IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,692
Likes: 3,018
|
Post by IFISAcava on Sept 25, 2019 12:16:56 GMT
New update on the lendy site. Say the funds of the refinancing have been received. Also mentions there are further deferred recoveries. i.e - there is a shortfall
|
|
sussexlender
Member of DD Central
Cheat seeking missile
Posts: 550 
Likes: 916
|
Post by sussexlender on Nov 2, 2019 12:46:02 GMT
Looks as if this long running con is going to continue.
The latest Update (see below in full) states that whilst the refinance took place investors are not going to be paid out until RSM have taken legal advice. On what? Who is paying for this further legal advice?
It doesn't seem that any other recent recoveries have needed further legal advice.
These shoddy borrowers have spun us along for years, have finally paid back some cash, still owe us all the unpaid interest and extra penalty interest, and RSM tell us they need to seek advice before they pay us some of it back? Many may think this is an obvious scam.
From Lendy / RSM dated 29.10.2019 As reported last month the refinance of the outstanding loan completed on 5th September 2019. The proceeds have been received and are currently held on account ready to be distributed to Investors once the AML checks are concluded and the distribution of funds has been clarified following legal advice.
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Nov 2, 2019 13:32:54 GMT
Tantalus. He was also called Atys . He was made to stand in a pool of water beneath a fruit tree with low branches, with the fruit ever eluding his grasp, and the water always receding before he could take a drink. He was the father of Pelops, Niobe and Broteas, and was a son of Zeus and the nymph Plouto.
You are not alone!
|
|
Garage246
Member of DD Central
Posts: 116
Likes: 209
|
Post by Garage246 on Nov 2, 2019 17:09:46 GMT
Looks as if this long running con is going to continue. The latest Update (see below in full) states that whilst the refinance took place investors are not going to be paid out until RSM have taken legal advice. On what? Who is paying for this further legal advice? It doesn't seem that any other recent recoveries have needed further legal advice. These shoddy borrowers have spun us along for years, have finally paid back some cash, still owe us all the unpaid interest and extra penalty interest, and RSM tell us they need to seek advice before they pay us some of it back? Many may think this is an obvious scam. From Lendy / RSM dated 29.10.2019 As reported last month the refinance of the outstanding loan completed on 5th September 2019. The proceeds have been received and are currently held on account ready to be distributed to Investors once the AML checks are concluded and the distribution of funds has been clarified following legal advice.
I assume from the way it is written that this is more to do with the payout waterfall mechanism which RSM on DFL012 based on Lendy T&Cs from March 2018 and held back £2M of the loan to go as Lendy fees yo creditors. I believe this is being workee on. I don't know but suspect until that is resolved the payout is being held. If that is the case this isn't a borrower issue for once.
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Nov 2, 2019 17:43:09 GMT
Yes, I suspect the issue with this, and many other very late loans is that the last LY T&cs, which they tried to thrust upon us, say Ly get all their money before lenders get any. I doubt the administrators want to do that before they check as to who is in the right.. Paying it out may be much easier than clawing it back. No, I didn't accept those T&cs either.. did you?
|
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Nov 2, 2019 18:02:54 GMT
Yes, I suspect the issue with this, and many other very late loans is that the last LY T&cs, which they tried to thrust upon us, say Ly get all their money before lenders get any. I doubt the administrators want to do that before they check as to who is in the right.. Paying it out may be much easier than clawing it back. No, I didn't accept those T&cs either.. did you? Could it be that, if the Waterfall is applied in full, the remaining amount available for Lenders is pitifully small? This loan was approaching 900 days overdue!
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Nov 2, 2019 19:19:03 GMT
Yes, I suspect the issue with this, and many other very late loans is that the last LY T&cs, which they tried to thrust upon us, say Ly get all their money before lenders get any. I doubt the administrators want to do that before they check as to who is in the right.. Paying it out may be much easier than clawing it back. No, I didn't accept those T&cs either.. did you? Could it be that, if the Waterfall is applied in full, the remaining amount available for Lenders is pitifully small? This loan was approaching 900 days overdue! Indeed. 900 days of Lendy penalty/default interest would likely leave the cupboard very bare!
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Nov 2, 2019 19:36:42 GMT
What is sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander. Administrators using ring fenced clients accounts should apply the same usage to Lendy charges.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Nov 2, 2019 20:58:45 GMT
Could it be that, if the Waterfall is applied in full, the remaining amount available for Lenders is pitifully small? This loan was approaching 900 days overdue! Indeed. 900 days of Lendy penalty/default interest would likely leave the cupboard very bare! It strikes me that the "cupboard" would still be pretty damn full - the "deductions" don't magically go into anyone's back pocket just by virtue of getting added onto Lendy's balance sheet.
Further, I would expect someone acting on behalf of creditors to insist that a claim is entered against Lendy for the excessive amounts deducted via an unfair "waterfall"; not just for the loans the administrators are repaying, but for all past loans where such an unfair "waterfall" has resulted in increased losses for investors whilst Lendy themselves drew off a profit on the same loan.
Reflecting on this, one simplistic short-term approach could have been to replace Lendy's unfair "waterfall" with a simple deduction of actual costs of the recovery action for the loans where RSM were responsible for distributing the money. However, this is then unfair to those lenders who received repayments that had Lendy's waterfall deductions from before the administrators were called in.
As such, it's probably fairer overall to, merely as an interim measure, apply the same "Lendy waterfall" calculation to the new loans, but then have claims submitted on behalf of all lenders against Lendy (in administration) for the amount that Lendy were deemed to have overcharged on fees etc.
That could result in a much larger pot of money for distribution, but also a much larger set of claims against that money - which would ultimately dilute the non-lender creditors for the benefit of lenders.
Even better if profits that had previously been extracted from the business can be clawed back to make the pot of money for distribution even larger, allowing everyone caught up in this mess (including non-lender creditors such as suppliers etc.) to get a bigger slice of what they're owed.
|
|
Garage246
Member of DD Central
Posts: 116
Likes: 209
|
Post by Garage246 on Nov 3, 2019 3:21:39 GMT
Yes, I suspect the issue with this, and many other very late loans is that the last LY T&cs, which they tried to thrust upon us, say Ly get all their money before lenders get any. I doubt the administrators want to do that before they check as to who is in the right.. Paying it out may be much easier than clawing it back. No, I didn't accept those T&cs either.. did you? We declined those T&Cs as well. TBH the way they were rolled out clearly breaches FCA guidance - see www.fca.org.uk/publication/finalised-guidance/fg18-07.pdfQuote "Where a term fails the fairness test under the Consumer Rights Act, it will not be binding on a consumer. Consumers may rely on the fairness test under the CRA when taking action in the courts, making complaints to firms and referring them to the Financial Ombudsman Scheme" It would also appear that not only does FCA have jurisdiction over this area in financial services, but also the Competition and Markets Authority. Now where did the FCA go in all this....
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Nov 3, 2019 11:28:41 GMT
the FCA should declare the last changes in T@Cs with LB putting himself and LY in front of lenders on any repayments to be null and void. LB clearly knew where this was all going to end up. surely the FCA and FOS should show some teeth and put a stop to his blatent contemt towards lenders/investors. he should not be allowed to walk away unscathed.also many lenders did not accept the changes are RSMaware of this.has LB ever made a statement anywhere apologising or explaining to the thousand of people who trusted him to be acting with some morals and integrity.instead we ended up with one of the biggest NARCISSIST to walk this planet.
|
|
one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Nov 3, 2019 12:47:49 GMT
the FCA should declare the last changes in T@Cs with LB putting himself and LY in front of lenders on any repayments to be null and void. LB clearly knew where this was all going to end up. surely the FCA and FOS should show some teeth and put a stop to his blatent contemt towards lenders/investors. he should not be allowed to walk away unscathed.also many lenders did not accept the changes are RSMaware of this.has LB ever made a statement anywhere apologising or explaining to the thousand of people who trusted him to be acting with some morals and integrity.instead we ended up with one of the biggest NARCISSIST to walk this planet. With regard to Lendy's latest T&Cs - which allowed them to collect their fees in the event of a loan default before Lenders. Playing devil’s advocate for a moment - are Lenders who failed to send a rejection letter at the time, deemed to have accepted them by RSM, and as such will suffer the consequences of having these fees deducted from any returns they are entitled to? Lenders who were stuck in defaulted loans would have had no choice but to have continued using the platform in order to withdraw their funds as and when they became available. I would imagine there are many retail investors who may have thought it was pointless sending a letter of rejection for this very reason. It almost seems that Lendy engineered their own demise in order to gain from increasing loan defaults, taking advantage of retail investors, who may have been too busy to scrutinise these T&Cs?
|
|
|
|
Post by brightspark on Nov 3, 2019 13:47:01 GMT
My view is the only issue of substance is whether or not contract terms are unfair. Whether or not the "new" terms are or were rejected by any lenders is irrelevant. When the Administrator implements terms which are unfair then they become a participant in the unfair terms.
|
|
neeps
Posts: 81
Likes: 120
|
Post by neeps on Nov 3, 2019 13:48:07 GMT
Yes, I suspect the issue with this, and many other very late loans is that the last LY T&cs, which they tried to thrust upon us, say Ly get all their money before lenders get any. I doubt the administrators want to do that before they check as to who is in the right.. Paying it out may be much easier than clawing it back. No, I didn't accept those T&cs either.. did you?  , surely any Lendy Ts&Cs became null & void the moment the administrators took over. Lendy/LB should have no claim on any of the returned money & it should be paid back immediately to all of us that lent in good faith.
|
|
|
|
Post by billy169 on Nov 3, 2019 14:10:39 GMT
If only !
|
|
, surely any Lendy Ts&Cs became null & void the moment the administrators took over. Lendy/LB should have no claim on any of the returned money & it should be paid back immediately to all of us that lent in good faith.