|
|
Post by picanto on May 9, 2018 14:35:41 GMT
I find it surprising that so many people are voting no to the deal. Considering so many people wish to pull out of Lendy ASAP then surely it would make sense for these people to accept the loss of interest (and be pleased that they haven't lost capital) and withdraw their funds once the capital is paid back in the next few weeks? Unless people are considering sticking around for a further 18 months (which doesn't seem the general consensus from what most forum members say), but if I was wanting to get out ASAP then I know which option I would choose... You probably have little P2P experience. Getting out of a platform, if you don't want to get an impact, implies working out a slow reduction of your committments. For FC I have started about two years ago and I still do one or two withdrawals a month. With Lendy I started 9 months ago and considering what is blocked, will be another two years anyway to get out. Those investing in P2P, usually, invest for interest and not for immediate access to their capital. So it is far better for people like me to get more money out slower than less immediately. Specially in a case like this, which by my rigorous standards I consider probably the easiest recovery of over 500 loans I have on multiple platforms. REJECT is the way forward for those interested in maximising their returns and not giving out free gifts to Lendy's "friends" I'm only going on what some other members on the forum say and what some investors have commented on their TrustPilot Reviews. I have read many posts of people wishing to get their funds out of Lendy as quickly as possible and jump ship, some of whom have gone as far as naming Lendy a "scam", others saying Lendy is doomed to failure. I can't imagine these people putting their trust in Lendy to try and recover 12-18 months loss of interest sometime in the distant future. It's not what I personally would do.
|
|
brianlom1
Member of DD Central
He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
Posts: 400 
Likes: 416
|
Post by brianlom1 on May 9, 2018 16:53:05 GMT
I suspect Lendy have already decided what to do. I imagine it will be in Lendy’s best interest to have the money returned to the platform where they hope it will be used to fund other tranches. Then what would the vote be for? I think Lendy might have a plan (of course) to pass to their friendly refinancing company 'easy' money that was due to lenders. But if the majority rejects that absurd plan, then they will have no choice I think than follow the lenders wishes and negotiate harder with the refinancing house or go for the building market sale. Major legal implications for gross negligence would result from acting against the wish of the lenders in such a case. I think Ly are counting on past experience (on their own platform and elsewhere). The 'winning' formula appears to be; lend money to some rogues, experience repayment difficulties, downgrade lender expectations, offer a choice between jam today (some/all capital returned) and an uncertain future (long timescale, no guarantees). In such cases, a significant proportion of borrowers can be relied upon to vote for the expedient option (irrespective of the merits of alternative courses of action).
|
|
Carter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 250
Likes: 549
|
Post by Carter on May 9, 2018 17:00:23 GMT
I think Lendy might have a plan (of course) to pass to their friendly refinancing company 'easy' money that was due to lenders. Really! Why would you use a platform if you think they are in the business of stealing their lenders money. Never-mind promoting your opinions to us idiots for that same platform to keep our money for another 12+ months. There are complex reasons why this development reached it's current situation and numerous parties are now involved and will need to be involved in any resolution. If lenders want to call quits and retrieve their capital now I fully understand. If lenders feel secure with the situation and want to hold out for the interest knowing that it may continue to be a little bumpy then fair play. I'm sure you're quite upset that you only get one vote like the rest of us thegrumbler . Please do take the opportunity to let us know your position again, I always listen to people that shout the loudest.
|
|
|
|
Post by charlata on May 9, 2018 18:58:31 GMT
I think Lendy might have a plan (of course) to pass to their friendly refinancing company 'easy' money that was due to lenders. Really! Why would you use a platform if you think they are in the business of stealing their lenders money. Never-mind promoting your opinions to us idiots for that same platform to keep our money for another 12+ months. There are complex reasons why this development reached it's current situation and numerous parties are now involved and will need to be involved in any resolution. If lenders want to call quits and retrieve their capital now I fully understand. If lenders feel secure with the situation and want to hold out for the interest knowing that it may continue to be a little bumpy then fair play. I'm sure you're quite upset that you only get one vote like the rest of us thegrumbler . Please do take the opportunity to let us know your position again, I always listen to people that shout the loudest. Whilst thegrumbler 's posting style may not be subtle, it's hard to fault his logic on whether the offer on the table is good value or not. The people voting for the offer seem to be so doing on the basis that they have little to no idea what the security is worth, or that another loan they were in has ended badly. So they'll just take a 10% haircut and be done with it. This of course begs the question of why anyone would be investing in secured loans if they can't even hazard a guess as to what the security is worth (clue: considerably more than the loan).
|
|
Carter
Member of DD Central
Posts: 250
Likes: 549
|
Post by Carter on May 9, 2018 19:35:47 GMT
Really! Why would you use a platform if you think they are in the business of stealing their lenders money. Never-mind promoting your opinions to us idiots for that same platform to keep our money for another 12+ months. There are complex reasons why this development reached it's current situation and numerous parties are now involved and will need to be involved in any resolution. If lenders want to call quits and retrieve their capital now I fully understand. If lenders feel secure with the situation and want to hold out for the interest knowing that it may continue to be a little bumpy then fair play. I'm sure you're quite upset that you only get one vote like the rest of us thegrumbler . Please do take the opportunity to let us know your position again, I always listen to people that shout the loudest. Whilst thegrumbler 's posting style may not be subtle, it's hard to fault his logic on whether the offer on the table is good value or not. The people voting for the offer seem to be so doing on the basis that they have little to no idea what the security is worth, or that another loan they were in has ended badly. So they'll just take a 10% haircut and be done with it. This of course begs the question of why anyone would be investing in secured loans if they can't even hazard a guess as to what the security is worth (clue: considerably more than the loan). I think you're also doing a disservice to other lenders, lenders might want their money back now for a variety of reasons and just because they hold a different view gets them labelled as idiots, clueless and out of their depth in this arena. So what is the security worth, you gave me a clue but that doesn't really cut it for me. This loan was a PBL not a DFL and the LTV was calculated on the market value of the freehold interest not GDV. The original valuation reports GDV as £13,912.300 but what is it now? Clearly there should be margin for profit for an incoming developer even with the remaining build costs, flats that have already been sold, legal costs as well as marketing etc. Personally I like to be given options but I also like to see the data to base my decision on and don't think this has been provided by Lendy, to my satisfaction as least. I have yet to cast my vote.
|
|
NSFW
Posts: 118
Likes: 58
|
Post by NSFW on May 9, 2018 20:52:27 GMT
I'm concerned that lenders who don't bother even checking out loans here will just accept the generous offer to appropriate interest/bonuses owed. I have a friend who has never seen the point in this forum and simply trusts Lendy to do what's best. That's why Lendy nudges people in the votes on what action to take. It's all in the wording. Maybe that's the true definition of a "retail investor".
|
|
|
|
Post by df on May 9, 2018 21:41:44 GMT
I would like to vote no but the vote button remains greyed out whatever option I choose. Does anyone else have this issue? I'm not in this loan but I received the email addressed to me, by name, inviting me to vote. I wonder if this is a technical issue or a competence one. Yes, seem here. Your vote wouldnt have any value because its weighted on loan parts held and that doesnt take into account interest owed so the system has automatically suspended the vote button. I suspect the email has been sent to all investors who have oustanding sums due which would include interest accrued or maybe even all investors (cant remember when I bailed). Its effectively a loan book update communication. I received the e-mail, but definitely have no outstanding sums - I've sold my loan parts when it was IOA.
|
|
|
|
Post by df on May 9, 2018 22:06:25 GMT
Why do you think you should be able to vote when you’re not in the loan? And why would you want to vote when you’re not in the loan? I didn't say at any time that I should be able to vote, just that I would like to vote. However I do have an issue with being invited to vote and then being figuratively told to bug**r off. I don't like being pis**d about. Having said that, I may well be involved in the next such loan in this situation and I would like to play a part in shaping the way that Lendy deals with such situations generally speaking. I agree, they should filter e-mail distribution. Why do I need invitation to vote on the loan I'm no longer involved in and can't vote? But I'm in support of Lendy's introduction of lenders vote policy, it can help them to make more informed decisions on failing loans. It's a good practice, worked well on AC so far.
|
|
brianlom1
Member of DD Central
He's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy!
Posts: 400
Likes: 416
|
Post by brianlom1 on May 9, 2018 22:22:24 GMT
I didn't say at any time that I should be able to vote, just that I would like to vote. However I do have an issue with being invited to vote and then being figuratively told to bug**r off. I don't like being pis**d about. Having said that, I may well be involved in the next such loan in this situation and I would like to play a part in shaping the way that Lendy deals with such situations generally speaking. I agree, they should filter e-mail distribution. Why do I need invitation to vote on the loan I'm no longer involved in and can't vote? But I'm in support of Lendy's introduction of lenders vote policy, it can help them to make more informed decisions on failing loans. It's a good practice, worked well on AC so far. It would be good practice if the proposals weren't always a matter of hobson's choice. Why should investor's take the hit every time? Why do Ly retain their margin even when the deal they negotiated goes sour? It's about time Ly had some skin in the game. A good place to start would be by foregoing a portion of their margin on loans that don't repay the full amount of capital + interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 9, 2018 23:05:03 GMT
I think you're also doing a disservice to other lenders, lenders might want their money back now for a variety of reasons and just because they hold a different view gets them labelled as idiots, clueless and out of their depth in this arena. So what is the security worth, you gave me a clue but that doesn't really cut it for me. This loan was a PBL not a DFL and the LTV was calculated on the market value of the freehold interest not GDV. The original valuation reports GDV as £13,912.300 but what is it now? Clearly there should be margin for profit for an incoming developer even with the remaining build costs, flats that have already been sold, legal costs as well as marketing etc. Personally I like to be given options but I also like to see the data to base my decision on and don't think this has been provided by Lendy, to my satisfaction as least. I have yet to cast my vote. If you need more data than those provided here, ask the friendly team at Lendy.... To me just suffice to say that the lenders are due less than 900k in total and the site was professionally valued 2.6 million even before a single stone was posed in (and is now not too far from completion). You have photos, professional reports etc on the status. Costs for drafting contracts and selling were already in the original plan. The only thing that is changed is that the lenders here don't have any committment to save the builder or the people who already payed for an apartment onsite. To me the margins are very ample (and this is why the clever Lendy team thought to this nice scheme to deprive lenders from their interests via a friendly lender). The site was professionally valued 2.6 million... i understand your point, but The Castle was also professionally valued at a figure higher than the loan. I personally don’t have the appetite to wait 18 months to find out whether the valuation is correct. I’m probably irrational because I’m one of those lenders in too deep and wanting my money out ASAP. Nonetheless, I voted to accept the offer, I want out.
|
|
NSFW
Posts: 118
Likes: 58
|
Post by NSFW on May 10, 2018 2:14:30 GMT
If you need more data than those provided here, ask the friendly team at Lendy.... To me just suffice to say that the lenders are due less than 900k in total and the site was professionally valued 2.6 million even before a single stone was posed in (and is now not too far from completion). You have photos, professional reports etc on the status. Costs for drafting contracts and selling were already in the original plan. The only thing that is changed is that the lenders here don't have any committment to save the builder or the people who already payed for an apartment onsite. To me the margins are very ample (and this is why the clever Lendy team thought to this nice scheme to deprive lenders from their interests via a friendly lender). The site was professionally valued 2.6 million... i understand your point, but The Castle was also professionally valued at a figure higher than the loan. I personally don’t have the appetite to wait 18 months to find out whether the valuation is correct. I’m probably irrational because I’m one of those lenders in too deep and wanting my money out ASAP. Nonetheless, I voted to accept the offer, I want out. So then we might get more BS offers. Interest free loans. Not good.
|
|
|
|
Post by rebull on May 10, 2018 5:36:22 GMT
I voted No and would not have done it any other way, but i think the vote will go to accept the offer. If you had the loan from the start, and the money was paid back in say 2 months time when the drawdown date was 2 years then 1 years interest will have been lost, a lot of people will be thinking, well that's still 6% a year that's not bad and i get my money back. Not that i agree with them, but who can blame them everyone is in a different situation. You have to see it from both sides of the coin.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on May 10, 2018 6:02:08 GMT
I voted No and would not have done it any other way, but i think the vote will go to accept the offer. If you had the loan from the start, and the money was paid back in say 2 months time when the drawdown date was 2 years then 1 years interest will have been lost, a lot of people will be thinking, well that's still 6% a year that's not bad and i get my money back. Not that i agree with them, but who can blame them everyone is in a different situation. You have to see it from both sides of the coin. I can and will understand perfectly well anyone voting to accept to abandon P2P forever (for example thinking this type of investment is not suited to them). But accepting a no-interest proposal to reinvest in a different loan (on this or other P2P platforms) would be totally foolish, as the strenght of this loan, as it is now for lenders, is unrivalled across loans and platforms everywhere, as far as I can see. What I mean is that the risks associated with recovery in such a dominant position with such a low recovery amount with respect to the value of the site, are far lower than any other loan I am involved in or have analysed (in any platform). This is why only a No/Reject vote makes sense for those continuing to keep money in this investment segment. That’s your opinion. I want to put the money into another loan offering 2% cashback and 12% now. I agree this is likely to be a very secure property so if the vote goes the other way i’m Very happy too. Not every decision is 100%. Sometimes you really don’t care or might be 49/50%
|
|
awk
Posts: 276
Likes: 147
|
Post by awk on May 10, 2018 8:49:22 GMT
Hi Lendy Support , Paul64 I sold my remaining loan parts (5 figure sum) in this loan at the end of Sept2017 - Therefore, I believe that I am still entitled to about 2 months of standard 'accrued interest'. I recently received your email about the vote on this loan, but do not appear to be able to place my vote. It has been suggested on this forum that only investors with Capital currently invested are being given a vote - please could you confirm whether this is true? Obviously, I also have an interest in the outcome of any vote and any action taken by yourselves following that vote (and guess how I will be voting). Please could you confirm how I can place my vote, or explain why I (and many others I suspect) am being excluded. regards awk
|
|
withnell
Member of DD Central
Posts: 550
Likes: 491
|
Post by withnell on May 10, 2018 14:01:29 GMT
33.02% to redeem at par, 32.42% to reject, 34.55% didn't vote - so hardly conclusive!
|
|
