dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jul 26, 2018 18:42:35 GMT
This whole things makes no sense. Lendy are owed £14m. If they are/were prepared to accept £11m and accept a loss then why would any new lender be prepared to lend £11m (net!) and be exposed at I00% LTV plus any additional funds to complete the building - seems like fantasy land
|
|
bloodycat
Member of DD Central
Posts: 184
Likes: 84
|
Post by bloodycat on Jul 26, 2018 18:46:24 GMT
Less than 50% of lenders by value voted for option 1. How many of those who didn't cast a vote were abstaining because they didn't like either option?
There were strong feelings expressed on here that the developer was trying it on but that people were voting for option 1 as the least bad option - especially if they want their money out sooner rather than later.
Unless the development is in a much worse state than we has been admitted I expect the developer will come back with a more realistic offer - at least to return all capital. I doubt we will see any bonus interest and will probably take a significant haircut on outstanding accrued interest.
|
|
|
Post by arctic on Jul 26, 2018 19:00:07 GMT
Option 2 is really the only decision they could go with if the platform was to retain any credibility. Some on here suggested option 1 may involve claims against RICS valuer to recover balance outstanding, has anyone here ever heard of such a claim being successful for a property of this kind of value and nature? Especially when the property had not even been placed on the open market?
These votes have always been advisory, not binding. Glad they made the right decision.
|
|
gareot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 75
Likes: 63
|
Post by gareot on Jul 26, 2018 19:22:49 GMT
Well it's about time Lendy started to flex their muscles. I voted for option 2 because there's no way the borrower should be allowed to take the p**s out of us. Well done Lendy, now what about H********** Q*** ? Get that right & I might start re-investing with you, join Trustpilot & give you a genuine good review.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Jul 26, 2018 20:17:54 GMT
Well, MT chose a good day to bury bad news didn't they?
...I'll get my coat..
|
|
|
Post by p2plender on Jul 26, 2018 23:13:45 GMT
Just more can kicking now. I wanted to just get back part of my investment and close my account. Now we have potentially years off Lendy waffle.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jul 27, 2018 1:33:53 GMT
This whole things makes no sense. Lendy are owed £14m. If they are/were prepared to accept £11m and accept a loss then why would any new lender be prepared to lend £11m (net!) and be exposed at I00% LTV plus any additional funds to complete the building - seems like fantasy land 11M is latest current valuation as is if the build continued to the revised, lower gross development value of, say, 16-17M that the new lender would be lending against instead of 22M. Of course if this now goes belly up and we’re later forced into a fire sale we might only get half that for a half-finished site and but dream of a 75-80% refinance (and having reinvested and made up our haircut in the meantime).
|
|
TheDriver
Member of DD Central
Slightly bonkers
Posts: 493
Likes: 190
|
Post by TheDriver on Jul 27, 2018 5:38:44 GMT
so if option 1 does come off, does that mean £ for £ I put in, I am looking at a reduced capital being returned but they are suggesting that this has been offset by the interest I have already received, thus I am breaking more than even and should be getting around 3%? (I got confused with their example maths) And does this also mean I need to wait 12 months to get that break even point (with this additional payment), or do I break even from whenever this gets settled? Yes it would have, but only on money invested from the beginning ie. 2 years ago, which means APR is under 1.5%. Anytime much after that would be less at 1% /month! And yes, next year/sometime/never. I wonder if the "investor feedback" to cause such a change of heart (given the obvious favour shown for option 1) is that L didn't realise the PG would be invalidated with option 1, and they'd have blown other "legal remedies" - although it would be incredible if they are so fundementally naive. Unless they HAVE considered the future effect of such a settlement, gifting the borrower lenders' capital as future profit with no second charge? Either their update is a smokescreen, and/or we'll see the rationale in a subsequent proposal.
|
|
|
Post by gaspilot on Jul 27, 2018 5:58:14 GMT
"....... it is anticipated by our appointed experts that this option (option2) will result in significantly less capital (than the c.84% return set out in Option 1) being available to investors following the recovery and sale of the security property."
A vote was taken showing a 3:1 majority in favour of option 1. Ly then decides to go with option 2. What a waste of time having a vote. They haven't got a clue what they are doing.
|
|
TheDriver
Member of DD Central
Slightly bonkers
Posts: 493
Likes: 190
|
Post by TheDriver on Jul 27, 2018 6:49:29 GMT
This whole things makes no sense. Lendy are owed £14m. If they are/were prepared to accept £11m and accept a loss then why would any new lender be prepared to lend £11m (net!) and be exposed at I00% LTV plus any additional funds to complete the building - seems like fantasy land 11M is latest current valuation as is if the build continued to the revised, lower gross development value of, say, 16-17M that the new lender would be lending against instead of 22M. Of course if this now goes belly up and we’re later forced into a fire sale we might only get half that for a half-finished site and but dream of a 75-80% refinance (and having reinvested and made up our haircut in the meantime). Hi dandy , not sure if I missed something, but could you say where you have seen the valuation? Last year GDV increased more than 10% to over £22M so that tranches for (delayed) build completion by the end of the year could be issued, supervised by an IMS. We know from forumite photos that it didn't quite happen, but how much to finish? Surely not £5+M?
|
|
dandy
Posts: 427
Likes: 341
|
Post by dandy on Jul 27, 2018 7:14:06 GMT
I haven't seen any valuation as not in this loan
Was just observing the fact that if Lendy consider £11m worth taking (ie best can get) then why would a new lender come in and hand over £11m at effective 100%+ of realisable value at time of loan. The GDV figures stated would require substantial more money to get there and with a borrower that is seemingly not in control of costs and can't be trusted
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Jul 27, 2018 7:30:59 GMT
Clearly the £11m is value to the borrower. But that is not the same as realisable value. To get to that point though requires more work on Lendys behalf, and the possibility of a greater crystallised loss. But these are the risks.
It is a shambles. No point in a vote of Lendy are going to side with the minority, or not give us the complete picture. I cannot think of any aspect of the vote that actually was correct.
The only possibilities seem to me that either the borrower lowered the offer or that the vote results were a work of fiction. There would have been dissenting voices but it appears that anyone voting 1) would have cause for complaint and in greater numbers too.
I do wonder if Lendy are fed up with the whole slagging of their business. They have their fees so there is not much motivation here...a bad result here might be seen as a bit of a 'i told you so'.
These types of DFLs are just not worth it for anyone apart from the borrower's. All the risk is on ours and Lendys side. I say Lendy as they win the short term but long term their reputation is gone.
Could a similar development get funding for dozens of tranches? Seems unlikely now because of the messes previous borrowers have made.
|
|
withnell
Member of DD Central
Posts: 550
Likes: 491
|
Post by withnell on Jul 27, 2018 8:22:01 GMT
"....... it is anticipated by our appointed experts that this option (option2) will result in significantly less capital (than the c.84% return set out in Option 1) being available to investors following the recovery and sale of the security property." A vote was taken showing a 3:1 majority in favour of option 1. Ly then decides to go with option 2. What a waste of time having a vote. They haven't got a clue what they are doing. I think it's just badly worded - they're going with more of an option 3, deal with the borrower but don't let them screw us over. Similar tactic to PBL120 and that worked out alright - they can go to the borrower with concrete feedback that investors are not happy to accept the deal
|
|
richox
Member of DD Central
Posts: 66
Likes: 120
|
Post by richox on Jul 27, 2018 8:59:32 GMT
No doubt the borrower will be wondering how to use the goings on over the vote to his advantage. Hopefully Lendy have a good grasp of all the pressure points though, and have thought through exactly how they are going to extract a better offer from him. At the end of the day securing an improved offer will be a win win situation for everyone, maybe even for the borrower. Lets hope for an all's well that ends well outcome.
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Jul 27, 2018 9:06:00 GMT
What feedback is there though?
The borrower knows that a good percentage of people either weighted by pounds or not are prepared to deal at £11m.
I would say some of the same conditions apply....the enforcement is too big a task for Lendy on a development of this size, and it suits them more to clear the loan quickly.
Personally I believe there will be another vote soon but with an increased recovery of something like 90% which they will spin as a massive success, but obviously the borrower still has gotten a significant discount on their loan and keeps the upside.
|
|