|
|
Post by zzr600 on Mar 1, 2016 18:22:52 GMT
LTVs that I recollect were at the 70% rate now seem to have gone down to 30's and 40s, e.g. PBL035 - Ryedale Leisure Village, Pickering.
Have the values of the security gone up significantly? If so, how is this assessed?
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853 
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Mar 1, 2016 18:26:07 GMT
LTVs that I recollect were at the 70% rate now seem to have gone down to 30's and 40s, e.g. PBL035 - Ryedale Leisure Village, Pickering. Have the values of the security gone up significantly? If so, how is this assessed? Your opening a can of worms here ......  SS takes their LTV as the value provided in the valuation report that they commission. The problem is, the market value doesn't always tell the whole story; I much prefer to calculate the LTV against the worst case scenario (i.e a 90 day market valuation). I suggest you do you own DD in each laon to come to your own conclution on the likelihood of the loan amount being reclaimed in the event of a default; key to this is to seek a realistic LTV.
|
|
|
|
Post by meledor on Mar 1, 2016 19:20:34 GMT
LTVs that I recollect were at the 70% rate now seem to have gone down to 30's and 40s, e.g. PBL035 - Ryedale Leisure Village, Pickering. Have the values of the security gone up significantly? If so, how is this assessed?
As far as your example PBL035 is concerned it has always been shown as 38%. But please note there is an existing first charge so the effective LTV is 60% as the Overview for this loan makes clear.
|
|
|
|
Post by sunspot on Mar 1, 2016 20:15:03 GMT
I have no knowledge of specific cases, but where money is invested in the asset, and all the boxes have been ticked with respect to an existing valuation (conditions being met, etc) then it's entirely reasonable that the loan to value ratio be amended.
I would expect such details to be noted when updates are released though.
|
|
