PBL064 - Tenanted Office Block, Somerset DEFAULT

I can tell you from another p2p site that PG are really worthless

Poorly phrased on my part. For avoidance of doubt, I didn't mean to imply the valuer or valuation was dodgy. The valuer was asked to value based on the information supplied to him by the borrower as is made clear in his report.

I meant only to suggest the bigger picture looks dodgy.

Well, yes I am with you on the attitude. We have to look at the security here, not directly on the borrowers or his methods with other people.
Problem is that all we have is an evaluation of the security which might be affected by data not entirely correct or true. This is a problem.
Of course the borrower might attempt to sell the property, but if no buyer is found, of course they might default on repayment and be happy with the 2 mil they received from SS, in which case the problem bounces back onto us. So, this is the reason why the valuation is a key part of the assessment.

dont forget PBL056 with the same parties which has apparantly been in refinance for 3 months, will it complete as per last update?

Hmmmmm...

The aforementioned Desmond P*******, had a widely reported court case with The Co-op bank (P******* v Co-Op bank), where he fell into arrears and the bank issued possession proceedings against him.  He applied to strike out the possession proceedings on the basis that they were an abuse of process or had been brought for a collateral purpose.

In the end, it seems the bank simply discontinued its claim for possession.

If this is what our borrowers (Desmond P******* is the previous director, but presumably still involved) are able to achieve against a major high street bank, imagine what they are going to put Lendy Ltd through if Lendy try to take possession of the security?

Links available on request

He must have a lot of influence and muscle and connections in the right places if he is able to get a repossession order struck out after defaulting on a loan, assuming all the legalities were done properly by the bank. I wasn't aware of that case and I don't know any of the circumstances surrounding it and it surprises me that such a defence would hold any weight. But for whatever reason it seems the bank backed down and of course that is a concern given that Lendy is a much smaller animal than Co-Op bank was.

Thanks for your probing on this. It does seem there is quite a heavy body of history to suggest the borrower is not the ideal person to do business with.

It's a shame that SS didn't do these sorts of probings themselves before they agreed to the loan. Given they must have known the individual's name and/or or associated company names it would have been quite easy for them to have found out certain information I would have thought given you have obviously been able to dig up quite a lot in just an afternoon on your computer. This may go back to a point that was made recently on the forum that while checking out the valuation of the security is all well and good, SS should perhaps also investigate the background of applicants a little more as well.



Edit - this was a reply to CD's post a couple above this one.