ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 23, 2015 12:57:57 GMT
Rejected by us, but everyone else decided to take the money & run so IVA accepted. Legal discussions. Confused.com here - who was 'everyone else'? There were creditors other than FK.
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,841
Likes: 1,465
|
Post by bugs4me on Apr 23, 2015 12:59:39 GMT
Confused.com here - who was 'everyone else'? There were creditors other than FK. So FK lenders finished up with pennies in the pound. I'm not involved but these instances have more than a fishy smell to them IMO.
|
|
min
Member of DD Central
Posts: 602
Likes: 169
|
Post by min on Apr 23, 2015 15:31:41 GMT
There were creditors other than FK. So FK lenders finished up with pennies in the pound. I'm not involved but these instances have more than a fishy smell to them IMO. This one's got haddock, cod and plaice written all over it but FK seem to be doing their best.
|
|
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 23, 2015 16:15:20 GMT
Confused.com here - who was 'everyone else'? There were creditors other than FK. What were the voting results ? Were FK lender votes aggregated with all the other creditors ?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Apr 23, 2015 16:24:59 GMT
There were creditors other than FK. What were the voting results ? Were FK lender votes aggregated with all the other creditors ? Here‘s the relevant paragraph from the update ‘Despite an overwhelming majority of FundingKnight lenders voting against the proposal, we are writing to inform you that the other creditors have voted in favour of the proposal, which has resulted in an overall position of 75.85% For and 24.15% Against the IVA. This means that the proposal has passed and will now go in to effect.' Based on the schedule of creditors in the IVA FK was the only party not to support the iVA.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Apr 23, 2015 17:11:38 GMT
That annoys me, when a borrower "volunteers" to pay the creditors a pittance to escape bankruptcy, and individual creditors are not in a position to say no. Mr S smirks his way into the future to open another business. I hope FK pursue him on a separate fraud charge; plenty of FK lenders are owed a lot more than I, probably including FK's own underwriting fraternity.
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Apr 23, 2015 18:40:09 GMT
I second that. I have more confidence here than at Fish Cakes that significant action will be pursued.
|
|
|
Post by jackpease on Apr 23, 2015 20:02:24 GMT
Well I thought that an IVA could not include debts accrued through fraud - I'd love to know (any lawyers here?) whether FK could - if they felt the loan application contained misrepresentations (as it clearly does) - could FK then start a private prosecution which would presumably prevent or stall the IVA?
It'd be a feather in FKs hat if it was the one to do what Funding Circle should have done with some of its dodgy ones Jack P
|
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,959
Likes: 1,680
|
Post by Steerpike on May 6, 2015 12:34:26 GMT
Based on the email from FK today, in this case at least, it appears that IVA = Get Out Of Jail Free.
It will be interesting to see what FK do next.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on May 6, 2015 13:21:50 GMT
Based on the email from FK today, in this case at least, it appears that IVA = Get Out Of Jail Free. It will be interesting to see what FK do next. The (almost) whole update wording is interesting. "We have been advised that, as a consequence of the approval of the IVA, all creditors are now stopped from pursuing any director or individual for recovery of monies under any civil action, including civil actions for fraud.
FundingKnight can now only pursue a civil action should the IVA fail.
There are alternative options available to us and we will be exercising all of them...." (my red emphasis).
Amazing. Offer an IVA which is accepted and you can't be had later for fraud. Not saying there is fraud here, but has Mr S picked out the right lawyer? Or is it just another instance of "the law is an ass"? Roll on the alternative options (especially following the alleged telling of fiscal lies to ensure getting the loan in the first place)!
|
|
|
Post by jackpease on May 6, 2015 15:30:45 GMT
This is truly gobsmacking and i am reading between the lines of FK's response that the way is no longer open for *civil* action on fraud.
What about criminal action? As mentioned previously, IVA's cannot be used to discharge fraud - or is it now too late?
I still believe that there is a role for some self help here - the usual thing seems to turn on a platform when a loan goes bad as opposed to trying to think how to help them stop this sort of thing again (remember this is not just a case of a firm going pop when it loses a contract eg AC electricians.
Eg had a criminal complaint been made - would the IVA had to be put on hold? It is open for the public to lay criminal cases and it may be that us borrowers are the ones that have to do this as the platform is merely the agent.
Jack P
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on May 7, 2015 10:32:27 GMT
It sounds unlikely to me that acceptance of an iva ( by other parties) would preclude prosecution for previously committed offences either civil or criminal.
|
|
bababill
Member of DD Central
Posts: 525
Likes: 243
|
Post by bababill on Jul 23, 2015 6:59:21 GMT
The due diligence (or lack of) is concerning..as of 24th of August 2014 (when around perhaps the loan was originating?), one credit company only recommended a maximum £10,000 credit limit.
|
|
|
Post by kayfundingknight on Jul 23, 2015 14:04:39 GMT
We shared the frustration of all affected lenders with this particular borrower. Unfortunately despite our best efforts, the borrower referred to in this post, failed to provide us with a true picture of their circumstances and as a result we have reported the borrower to the police for fraud.
We do refer to credit company data when making our lending decisions, however, in our experience, often this is not up to date and/or is not 100% reliable as it is usually historic. The quoted credit limits may also only refer to trade credit and are not an indication of a borrowing limit. We always have and continue to take a number of factors into account and recommendations and information from credit companies is just one piece of the information we gather and assess.
As a new lender with FundingKnight, I hope that this gives you some clarity and reassurance. Please contact us at info@fundingknight.com if you have any further queries, concerns or need any assistance.
|
|
|
Post by profunder on Aug 16, 2015 18:15:27 GMT
Hello,
I have registered to make this post, firstly I disclose I have no interest in this loan and not a member of FK. This thread unsettles me a little as I have read it for general interest.
It was mentioned the loan is backed by a personal guarantee, is this not correct?
If the loan was backed by a personal guarantee, that guarantee is supposed to protect the lender for losses against the business loan (if fraud has happened or not). Until the business loan has defaulted or been settled (including in an IVA) then there is no recourse.
However as lenders now have a loss as the IVA has completed then clearly the directors guarantee should not be enforced. Unless an agreement is reached with the director to pay the loss (or settle with discount), the director needs to be sued for the loss. This should be a straighforward (but slow) process.
Once the judgement has been ruled in factor on FK you can write a statutory demand which gives 21 days for payment. Failure of payment allows you then to apply to bankrupt the director and take possession of assets such as his home.
Nothing in the IVA between the company and investors prevents the directors guarantee from being enforced and ultimate bankruptcy in event of non payment.
Why is this not being pursued? Or was the guarantee never taken?
|
|