|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Aug 4, 2016 16:19:47 GMT
Partly because borrow behaviour has not allowed the property to fall into disrepair? No because of the enhanced planning consent obtained by the borrower for the site of 4 slightly smaller flats vs 3 larger flats, and general property inflation in the area (although offset once inflation on the now slightly larger development cost especially fixtures and fittings is taken into account i.e. 4 kitchens not 3; 8 bathroom suites not 6 etc). I thought we were talking about a tenanted office block? 
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Aug 4, 2016 16:26:16 GMT
No because of the enhanced planning consent obtained by the borrower for the site of 4 slightly smaller flats vs 3 larger flats, and general property inflation in the area (although offset once inflation on the now slightly larger development cost especially fixtures and fittings is taken into account i.e. 4 kitchens not 3; 8 bathroom suites not 6 etc). I thought we were talking about a tenanted office block? Sorry ... guilty as charged of allowing this thread to go so seriously off topic as to be discussing a loan on a different platform entirely ! 
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,334 
Likes: 11,557
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 4, 2016 17:13:20 GMT
While I suspect the much mentioned individual does have some involvement with the borrowers, he is not a director of the borrower nor was he a director at the time SS made the loan. He is a director of the company that is the borrower for the farm
Thats not to say that the director of the PBL64 borrower isnt of relevance as he appears to be a director of some of the companies referred to (is he actually mentioned anywhere by name?)
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Aug 4, 2016 17:20:20 GMT
He was a director of the borrower two months before the loan was made, and a person with the same surname also resigned at the same time and the current director has the same surname as both of them.
Not an uncommon modus operandi for people with financial skeletons in their closet.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Aug 4, 2016 17:54:42 GMT
While I suspect the much mentioned individual does have some involvement with the borrowers, he is not a director of the borrower nor was he a director at the time SS made the loan. He is a director of the company that is the borrower for the farm Thats not to say that the director of the PBL64 borrower isnt of relevance as he appears to be a director of some of the companies referred to (is he actually mentioned anywhere by name?) He is actually mentioned in the Valuation Report for PBL064... infact, the Valuation Report says that they relied on information provided by him.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,334
Likes: 11,557
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 4, 2016 18:23:01 GMT
While I suspect the much mentioned individual does have some involvement with the borrowers, he is not a director of the borrower nor was he a director at the time SS made the loan. He is a director of the company that is the borrower for the farm Thats not to say that the director of the PBL64 borrower isnt of relevance as he appears to be a director of some of the companies referred to (is he actually mentioned anywhere by name?) He is actually mentioned in the Valuation Report for PBL064... infact, the Valuation Report says that they relied on information provided by him. Sorry I meant is the actual director VP mentioned in any of the controversial stuff not DP Well aware of history of directorships. Again surprises me lack of activity on PBL56 compared to PBL64 where I would have thought his alleged track record would be more relevant as the direct borrower not an eminence grise.
|
|
|
|
Post by geraldine1210 on Aug 4, 2016 18:40:19 GMT
Behaviour/character absolutely should be taken into account. At what point does a lender say "I will not deal with you"? I absolutely 100% agree with the first part of your reply, but unfortunately that particular horse bolted last October and has since appeared in your supermarket own brand meat pie. Two points though, we do not have access to credit reference agency records, I presume SavingStream do, where these matters will be recorded, along with a simple company search that in a couple of clicks records 55 appointments for this particular person, something which should raise questions in itself. We do have access to Gogle (other search engines are available  ) where all of his alleged misdemeanors are readily available. Secondly, by quite a sizable majority it would appear that posters on this board do not agree with you and me, if the results of the poll on the other thread is anything to go by. In fairness, I don't think that was the clearest poll. Not really obvious what was being asked.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Aug 4, 2016 18:50:13 GMT
He is actually mentioned in the Valuation Report for PBL064... infact, the Valuation Report says that they relied on information provided by him. Sorry I meant is the actual director VP mentioned in any of the controversial stuff not DP Well aware of history of directorships. Again surprises me lack of activity on PBL56 compared to PBL64 where I would have thought his alleged track record would be more relevant as the direct borrower not an eminence grise. I never came across VP being mention in the controversial stuff, although he has been involved in the controversial companies, both past & present. I would imagine the lack of activity seen with PBL56 on the SM is largely down to the loan value (£455,000 vs £2,000,000); simply less of it to trade.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Aug 4, 2016 19:06:48 GMT
He is actually mentioned in the Valuation Report for PBL064... infact, the Valuation Report says that they relied on information provided by him. Sorry I meant is the actual director VP mentioned in any of the controversial stuff not DP Well aware of history of directorships. Again surprises me lack of activity on PBL56 compared to PBL64 where I would have thought his alleged track record would be more relevant as the direct borrower not an eminence grise. As the saying goes you cannot choose your family you can choose your business associates
|
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Aug 5, 2016 8:47:19 GMT
.... The alledged background of the borrower's directors/shareholders does not IMO influence the valuation placed on the security for this loan. Mmm! Like the AC loans Epping/Ipswich ... good security/valuations(??), but borrower/directors' behaviour has been destructive. I prefer to vacate PBL56/64 despite apparently good security/valuations, because of previously publicised borrower behaviour. But I'm a riskwimp. Each to his own!  edit?timing!! Two minutes ago!! AC loan 174 called in borrower behaviour.
edit 17:03, OK AC #174 is different and the security may even be enhanced, but borrower behaviour still matters if they obstruct eventual repayment of the loan, so I still take existing knowledge of borrowers into account. I can't comment on how other platforms assess credit. In terms of one certain loan on AC mentioned above, borrower behaviour can be destructive and in this case has delayed recovery for at least 18 months and might even delay it further. In times of stress, borrowers do some strange things. I don't enjoy telling lenders that we think the property is fine but the borrower is playing the system and we can't take control of it yet. I don't enjoy having to go to court to work through these things. However, when you lend money, these things happen. That is why I have an IP and an insolvency lawyer working in house. I do take the view that borrower behaviour is important. 174 has been given time to work with us, they haven't so the grace period is over and we take control. A loan is a two way relationship and both parties have to trust each other. That trust should be there from day 1. I'll shut up now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 5, 2016 10:49:11 GMT
[Admin note]
We have been made aware of concerns by some forum members in relation to their participation in a group PM thread related to this topic. This note is to help inform forum members.
Under the action drop down at the top of the PM thread there is an option to "leave conversation". That does what it says, but doesn't erase you as a previous participant, so before leaving it might be appropriate to post a comment that makes clear that you don't agree with whatever it is that concerns you.
Unlike the main forum there is no way of deleting or editing a post you have made on a PM thread, and any attempt to delete a PM thread merely deletes it from your own inbox not from the proboards database.
The forum staff can not see PM's but proboards staff can. It would not be surprising if printouts of PM's were circulated to journalists or regulators (for example) by a participant in the PM.
We recommend that forum members protect themselves by not participating in PM threads which could breach the Defamation Act 2013.
|
|
|
|
Post by easilyparted on Aug 5, 2016 12:55:54 GMT
I've been relishing the day the certain owner of said office block chases me for defamation,bring it on.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Aug 5, 2016 14:18:15 GMT
I've been relishing the day the certain owner of said office block chases me for defamation,bring it on.
Failure to respect this will result in your stay here being a short one.
RM
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on Aug 5, 2016 14:24:50 GMT
Perhaps he is trying to change his ID to easilydeparted
easilyparted Are you actually an investor in SS are just a visiting (and arguably useful) timberesque spoon manipulator?
|
|
dovap
Member of DD Central
Posts: 467
Likes: 410
|
Post by dovap on Aug 5, 2016 14:35:11 GMT
fwiw highlighting the borrowers and associates
has been very useful - quite glad to be out of two loans now
very strange to find some don't think the character/past histories of borrowers to be relevent -
each to their own I suppose
|
|
) where all of his alleged misdemeanors are readily available. Secondly, by quite a sizable majority it would appear that posters on this board do not agree with you and me, if the results of the poll on the other thread is anything to go by.
