mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Feb 3, 2018 17:41:26 GMT
The update is positive. The build-out option has been loudly demanded here. Have Ly given any indication of where the money to build out would come from. Also has the access issue been resolved? No and No, nore where any such funding may rank in the queue to be repaid. While build out will likely produce a higher return, it's going to mean that there is probably 9-12 months to go (optimistically, realistically longer) to repayment and there will still be a capital loss at the end.
|
|
guff
Posts: 730 
Likes: 707
|
Post by guff on Feb 3, 2018 21:42:26 GMT
I too was convinced the report would be a complete analysis (including costs). Without costs, this 'report' is another complete waste of time and kicking the can down the road. The IMS report establishes viability and what is required to achieve practical completion. Ly can now tender for development completion based on these requirements and the developers will budget their own costs to do so (the IMS will not be second guessing different developers’ cost bases). I can see how people might have been confused because the Lendy update dated 21/12/17 did say "…The instructed IMS is continuing with its review of the build out option for the site and we hope to be in a position to make a decision following receipt of the final figures from it in the new year.", so Lendy appear to have been expecting detailed costings. It makes you wonder what expertise they have in this field and doesn't inspire confidence if they take on the build-out themselves… with Provision Fund backing presumably.
|
|
trevor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 557
Likes: 381
|
Post by trevor on Feb 3, 2018 22:31:57 GMT
Bancrupcy is very definitely NOT the best option. Any money left goes first to the receiver and HMRC which in many cases means nobody else gets anything. I'm currently very unhappy with Lendy but support the build out option. What they will need to do is ensure they have a 3rd party advising them to ensure the build out is properly costed and controlled.
|
|
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 Feb 4, 2018 1:30:19 GMT
Bancrupcy is very definitely NOT the best option. Any money left goes first to the receiver and HMRC which in many cases means nobody else gets anything. I'm currently very unhappy with Lendy but support the build out option. What they will need to do is ensure they have a 3rd party advising them to ensure the build out is properly costed and controlled. Actually HMRC is an unsecured creditor & has no priority over other creditors.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 4, 2018 10:31:54 GMT
Bancrupcy is very definitely NOT the best option. Any money left goes first to the receiver and HMRC which in many cases means nobody else gets anything. I'm currently very unhappy with Lendy but support the build out option. What they will need to do is ensure they have a 3rd party advising them to ensure the build out is properly costed and controlled. Actually HMRC is an unsecured creditor & has no priority over other creditors. HMRC is no longer a preferential creditor, except in Adminisatrative Receiverships, but they do issue, by far, the most petitions for Bankruptcy and Compulsory Liqudation. Effectively the only preferential creditors now are certain claims of employees Notwithstanding the above there is rarely a distribution to unsecured creditors in both cases because there are no assets, those where the are are usually taken by secured creditors and fees, although there are no statistics it is estimated that fewer than 5% pay any dividend at all to unsecured creditors and the situation is worse in Bankruptcy than Liquidation. Even where there is it would be highly unusual for payment to be made under a year and often it takes considerably longer.
|
|
Jeepers
Member of DD Central
Posts: 818
Likes: 721
|
Post by Jeepers on Feb 7, 2018 20:02:22 GMT
Sorry if this has already been covered.
Under the old terms, are Lendy on the hook for accrued interest as well as the capital?
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 8, 2018 6:37:00 GMT
Sorry if this has already been covered. Under the old terms, are Lendy on the hook for accrued interest as well as the capital? I think that will ultimately ne decided by a court unless Lendy decide to pay. The old terms and conditions are vague and contradictory, some posters on here believe, not me, they are not liable at all, if they are whether it includes interest is a further complication.
|
|
ingwer
Member of DD Central
Posts: 121
Likes: 47
|
Post by ingwer on Feb 8, 2018 8:05:24 GMT
The impact of any negative publicity may be a factor on the route Lendy takes. Lots of newspapers etc. quite happy to publish "facts". Also could the FCA have an opinion ? Just hoping this loan will be resolved in my lifetime  |
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,045
Likes: 1,862
|
Post by littleoldlady on Feb 8, 2018 8:24:25 GMT
Sorry if this has already been covered. Under the old terms, are Lendy on the hook for accrued interest as well as the capital? The old terms and conditions are vague and contradictory, some posters on here believe, not me, they are not liable at all, if they are whether it includes interest is a further complication. That will be expensive. We will need a class action group which will be difficult to organise without a list of investors which I doubt Ly will be eager to provide. We could possibly organise one through this forum but we probably only represent a small fraction of lenders.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 8, 2018 8:42:03 GMT
Although a class action would be possible (enough people on here would probably form a large enough body) the action is more likely to come from a "Big Hitter" who has lost enough and has been disenchanted with the company and its conduct in this and other areas who will take it to court. Of course Lendy could settle out of court to keep everyone else in the dark and limit their loss.
|
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Feb 8, 2018 9:17:41 GMT
This is one of my biggest loans. The reason it was so big was that, in my mind, I was lending to Saving Stream (now Lendy) so there seemed little point in spreading the investments around multiple loans as one would do now.
I believe Lendy have stated somewhere that this loan is under the old T's and C's.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 8, 2018 9:42:57 GMT
This is one of my biggest loans. The reason it was so big was that, in my mind, I was lending to Saving Stream (now Lendy) so there seemed little point in spreading the investments around multiple loans as one would do now. I believe Lendy have stated somewhere that this loan is under the old T's and C's. There is no dispute this loan is under the "old" terms and conditions, the problem is does that mean Lendy is liable to the lenders in full? If so for the capital, or capital and interest? Fwiw I believe theyare, others disagree, hence my comment several posts ago it is likely to be decided by a court.
|
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Feb 8, 2018 13:05:35 GMT
Thankfully I got out of this well before it started to look like a disaster in the making. The only thing puzzling me about the ensuing mess and the deliberations about Lendy's liability to investors, is that if they are wholly responsible in terms of capital and possibly interest as well, cautionary notes to investors about risk would have been meaningless. Would there have been any risk at all? Explanations welcome.
|
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Feb 8, 2018 13:32:56 GMT
Thankfully I got out of this well before it started to look like a disaster in the making. The only thing puzzling me about the ensuing mess and the deliberations about Lendy's liability to investors, is that if they are wholly responsible in terms of capital and possibly interest as well, cautionary notes to investors about risk would have been meaningless. Would there have been any risk at all? Explanations welcome. There's always risk, in this case the most obvious is Lendy going bust due the claims against then from these old T&Cs loans. One can only hope that the claimed large 2016 profit has not been all spent on Cowes, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by dualinvestor on Feb 8, 2018 13:39:32 GMT
There are two distinct risks.
IF Lendy Ltd are the principal then they are not covered by the FSCS so there is a risk of Lending to them, the same as lending to any company
The other is the loan itself which may default, if the terms and conditions do absolve Lendy from liability then the risk is the same as any other loan.
All Financial Services companies are obliged to issue general risk warnings (including those covered by the FSCS) but as to what they actually mean one would have to look in detail at the terms and conditions and even then, as we have seen with all "old" Lendy loans, it may still be obscure and subject to diferent interpretation.
|
|
