Property Loan 20 - Repaid in full after Default

It is likely the loan went into default when Administrators were appointed, I don't know the details of a Lendy Ltd loan contract but most loan contracts have a standard "insolvency" clause.

Edit If default had not already happenned

That initially looks like a breach of contract by Lendy. The one between Lendy and the lenders to them, where at the time of origination of this loan Lendy was committed to paying its interest to those who lent it money on time each month.

This wouldn't apply to new loans made after the change of terms on 11 May, which are covered by different terms saying that the interest will be rolled up.

I'm assuming that they were not forced by the FCA to make the change to all past loan agreements, thereby passing some risk from Lendy to those who lent to Lendy. If an absolute instruction from the FCA I assume it would be covered by typical regulatory requirements terms and permitted.

It's also a concern that Lendy changed the terms of their own loan just 16 days before failure of their borrower and they appear now to be intending to benefit from the change. since administration takes time to arrange it seems hard to believe that they didn't know before changing the terms. A borrower rewriting its own loan's terms to be more favourable? Very bad news.

Still, however it's done, the fact that Lendy is apparently going to fail to meet one of its obligations as they existed at the time of loan origination to people who lent Lendy itself money causes me to have a significantly worse view of the platform. Not that much different from any other borrower. If a borrower defaults I'd be reluctant to give them another opportunity to do so. Worse still when it's a platform that I'd have to rely on to enforce terms not doing the enforcement of terms.
If Lendy fails to pay the interest it is committed to paying to those who lent it money on time each month and in full then a formal complaint and escalating to the Financial Ombudsman Service would seem like one approach that those who lent them money could use. Even lenders who might accept borrower Lendy paying late might be reluctant to accept the firm they lent to not paying at all and might do this if the money isn't forthcoming. The procedure still well known as a small claim would be another route but FOS is cheaper for consumers to use than the courts. But at the moment Lendy are at least saying that they intend to pay their interest late rather than not at all.

Of course, that's what they are saying today. Given that they changed the terms to a version that would allow rolling up they could change them again before this is done and assert that both changes to the terms of the loan to them apply.

Of course if Lendy would be at material risk of failure by paying then its creditors might well want to show ample forbearance.

Not good to see any platform apparently unwilling rather than unable to pay its original obligations to creditors. I do wonder what effect that might have on the future viability or growth of the platform.

Whatever happens this one is an interesting case to watch on the platform ethics and risk front.

how do you know there is no prospect of lendy or saving stream being inSolvent and unable to carry on normally it all sounds very rosy to me and if You've got inside information to support that then I bet we'd all love to hear it so we can rest easier

I suspect if Lendy Ltd were in default this would be a totally different discussion.  However I reiterate that the title of this thread is correct it certainly appears that everyone else believes it has, so do Lendy Ltd. 

It is also entirely possible that people who have purchased portions of this loan on the SM post September 2015 have a direct relationship with the borrower, not Lendy Ltd

cavendum est fenerantis

I don't like it, the apparent attempt to change the rules behind our backs, a default of over 2M 1.7M at 70%LTV isn't bombproof and Lendy would have to swallow the loss I think, I'm off.  The good news, my entire holding sold in minutes.

Hmm, the company is exposed to a potential default of £1.7million and has net assets of £? (less than £400k on latest, although out of date, information) and a very opaque situation with regard to whether the PF is part of those net assets and you believe everything in the garden will be rosy, inetersting point of view.