|
|
Post by get2jaime on Sept 23, 2024 10:06:11 GMT
Have read the detailed explanation through the website of which way to go, strikes me we are being encouraged to take Option 1 the final settlement offer. I have a decent chunk of cash with this loan via QAA, be interesting to know which way voters are planning to go? My inclination is go for the longer administration option.
|
|
|
|
Post by captainconfident on Sept 23, 2024 10:13:41 GMT
I've always had this in my notes as "The Cocked-Up Carehome" and have been slapping myself on the back for selling my holding before the storm clouds gathered. Until yesterday when Assetz reminded me of my folly in activating their QAA (which seemed to have protection against adverse events) and that they had whacked a big chunk of that into this loan.
Aren't those "monitoring fees" high. Turns out AC were the only party guaranteed against adverse events.
|
|
DeafEater
Member of DD Central
Extremely Moderate
Posts: 228 
Likes: 304
|
Post by DeafEater on Sept 23, 2024 11:02:47 GMT
I didn't see any mention of the provision fund covering any of the 48% shortfall. Does it help if you believe in fairies?
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 796
Likes: 804
|
Post by eeyore on Sept 23, 2024 11:16:54 GMT
I've always had this in my notes as "The Cocked-Up Carehome" and have been slapping myself on the back for selling my holding before the storm clouds gathered. Until yesterday when Assetz reminded me of my folly in activating their QAA (which seemed to have protection against adverse events) and that they had whacked a big chunk of that into this loan. Aren't those "monitoring fees" high. Turns out AC were the only party guaranteed against adverse events. My partner has also just had the email about the vote, so when I went to look at the details, I was surprised to see that this loan is 4% of the QAA account's total and is 50% larger than the next largest loan. We have always regarded the QAA as a "black box" - lots of loans with enough diversity not to be dependent on the success or failure of a few loans. Looking at the history of this loan, I'm not impressed by the scope of AC's "monitoring" despite the high fees - missing the fact that the borrower had started to construct additional facilities in the roof space which weren't in the project plan! Given the insistence of the prospective purchasor of the incomplete property that the personal guarantees for the loan be abandoned (as outlined in Option A), I'm assuming that the purchasor is a connected party to the original borrower.
|
|
p2pfan
Member of DD Central
Full-Time Investor
Posts: 781 
Likes: 889
|
Post by p2pfan on Sept 23, 2024 11:21:36 GMT
Another Assetz Capital and P2P lending farce.
For instance, the Borrower perpetrated a fraud, expanding the construction project and using Lenders' money while keeping the matter hidden from AC and AC Lenders: "During the course of the build the Borrower applied for and was granted planning for additional palliative care beds in the roof space. Rather than advise AC of this and reappraise the project and required funding, the Borrower utilised funds to incorporate works on this extended project. It soon became evident that there would be inadequate funds to complete"
There are 101 issues with this development now, including the sizes of the rooms, legal issues, fire safety etc. etc.
I've voted to accept the full and final settlement offer, as tragic as that scenario is. It means Lenders will only get half their money back (if AC and their cohorts don't find out reasons to extract further sums from the sum due to us) but that's better than going into an Administration process than can and will take many years and will result in gargantuan amounts in AC and Administrator's fees.
Laurel and Hardy could have done a better job than AC in running a lending business. AC have been highly negligent and fallen short at every single point of this project.
|
|
m2btj
Member of DD Central
Posts: 631
Likes: 772
|
Post by m2btj on Sept 23, 2024 11:51:55 GMT
Another Assetz Capital and P2P lending farce. For instance, the Borrower perpetrated a fraud, expanding the construction project and using Lenders' money while keeping the matter hidden from AC and AC Lenders: "During the course of the build the Borrower applied for and was granted planning for additional palliative care beds in the roof space. Rather than advise AC of this and reappraise the project and required funding, the Borrower utilised funds to incorporate works on this extended project. It soon became evident that there would be inadequate funds to complete" There are 101 issues with this development now, including the sizes of the rooms, legal issues, fire safety etc. etc. I've voted to accept the full and final settlement offer, as tragic as that scenario is. It means Lenders will only get half their money back (if AC and their cohorts don't find out reasons to extract further sums from the sum due to us) but that's better than going into an Administration process than can and will take many years and will result in gargantuan amounts in AC and Administrator's fees. Laurel and Hardy could have done a better job than AC in running a lending business. AC have been highly negligent and fallen short at every single point of this project. So much for AC's monitoring surveyor who obviously hadn't visited the site in an age! Simple schoolboy errors that could have been avoided by keeping the eye on the ball! AC will take outstanding Monitoring Fees of £234,865 from any proceeds received. Had the site been properly monitored we may not be in this mess today! Now it's investors who have to pick up the tab for sloppy monitoring & a rogue lender.
|
|
|
|
Post by nbk on Sept 23, 2024 13:59:46 GMT
Have read the detailed explanation through the website of which way to go, strikes me we are being encouraged to take Option 1 the final settlement offer. I have a decent chunk of cash with this loan via QAA, be interesting to know which way voters are planning to go? My inclination is go for the longer administration option. Going to administration is almost a guarantee of drawing the process out for years, increasing costs and reducing payback to orginal lenders by a significant amount (possibly to under 10%), based on all the other administration results I've been dragged into across P2P. I'm going for Option A.
|
|
spareapennyor2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 626
Likes: 470
Member is Online
|
Post by spareapennyor2 on Sept 23, 2024 14:06:55 GMT
cutting my losses
be done with it
|
|
69m
Member of DD Central
Posts: 122
Likes: 215
|
Post by 69m on Sept 23, 2024 15:45:46 GMT
I avoided this project when it was listed as an MLA loan, but I've ended up with a holding worth a couple of quid through the QAA.
I'm flabbergasted by how badly it has been managed. An arguably fraudulent use of funds (as mentioned above) plus a whole load of new issues (apparently only discovered by the latest buyer's due diligence) are just a couple of examples of inadequate oversight. AC's insistence that it'll be taking a substantial monitoring fee just adds insult to injury, really.
My sympathies to anybody who has a substantial amount tied up in this disaster. That the voting history reads like a list of 'full and final settlement' broken promises must be especially galling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ace on Sept 23, 2024 16:45:31 GMT
That AC continues to draw massive monitoring fees of hundreds of thousands of pounds when their monitoring has turned out to be utterly useless (and likely negligent) is indeed galling. They have absolutely no shame.
As I only have a few quid in this via the access accounts I won't vote. I'll leave it up to those unfortunate soles with higher amounts at stake to decide which way to jump.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Sept 23, 2024 17:04:57 GMT
I've always had this in my notes as "The Cocked-Up Carehome" and have been slapping myself on the back for selling my holding before the storm clouds gathered. Until yesterday when Assetz reminded me of my folly in activating their QAA (which seemed to have protection against adverse events) and that they had whacked a big chunk of that into this loan. Aren't those "monitoring fees" high. Turns out AC were the only party guaranteed against adverse events. yeah. Thankfully I "only" have £68 in it, but its the largest and about 40% more than the next largest. I would read through the updates but can't be a***d. I think the summaries of posters are good enough. I'm inclined to just vote for settlement. If I can be bothered to vote at all. I'm sure prolonging our agony will simply increase the fees that AC collect anyway.
|
|
|
|
Post by garreh on Sept 23, 2024 19:01:59 GMT
I have £800 tied up in this, by far most out of all my loans. I'm inclined to vote A for an orderly and quick sale and cut the loss, but can't see Option B being any worse than a 50% haircut - though it would drag the process out for possibly a 5-20% better return.
AC if your reading this: You failed all form of due diligence on this loan. There is absolutely no justification for charging 10% in management fees when you lost investors 50% capital.
|
|
|
|
Post by frank121 on Sept 23, 2024 19:45:39 GMT
An absolute joke... Zero transparency and I find the monitoring surveyors fees hard to swallow considering we do not even see the reports. Exactly what was monitored when so many errors were allowed? It's a farce since we cannot do anything about it. I also have about £800 in this loan which is roughly 5% of my portfolio. It's probably better to vote option A even if I think the administrators should have a better chance to fetch more, (yes I am still naïve but not so young) it’s likely it’s undervalued despite all the flaws but we have no idea if the personal guarantees of almost 2M are worth anything. However, can we chance AC to manage this effectively!! Answers on a postcard...don't forget the S.A.E. ;p
|
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Sept 28, 2024 11:23:07 GMT
The borrower went of plan , did not tell us , ran out of money but had a solution he can sit pritty and we can pay for his mistakes. Don't care if I loose more ,B.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,315
Likes: 11,523
|
Post by ilmoro on Sept 28, 2024 12:53:21 GMT
The borrower went of plan , did not tell us , ran out of money but had a solution he can sit pritty and we can pay for his mistakes. Don't care if I loose more ,B. Last time one of the people involved came up with a solution it destroyed the value of the asset. Take the money ... I doubt you'll get any satisfaction going down the other rabbit hole & more than the Lendy investors have.
|
|
