PBL94 - Isle of Wight land - DEFAULT

Lendy Investors' risk statement.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) does not prescribe how we should address or disclose the risks relevant to lenders on the Platform, nor the level of diversification investors should seek to mitigate risks, but does require us to ensure all information we provide to users of the Platform is fair, clear and not misleading.

Well, that's all right then.

It's rumored that this is up for sale for £1m , it is being marketed by the same people who submitted the VR (JLL) no asking price on their sight it's £on application , are they really bold enough to be marketing this at £1m when they valued it at £5m?.... Beggars belief.

Looking through the details, it clearly states that the plot has full access from Wo****nd v**w. I cannot understand nor ascertain what has happened to reduce the value by 80% (£5m down to £1m)

Paul64

edit. ***** just in case. 

second edit. Now managed to find it with a price ... £900k 

Also being marketed elsewhere for £900k ... An audit/tax/consultancy firm that seem to deal in distressed assets. 

It's a bargain!

I think.

I have asked Lendy to clarify. I have several thousand in this one. I am owed some answers. So are many other investors.

This PBL on the  Isle of Wight is not like Exeter DFL001 and DFL002 - project(s) gone wrong owing to lots of money having been (mis)spent on site or some misjudgements as to market value of hi-tech homes, for example. It is a project still on the same drawing board as when the valuation was done. So what has changed?

We all accept that building projects can go wrong once they have started on site. Ground conditions may prove troublesome, the market for a specific type of home can crash, local employers can go bust leading to a severe local downturn in local property prices, key people may die. People who invest in diamonds, gold and other bling must accept that the markets may crash at intervals. These risks and the capital losses that may result from them are not a consequence of platform incompetence.

All of these risks we accept when we fund DFLs. But this is not a DFL. It is a building site with full PP for a substantial development close to the venue for Cowes Week - an area of particular PR importance to one of the fastest growing P2P platforms.

My thanks to those who have kept and distributed extracts from the VR. Their observations and disclosures thus far appear to suggest that either there was gross incompetence at Lendy Towers    or there was gross incompetence at Lendy Towers.

As I read it so far, a valuation of £5 million was accepted with only £1M of insurance cover and with no check being made as to the presence of a ransom strip despite a clear 'warning' in the report that no check had been made as to whether one existed. Is this correct?

To end what could be damaging speculation here (and maybe elsewhere in the wider Press), and all perhaps based on false rumour, could Lendy now state what exactly is the problem and who ought to have discovered it before the loan of £3 million was made available? 

I do have the original Valuation for this loan, as well as the Appendix.
If anyone would like to have a copy, please suggest a way of sending the PDF to you directly.

Ironically, I have an advert at the bottom of my page: "Don't get held hostage by ransomware".  Sophos offering to prevent aforementioned threat.  Shame they can't also protect strips of land...