DFL001 - Exeter Loan 1 - DEFAULT

I have only recently been told of this forum by the broker who introduced me to Lendy, so apologies for not introducing myself earlier.
I am the developer of both Exeter projects.
These are both quality developments which unfortunately started to become marketable just as the Brexit, The snap election and Stamp duty adversely effected the market.
That coupled with the usual unforeseen construction problems, and bad weather early on caused delays and cost increases to the build program.
All of this could have been traded out of had Lendy been more intelligent in the way the situation has been handled. They simply stopped funding which caused the main contractor on both projects to go bust.
I had warned X of that distinct possibility way back and the disastrous effect that would have on both projects, his response was one of indifference.
They have now unfortunately appointed LPA receivers which was the worst possible decision to make, as it immediately blights the projects and substantially reduces the GDV's. and will result in a fire sale.
The relationship between one of the principles of Lendy and I became strained back in 2016 after he pulled out of another project and his subsequent refusal to honour a written undertaking to me to pay certain fees incurred under the terms of that JV project. In fact in Nov 2016 as a result of me emailing to insist he honour his obligation to me, he sent me an email telling me 'I was about to loose my shirt'!
In the light of subsequent events you have to read into that what you will.

I had arranged alternate funding to redeem the Quay*** project funding before the redemption date of 31st July and my lawyers and I repeatedly asked Lendy for a redemption statement. This they delayed giving until I eventually threatened to report them to the FCA unless they did so.
I received the redemption statement the following day.
My alternate funding was made up of a new fixed term loan at 5.5% plus the sale of one of the commercial units.
However Lendy simply ignored repeated requests from my solicitors for an undertaking to release the charge over the commercial unit on which I had agreed the sale, until eventually they refused stating they would not allow the piecemeal sale of the project. However that’s exactly the basis on which this JV was agreed and virtually all developments depend on to exit loans. I had agreed to pay over 100% of the proceeds of the sale.
This arrangement would have repaid in full the amount outstanding less the £350,000 balloon payment (agreed under the terms of the JV) and the inflated charges they had chosen to load the loan with.
Initially I offered £2.9m in full and final settlement so long as they repaid me the fees due to me under the terms of another JV deal I had agreed with the directors, this they refused.
I then decided that I had no option but to redeem in full the now inflated figure of circa £3.6m and I agreed terms for additional funding to fill that gap.
Before I could finalise that they appointed receivers on both projects, an utterly daft thing to do. My new funders had to withdraw once receivers were appointed because that caused the company to be unable to meet the conditions precedent in the loan terms.
I had earlier even offered to spend the fee money owed to me on the projects to help fill the gap and also offered additional security if they would provide further funding and time. I believe they refused to co-operate because they thought that they could asset strip equity out of the project/s.

The Re*** Court development would also have returned all investors funds had we been allowed to trade out of the delays.
I believe Lendy have turned 2 quality projects with great potential, but with a number of problems that could have been traded out of, into dead loss projects. Not least because the main access to the site is controlled by my son and because Lendy reneged on the JV he is understandably unwilling to allow access unless a new agreement is entered into.

I am now considering legal action against Lendy for failure to pay the fees due to me under the terms of the written undertaking given me by Lendy. That claim will be in the order of £80,000 and results from the terms of another JV agreed with the directors which then withdrew from, triggering the undertaking to pay my fees spent on the aborted project, all of which is fully documented.
There is still the opportunity to complete both projects if further funding at reasonable rates is made available.
If the Re*** Court site is left to rot over the winter it would be a disaster for that project. One house is completed and is a furnished show house, 3 others are 90 to 95% completed, a further 6 are 50 to 75% completed. and there is another 2.25acres with planning for 44 units.
However the receiver has now boarded the site to secure it which effectively prevents any further marketing.

I note there is mention of King******* & Co, this is an Estate agency I have assisted in setting up and run by an experienced estate agent with 8 or more years experience in the business. It makes sense to use this agency to market the units together with Wilk***** Gra** on a joint basis which was agreed in principle but not ratified before the receivers stepped in.

I have now returned the second of your two posts to public view. I have partially redacted the names of the two developments, and the names of the estate agencies to avoid googles crawlers from picking up on the connections. This is consistent with the moderation of all posts in this thread.

I believe the only individuals you originally named are Lendy staff, but that is something we needed to verify before being able to return the post to view. This is as much for you own protection as that of the forum staff and members.

Something I can't get my head around - was Lendy part of the JV and an equity holder in the development?
Seems that there could be a potential conflict of interest here.

At the moment I don't see the solutions producing any winners save for the people that work in legals.

Would completing the development actually produce profits even if the finance could be rolled over? It seems overkill to build another 44 houses in a market which has already suffered adverse effects and to which more may be coming.

I would be surprised if Lendy have much to say at all, other than perhaps they didn't share the developers confidence  with regards to his ability to get the project back on track. With the potential threat of legal action they can't really say too much else.

Since we don't get to see the IMS reports we have no way to tell if the developer is overly optimistic or Lendy have been unnecessarily heavy handed. I suspect the truth probably lies somewhere in between. It would not be surprising if Lendy have made some mistakes, this being their first DFL and they should probably be more critical of the reports they receive from surveyors, rather than taking them at face value. There are a number of DFL loans (unfortunately this isn't one of them) that I have avoided because I wasn't convinced by the projected figures. 

It's these allegations that I would like Lendy to explain/justify -

' I had arranged alternate funding to redeem the Quay*** project funding before the redemption date of 31st July and my lawyers and I repeatedly asked Lendy for a redemption statement. This they delayed giving until I eventually threatened to report them to the FCA unless they did so.

I received the redemption statement the following day.

My alternate funding was made up of a new fixed term loan at 5.5% plus the sale of one of the commercial units.

However Lendy simply ignored repeated requests from my solicitors for an undertaking to release the charge over the commercial unit on which I had agreed the sale, until eventually they refused stating they would not allow the piecemeal sale of the project. However that’s exactly the basis on which this JV was agreed and virtually all developments depend on to exit loans. I had agreed to pay over 100% of the proceeds of the sale.

This arrangement would have repaid in full the amount outstanding less the £350,000 balloon payment (agreed under the terms of the JV) and the inflated charges they had chosen to load the loan with.

Initially I offered £2.9m in full and final settlement so long as they repaid me the fees due to me under the terms of another JV deal I had agreed with the directors, this they refused.

I then decided that I had no option but to redeem in full the now inflated figure of circa £3.6m and I agreed terms for additional funding to fill that gap.

Before I could finalise that they appointed receivers on both projects, an utterly daft thing to do. My new funders had to withdraw once receivers were appointed.'

According to the  borrower Lendy went after him even when he had new funding almost in place.

Hi developer . Could you clarify below please. (my bold above)

1. Did your son own sole access to the development before lendy became the funder.?
or
2. Was access transferred to your son after lendy became the funder?

Thanks in advance.