|
Post by waryinvestor on Oct 4, 2020 10:17:48 GMT
I have looked through my records and it appears I had to pay my minibond investments into Wellesley & Co Limited (which is governed by FCA) Their bank details are Account WELLESLEY & CO LTD, Sort code 20-00-00, Account number 93497275. What about anyone else? I think I will inform the FCA in case it makes a difference (grasping at straws!!!). IT HAS BEEN CONFIRMED BY MY BANK THAT I PAID MY FUNDS INTO WELLESLEY & CO LTD AND RECEIVED PAYMENTS BACK FROM THEM. Exactly. My Holdings clearly state that the P2P Investments are from Wellesley & Co Limited and NOT from Well Finance (Account overview page states that on Wellesley Classic View). Have added to my Complaint to FCA as they should have controlled WCL's dealings as they regulated it (they'd try to hide behind the complex web of non-regulated subsidiaries, but even if a regulated Co loans via an unregulated one or directly to a borrower, it should still come under FCA's remit). If FCA don't come back with anything satisfactory, take it to Complaints Commissioner (who is already investigating FCA for its other failures, like Collateral). They just can't blatantly wash their hands off.
Edit : Page 16 of the CVA states that WACL operates the P2P - originates, syndicates and SERVICES the Loans.
|
|
|
Post by dm on Oct 4, 2020 12:31:10 GMT
After reading the T and Cs WACOL is the platform operator, service provider, originator, syndicator and pretty much everything it seems except being the contractual counterparty to the investments; which is Wellesley Finance plc. This structure was totally designed to deceive investors and provide false comfort about FCA regulation.
|
|
2boi
Posts: 69
Likes: 43
|
Post by 2boi on Oct 4, 2020 15:19:27 GMT
We don't want the CVA to fail. I do believe this is the best option for most. Of course, we need to understand all of the dubious goings on. The goal should be to make the terms of the CVA more fair as it is so one side e.g. share any upside on the heavily discounted loan book for one. Surely if the CVA is voted for then the terms of the CVA are set so we can't change them - "[The CVA] is a legally binding agreement between the business and its creditors that details how repayments of company debt should be formulated to provide a better outcome to creditors when versus the alternative option of administration" So if you want to change the terms of the CVA then you have to vote against it or am I missing something? One other thing - not voting until the last minute - I can see why people are saying this but I would not encourage it, not everone will get it done in time. Also officially if you vote now your vote won't be counted until 13 October anyway: "Voting closes on 23.59pm 13 October 2020 at which point Duff & Phelps will count all votes and the results will be announced in the days following". So vote now and vote no - www.wellesley.co.uk/investor-information/vote/
|
|
|
Post by et on Oct 5, 2020 8:45:21 GMT
We don't want the CVA to fail. I do believe this is the best option for most. Of course, we need to understand all of the dubious goings on. The goal should be to make the terms of the CVA more fair as it is so one side e.g. share any upside on the heavily discounted loan book for one. Surely if the CVA is voted for then the terms of the CVA are set so we can't change them - "[The CVA] is a legally binding agreement between the business and its creditors that details how repayments of company debt should be formulated to provide a better outcome to creditors when versus the alternative option of administration" So if you want to change the terms of the CVA then you have to vote against it or am I missing something? One other thing - not voting until the last minute - I can see why people are saying this but I would not encourage it, not everone will get it done in time. Also officially if you vote now your vote won't be counted until 13 October anyway: "Voting closes on 23.59pm 13 October 2020 at which point Duff & Phelps will count all votes and the results will be announced in the days following". So vote now and vote no - www.wellesley.co.uk/investor-information/vote/ Correct, if CVA goes through, it’s pretty much game over. At the same time we don’t necessarily want to reject it. In my view, our best option is to build enough support that we could block it. That gives us the power to negotiate a better CVA. Just to be clear, voting AGAINST the CVA is FINE. I absolutely didn’t mean wait for the literal last minute and was more a plea to sit tight for those thinking of voting in favour or sitting on the fence so that we can show that the CVA, as proposed, in a terrible deal for creditors.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 5, 2020 9:47:24 GMT
Surely if the CVA is voted for then the terms of the CVA are set so we can't change them - "[The CVA] is a legally binding agreement between the business and its creditors that details how repayments of company debt should be formulated to provide a better outcome to creditors when versus the alternative option of administration" So if you want to change the terms of the CVA then you have to vote against it or am I missing something? One other thing - not voting until the last minute - I can see why people are saying this but I would not encourage it, not everone will get it done in time. Also officially if you vote now your vote won't be counted until 13 October anyway: "Voting closes on 23.59pm 13 October 2020 at which point Duff & Phelps will count all votes and the results will be announced in the days following". So vote now and vote no - www.wellesley.co.uk/investor-information/vote/ Correct, if CVA goes through, it’s pretty much game over. At the same time we don’t necessarily want to reject it. In my view, our best option is to build enough support that we could block it. That gives us the power to negotiate a better CVA. Just to be clear, voting AGAINST the CVA is FINE. I absolutely didn’t mean wait for the literal last minute and was more a plea to sit tight for those thinking of voting in favour or sitting on the fence so that we can show that the CVA, as proposed, in a terrible deal for creditors. My experience is (from several p2p cases) that a negotiation will not be entertained and if it is entertained, it will not go through. The lender base is too fragmented to gain enough support in the short time available to negotiate with a bunch of [bleeps] GW&co, and highly experienced professionals (D&P). For a start, which "negotiator" from the lenders side will go and discuss with WG and D&P? Does that person have any experience in negotiating, bearing in mind D&P have enormous experience in these specific matters. Whichever deal people vote for, it is a "head they win, tails we lose" scenario. Anyone, please feel free to come back here in several years time and correct me if I am wrong. For the record, I have already voted against the CVA, but everyone should make up their own mind at to how they wish to vote.
|
|
|
Post by dm on Oct 5, 2020 10:06:53 GMT
Seems to me that if the CVA is passed we have no further re-course? If the CVA is rejected then we face the risk of Administration; but I am not entirely convinced Wellesley would want to go down this road for the reasons 'et' has stated as in effect it would be a contrived Administration as they have not worked with their clients to overcome the transient liquidity issues and the whole matter would be thoroughly scrutinised?. I am still unclear in the event of Administration whether Cloverleaf gets to keep the loan book it bought for a massive discount or whether this would then be invalid and/or pursued by any 'independent' Administrator?
'Et' we need guidance from your insolvency expert as to the best course of action for the vote and then any advised subsequent actions. Ideally it would be best to get the vote suspended, but it is clear that Wellesley has purposefully orchestrated to allow as little time as possible for evaluation, particularly in light of the 220 page CVA document. I think improving the terms of this wretched CVA are impossible between now and the vote deadline; but it might be possible if the vote was suspended.
Wellesley is banking on fragmentation to get the CVA through but 75% is still a big hurdle for them to achieve to get it passed?
So many moving parts and unknowns in this whole stinking corrupt affair.
|
|
|
Post by carol167 on Oct 5, 2020 10:20:19 GMT
Well I've just voted no. Bunch of crooks the lot of em. I hope they rot in hell.
|
|
|
Post by m1kehunt on Oct 5, 2020 10:33:27 GMT
Correct, if CVA goes through, it’s pretty much game over. At the same time we don’t necessarily want to reject it. In my view, our best option is to build enough support that we could block it. That gives us the power to negotiate a better CVA. Just to be clear, voting AGAINST the CVA is FINE. I absolutely didn’t mean wait for the literal last minute and was more a plea to sit tight for those thinking of voting in favour or sitting on the fence so that we can show that the CVA, as proposed, in a terrible deal for creditors. My experience is (from several p2p cases) that a negotiation will not be entertained and if it is entertained, it will not go through. The lender base is too fragmented to gain enough support in the short time available to negotiate with a bunch of [bleeps] GW&co, and highly experienced professionals (D&P). For a start, which "negotiator" from the lenders side will go and discuss with WG and D&P? Does that person have any experience in negotiating, bearing in mind D&P have enormous experience in these specific matters. Whichever deal people vote for, it is a "head they win, tails we lose" scenario. Anyone, please feel free to come back here in several years time and correct me if I am wrong. For the record, I have already voted against the CVA, but everyone should make up their own mind at to how they wish to vote. From your experience with "several p2p cases" what was the average p/£ payouts? I still think 48p/44p/£ is too low, thoughts?
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Oct 5, 2020 10:45:07 GMT
My experience is (from several p2p cases) that a negotiation will not be entertained and if it is entertained, it will not go through. The lender base is too fragmented to gain enough support in the short time available to negotiate with a bunch of [bleeps] GW&co, and highly experienced professionals (D&P). For a start, which "negotiator" from the lenders side will go and discuss with WG and D&P? Does that person have any experience in negotiating, bearing in mind D&P have enormous experience in these specific matters. Whichever deal people vote for, it is a "head they win, tails we lose" scenario. Anyone, please feel free to come back here in several years time and correct me if I am wrong. For the record, I have already voted against the CVA, but everyone should make up their own mind at to how they wish to vote. From your experience with "several p2p cases" what was the average p/£ payouts? I still think 48p/44p/£ is too low, thoughts? All P2P cases are still live and running in administration. A large factor in the repayments depends upon the contracts that were used and the types of security obtained, together with the lender’s allocation of specific loans, and how heavily the lender was invested in specific loans or if the lender was diversified amongst most loans in the loan book. it is impossible to give accurate estimates due to the above. Hence, as a ballpark figure, and naturally depending upon the holders loan diversification, I believe average repayments are looking to settle around the 30p in the £, most unfortunately!! There will be lenders who receive more, and lenders that receive less.
|
|
|
Post by et on Oct 5, 2020 10:49:17 GMT
Seems to me that if the CVA is passed we have no further re-course? If the CVA is rejected then we face the risk of Administration; but I am not entirely convinced Wellesley would want to go down this road for the reasons 'et' has stated as in effect it would be a contrived Administration as they have not worked with their clients to overcome the transient liquidity issues and the whole matter would be thoroughly scrutinised?. I am still unclear in the event of Administration whether Cloverleaf gets to keep the loan book it bought for a massive discount or whether this would then be invalid and/or pursued by any 'independent' Administrator?
'Et' we need guidance from your insolvency expert as to the best course of action for the vote and then any advised subsequent actions. Ideally it would be best to get the vote suspended, but it is clear that Wellesley has purposefully orchestrated to allow as little time as possible for evaluation, particularly in light of the 220 page CVA document. I think improving the terms of this wretched CVA are impossible between now and the vote deadline; but it might be possible if the vote was suspended.
Wellesley is banking on fragmentation to get the CVA through but 75% is still a big hurdle for them to achieve to get it passed?
So many moving parts and unknowns in this whole stinking corrupt affair. I am expecting to have call with legal advisor this afternoon so hopefully will have a concrete way forward soon. in respect of the loan book transfer to Cloverleaf, if this or any transaction is proven to be antecedent (dodgy) then the administrator has the power to reverse them.
|
|
np
New Member
Posts: 5
Likes: 3
|
Post by np on Oct 5, 2020 10:49:19 GMT
I agree with the above comments from Mucho. My experience with a P2P company in administration (still ongoing after 2 years!!) is 38p in the pound from only 2 of th 10 loans that I had/have.
|
|
|
Post by m1kehunt on Oct 5, 2020 11:27:59 GMT
I can understand low payouts with the riskier p2p NOT secured on property (wouldn't touch those with a barge pole), but Wellesley sold this particular p2p as secured on property assets and unless all the properties got hit by an earthquake then the loan book is still secured until the properties are sold. I fully understand the liquidity issue, have one myself! If Wellesley just waited 6 mths - 1yr? until properties are sold we'd all get our money back.. I'm prepared to wait it out but haven't been offered this as an alternative?
I have investments in the larger p2p's (Rate setter/Assetz Capital) who seem to have mechanisms in place to get through the current "abnormal market conditions" (limiting withdrawals or offering to sell loan books at a discount , currently around 8% with assetz capital..). Nothing from Wellesley!
|
|
|
Post by dm on Oct 5, 2020 11:52:30 GMT
M1ke. Of course Wellesley could have worked with its clients to get over the short term liquidity issue, but instead saw this as a golden opportunity to rip them off and for the Directors to make a huge amount of money at their clients expense. As you say similar platforms have faced similar issues but have introduced equitable measures. This is what is so disgusting about the 'Wellesley Way' it's an attempt to rob you of your capital and accrued interest in broad daylight.
|
|
|
Post by et on Oct 6, 2020 13:57:58 GMT
|
|
lac47
New Member
Posts: 2
|
Post by lac47 on Oct 6, 2020 17:45:10 GMT
the only 'constructive' thing about the CVA is that included in the CVA documentation, they have had to disclose all of the shady and underhand things they have got up to, including the sale of the Loan Book at a knock down price to 'one of their own' and allowing Directors to write off their Loans from the company which were used to enable them to buy shares. When the CVA is 'defeated' and then an Administrator is appointed, he/she will then have all the ammunition they will need to challenge the Directors to 'correct' these malfeasances,,,yeh
|
|