it appears that this is a typical move by administrators to ignore pre-existing contracts and attempt to have their own methods take priority over what is previously agreed. The CC only agreed to the 2.5%. We were never asked for the 5%, let alone agreed to it. The 5% has not been distributed to the Directors/shareholders [yet] as there is a legal challenge around the corner. National law firm about to be formally engaged to offer specialist administration law advice to us over this 5% theft. CG fees were not taken out of the 5% as we were never asked, never told, it was never even hinted, let alone mentioned that 5% would be charged. Let’s just say, TOTAL COVER-UP!! MP2P
|
|
sqh
Member of DD Central
Before P2P, savers put a guinea in a piggy bank, now they smash the banks to become guinea pigs.
Posts: 1,426
Likes: 1,211
|
Post by sqh on Apr 11, 2020 10:09:55 GMT
Hi Mucho P2PWe were both at the administrators first meeting in Manchester Nov 28th. I seem to remember CG & co suggesting that FS had given some form of exclusivity rights to Avison Young. In the case of loan 2175354900 the receivers were called in 1/2/2019 which is during the reign of Raj Kumar. The same applies to Dell 1 & 2. and I believe Charter House. Raj Kumar seemed to be out of his depth when dealing with receivers and that may have been one reason why he sought administration. It would be wrong to recompense secured creditors who were at fault when dealing with receivers. |
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 11, 2020 10:54:11 GMT
When time permits...could someone from Admin/CC explain why FS, who through a combination of incompetence, mismanagement, malfeasance and other irregularities, all contrary to their FCA accreditation, seem to be making a packet out of this Administration ? Ive no doubt this has all been endlessly discussed before via all the channels available (Indy..FSAG & FB) but were the CC fully in agreement with what seems a disproportionate dispersal of recovered funds ? I don't begrudge CG & Co of their 2.5% (+VAT) one iota. In fact I think that's extremely reasonable. But the 5% that the directors of FS 'appear' to be getting is beyond insulting, its a disgrace. In the case of Gainsborough House, as funds have now been distributed to those lenders unfortunate enough to be caught up in it, have the c£60K "FEES" also been distributed to those directors ? Why were'nt the CG & Co's fees taken out of FS's 5%...if they must have anything ..at all ? Hi Roger, Firstly, please tag me, or I will never see all the messages. It’s just me attending to all the lenders queries on multi-platforms, amongst liaising with the guy handing the legal side and providing advice and tactics, gathering evidence, in comms with CG….the list is endless. I was alerted to this post from another lender. No, I can not explain, they are twisting the contract to the extreme, legal yes, ethical, no way. Wait till you see my post on FB in the next few days or so. Having discussed the matter with lenders who have had experience of administrations (again more time…) it appears that this is a typical move by administrators to ignore pre-existing contracts and attempt to have their own methods take priority over what is previously agreed. The CC only agreed to the 2.5%. We were never asked for the 5%, let alone agreed to it. The 5% has not been distributed to the Directors/shareholders [yet] as there is a legal challenge around the corner. National law firm about to be formally engaged to offer specialist administration law advice to us over this 5% theft. CG fees were not taken out of the 5% as we were never asked, never told, it was never even hinted, let alone mentioned that 5% would be charged. Let’s just say, TOTAL COVER-UP!! MP2P Hi@Mucho P2P ..point taken .. I have PM'd you on another matter but pleased to see you've seen this thread also...cheers Marc Why doesn't this bloody tag thingy work..ive done it a thousand times in the past.. 
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 11, 2020 11:49:41 GMT
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 11, 2020 12:21:24 GMT
Try this @ muchop2p without the space  Or you can use this  click on it start to type muc... in the box and you are presented with  and select 
In Edit: Ah ... too late.
 yes thanks...I found that no spaces anywhere worked..but I wasn't aware of the alternative... star dust ..voila !
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,895
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Apr 11, 2020 16:07:07 GMT
Sir
I like your langage and command of the English language - thanks for your efforts and good luck!
|
|
|
|
Post by ron on Apr 11, 2020 20:14:38 GMT
The additional 5% fee is insulting. Also, if it was added by the new directors in the Terms and Conditions, it should in any case NOT apply to the vast majority of loans, ie., those sold to investors before then!
Has anyone written a complaint email that can be shared, and that we can all send to the administrators?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,840
Likes: 11,068
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 11, 2020 21:14:05 GMT
|
|
rogerthat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,048
Likes: 1,994
|
Post by rogerthat on Apr 11, 2020 21:14:41 GMT
The additional 5% fee is insulting. Also, if it was added by the new directors in the Terms and Conditions, it should in any case NOT apply to the vast majority of loans, ie., those sold to investors before then! Has anyone written a complaint email that can be shared, and that we can all send to the administrators? The CC are on the case and are seeking legal advice..
|
|
|
|
Post by ron on Apr 12, 2020 8:44:32 GMT
Thanks. Well, for a start 3% would be 40% less than 5% for all loans sold before April... and that seems straightforward. Obviously a second point relates to where in the waterfall of payments this fee sits. Good luck to the CC & lawyers on this
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Apr 12, 2020 8:51:24 GMT
Thanks. Well, for a start 3% would be 40% less than 5% for all loans sold before April... and that seems straightforward. Obviously a second point relates to where in the waterfall of payments this fee sits. Good luck to the CC & lawyers on this Nice idea, but I think you need a few years into the equation  (Edit, I'm presuming 'April 16' refers to April 2016 not 16th of April! )
|
|
yes thanks...I found that no spaces anywhere worked..but I wasn't aware of the alternative...
