ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 24, 2021 12:39:46 GMT
Compared to Collateral, where half of the admin is trying to find where the bloody hell the directors have gone and put all the information, I'm perfectly happy for the directors to be retained on consultancy as required. Yes, given that someone has got to assist the administrators with the complexities at least in the short term, somebody from staff would need to be retained (choice of 2 AIUI). They could remain employed which represents a fixed cost to administrators or they can consult on a time/cost basis which represents a flexible cost to the administrators. Consultancy seems the logical choice plus you get access to both rather than just one.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 12:10:45 GMT
Thought it was the Duty of the Directors of the Failed company to Assist/Cooperate in Administration (as and when needed). Moreover, the Administrators were already involved in most of the Loans - from much before the Adminstration (to the extent of arranging further Loans and Completing Unfinished Builds).
So, Admins charge WindDown Fees + Platform Admin Fees + Directors (MoneyThing) charge again
Retaining MoneyThing Admin Staff is different than retaining the Directors (either on a Fixed Cost or Consultancy basis).
Not sure if MoneyThing would continue to Charge the 2% per Annum Admin Fees too.
I think, it is over the top.
|
|
starfished
Member of DD Central
Posts: 296
Likes: 216
|
Post by starfished on Mar 29, 2021 12:32:33 GMT
Thought it was the Duty of the Directors of the Failed company to Assist/Cooperate in Administration (as and when needed). Moreover, the Administrators were already involved in most of the Loans - from much before the Adminstration (to the extent of arranging further Loans and Completing Unfinished Builds).
So, Admins charge WindDown Fees + Platform Admin Fees + Directors (MoneyThing) charge again
Retaining MoneyThing Admin Staff is different than retaining the Directors (either on a Fixed Cost or Consultancy basis).
Not sure if MoneyThing would continue to Charge the 2% per Annum Admin Fees too.
I think, it is over the top.
"Assist/Cooperate in Administration" is not the same as asking someone to work for free...
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 29, 2021 12:37:42 GMT
Thought it was the Duty of the Directors of the Failed company to Assist/Cooperate in Administration (as and when needed). Moreover, the Administrators were already involved in most of the Loans - from much before the Adminstration (to the extent of arranging further Loans and Completing Unfinished Builds).
So, Admins charge WindDown Fees + Platform Admin Fees + Directors (MoneyThing) charge again
Retaining MoneyThing Admin Staff is different than retaining the Directors (either on a Fixed Cost or Consultancy basis).
Not sure if MoneyThing would continue to Charge the 2% per Annum Admin Fees too.
I think, it is over the top.
Directors are required to help the administrators in their investigations as to why the company failed but they are not required as AIUI to assist with the continued running of the company, there involvement is at the discretion of the administrators. The platform charges the costs of managing the recovery of the loans. That is different to the fees & costs, including the director fees, of the administration payable from the company's assets. Not sure there were any admin staff anymore, I think the directors were the only staff left but I dont think we are talking about the directors being paid to do admin but provide operational & loan related info. The 2% is the cost of managing the recoveries on behalf of the Security Trustee, at the low end of such fees - FS 2.5%, Lendy 3%.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 13:03:44 GMT
Thought it was the Duty of the Directors of the Failed company to Assist/Cooperate in Administration (as and when needed). Moreover, the Administrators were already involved in most of the Loans - from much before the Adminstration (to the extent of arranging further Loans and Completing Unfinished Builds).
So, Admins charge WindDown Fees + Platform Admin Fees + Directors (MoneyThing) charge again
Retaining MoneyThing Admin Staff is different than retaining the Directors (either on a Fixed Cost or Consultancy basis).
Not sure if MoneyThing would continue to Charge the 2% per Annum Admin Fees too.
I think, it is over the top.
"Assist/Cooperate in Administration" is not the same as asking someone to work for free... I understand that, but why should there be need to ask someone to work at a cost - the very same people who caused these failures in the 1st place. All relevant documents should already be available and if something is needed for investigations, the Directors need to cooperate. The Administrators should be able to do that work.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 29, 2021 13:31:16 GMT
"Assist/Cooperate in Administration" is not the same as asking someone to work for free... I understand that, but why should there be need to ask someone to work at a cost - the very same people who caused these failures in the 1st place. All relevant documents should already be available and if something is needed for investigations, the Directors need to cooperate. The Administrators should be able to do that work. The administrators are insolvency practitioners, they are not likely to be particularly knowledgeable on the intricacies of P2P, intimate with MTs systems and paperwork etc. They are going to have to ask about stuff and the former directors are probably the best & cheapest option.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,657
Likes: 2,450
|
Post by iRobot on Mar 29, 2021 13:35:27 GMT
Thought it was the Duty of the Directors of the Failed company to Assist/Cooperate in Administration (as and when needed). <snip> For accuracy, the Directors are now former Directors as of 06/01/21.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 13:51:54 GMT
Thought it was the Duty of the Directors of the Failed company to Assist/Cooperate in Administration (as and when needed). Moreover, the Administrators were already involved in most of the Loans - from much before the Adminstration (to the extent of arranging further Loans and Completing Unfinished Builds). So, Admins charge WindDown Fees + Platform Admin Fees + Directors (MoneyThing) charge again Retaining MoneyThing Admin Staff is different than retaining the Directors (either on a Fixed Cost or Consultancy basis). Not sure if MoneyThing would continue to Charge the 2% per Annum Admin Fees too. I think, it is over the top.
Directors are required to help the administrators in their investigations as to why the company failed but they are not required as AIUI to assist with the continued running of the company, there involvement is at the discretion of the administrators. The platform charges the costs of managing the recovery of the loans. That is different to the fees & costs, including the director fees, of the administration payable from the company's assets. Not sure there were any admin staff anymore, I think the directors were the only staff left but I dont think we are talking about the directors being paid to do admin but provide operational & loan related info. The 2% is the cost of managing the recoveries on behalf of the Security Trustee, at the low end of such fees - FS 2.5%, Lendy 3%. The Directors should No Longer be needed "to assist with the continued running of the company". The "costs of managing the recovery of the loans" are already catered for - under the Headings 'Platform Admin Fees & Winddown Fees' plus by Disbursements to Receivers, etc. We aren't talking about the Disbursements here. All "operational & loan related info" should already be available - unless it was a micky mouse company. "2% is the cost of managing the recoveries on behalf of the Security Trustee, at the low end of such fees - FS 2.5%, Lendy 3%" - this again is catered for under the Administrators Charges. Remember that the 2% Fee with Moneything (as compared to 2.5% FS is not on the Total Capital Recovered. For MoneyThing, it is 2% per Annum - Not 2 % over the entire period of Recovery (like FS) and this too is backdated to when they think the troubles started & NOT when the Loans were officially Defaulted on the Platform. Also, they charge 2% per Annum on the entire Loan, irrespective of the fact that only 30% of Capital is Recovered, as has been the case with Newcastle Loan (16 months extra which equates to more than 4%) and instead of 4% on the 30% Recovery, they charged it on 100%, making it 3.33x2=6.6 times more).
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 14:03:06 GMT
NOTE : All the details of the Fees charged, Disbursements, etc, for the Newcastle Loan seem to have disappeared from their Website now (unless I am not looking at the right place).
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 29, 2021 14:41:32 GMT
NOTE : All the details of the Fees charged, Disbursements, etc, for the Newcastle Loan seem to have disappeared from their Website now (unless I am not looking at the right place). Think they are on the original default loan, havent migrated across to the residual loan with the relevant update.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 18:02:14 GMT
No, they aren't on any Loan. I'm sure they were present a few months ago (before Admin). Some of the Updates have also changed.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 18:04:04 GMT
I understand that, but why should there be need to ask someone to work at a cost - the very same people who caused these failures in the 1st place. All relevant documents should already be available and if something is needed for investigations, the Directors need to cooperate. The Administrators should be able to do that work. The administrators are insolvency practitioners, they are not likely to be particularly knowledgeable on the intricacies of P2P, intimate with MTs systems and paperwork etc. They are going to have to ask about stuff and the former directors are probably the best & cheapest option. Agreed, but why would they need to fall back on ex-Directors for a Fee.
Would FS Investors be happy if FS Admins asked for Consultancy from Raj or Luxmore for a Fee.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 29, 2021 18:28:24 GMT
The administrators are insolvency practitioners, they are not likely to be particularly knowledgeable on the intricacies of P2P, intimate with MTs systems and paperwork etc. They are going to have to ask about stuff and the former directors are probably the best & cheapest option. Agreed, but why would they need to fall back on ex-Directors for a Fee.
Would FS Investors be happy if FS Admins asked for Consultancy from Raj or Luxmore for a Fee.
Why would the ex-directors do it for free? IIRC Hackett was
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,848
Likes: 11,077
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 29, 2021 18:36:26 GMT
No, they aren't on any Loan. I'm sure they were present a few months ago (before Admin). Some of the Updates have also changed.
You sure, the breakdowns are on the EOS statements attached to the 2/4 update on the original default loans (MTBA1012) I dont recall anything more detailed.
|
|
mah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 325
Likes: 363
|
Post by mah on Mar 29, 2021 18:53:58 GMT
Agreed, but why would they need to fall back on ex-Directors for a Fee.
Would FS Investors be happy if FS Admins asked for Consultancy from Raj or Luxmore for a Fee.
Why would the ex-directors do it for free? IIRC Hackett was My point is 'Why should there be a need to ask them' - whether for Free or for an additional Remuneration (Conflict of Interest).
|
|