|
|
Post by earthbound on May 17, 2016 9:20:11 GMT
... Where do you consider his other illiquid assets would come into play? The loan is secured solely on the yard.... Just a few months ago the borrower had two boatyards (ref. his attempt to borrow from us via SS). Presumably he still has assets, including in the other one. Does FS include PGs in its loan contracts? Hi og, your right he did have 2 boat yards, according to my research the other one went into liquidation and has now gone.. No other security held other than the yard afaik.
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087 
Likes: 3,233
|
Post by oldgrumpy on May 17, 2016 9:49:19 GMT
Just a few months ago the borrower had two boatyards (ref. his attempt to borrow from us via SS). Presumably he still has assets, including in the other one. Does FS include PGs in its loan contracts? Hi og, your right he did have 2 boat yards, according to my research the other one went into liquidation and has now gone.. No other security held other than the yard afaik. Oh, bum!!! Good job I only have a low three figs in this one, then. (PS, no, I don't like figs  )
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on May 17, 2016 12:15:40 GMT
Im not convinced that SS would have handled this any different to FS. So far SS have had one relatively simple recovery on a property loan where it was quite clear that the borrower couldnt repay the loan and couldnt support covering on going interest payments, so the decision to launch a recovery was relatively simple and the security good. Even so it wasnt without elements of poor communication and over optimistic timescales, ie not allowing time for legal proceedings to gain possession. Furthermore, we have absolutely no knowledge of the procedure followed, LPA, fees etc. In all other cases , where loans are currently beyond term SS is working with borrowers to secure repayment, presumably in the belief that that is the best route for SS, lenders & the borrower (an FCA requirement under treating fairly rules) and in all cases, updates have largely proved optimistic on timescales & outcomes. It is quite possible that any of these could suddenly go into default and then the sitution would look little different from FS, except of course that SS are working with borrowers who appear to be able to cover monthly interest.
We have little knowledge of what is going on behind the scenes in the Boatyard case, (did SS or the borrower not go ahead?), no idea what the issues are. There clearly has been a process involving the borrower raising funds and FS has seen evidence of his efforts. It could be that issues arise from 3rd parties and that is why timescales have slipped Been involved in enough of these protracted recoveries across multiple platforms to know that that is easily possible. FS have communicated what they know (more regularly than SS it could be noted) and can share, they may have been guilty of optimism but they must consider given the facts that they have, and we dont, that the route followed was the best route for a successful outcome for all parties - not least because involvement of LPA reduces recovery by 3-5% in fees and doesnt guarentee any more chance of success.
I note that in a even more delayed repayment an LPA has been appointed and nothing has happened in two months!
If you think this is frustrating have a look at a few of the AC or FC recoveries.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on May 17, 2016 13:27:08 GMT
... Where do you consider his other illiquid assets would come into play? The loan is secured solely on the yard.... Just a few months ago the borrower had two boatyards (ref. his attempt to borrow from us via SS). Presumably he still has assets, including in the other one. Does FS include PGs in its loan contracts? I haven't a clue whether or not FS use PGs, though they've been pretty quiet about it if they do. On other platforms, whether borrowers' other assets are relevant seems to depend on whether the loan is to an individual or a company/SPV. With FS being based on a pawn model, it may be that the security is the sole source of recourse if the borrower doesn't redeem their property.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on May 17, 2016 13:35:47 GMT
... except of course that SS are working with borrowers who appear to be able to cover monthly interest. How do we know this? With loans written under the old SS Ts&Cs, interest payments to investors are SS/Lendy's responsibility, so they'd have been making those payments whether or not they were receiving anything from the borrower. That, of course, was before the most recent Ts&Cs announcement, so I suppose we'll find out soon which borrowers actually are up to date with their interest payments and which are behind. Could be interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2016 13:43:14 GMT
The odd thing is it looked like a mess from the first. I wonder why it was ever brought to the market.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,329
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on May 17, 2016 14:00:21 GMT
Just a few months ago the borrower had two boatyards (ref. his attempt to borrow from us via SS). Presumably he still has assets, including in the other one. Does FS include PGs in its loan contracts? I haven't a clue whether or not FS use PGs, though they've been pretty quiet about it if they do. On other platforms, whether borrowers' other assets are relevant seems to depend on whether the loan is to an individual or a company/SPV. With FS being based on a pawn model, it may be that the security is the sole source of recourse if the borrower doesn't redeem their property. Getting a sense of deja vu here but couldnt work out why. Then realised same points made in the other Scot Boatyard thread  ... except of course that SS are working with borrowers who appear to be able to cover monthly interest. How do we know this? With loans written under the old SS Ts&Cs, interest payments to investors are SS/Lendy's responsibility, so they'd have been making those payments whether or not they were receiving anything from the borrower. That, of course, was before the most recent Ts&Cs announcement, so I suppose we'll find out soon which borrowers actually are up to date with their interest payments and which are behind. Could be interesting. Hence the use of the word 'appear' All we know is what SS tell us in updates and there are a few overdue loans where payments arent mentioned, PBL20, 25, 26, 36. One reason I sell out of loans before term because Im not entirely sure exactly what the situation is and see no need to find out. Trying to follow a similar strategy on FS but unsurpisingly not as easy without significant discount.
|
|
littleoldlady
Member of DD Central
Running down all platforms due to age
Posts: 3,045
Likes: 1,862
|
Post by littleoldlady on May 17, 2016 20:59:27 GMT
This works if you withdraw the funds and put them in a FSCS a/c paying derisory interest. But if you reinvest in a new loan aren't you merely transferring the risk to an inherently riskier loan? Riskier because it's longer term and so more likely to be extant when the next recession arrives (all else being equal). Edit: I can't get the hang of editing the post I am referring to. This is a comment on " I sell out of loans before term because Im not entirely sure exactly what the situation is and see no need to find out." in the post above.
|
|
|
|
Post by earthbound on May 17, 2016 23:42:04 GMT
We have little knowledge of what is going on behind the scenes in the Boatyard case Your right there.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on May 18, 2016 1:45:56 GMT
This works if you withdraw the funds and put them in a FSCS a/c paying derisory interest. But if you reinvest in a new loan aren't you merely transferring the risk to an inherently riskier loan? Riskier because it's longer term and so more likely to be extant when the next recession arrives. Edit: I can't get the hang of editing the post I am referring to. A replacement loan could be riskier because of the reason suggested by littleoldlady, but it also could be less risky because maybe the LTV is lower, or perhaps the exit plan might look more achievable, or various other reasons. One type of loan I tend to be less enthusiastic about is where the security is rare, or even unique. If it were to become necessary, selling those aren't easy. Either you have to wait quite a while for the right buyer to come along, or you have to discount the price severely to encourage someone to buy. A key indicator for the latter is when the valuer was asked to provide a value based on the 'special' assumption of a limited -- usually 180 or 90 days -- marketing period. If the valuer indicates the discount required to achieve a quick sale is small, I take it as a good sign. If it's large -- such as the 37.5% for this boatyard -- it sets my alarm bells ringing.
|
|
|
|
Post by earthbound on May 20, 2016 4:36:07 GMT
Dead line day... FS not going to appoint a receiver today so I would envisage there may be some frantic activity going on behind the scenes this weekend, or of course, he may well pay up today.  That would be nice. |
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 738
Likes: 859
|
Post by 11025 on May 20, 2016 21:29:02 GMT
Dead line day... FS not going to appoint a receiver today so I would envisage there may be some frantic activity going on behind the scenes this weekend, or of course, he may well pay up today. That would be nice. Just had email , sadly no funds and they will be appointing receivers monday , not the outcome we were hoping for but at last decisive action is being taken.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on May 20, 2016 22:09:02 GMT
I've never been in this loan so just an interested observer.
One interesting bit of learning this week from the first AC property loan (#86) in Scotland to need the security realising is that the Law of Property Act (LPA) doesn't apply in Scotland and there is no such thing as LPA Receivers in Scotland. It seems the legal route in Scotland is to appoint an administrator over the borrowing entity.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on May 20, 2016 22:57:11 GMT
Just had email , sadly no funds and they will be appointing receivers monday , not the outcome we were hoping for but at last decisive action is being taken. One interesting bit of learning this week from the first AC property loan (#86) in Scotland to need the security realising is that the Law of Property Act (LPA) doesn't apply in Scotland and there is no such thing as LPA Receivers in Scotland. It seems the legal route in Scotland is to appoint an administrator over the borrowing entity. So what do we read into FS's use of the word "receivers"? That they forgot and used the wrong word? Or that they were unaware of the issue and aren't familiar with the differences between how things work under English and Scottish laws?
|
|
|
|
Post by earthbound on May 21, 2016 0:25:26 GMT
mikes1531 I would be surprised if FS turned out to be that incompetent.
|
|
)
That would be nice.
