|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Apr 11, 2014 23:24:54 GMT
I find it strange that some loans have all questions, even difficult ones answered quickly and other loans languish for days and days with no response. I suspect that what's happening is that the RM may have to go back to the borrower, either for some answers or for approval of answers they've written, and some borrowers respond promptly while others don't. There also are different introducers involved, and different RMs. Another step is compliance, as these are searching questions they need to be rigorous with the answers. Tho' I suppose nomore rigorous than before as AC say they've always tried to apply the highest standards to their work. Finally the hardest bit, typing them up to go on line.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Apr 13, 2014 21:04:56 GMT
I see that there's someone who's bid 100k on this proposal under the name of an ancient Egyptian leader. I was wondering if this is an u/wer who knows AC will not be using u/wers on this loan, or is it someone who doesn't know about the advantages of being an u/wer? He made his bids on the same page as me (34).
|
|
bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Apr 13, 2014 21:36:56 GMT
I suspect that what's happening is that the RM may have to go back to the borrower, either for some answers or for approval of answers they've written, and some borrowers respond promptly while others don't. There also are different introducers involved, and different RMs. Another step is compliance, as these are searching questions they need to be rigorous with the answers. Tho' I suppose nomore rigorous than before as AC say they've always tried to apply the highest standards to their work. Finally the hardest bit, typing them up to go on line. Not sure about the compliance issue but sometimes borrowers and/or their advisers are very quick to respond and other times...well. Just maybe the advisers or borrowers simply do not understand the necessity of instilling confidence in would be lenders. Certainly if you were asked some of the relevant questions by a bank and either refused or couldn't answer then I expect the 'computer would say no'. With any prospective loan, If I'm not comfortable with the answers or in this case the apparent lack of them, then I simply walk away.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Apr 14, 2014 3:10:00 GMT
I see that there's someone who's bid 100k on this proposal under the name of an ancient Egyptian leader. I was wondering if this is an u/wer who knows AC will not be using u/wers on this loan, or is it someone who doesn't know about the advantages of being an u/wer? He made his bids on the same page as me (34). AIUI, an underwriter is expected to put their loan parts on the AM as soon as possible, so anyone who wanted to hold their parts longer would not be considered to be an underwriter. (On the other hand Re****h shows as being funded 25% by underwriters, yet there are none of those parts on the AM despite drawdown having occurred a month ago.) Also, I'd expect a bid of that size to be a shadow bid. PS. There's no point in referring to a specific numbered page on the list of bids because the numbering changes as more bids come in. The best that could be done would be to refer to a page as being NNth from the end of the list, because that number shouldn't change.
|
|
andy2001
Member of DD Central
Posts: 361 
Likes: 34
|
Post by andy2001 on Apr 14, 2014 3:51:33 GMT
I see that there's someone who's bid 100k on this proposal under the name of an ancient Egyptian leader. I was wondering if this is an u/wer who knows AC will not be using u/wers on this loan, or is it someone who doesn't know about the advantages of being an u/wer? He made his bids on the same page as me (34). AIUI, an underwriter is expected to put their loan parts on the AM as soon as possible, so anyone who wanted to hold their parts longer would not be considered to be an underwriter. (On the other hand Re****h shows as being funded 25% by underwriters, yet there are none of those parts on the AM despite drawdown having occurred a month ago.) Also, I'd expect a bid of that size to be a shadow bid. PS. There's no point in referring to a specific numbered page on the list of bids because the numbering changes as more bids come in. The best that could be done would be to refer to a page as being NNth from the end of the list, because that number shouldn't change. I don't think the underwriters have to sell there loan parts. Re****ch is still showing underwriter loan units being held, and they haven't been on the aftermarket for some time.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Apr 14, 2014 11:55:00 GMT
AIUI, an underwriter is expected to put their loan parts on the AM as soon as possible, so anyone who wanted to hold their parts longer would not be considered to be an underwriter. (On the other hand Re****h shows as being funded 25% by underwriters, yet there are none of those parts on the AM despite drawdown having occurred a month ago.) Also, I'd expect a bid of that size to be a shadow bid. PS. There's no point in referring to a specific numbered page on the list of bids because the numbering changes as more bids come in. The best that could be done would be to refer to a page as being NNth from the end of the list, because that number shouldn't change. I don't think the underwriters have to sell there loan parts. Re****ch is still showing underwriter loan units being held, and they haven't been on the aftermarket for some time. That may be true, but if they decide to do that they ought to let AC know so that those loan parts can be reclassified from Underwritten to Lent. Otherwise it's misleading to the rest of us lenders who are wanting to buy some of the parts when they come onto the AM. It has been suggested that one strategy of avoiding dead money would be to wait until after drawdown and then buy underwritten parts off the AM. If it turns out that the 'underwriters' are investing instead of underwriting then we're being led down the garden path, and that's not a good business practice at all!
|
|
andy2001
Member of DD Central
Posts: 361
Likes: 34
|
Post by andy2001 on Apr 14, 2014 12:43:14 GMT
Looks like a lot of Q&As have now been answered.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Apr 14, 2014 15:36:59 GMT
Looks like a lot of Q&As have now been answered. ... but not satisfactorily.
|
|
j
Member of DD Central
Penguins are very misunderstood!
Posts: 2,188
Likes: 540
|
Post by j on Apr 15, 2014 17:47:21 GMT
Gently chugging along  Are we having any new loans please? I'm getting bored looking at the same screenshot every day  |
|
andy2001
Member of DD Central
Posts: 361
Likes: 34
|
Post by andy2001 on Apr 15, 2014 21:16:00 GMT
If anyone wants to get on this or add more, they should probably do it now. Only about 36k left.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Apr 16, 2014 2:55:38 GMT
If anyone wants to get on this or add more, they should probably do it now. Only about 36k left. Down to less than £10k now, so the last of it probably will disappear later this morning.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Jun 9, 2014 22:16:06 GMT
Glad to see this answer to a question about permission in the Q&A dated 6th June,
"Yes planning permission has been received."
IN EDIT 25/9/14: But the above answer in the Q&A (and 'Recent Activity') was later changed/corrected please loan for details.
|
|
|
|
Post by chielamangus on Oct 8, 2014 13:43:09 GMT
Some information for those of you with an "interest" in this loan. The planning application process began in June 2013. In April, when the AC loan was being negotiated it was already clear that the application was not straightforward - as many of us guessed from the limited information we were given at the time. The application was refused in June 2014. I can find no evidence of a second application since then, and based on the evidence of the first application, it would be an uphill task to get the decision reversed. Given this, would an extension to this loan be desirable from anyone's perspective? Hard for the borrower, but even harder paying default interest and little chance of getting a higher property value with PP.
Of course, my facts might be wrong. Don't take my word on any of this. Do your own research before you take any decision. Good luck.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Oct 8, 2014 16:09:16 GMT
The application was refused in June 2014. I can find no evidence of a second application since then... Of course, my facts might be wrong. Don't take my word on any of this. Do your own research before you take any decision. Good luck. ISTM that chielamangus's facts are wrong. There's an entry, dated 6/Oct, in the Recent Activity section of the Overview page of this loan that includes... There's more info there as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Oct 8, 2014 16:50:38 GMT
I agree with chielamangus 's analysis, and would go further. Having read all the supporting material for this 2013-14 refused planning application, and the earlier 2012 refused planning, I have very real concerns about the as is valuation of the site. Without access to the valuation report, it is impossible to know how much "hope value" was incorporated into the valuation (for those on SS, the valuation report for PBL 004 demonstrates the concept of hope value very clearly - essentially it is a fraction of the expected uplift in value if planning is granted). I have reduced my 4 figure holding down to a single £20 part to ensure I continue to receive AC email updates on this loan. mikes1531 AIUI the council's planning dept are currently considering whether they are going to accept the new application for plannng. Until such point it isn't listed on the council's website.
|
|
