twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089 
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Jan 3, 2017 22:22:05 GMT
Well, you never know. You heard about tax havens. What better than having a tax haven in heaven. Hmmm...
Suspending my atheism for a moment: I suppose that heaven and tax should be mutually exclusive. Presumably, an afterlife with tax would be hell?
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,022
Likes: 5,148
|
Post by adrianc on Jan 3, 2017 22:30:11 GMT
Well, you never know. You heard about tax havens. What better than having a tax haven in heaven. Hmmm...
Suspending my atheism for a moment: I suppose that heaven and tax should be mutually exclusive.
Are you kidding me...? The tithe - 10% of your income to the church, on top of taxes - is a long and ancient tradition, with tithe barns in most villages just to hold all that donated proportion of the harvest. How d'you think the Vatican got so wealthy...? (I leave it as an exercise to the reader to decide whether Billy Graham and "heaven" are mutually exclusive :- billygraham.org/answer/does-a-christian-have-to-tithe/)
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Jan 3, 2017 23:03:25 GMT
How d'you think the Vatican got so wealthy...? Brainwashing.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,022
Likes: 5,148
|
Post by adrianc on Jan 3, 2017 23:05:36 GMT
How d'you think the Vatican got so wealthy...? Brainwashing. Is THAT what they call it? 
|
|
|
|
Post by harryvederci on Jan 10, 2017 13:37:49 GMT
There is a new administrators update on the previous landowners company which confirms 100% this property was sold for £1,050,000.
It also states, in relation to the bombed out industrial site immediately below it which they still cant sell; the area around Glenrothes has been hit hard by the departure of a large number of local employers and there is little prospect of that demand being replaced....alternative use values have been contemplated including redevelopment as residential, but this option would appear uneconomical, and in any event, it may be difficult to attract housebuilders to purchase the properties due to their location.
SS appear to have been sold down the river with £2,450,000 out on this on the back of that 'valuation report'
Did the borrowers flip it on a subsale with SS unaware?
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Jan 10, 2017 14:21:47 GMT
There is a new administrators update on the previous landowners company which confirms 100% this property was sold for £1,050,000. It also states, in relation to the bombed out industrial site immediately below it which they still cant sell; the area around Glenrothes has been hit hard by the departure of a large number of local employers and there is little prospect of that demand being replaced....alternative use values have been contemplated including redevelopment as residential, but this option would appear uneconomical, and in any event, it may be difficult to attract housebuilders to purchase the properties due to their location.SS appear to have been sold down the river with £2,450,000 out on this on the back of that 'valuation report' Did the borrowers flip it on a subsale with SS unaware? There is no saying that our borrower was the immediate party; they may have purchased it from a party that acquired it from the administrators The above is possible but I admit unlikely. If our borrower is the immediate party, and they purchased the site for £1,050,000, then there is c£1,150,000 unaccounted for... not good.
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Jan 10, 2017 15:03:59 GMT
There is a new administrators update on the previous landowners company which confirms 100% this property was sold for £1,050,000. It also states, in relation to the bombed out industrial site immediately below it which they still cant sell; the area around Glenrothes has been hit hard by the departure of a large number of local employers and there is little prospect of that demand being replaced....alternative use values have been contemplated including redevelopment as residential, but this option would appear uneconomical, and in any event, it may be difficult to attract housebuilders to purchase the properties due to their location.SS appear to have been sold down the river with £2,450,000 out on this on the back of that 'valuation report' Did the borrowers flip it on a subsale with SS unaware? OK... after some digging (thank you for PM harryvederci  ) I think (not 100% certain) that our security contains more than just that one sale The Admin Progress Report Notes that the Northern element of W******** sold for £1,050,000. From the VR -
|
|
|
|
Post by harryvederci on Jan 10, 2017 16:30:31 GMT
agree CD there is the northern site & the southern (modern industrial) sites
unfortunately SS have only the northern site and its the southern site the administrators still cant sell
from the valuation report...the property is bounded by Whitecraigs Road to the east and south
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Jan 10, 2017 17:09:35 GMT
agree CD there is the northern site & the southern (modern industrial) sites unfortunately SS have only the northern site and its the southern site the administrators still cant sell from the valuation report... the property is bounded by W********** Road to the east and southThere does seem to be part of the site that is not included, but it does seem the "Moden Units" north of W********** Road, seem to be (which looks to be part of the "south side of the industrial estate"). I'm not disagreeing with you; just trying to iron out exactly what our security is, and what was involved in that sale. No outline map in the VR which is annoying; possibly in the appendix, which is missing. I have dropped SS an e-mail to ask them to send it through.
|
|
|
|
Post by harryvederci on Jan 20, 2017 14:47:54 GMT
No outline map in the VR which is annoying; possibly in the appendix, which is missing. I have dropped SS an e-mail to ask them to send it through.
did you ever get a response to this C_D?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 14, 2017 0:00:26 GMT
Interest now accruing
|
|
|
|
Post by harryvederci on May 26, 2017 15:41:31 GMT
latest update The planning meeting still expected to proceed in June.
What has that got to do with the price of fish?
So 5 months after this loan was due for repayment, they decide to apply for renewal of planning for residential which was never viable anyway. Its all in the previous insolvent company administrator filings, where alternative use was exhausted viz
alternative use values have been contemplated by **** including redevelopment as residential, but this option would appear uneconomical, and in any event, it may be difficult to attract housebuilders to purchase the properties due to their location.
This is the property that was bought for £1,050,000 as confirmed by the admin filings but has somehow morphed into a £2,450,000 Ly loan
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Jun 26, 2017 21:35:59 GMT
latest update The planning meeting still expected to proceed in June.Despite numerous on line searches, I am unable to find a current planning application for this site. The last Full Application was made in March 2008 and subsequently withdrawn in January 2010. There was a Pre Planning Application made but this does not constitute a Planning Application. The Full Application and the subsequent PAN only relates to the north half of W********l Industrial Estate. I've never really understood many of the arrangements relating to this loan - one reason I got out of it a long time ago. There are some very recent planning applications on the Fife website (13 June) but with Saving Stream as the applicant (via a firm of planning consultants). I didn't understand the update: "The planning meeting did not proceed on the option of the borrower, so in light of this we have applied for our own planning to protect investor\'s position." Has anything happened on the land during the course of the loan apart from a lapse (or similar) in planning?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 27, 2017 0:48:56 GMT
Planning has expired because borrower wasnt able to apply for reserve matters within 5 years of original planning. Main reason inability to reach agreements with all the various parties who seem to have interests/ownership of bits of the site affected. As a result Lendy are looking to enforce their security and apply for a three year extension to the planning to enable them to resolve the various issues and get the development going. The land still held by the original owner appears to be different to the site covered by the loan (both are listed in Lendy submission to planning) No development has occurred because the reserve matters werent resolved/unable to get funding as a result. Bit of a mess.
This is all my interpretation from the docs on the planning portal.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,330
Likes: 11,549
|
Post by ilmoro on Jun 27, 2017 14:10:06 GMT
Whilst no formal Planning Application has been made, it transpires that they have applied for the Planning Permission in Principal to be extended for 3 years and that this was lodged and validated by Fife Council on the 13th June 2017, 1 day before the original PPP expired. The waffle document from Ly's Planning Consultant doesn't add anything, merely regurgitates what is stated in the original PPP approval document. IMHO without an extension to the PPP, this land would be valued at that of a derelict industrial site. Again IMHO, there are a number of errors in the online application made which I will look at later (need to take the dog for a walk in the monsoon). The Planning Consultant has also compared the Local Development Plans of 2012 and 2017, to ensure that the Council has not moved the goal posts in the 5 years since the original application was made. I have noted the the Ly site has been changed to mixed use development from the 2017 draft which was designated as Industrial use (someone been lobbying in the background?). I've now had an opportunity to look at the online Planning Application submitted by Ly's Planning Consultant. Payment was made at 17:38 on the 13th June 2017. PPP was granted on 14th June 2012 so it looks as though this was a rather hurried application as permission expired 5 years after 14th June 2012. IMHO the agent submitted this without visiting the site or having much knowledge of the previous proposal. Among the many mistakes on the application form are; Description - This is given as a greenfield site whereas it is in fact a run down industrial site with some homes and operating premises. New Access required - Answer given as No despite the proposal showing a new roundabout on the dual carriageway and this being one of the prime conditions of approval. Altered water supply or drainage requirements - Answer given as No. A quick look at the proposed drawings would show this is necessary. Proposing to connect to a Public water supply - Answer given as No although there are no private water supplies in the area. Are there trees on or adjacent to the site - Answer given as No. The site has some very mature trees both on the site and surrounding the site. Do you propose to create any Non Residential Floor Space - Answer given as No despite there being a fundamental requirement in the PPP to provide industrial units at each stage of the housing construction. The Local Plan for this site requires the provision of; 10% affordable housing. The budget allowance payable to the developer is I believe £140k per unit, not leaving much profit. New Community Centre to be provided. No profit for any developer. Two points of access required. Thus the need for a very expensive new access roundabout, which must be built before development work begins. Again a cost with no return for a developer. Sounds like it needs a developer with deep pockets willing to take this on Youre looking at the wrong application form ... thats the one for the roundabout. The one for the extension of planning correct identifies the industrial nature of the site and the presence of trees, though many of the Qs are irrelevant as it is meerly seeking an extension to the exisiting time limits not any amendments to the planning. Conclusions certainly true ... this loan is going to run for at least 3 years as the application says any other timescale is unrealistic or SS, a division of Lendy, are going have to get the PP and flog it on fairly promptly.
|
|
)
