PBL167 Pickering Holiday Cottages DEFAULT Part Recovery

Hi Jester.
Thanks for the post.
I see that 167 shows as not yet drawn down so 122 is still pending. My mistake.

There may not have been any intention to mislead, but if something is capable of being misunderstood, it will be!

Will you ever understand that misunderstandings resulting from receipt of misunderstandable communication were, and will for ever be, quite understandably, inevitable?

V. poor D- ....... Must try harder.
 

A SOTBO I know, but if communicators communicated in a manner that was unambiguous they would have less reason to hide behind the barricades!

Holding platforms "to account" is part of the role of this forum. But so is the ability to have a constructive dialogue between forum members and the platforms. 

There are ways to express 'disgruntlement' which facilitate constructive dialogue. Then there are some of the posts in this thread and in others. 

A sure fire way to result in platforms disengaging from the forum is to either personally attack/insult representives of the platform or one of their colleagues, or to make statements to which a rep is unlikely to be able to respond to without involving their lawyers.  

Unfortunately, the 'we' who now understand are a tiny minority of PBL122 investors, because not that many investors follow this forum.

I won't use the inflammatory 'misled', but I will say I misunderstood what was going to happen, partly because of what LfSS had told us, and partly because I had assumed this follow-on situation would be handled as SS had done in similar circumstances in the past.

Earlier, I sent an email to LfSS Customer Support asking for clarification of this situation but I've not had a response yet, other than an acknowledgement that my message was received.  Unless CS turnaround has improved in the last few days, it probably will be a week before I receive a response.

Inasmuch as Paul64 has acknowledged to us that the situation could have been made clearer, and inasmuch as such a small portion of PBL122 investors will have seen this thread, ISTM that LfSS really need to send an email to all PBL122 investors clarifying the situation.  If they want PBL122 investors to clear their negative balances sooner rather than later, they need to ask the investors to do so.

The LTV is not "very high" (by which I assume you mean >70%). Well it would be if 167 was drawn down and both loans outstanding simultaneously, but as when 167 drawdown happens 122 will be immediately repaid it's a very form over substance view as 167 is currently fully cash backed and could be cancelled and investors repaid easily from that cash.

The rest of your point remains valid - I think Lendy should stall the requirement to resolve negative balances until drawdown which we are told is soon. Or at the very least should allow wales of 167 notwithstanding the negative balance created by having pre-funded it in the face of uncertainty.