Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Aug 21, 2017 20:44:21 GMT
I know more than you think. And I have read the thread, thanks. You can't expect a platform to compensate for losses, when they haven't done anything negligent. That and the talk of suing valuers is naive. Suing valuers? Again your on the wrong thread .. compensating for losses? Take a look at lendys pf fund FundingSecure doesn't have a PF! Lendy has a different model. What has Lendy's PF got to do with FS compensating for capital losses? Why should FS compensate for capital losses?
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 21, 2017 20:51:48 GMT
Suing valuers? Again your on the wrong thread .. compensating for losses? Take a look at lendys pf fund FundingSecure doesn't have a PF! Lendy has a different model. What has Lendy's PF got to do with FS compensating for capital losses? Why should FS compensate for capital losses? You really should calm down Liz not white wine Again i hope 😂
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 718
Likes: 830
|
Post by 11025 on Aug 21, 2017 20:57:53 GMT
Suing valuers? Again your on the wrong thread .. compensating for losses? Take a look at lendys pf fund FundingSecure doesn't have a PF! Lendy has a different model. What has Lendy's PF got to do with FS compensating for capital losses? Why should FS compensate for capital losses? I here what you say , but until certain questions are answered , things appear to have been done that possibly do not have the lenders best interest at heart , it could be construed that selling the yard in such a way rather than putting to auction maybe negligent , more information is required to be sure that they have acted correctly.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 21, 2017 20:59:40 GMT
Where a platform is suspected of disposing of an asset in a maybe? Unscrupilous way.. it is then fitting that the lenders should know the details of the sale
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Aug 21, 2017 20:59:58 GMT
FundingSecure doesn't have a PF! Lendy has a different model. What has Lendy's PF got to do with FS compensating for capital losses? Why should FS compensate for capital losses? You really should calm down Liz not white wine Again i hope 😂 I am calm, you don't seem capable of answering a simple question. You quote Lendy's PF when it is irrelevant to Fundingsecure's model. You are making yourself look silly with your rude and patronising responses to me. You then make out I have been drinking, which is inappropriate.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 21, 2017 21:04:13 GMT
Maybe this would have got more at auction but I doubt it. The administrators will have made enquires regarding potential realisation from auction. From the property defaults Ive seen auction has nearly always resulted as a poor result as it usually indicates there is little market for the property. This is an asset with little market, in a an industry sector/area that has almost certainly declined since 2014 due to the collapse in Brent Crude price (50%) and resulting issues with the oil service industry, fishing decline, defence spending declining, general negativity about economy in general/Scotland in particular. Dont remember but did FS have vacant possession?
As far as transparency goes. No guarentee an auction would provide this as they arent all public and anonymity of price and purchaser is allowed. No harm in asking FS for comment but Im not optimistic of any further clarity. Administrators report may be public at some point.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Aug 21, 2017 21:11:41 GMT
FundingSecure doesn't have a PF! Lendy has a different model. What has Lendy's PF got to do with FS compensating for capital losses? Why should FS compensate for capital losses? I here what you say , but until certain questions are answered , things appear to have been done that possibly do not have the lenders best interest at heart , it could be construed that selling the yard in such a way rather than putting to auction maybe negligent , more information is required to be sure that they have acted correctly. You should speak to fundingsecure if you think the administrators have acted negligent and pass any evidence you have on to them. The issue being discussed was slightly different. ie why should FS have to pay for the capital shortfall? Implying that FS are at fault. There seems to be a lot of blame here, towards FS, the valuers and the administrators. But without evidence of wrong doing you can't expect to be compensated. Maybe fundingsecure need to address some of the questions raised here, to stop the tainting the FS brand.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 21, 2017 21:13:58 GMT
Where a platform is suspected of disposing of an asset in a maybe? Unscrupilous way.. it is then fitting that the lenders should know the details of the sale Its not the platform, its the administrators, the platform will have acted on the administrators recommendation. If they had rejected it, the administrators would potentially have resigned and we'd have been back to square one with more costs.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 21, 2017 21:16:35 GMT
Maybe this would have got more at auction but I doubt it. The administrators will have made enquires regarding potential realisation from auction. From the property defaults Ive seen auction has nearly always resulted as a poor result as it usually indicates there is little market for the property. This is an asset with little market, in a an industry sector/area that has almost certainly declined since 2014 due to the collapse in Brent Crude price (50%) and resulting issues with the oil service industry, fishing decline, defence spending declining, general negativity about economy in general/Scotland in particular. Dont remember but did FS have vacant possession? As far as transparency goes. No guarentee an auction would provide this as they arent all public and anonymity of price and purchaser is allowed. No harm in asking FS for comment but Im not optimistic of any further clarity. Administrators report may be public at some point. Yes agreed wholeheartedly .. but that does not predispose the question being asked .. i personally am not bothered about the loss .. but i am bothered about how it occured .. and has as been asked elsewhere this could have repercussions on both past and future defaults on the FS platform
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 718
Likes: 830
|
Post by 11025 on Aug 21, 2017 21:20:29 GMT
I here what you say , but until certain questions are answered , things appear to have been done that possibly do not have the lenders best interest at heart , it could be construed that selling the yard in such a way rather than putting to auction maybe negligent , more information is required to be sure that they have acted correctly. You should speak to fundingsecure if you think the administrators have acted negligent and pass any evidence you have on to them. The issue being discussed was slightly different. ie why should FS have to pay for the capital shortfall? Implying that FS are at fault. There seems to be a lot of blame here, towards FS, the valuers and the receivers. But without evidence of wrong doing you can't expect to be compensated. Maybe fundingsecure need to address some of the questions raised here, to stop the tainting the FS brand. I have already contacted FS to try and establish answers to these questions , if you read my post correctly you will see I have not jumped the gun in blaming FS ....
"possibly" and "more information is required to be sure that they have acted correctly"
In actual fact I think FS have done themselves far more damage in the last year or so by the appalling way they have handled updates and defaults, in particular this loan and the power boat loan .
Way before this happened I had reduced my holding in FS loans to a fraction of what it was due to this ...
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 21, 2017 21:26:58 GMT
I here what you say , but until certain questions are answered , things appear to have been done that possibly do not have the lenders best interest at heart , it could be construed that selling the yard in such a way rather than putting to auction maybe negligent , more information is required to be sure that they have acted correctly. You should speak to fundingsecure if you think the administrators have acted negligent and pass any evidence you have on to them. The issue being discussed was slightly different. ie why should FS have to pay for the capital shortfall? Implying that FS are at fault. There seems to be a lot of blame here, towards FS, the valuers and the administrators. But without evidence of wrong doing you can't expect to be compensated. Maybe fundingsecure need to address some of the questions raised here, to stop the tainting the FS brand. Liz we have spoke to fs.. we would,nt be here winging had the resulting communications been positive.. i do not post here for the good of my health ... like you ( remember) i post because i am not happy about they (fs) have handled the sale of an asset which i happen to be k2.5 poorer
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 21, 2017 21:40:58 GMT
Where a platform is suspected of disposing of an asset in a maybe? Unscrupilous way.. it is then fitting that the lenders should know the details of the sale Its not the platform, its the administrators, the platform will have acted on the administrators recommendation. If they had rejected it, the administrators would potentially have resigned and we'd have been back to square one with more costs. Sorry but the administrators are being paid for and are acting on the behalf of the 1. Platform and 2. The lenders.... their job is to realise the best outcome . That outcome has to be achieved via all avenues... the auction avenue was not investigated in this case... why not?
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,156
Likes: 4,830
|
Post by ozboy on Aug 21, 2017 22:11:38 GMT
Bottom line - how can you spend £160,000 on renewing a slipway, and then sell the whole shebang for only £225,000?!!!
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,870
Likes: 11,097
|
Post by ilmoro on Aug 21, 2017 22:12:24 GMT
Its not the platform, its the administrators, the platform will have acted on the administrators recommendation. If they had rejected it, the administrators would potentially have resigned and we'd have been back to square one with more costs. Sorry but the administrators are being paid for and are acting on the behalf of the 1. Platform and 2. The lenders.... their job is to realise the best outcome . That outcome has to be achieved via all avenues... the auction avenue was not investigated in this case... why not? Administrators act on behalf of all creditors. They are paid from the realisations as agreed by creditors not by the platform. How do you know the auction avenue wasnt investigated? Id be very surprised if they didnt make enquires of that route and decided it wouldnt realise the best outcome.
|
|
|
Post by martin44 on Aug 21, 2017 22:27:43 GMT
Sorry but the administrators are being paid for and are acting on the behalf of the 1. Platform and 2. The lenders.... their job is to realise the best outcome . That outcome has to be achieved via all avenues... the auction avenue was not investigated in this case... why not? Administrators act on behalf of all creditors. They are paid from the realisations as agreed by creditors not by the platform. How do you know the auction avenue wasnt investigated? Id be very surprised if they didnt make enquires of that route and decided it wouldnt realise the best outcome. I dont know if the auction avenue was investigated ... thats what im trying to establish .. the auction avenue should be a given. Edit also .... how would the platform establish an auction would not be the correct decision?
|
|