Can anyone give some ideas about this: The last comment for this loan (24 August 2016) mentions that: "our legal representatives are, via the courts, pursuing a charging order against the property owned by the Director - this will provide added protection as and when the relative property is sold - the property remains on the market"
Can this lead to the property staying on the market, perhaps at an unreasonable sale price, for ever? Will it be better for lenders if this loan is formally defaulted and the charge on the asset called in, or does the text quoted above already mean this?
A new comment was received today: " As indicated previously an application has been made for a charging order against the property owned by the Director - we are still awaiting confirmation from the court confirming this has been awarded. Meanwhile the property remains for sale on the market. "
Not much different from the previous one, but I suppose better than nothing. I still do not understand if this means that the borrower can leave the property on sale for ever.
lendingcrowd : Where there any objections raised by Mr. C? Any news about the Final Charging Order?
last update: November 1st, 2016 15:12 Comment #22
By way of update our interim charging order will be final if no objection is made by Mr.C*******i by 15th November. It is anticipated that all going well a Final Charging Order will be received by 2nd December. In the meantime the relative property is still on the market.
"We have heard today that the Charging Order was finalised on 29 November 2016. ******** has been in dialogue recently with our agents and we will provide an update once we become of any changes."
Now the Charging Order has been finalised I'm pretty confident this will be recovered once the property is sold - it's just going to take some time!
I am not confident about anything. The director has continuously broken his promises to the extent that what he says means nothing at all. Has he any desire to actually sell his home in order to repay us, I highly doubt it. The director has for a long time been starting and closing companies, while in the profile for the loan he disclosed none of this. He is still a director of other companies including a property development. How has this one not been defaulted?
Any update!? On the 29th January it will be a whole year, yes a whole year since the last payment on this.
Yet there is no default why? There website says 'When the loan falls into default and there appears to be no clear indication of how and when the payment will be received recovery action will be taken.'
Surely recovery action has been taken, and I have no idea how or when this loan will be repaid, as quite frankly any promise on it from the borrower has turned out to be not worth the paper it's written on.
I just feel by not defaulting this it is a) giving potential borrowers the feeling there are less defaults than there actually are and b) isn't showing to the lenders they are serious about recovery.
Other platforms don't just default when all hope is lost, they default when there is a serious doubt as to whether the repayments will be paid as planned as there is a need to call in the promises of the guarantor or the security.
For me it's clear the guy has had a year to sell his house, that's load of time. If no progress has been made putting an order on the house is not enough, he simply will never sell it, why would he.
They need to issue a statutory demand to the guy and then start bankruptcy proceedings. This usually get's people moving and if not the house will be sold as part of the bankruptcy and recovery can be made.
This guy is clearly unreliable and in my opinion was never upfront about this loan in the first place. For me this is a test case for LC, a loan that should be recovered that seemingly isn't. It needs to be defaulted now and a statutory demand issued.
Well, it's now, what, a year since it's last payment? And it hasn't been defaulted yet. lendingcrowd , please can you explain how this has come to pass?
That would be a very interesting explanation, especially given that:
When a Borrower signs a loan contract with LendingCrowd they are agreeing to various terms and conditions attached to the loan. The most significant term is that they meet their monthly loan repayment on time. If they fail to meet any of the contracted terms and conditions then they will be in default of the loan.
from LC's own website! (my bolding) It goes on to cloud the issue by defining LATE and IN ARREARS status, but surely DEFAULT happens before LOSS? which has now been admitted on 2 occasions - with at least this and one more in that position by industry standards - with the former significant by its absence!
Can this one be written off as a bad debt please. No payment since Feb of last year - for whatever reason it clearly is not looking great - obviously continue to chase the debt please but the end of the tax year looms and I'm sure there are people with more cash than me in this one !