|
|
Post by lusitania on Nov 26, 2017 14:44:30 GMT
For me clearly option 'A'. I would be quite curious to actually see that IMS, which apparently stated all was progressing 'well'... what I still can not get my head around is the fact that just one month earlier there was a further tranche released!
|
|
xpubman1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 62 
Likes: 40
|
Post by xpubman1 on Nov 26, 2017 15:13:47 GMT
exploiting the inexperience, naivety, and arrogance of some peer to peer platforms So the moral of the story is don't invest with new start ups until they have established a reliable track record? (or alternatively invest with Unbolted where you can only loose £5 at a time). At one time this forum created some interesting and knowledgeable posts that were well worth reading, from people like Dude, Il Moro and others, Now all I read is speculation and pessimism. The moral of the story is.. If you do not like Lendy, get out when you can and do not bother reading this link or posting
|
|
xpubman1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 62
Likes: 40
|
Post by xpubman1 on Nov 26, 2017 15:25:16 GMT
As an addendum I would like to say that I am not a new member, I have been around for some years, and have invested on multiple platforms, believe me there are others far worse than Lendy for reasons too many to list, FC, comes to mind, closely followed, by TC, who have both defaults and write offs that approach double figures of millions.
Lendy remind us that no one person, as of yet has lost a penny, no matter that they juggle the figures to reach that conclusion, it is a fact.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,054
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Nov 26, 2017 16:09:29 GMT
So the moral of the story is don't invest with new start ups until they have established a reliable track record? (or alternatively invest with Unbolted where you can only loose £5 at a time). At one time this forum created some interesting and knowledgeable posts that were well worth reading, from people like Dude, Il Moro and others, Now all I read is speculation and pessimism. The moral of the story is.. If you do not like Lendy, get out when you can and do not bother reading this link or posting So you've been a member for over 3 years, and before today have managed 1 post? Can't see that this qualifies you to criticise others. I got out of Lendy a while ago, but am still happy to post information from any of their developments that I pass by.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,334
Likes: 11,558
|
Post by ilmoro on Nov 26, 2017 19:48:45 GMT
Lendy remind us that no one person, as of yet has lost a penny, no matter that they juggle the figures to reach that conclusion, it is a fact. Just to temper that Lendy 'fact' with another observation, let's look at PBL056 - a farm in Somerset where the loan amount was £455,000 secured, at the time, against an asset valued at £650,000. The loan term expired early September 2016. A year and a bit later, the security was sold and, a few days ago, capital returned in the sum of £283,167 or 62% of the loan amount. For the first time, the PF hasn't been used to prop up that 'no capital loss' claim and instead the update to lenders currently sitting on a 38% capital loss is that: "We have been liaising with our solicitors and taking advice in respect of all recovery options for the outstanding capital, accrued interest and bonus accrual. That advice has now been finalised and the relevant claims will be issued shortly."This is in contrast to previous shortfalls where the PF did prop up the loss and any continued action to seek redress from the borrower / other claims were 'carried forward' to be considered as, as Lendy once called it, " contracted future income". So, you are perfectly correct that it is a 'fact' that Lendy do remind us at the bottom of every single page - along with the somewhat ambiguous claim in the 'How it works' section of " Since 2012 thousands of investors have earned over £32,131,096 in interest, and we have a 100% success record in repayments." - but I wonder if it feels that way to the lenders in PBL056 who are still awaiting 38% of their capital, and are outstanding circa £50,000 in accrued interest and missing bonus interest between them. (As an aside, it's a wonderful example of Lendy's mindset that the loan listing for PBL056 has a reduced loan amount of £171,833 and a reduced LTV of 26%. In other words, Lendy are still showing the asset as having a value of £650k when it arguably shouldn't have a value listed at all given that it has been sold and cannot any longer be considered as security. Well, perhaps allow a 'hope' value of £1, just to avoid a divide by zero error  ) Perhaps someone needs to remind them that this a model 1 agreement and Lendy is the borrower so they are on the hook or have those goalposts trotted over the hills in a galaxy far far away. Sorry xpub more cynical then normal but im in pub rather than ex currently Edit how about a LTV of infinity just for realism
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,322
Likes: 1,576
|
Post by GeorgeT on Nov 26, 2017 19:57:41 GMT
Big point that - the pig farm was old terms loan so LY are liable to make up the shortfall. Should they have done that when the repayment was made?
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Nov 26, 2017 22:24:05 GMT
Big point that - the pig farm was old terms loan so LY are liable to make up the shortfall. Should they have done that when the repayment was made? Probably, but who is going to force them to pay up?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Nov 28, 2017 23:12:05 GMT
(As an aside, it's a wonderful example of Lendy's mindset that the loan listing for PBL056 has a reduced loan amount of £171,833 and a reduced LTV of 26%. In other words, Lendy are still showing the asset as having a value of £650k when it arguably shouldn't have a value listed at all given that it has been sold and cannot any longer be considered as security. Well, perhaps allow a 'hope' value of £1, just to avoid a divide by zero error ) AFAICT, this is a problem that affects all loans that have had partial repayments. AIUI, those payments are related to the release of of some of the security, so it's a total nonsense to reduce the numerator of the LTV calculation without making an adjustment to the denominator at the same time. What Lendy are doing is, IMHO, causing the LTVs they're showing to become more and more meaningless. Or perhaps I should say I believe them to be becoming misleading? I really don't see how Lendy can justify their LTV numbers. If it wasn't so serious, I'd call it a joke!
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Nov 29, 2017 1:52:56 GMT
At one time this forum created some interesting and knowledgeable posts that were well worth reading, from people like Dude, Il Moro and others, Now all I read is speculation and pessimism. The moral of the story is.. If you do not like Lendy, get out when you can and do not bother reading this link or posting That's not a moral, unless you are a Daily Mail reader (in the gist of if you don't like something in this country then you should get out). I'm not sure what your parents taught you, but the adept profess a moderate morality where if you don't like something you say so and you say why. It is discussed among peers here and we either keep our opinion, reform it or change it. Some new decisions may or may not come out of it. Not all of it will be informative but there is no harm in that and there is no harm to you either. I gained nothing from your post so you haven't contributed anything, if you were using your own (DM) moral, you should have stopped writing the minute you started typing. But with my 'morals' I welcome you to, it was a joy to hear from you and I look forward to your next ones.
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Dec 8, 2017 14:46:09 GMT
The "build out site" is now an option on the table. The plan is for the receiver to getting an IMS review. I'm a bit disappointed that this review hasn't been done already but moving on, I am glad this is now a possibility. In my opinion, I believe this is probably the one which has a chance to give us the capital and accrued interest (or at least most of it) back. The one disadvantage that it has is that it will take a while before this is completed. Does anyone have an idea how long it would take to finish the work?
Also it would be interesting to have a poll here on how many would back built-out-the-site vs just-get-rid-of-it. I don't know how to create poll here, if there's no such widget perhaps we could create two posts and people 'like' the relevant post as a vote ..
|
|
ingwer
Member of DD Central
Posts: 121
Likes: 47
|
Post by ingwer on Dec 8, 2017 15:06:54 GMT
My concern would be the Just-get-rid-of-it option would not cover the loan and Lendy would NOT dip into the PF.
|
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Dec 8, 2017 17:52:16 GMT
I don't have money in this any more. My non Lendy P2P money is in a broad spread of housing developments. My natural inclination on this sort of thing would be to build it out. What would bother me about doing that are my misgivings about the project itself. I believed the properties were optimistically priced and being fairly tightly packed in, really did not have a lot of appeal. My concern is that building out would not result in the original rewards the developer anticipated. Before embarking on a build out, I would want to consider the implications and cost/benefit of reducing the specifications and making them more appropriate to the location and layout. It would mean lowering the sights on the anticipated return, but building to the full original specification might not achieve more in any case.
|
|
rrrupert
Member of DD Central
Posts: 121
Likes: 99
|
Post by rrrupert on Dec 9, 2017 11:12:55 GMT
Many seem to like the idea of a build out. But I dont see who would pay for this. Hoping Lendy will put a big chunk of money in to bail out the lenders seems very very optimistic. And I doubt many lenders would want to put more money into this project. I certainly wouldnt.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Dec 9, 2017 12:35:12 GMT
IMO a build our would be a disaster, a Receiver or a Lender is the worst possible person to build out a development, even with the appropriate professional assistance. They are simply not qualified to do it. Add to that problems with the site, suggestions of over-pricing, lack of parking etc IMO such a scheme would all end in tears and 9in the end a 35% loss of capital now will be ,in hindsight, an attractive situation that lenders will be soory they did not snatch the offerors hands off.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,054
Likes: 4,441
|
Post by agent69 on Dec 9, 2017 13:23:01 GMT
They are simply not qualified to do it. Which sits them nicely alongside the original developer. I got out of this loan a long time ago, but would have thought the way forward would be straightforward to decide. Either: - We can sell the development today for £x
- If we spend £y to build out the site we can sell it for £z
If z-y is > x you build out, if not sell now. Only issue could be whether you want to occupy the moral high ground and reject x if it is associated with the original developer.
I have driven past the development many times and if I was paying £800k for a house I would want more space, I wouldn't want to back onto a field where cheaper houses might be built in the future, and I don't want to see the ass end of Exeter rugby club from my bedroom window. I think the houses are overvalued and whatever happens I think a significant loss is inevitable.
|
|
)
