cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853 
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Feb 25, 2016 17:54:50 GMT
E-mail received from SS on 25/02/2016 --------------------------------------- 26/02/2016 UPDATE : Loan Canceled (See Here For SS Explanation)--------------------------------------- Some of my observations from my quick read of the valuation report
1. In the surveyors opinion, in the absence of the prospect of achieving planning permission for a viable alternative use, the land would have a nil value. The value of the land is therefore totally reliant on the prospect of obtaining planning
permission for a viable alternative use - in this case residential development. However, based on the information provided and included in the report we are of the view that planning permission would be granted for residential development albeit conditional and subject to environmental screening. > So the land is currently worth nothing..... So by my reckoning the current LTV is... ∞% (that's an infinity symbol BTW)...... 2. 60 day market valuation is £1.5million, which would make the LTV 87% in the worst case scenario (only after PP has been granted)
> PP was denied on 16 September 2010. The reason given was; > The development proposed would be detrimental to the amenities of adjoining and local residents > The lack of a completed undertaking to provide 25% affordable housing 3. PP has been denied or withdrawn 4 times since the year 2000.
4. Unsurprisingly Thirty-eight letters and emails of objection have been received by the surrounding houses. One of the more interesting objections..... > Toxic/hazardous waste was tipped (illegally) at the site; by disturbing the land it will remove the safe layer of soil protecting residents from harmful chemicals and air-borne particles. The air will be filled with dangerous dust and gases constituting a serious health hazard 5. Between 1956 & 1986 the site was used as a landfill |
|
star dust
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,998
Likes: 3,531
|
Post by star dust on Feb 25, 2016 18:03:08 GMT
I just have to complain, what's happened to their 48hrs notice? Will be out all day so will miss all the shenanigans - don't you just love pre-fund. Now, this ones not much above a million, what's the betting on the pre-fund inflation rate?  . |
|
|
|
Post by pepperpot on Feb 25, 2016 18:17:37 GMT
I just have to complain, what's happened to their 48hrs notice? Will be out all day so will miss all the shenanigans - don't you just love pre-fund. Now, this ones not much above a million, what's the betting on the pre-fund inflation rate? . 19.7%, 5 times inflated should just about do it. But, shhh, I didn't say that.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Feb 25, 2016 18:23:34 GMT
Bargepole loan for me.
Many years ago I lived next to an equivalent site for ten years that had been in use for land fill in the 60's and 70's. Between my garden and the ex landfill site was a foot wide very deep trench filled with rubble. The idea was the dangerous gases would be released to atmosphere rather than permeating into the soil of my garden. Environmental monitoring confirmed that this technical solution worked perfectly. What was less re-assuring was the composition of the off-gases changed quite significantly over the ten years, and the best theory put forward was a "hot spot" had sprung into life somewhere in the volume of landfill. The volume of gases being released via these trenches was also quite staggering.
Nobody really knows how landfill will decompose, and to build on top is madness. I seem to recall a 100 year recommendation of no building for the site I was adjacent to.
|
|
t
Posts: 77
Likes: 7
|
Post by t on Feb 25, 2016 18:30:00 GMT
I will listen to my gut on this one and pass
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Feb 25, 2016 18:33:45 GMT
Bargepole loan for me.
Many years ago I lived next to an equivalent site for ten years that had been in use for land fill in the 60's and 70's. Between my garden and the ex landfill site was a foot wide very deep trench filled with rubble. The idea was the dangerous gases would be released to atmosphere rather than permeating into the soil of my garden. Environmental monitoring confirmed that this technical solution worked perfectly. What was less re-assuring was the composition of the off-gases changed quite significantly over the ten years, and the best theory put forward was a "hot spot" had sprung into life somewhere in the volume of landfill. The volume of gases being released via these trenches was also quite staggering.
Nobody really knows how landfill will decompose, and to build on top is madness. I seem to recall a 100 year recommendation of no building for the site I was adjacent to. Agreed; I too have removed my funding... to many if, buts and maybes. Quite worried about the fact the land is worthless in its current state. On an unrelated note (kind of related), it will be interesting to see how many people actually invest in the loan, as an indication how may people actually do any DD. Last time around we had 1600; surely that has to fall quite considerably on this loan considering the indicated risks?
|
|
sam i am
Member of DD Central
Posts: 697
Likes: 555
|
Post by sam i am on Feb 25, 2016 18:40:24 GMT
It will be very interesting to see how much pre-funding there is on this one. My feelings don't disagree with any of the above.
To be fair to Savingstream they have made it clear that this one is speculative and is very reliant on a PG. It's up to us to decide whether we like loans secured by a PG rather than the land itself.
|
|
markdirac
Member of DD Central
Posts: 128
Likes: 51
|
Post by markdirac on Feb 25, 2016 18:48:47 GMT
... it will be interesting to see how many people actually invest in the loan, as an indication how may people actually do any DD. Last time around we had 1600; surely that has to fall quite considerably on this loan considering the indicated risks? We do DD 'cos that's what one does on P2P, and what one has always done. But ... at SS, there's very little information on which to execute DD. And anyway, there's always the provision fund. So I'm not sure that SS intend or expect lenders to do any DD at all. And I always wonder why I am bothering with DD, at SS. I wonder why SS bother to provide any information about the loans at all, given that what they provide is inadequate, and given their provision fund.
|
|
|
|
Post by ladywhitenap on Feb 25, 2016 18:49:57 GMT
It will be very interesting to see how much pre-funding there is on this one. My feelings don't disagree with any of the above. To be fair to Savingstream they have made it clear that this one is speculative and is very reliant on a PG. It's up to us to decide whether we like loans secured by a PG rather than the land itself. On another platform I'm invested with, quite a few PGs are turning out to be worthless. I'm not saying that is the case here but I think the history of this land combined with the potential reliance on a PG makes it one that I will avoid. LW
|
|
ablender
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,204
Likes: 555
|
Post by ablender on Feb 25, 2016 18:51:07 GMT
If it is heavily reliant on a PG, does it make sense to have more detail about this PG?
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Feb 25, 2016 18:51:11 GMT
It will be very interesting to see how much pre-funding there is on this one. My feelings don't disagree with any of the above. To be fair to Savingstream they have made it clear that this one is speculative and is very reliant on a PG. It's up to us to decide whether we like loans secured by a PG rather than the land itself. I'm a big fan of SS; but not with this loan I'm afraid. If they said "look guys, we're going to try something new; and as such this loan will provide 18% interest", then I could understand. As such it would be intreasting to know how much interest SS are getting on this one. That being said, if this attracts the necessary investors at 12%, how can I argue against SS placing it online at 12%.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Feb 25, 2016 18:53:39 GMT
Pretty much all local authorities are under immense pressure to identify and approve sites for additional housing so I've little doubt PP will be granted for a scheme eventually. Should be OK to hold for a few months at least, and likely to be pretty liquid given the loan size. Sounds like a nightmare site to build on though so I'd be more dubious about any future DFL ...
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,043
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 25, 2016 18:55:58 GMT
Reading the correspondence from 2013 you get the impression that the local authority would like the works to proceed in order that the site gets cleaned up. Locals obviously not impressed. The developer appears to have carried out some site investigation work (which uncovered asbestos). However a full investigation is outstanding so the cost of remediation is currently unknown. If it's been used as a tip since the 50's I dread to think what might be in there. PS Don't worry about the lack of asset security, there's a PG from a man who's not short of a bob or two.. Attachment Deleted |
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,010
Likes: 5,140
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Feb 25, 2016 19:03:12 GMT
I'm not quite as doom'n'gloom on the prospect of planning permission as some of the above comments.
On the pro side:
2011 was a VERY different climate, wrt housing development, to today.
If there really IS hazardous waste been tipped there, and there are the elevated levels of methane etc, then that seems to be a good reason TO encourage redevelopment.
Outline permission was granted in 1990, and extended in 94 and 95.
There's a letter from the council planning manager broadly supporting the concept.
On the con side:
The 2000 refusal was for 69 houses, the 2011 refusal was for 38 houses, the outline plan here is for nearly 120.
The costs of dealing with the environmental problems are unknown.
The recent launches and future pipeline mean we have no drought on SS...
I dunno... I really dunno. Could go either way.
|
|
|
|
Post by ragamuffin on Feb 25, 2016 19:11:03 GMT
As many of you are saying - interesting one. Kudos to Arnie - thanks for your observations. If we can't all personally do DD at least we can follow the debates on this forum and make far more educated investments. Those who just go in regardless kind of deserve what they get...
|
|
.
