|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Nov 4, 2022 10:39:45 GMT
Cladding issue is unlucky and accounts for most of the worst performing properties I hold. I think if they'd managed to sell a few more this year I'd probably be willing to put some of that into the equity raises but I'm reluctant to invest any new cash. Seems to be several that don't look too far off, often just waiting on a single tenant to leave. Any thoughts on the above that was seemingly pasted into most of the updates a while ago? The latest "anniversary" on a property I have is March 2024. A bit early/optimistic for them to be thinking beyond that? That a large proportion of them might be sold before then. You can bet that the "improvement works" will be another cash cow for them.....their excuse for not selling will be that there isn't a sufficient market without making improvements that will allow it to be bought by landlords.
|
|
daveb4
Member of DD Central
Posts: 220
Likes: 116
|
Post by daveb4 on Nov 7, 2022 10:23:49 GMT
I was advised by phone that if the cash is not raised they will continue to endeavour to sell properties until there is not a deficit and/or more unlikely to close that property down.
So debatably;
Put equity raise in the properties which will continue to be rented and you keep your current percentage with the hope of future property dividends followed by sale profits/losses upon annual reviews.
Don't put the equity fundraise in and not enough is raised for the properties and they will continue to be sold to cover the negative position (which in most cases they are already trying to do). The risk here though is if they do though raise enough cash you obviously take the risk of diluted funds when the properties are finally sold sometime in the future.
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Nov 11, 2022 11:25:47 GMT
Like previous filibusting actions, this looks like just a waste of time, not one has reached 10% yet and 50% is the minimum.
|
|
|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Nov 15, 2022 18:06:13 GMT
Probably in light of the dire uptake, they've extended the deadline to 13 Dec, along with releasing more info re the properties.
The thing that stands out to me is the number of lease variations required to get the sale through across the portfolio.
As part of my small offline portfolio, I have bought and sold leasehold flats and I don't get this - "Lease is 125 years from 1/1/2015 with ground rent of £300pa doubling every 25 years. Landlord is unwilling to negotiate a variation therefore lease extension notices have been served on the landlord which will allow leases to be statutorily varied to a peppercorn (nil) ground rent. A valuation has been undertaken which indicates that the premium payable for each variation is £8,000 - £11,000 plus our and the landlord's legal costs and disbursements."
I've no idea why they're planning to spend so much money on a statutory extension of a lease for a London property which has 118 years left on it and the GR is doubling only every 25 years, which is fine for most mainstream lenders. It only becomes an issue when the doubling period is 21 years or less.
Getting rid of the doubling clause would be a good thing but given the facts it's almost certainly not worth it to spend 8-11k + freeholder's costs per flat on doing it now. I
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Nov 15, 2022 19:28:57 GMT
Probably in light of the dire uptake, they've extended the deadline to 13 Dec, along with releasing more info re the properties. The thing that stands out to me is the number of lease variations required to get the sale through across the portfolio. As part of my small offline portfolio, I have bought and sold leasehold flats and I don't get this - "Lease is 125 years from 1/1/2015 with ground rent of £300pa doubling every 25 years. Landlord is unwilling to negotiate a variation therefore lease extension notices have been served on the landlord which will allow leases to be statutorily varied to a peppercorn (nil) ground rent. A valuation has been undertaken which indicates that the premium payable for each variation is £8,000 - £11,000 plus our and the landlord's legal costs and disbursements."I've no idea why they're planning to spend so much money on a statutory extension of a lease for a London property which has 118 years left on it and the GR is doubling only every 25 years, which is fine for most mainstream lenders. It only becomes an issue when the doubling period is 21 years or less. Getting rid of the doubling clause would be a good thing but given the facts it's almost certainly not worth it to spend 8-11k + freeholder's costs per flat on doing it now. I
I haven't been following anything close enough for some time in order to comment. Their track record of returns is abysmal and this appears to be just another contributing example.
|
|
|
Post by longjohn on Nov 16, 2022 16:28:28 GMT
I don't get this - "Lease is 125 years from 1/1/2015 with ground rent of £300pa doubling every 25 years. Landlord is unwilling to negotiate a variation therefore lease extension notices have been served on the landlord which will allow leases to be statutorily varied to a peppercorn (nil) ground rent. A valuation has been undertaken which indicates that the premium payable for each variation is £8,000 - £11,000 plus our and the landlord's legal costs and disbursements."
I don't get this either. Doubling the ground rent every 25 years implies an inflation rate of 2.6%pa which is pretty close to the government target. Seems to me to be another way for them to extract a profit somewhere.
|
|
|
Post by scepticalinvestor on Nov 22, 2022 13:49:37 GMT
Doesn't look like the equity fundraise wheeze is going to have enough takers (min 50% required), the highest at the mo is less than 12%.
I wonder what scheme they're going to come up with next to keep the gravy train chugging along......
|
|
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 Nov 28, 2022 17:46:18 GMT
New wheeze - as if by magic everyone's Portfolio has gone up in value as it defaults to the better valuation measure
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Nov 28, 2022 17:57:48 GMT
New wheeze - as if by magic everyone's Portfolio has gone up in value as it defaults to the better valuation measure Yes, that boosts my Unrealised Capital Gains by 86%! What a shame I can't sell them for that valuation. It would become my top performing platform
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Nov 28, 2022 21:19:47 GMT
New wheeze - as if by magic everyone's Portfolio has gone up in value as it defaults to the better valuation measure Yes, that boosts my Unrealised Capital Gains by 86%! What a shame I can't sell them for that valuation. It would become my top performing platform
Cover up the bad news with good news, straight out of the corporate textbook.
My investment value has dropped on several properties which means many of the lack lustre valuations we've been fed over the years aren't even real when it comes to selling time. No mention of this in the email. And dividends are also washed up.
My vacant possession value went up by a similar amount as my investment value went down.
|
|
jester
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 203
|
Post by jester on Nov 30, 2022 19:38:11 GMT
It's a damning indictment that when they opt for the most favourable valuation available it moves my portfolio from having lost substantial value, to losing some value!
Hardly a sparkling performance whatever way you cut it during a period of substantial property market growth.
|
|
|
Post by overthehill on Nov 30, 2022 20:07:43 GMT
It's a damning indictment that when they opt for the most favourable valuation available it moves my portfolio from having lost substantial value, to losing some value! Hardly a sparkling performance whatever way you cut it during a period of substantial property market growth.
I don't know how much the cladding issues with about 10 properties have affected the portfolio returns, no doubt PP have their mitigating figure , nevertheless their general performance has made investing a complete waste of time and more like an interest free loan. Still in terms of capital preservation Fundingsecure was worse and currently Archover and Ablrate could also be worse.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,871
Likes: 7,915
|
Post by SteveT on Dec 1, 2022 12:32:24 GMT
It's a damning indictment that when they opt for the most favourable valuation available it moves my portfolio from having lost substantial value, to losing some value! Hardly a sparkling performance whatever way you cut it during a period of substantial property market growth.
I don't know how much the cladding issues with about 10 properties have affected the portfolio returns, no doubt PP have their mitigating figure , nevertheless their general performance has made investing a complete waste of time and more like an interest free loan. Still in terms of capital preservation Fundingsecure was worse and currently Archover and Ablrate could also be worse.
That's comparing (rotten) apples and pears. P2P lending is junk debt. Property Partner is supposedly equity (albeit leveraged)
|
|
jester
Member of DD Central
Posts: 161
Likes: 203
|
Post by jester on Dec 13, 2022 15:53:01 GMT
I had three properties with an equity raise, two of which have now been cancelled!
So I have a simple decision whether to invest in the remaining equity raise which is now over 50%
I feel like I should match my current investment as it's a small portion of my overall portfolio so my holding isn't diluted and hope for proceeds from flat sales, what are others thinking?
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,871
Likes: 7,915
|
Post by SteveT on Dec 13, 2022 17:45:04 GMT
I had three properties with an equity raise, two of which have now been cancelled! So I have a simple decision whether to invest in the remaining equity raise which is now over 50% I feel like I should match my current investment as it's a small portion of my overall portfolio so my holding isn't diluted and hope for proceeds from flat sales, what are others thinking? Given their track record over the last 3 years and their regular changing of the rules to suit their own ends, I’m not putting another penny into PP. Why send good money after bad?
|
|