c88dnf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 364 
Likes: 266
|
Post by c88dnf on Oct 26, 2020 12:18:08 GMT
Although tabbed as defaulted for quite a while, this loan has been entirely repaid and with interest this morning (26/10/20). I haven't calculated the interest rate achieved/ applied in the indecent haste to get my dosh withdrawn...
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
Post by r1200gs on Oct 26, 2020 12:31:47 GMT
Is it actually in your account for withdrawal?
Getting the money to the receiver seems to be no guarantee the receiver will pay it to its rightful owner, as per tower block.
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,742
Likes: 3,137
|
Post by jonno on Oct 26, 2020 12:43:24 GMT
Is it actually in your account for withdrawal? Getting the money to the receiver seems to be no guarantee the receiver will pay it to its rightful owner, as per tower block. Yep. Available for withdrawal; All cap and interest (less CG fees). A veritable oasis in a desert of sh*te.
|
|
c88dnf
Member of DD Central
Posts: 364
Likes: 266
|
Post by c88dnf on Oct 26, 2020 12:46:10 GMT
Is it actually in your account for withdrawal? Getting the money to the receiver seems to be no guarantee the receiver will pay it to its rightful owner, as per tower block. Certainly is. Or rather was. Now in the withdrawal process, along with the rather less satisfactory return from last week's conclusion.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Oct 26, 2020 13:11:22 GMT
Yep. Available for withdrawal; All cap and interest (less CG fees). A veritable oasis in a desert of sh*te. Another example of the perverse situation where the better the redemption, the worse the outcome for the lender. Total owed to lenders was £138,000 capital + £31,622.79 interest, or, in round figures, £170k. After all fees (inc. FS' 5%)*, had the redemption sum been £170k CG's fee would have been £5,100 so the interest returned to lenders would have been £26,900 However, because the redemption sum was just shy of £210k, CG have deducted £6,300 (rounded), reducing lenders returns. It's a perverse scenario where the better the redemption for the platform and borrower (although barely, in this case), the worse the outcome for the lender. * - mathematically, it wouldn't quite work out this way, but it nonetheless illustrates the point.
|
|
adrian77
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,894
Likes: 4,122
|
Post by adrian77 on Oct 26, 2020 15:21:01 GMT
probably a silly question - did FS take 5% of the £210K recovered?
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Oct 27, 2020 11:54:31 GMT
probably a silly question - did FS take 5% of the £210K recovered? This one fits into the 'rare occasions' category mentioned in this post, so it's not possible to say how FS calculated their fees other than they took all that was owing to them, given there was still a very small sum left over and returned to the borrower.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 323
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Oct 27, 2020 19:45:58 GMT
Yep. Available for withdrawal; All cap and interest (less CG fees). A veritable oasis in a desert of sh*te. Another example of the perverse situation where the better the redemption, the worse the outcome for the lender. Total owed to lenders was £138,000 capital + £31,622.79 interest, or, in round figures, £170k. After all fees (inc. FS' 5%)*, had the redemption sum been £170k CG's fee would have been £5,100 so the interest returned to lenders would have been £26,900 However, because the redemption sum was just shy of £210k, CG have deducted £6,300 (rounded), reducing lenders returns. It's a perverse scenario where the better the redemption for the platform and borrower (although barely, in this case), the worse the outcome for the lender. * - mathematically, it wouldn't quite work out this way, but it nonetheless illustrates the point. 1 question - had the redemption been £210K, CG would still have received 170K from Receivers (after FS 5%), so shouldn't their charges still be £5100 and Lenders Return the same at £26.900 ?
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Oct 29, 2020 16:39:22 GMT
1 question - had the redemption been £210K, CG would still have received 170K from Receivers (after FS 5%), so shouldn't their charges still be £5100 and Lenders Return the same at £26.900 ? Hi mah , CG&Co calculate their wedge on net redemptions, but pre-FS fees. Of course, one might argue it should be after FS fees (although in a typical Administration, CG would be entitled to their fees before any creditors / investors receive a dividend / pay-out) -or- One might argue that the FS' 5% 'default loan administration fee' is designed to cover the exact activity which CG are undertaking and therefore, CG's 2.5%++ should come out of that 5% -or- One might argue that FS' 5% fee should be struck out altogether ... ... to be continued in a court room soon 
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 323
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Oct 29, 2020 22:10:56 GMT
1 question - had the redemption been £210K, CG would still have received 170K from Receivers (after FS 5%), so shouldn't their charges still be £5100 and Lenders Return the same at £26.900 ? Hi mah , CG&Co calculate their wedge on net redemptions, but pre-FS fees. Sorry, what I meant was that the Net Receivable to FS would still be the same - the sum of Capital + Interest - in this case £170K (even if it fetched, say, 125% of the Loan, with the remaining going back to the Borrower, not to FS). So, CG should still charge 3 % on the 170K, even if it fetched £210K ?
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 323
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Oct 29, 2020 22:13:03 GMT
or One might argue that the scales of justice and morality are even more tilted at the moment as assuming a total recovery rate of 65% of capital (is that realistic) the actual FS fee would be 7.69% due to their self appointed right to use the loan amount rather than the recovered amount just to rub salt into the wounds, sheer class.
"Self Appointed Right" to NOT only use the Higher of the Full Loan Amount or Recovered Amount, but also any Forefeited Deposit from other Parties and Sundries - so Just use whichever is the Highest Figure.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Oct 30, 2020 11:25:30 GMT
Hi mah , CG&Co calculate their wedge on net redemptions, but pre-FS fees. Sorry, what I meant was that the Net Receivable to FS would still be the same - the sum of Capital + Interest - in this case £170K (even if it fetched, say, 125% of the Loan, with the remaining going back to the Borrower, not to FS). So, CG should still charge 3 % on the 170K, even if it fetched £210K ? Hmmmn - doesn't this boil down to what one party thinks should be done and another party applying what has been agreed can be done? The agreement is that CG will charge 2.5% (+ VAT + sundries) against the nett redemption sum. That's what they have done, because that's what has been agreed they can do. CG aren't going to be reducing fees they can claim under agreed terms, if for no other reason than they need to ensure their total bill - which includes activity on loans where they haven't been able to claim a redemption fee (or a very small one) - will be covered. CG aren't a charity. They are not (primarily) working on lenders' behalves. They are primarily working on ensuring that their P&L account on this particular case - the Administration of FS - ends up in the black rather than in the red. What stings most is that CG's fee - however it's calculated - comes directly from lenders' interest rather than from the 5% 'FS default loan administration fee'. Were it to come out of that 5%, how CG calculate their cut would largely be a moot point.
|
|
