dovap
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467 
Likes: 410
|
Post by dovap on Aug 2, 2016 14:50:18 GMT
manpower were/are contracting out hardware repair centre type operation for IBM
(as far as I could tell)
(apart from a Royal mail address couldn't find anything to suggest there are still there)
and they were paying ~ £6.5 psf (which is in line with the rates for brand new units in the same area)
and yet this one is worth £10 psf as that's what the borrower is paying to himself ?
still new valuation on the way although the old one is fine (if it's not already sold / repaid by then)
|
|
Jeepers
Member of DD Central
Posts: 818
Likes: 721
|
Post by Jeepers on Aug 2, 2016 15:05:21 GMT
Borrowers plan A- Sell to repay
It's still not on the market and is due to be repaid in under 3 months.
Plan B- refinance
He's a finance broker and couldn't find cheaper rates than SS. Who's going to refinance him? No P2P platform will touch him after reading this thread.
I'd like to see a more feasible repayment method 😁
As long as he garden centre doesn't clear out the PF, we should be ok 😕
|
|
|
|
Post by harvey on Aug 2, 2016 15:16:56 GMT
Borrowers plan A- Sell to repay It's still not on the market and is due to be repaid in under 3 months. Plan B- refinance He's a finance broker and couldn't find cheaper rates than SS. Who's going to refinance him? No P2P platform will touch him after reading this thread. I'd like to see a more feasible repayment method 😁 As long as he garden centre doesn't clear out the PF, we should be ok 😕 Quite. The last SS update, just over a week ago, stated "We have regular contact with the borrower, he is going to sell the property in order to repay our loan. He is a finance broker so has good lender contacts if repayment is needed through refinance as well."
So why isn't it being marketed for sale? Or has the borrower got an off-market buyer lined up? I trust SS are asking these basic questions.
|
|
kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 691
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Aug 2, 2016 15:22:11 GMT
Fwiw, there's a recognisably "IBM" logo on the grass outside the building (I think I saw that on rightmove).
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2016 15:45:33 GMT
So in 79 days this loan should be repaid in full. Let's be flexible and say it should be repaid within 100 days. 100 days is 10 December. We shall see what happens. Not to be too picky, but 100 days from now is 12 November
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2016 15:54:21 GMT
Probably a good idea for lendy to sell this on sharpish. Even at a loss. Sell? Sell what? Lendy has simply lent out money on our behalf. The security is only a guarantee in case of difficulties from the borrower. Let's hope this guy deals with this particular loan correctly and repays when due (still more than 75 days to go!) and stop. If he doesn't, there are clear procedures to progress with the security, but i very much doubt this will be before 2017 (so I don't see at all possible to act quick as suggested here).
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 2, 2016 16:18:51 GMT
Fwiw, there's a recognisably "IBM" logo on the grass outside the building (I think I saw that on rightmove). A slightly "tampered with" image from Streetview, date unknown. Attachments:
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,333
Likes: 11,552
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 2, 2016 16:33:53 GMT
There is a FOI response from the local council (April 2016) regarding up to date commercial rates which lists both existing tenants (cant vouch for the accuracy)
Manpower have a contract to provide staff to work for IBM at that location. Rates info clearly states MP trading as IBM. Staff are employed by Manpower but work for IBM. ie agency staff, which of course is what Manpower does. Separate companies.
There's a social media site listing it among IBM offices in 2014
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 2, 2016 16:41:36 GMT
I wondered how Manpower could be trading as IBM. They are really trading as themselves but for IBM.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2016 16:46:39 GMT
The banks never used to care about the character of their borrowers. Which is one of the reasons P2P came about.
But I'm not a bank.
My loans go to people I trust to pay back. .... No, my loans go to people I trust to do what is right.
Why should I lend to someone I have doubts about?
The way for P2P portals to understand this is if we don't take out a loan where there are doubts about the borrower.
|
|
boble
Posts: 150
Likes: 65
|
Post by boble on Aug 2, 2016 16:59:47 GMT
The banks never used to care about the character of their borrowers. Which is one of the reasons P2P came about. But I'm not a bank. My loans go to people I trust to pay back. .... No, my loans go to people I trust to do what is right. Why should I lend to someone I have doubts about? The way for P2P portals to understand this is if we don't take out a loan where there are doubts about the borrower. My policy with indicated lenders; which is different from P2P, is that the principal party must invest a minimum of 10% of their own money into each loan at first risk.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Aug 2, 2016 17:01:18 GMT
Whatever the relationship between Manpower UK Limited and IBM, this statement is simply not true
"One of the tenants is Manpower UK Ltd, which is part of IBM."
Edit Manpower UK Limited is owned by Manpower Public Limited Company
Manpower Public Limited Company is owned by Manpower Holdings Limited
Manpower Holdings Limited is owned by Manpower Group Inc ( a company listed on the New York and German stock exchange)
The lease (and therefore the tenant) dated 19 February 2010 is between ************** and Manpower UK Ltd and the deed of variation dated 1 July 2015 is between ************** and Manpower UK Ltd (according to clause 3.1 of the valuation report)
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Aug 2, 2016 17:30:36 GMT
I'm not following this thread in any great detail, but will make one observation .... if the valuation of the property is based on a multiple of rental income, then consideration should be given to who the ultimate source of that rental stream is ... which is in this case is IBM. If IBM terminated the contract under which Manpower provides services (office plus staff) to IBM at this location, Manpower would have no further need for the property and would in turn (depending on lease conditions) cancel the lease with the owner of the property, and make the staff redundant (or deploy them to other Manpower locations).
Yes, its sloppy language that has allowed the impression that Manpower is part of IBM, and could have misled a few lenders, however the degree to which any such lenders have been misled is IMO minimal as it is IBM that is the source of the cash that is paying the rental (via an intermediary, Manpower)
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Aug 2, 2016 17:47:22 GMT
I'm not following this thread in any great detail, but will make one observation .... if the valuation of the property is based on a multiple of rental income, then consideration should be given to who the ultimate source of that rental stream is ... which is in this case is IBM. If IBM terminated the contract under which Manpower provides services (office plus staff) to IBM at this location, Manpower would have no further need for the property and would in turn (depending on lease conditions) cancel the lease with the owner of the property, and make the staff redundant (or deploy them to other Manpower locations). Yes, its sloppy language that has allowed the impression that Manpower is part of IBM, and could have misled a few lenders, however the degree to which any such lenders have been misled is IMO minimal as it is IBM that is the source of the cash that is paying the rental (via an intermediary, Manpower) Except we know that the Manpower lease is for 15 years from 19 February 2010, we don't know any of the terms of the contract, if any, between Manpower and iBM, nor do we know of any break clauses that may exist in the lease, some of which may be contingent upon that contract. We also know that there was some renegotiatoion last year and we do not know for what reason but it did result in a deed of variation. Implying that IBM owns the tenant would make some of the other considerations irrelevent.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,333
Likes: 11,552
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 2, 2016 18:00:13 GMT
I'm not following this thread in any great detail, but will make one observation .... if the valuation of the property is based on a multiple of rental income, then consideration should be given to who the ultimate source of that rental stream is ... which is in this case is IBM. If IBM terminated the contract under which Manpower provides services (office plus staff) to IBM at this location, Manpower would have no further need for the property and would in turn (depending on lease conditions) cancel the lease with the owner of the property, and make the staff redundant (or deploy them to other Manpower locations). Yes, its sloppy language that has allowed the impression that Manpower is part of IBM, and could have misled a few lenders, however the degree to which any such lenders have been misled is IMO minimal as it is IBM that is the source of the cash that is paying the rental (via an intermediary, Manpower) Except we know that the Manpower lease is for 15 years from 19 February 2010, we don't know any of the terms of the contract, if any, between Manpower and iBM, nor do we know of any break clauses that may exist in the lease, some of which may be contingent upon that contract. We also know that there was some renegotiatoion last year and we do not know for what reason but it did result in a deed of variation. Implying that IBM owns the tenant would make some of the other considerations irrelevent. Previous party was dissolved. I presume the notorious 2014 sale may have been debt forgiveness to related party/newco
|
|
