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 Jan 11, 2019 10:16:57 GMT
New charge in favour of a JV partner registered, same as for other two blocks. JV from 1/17.
Links in DDC
From January 2017? Thats the date referenced for the JV agreement in the charge so its an exisiting relationship. Unclear yet as to what the significance is. Could be a refinance or additional borrowing behind Lendy or merely a charge to protect existing interests, presumably subordinate to Lendy. Not the first time an additional charge has appeared on this site (last time without Lendy's knowledge). This is technically a third charge as the other charge is also still unsatisfied.
Edit It doesnt appear to be a late registration as its is dated 8/1/19, its the JV that already existed not the charge
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Jan 11, 2019 10:29:37 GMT
Thats the date referenced for the JV agreement in the charge so its an exisiting relationship. Unclear yet as to what the significance is. Could be a refinance or additional borrowing behind Lendy or merely a charge to protect existing interests, presumably subordinate to Lendy. Not the first time an additional charge has appeared on this site (last time without Lendy's knowledge). This is technically a third charge as the other charge is also still unsatisfied.
Edit It doesnt appear to be a late registration as its is dated 8/1/19, its the JV that already existed not the charge
I take it the January 17 date you are referencing is the one that is hand written, and judging by the spacing over something tippexed out?
|
|
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 Jan 11, 2019 10:33:33 GMT
Thats the date referenced for the JV agreement in the charge so its an exisiting relationship. Unclear yet as to what the significance is. Could be a refinance or additional borrowing behind Lendy or merely a charge to protect existing interests, presumably subordinate to Lendy. Not the first time an additional charge has appeared on this site (last time without Lendy's knowledge). This is technically a third charge as the other charge is also still unsatisfied.
Edit It doesnt appear to be a late registration as its is dated 8/1/19, its the JV that already existed not the charge
I take it the January 17 date you are referencing is the one that is hand written, and judging by the spacing over something tippexed out? Yep & possibly, even harder to read in other two charges on the adjacent blocks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Jan 11, 2019 10:53:36 GMT
I take it the January 17 date you are referencing is the one that is hand written, and judging by the spacing over something tippexed out? Yep & possibly, even harder to read in other two charges on the adjacent blocks. So could be a joint venture agreed previously but not taken up at the time, being revisited? Or any number of other things. Yet potentially promising, given the collateral connection.
|
|
sl75
Posts: 2,092
Likes: 1,245
|
Post by sl75 on Feb 27, 2019 11:23:47 GMT
DFL022 tranche 16 seems a curious case (but one I'm not involved in... any of the 236 affected investors reading here?)
If the status on the website is accurate (which I don't think can be safely assumed anyway...), the tranche has neither been "drawn down" (e.g. to use towards payment of interest on the other tranches) nor have the monies been returned to investors, simply staying on deposit "untouched".
|
|
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 11, 2019 11:22:35 GMT
Mr Webb has popped to his clearly substantial hat rack for a headwear change and, along with a colleague, provided his proposals for recovery on this one to view at CH. Note the current cap on fees at 101k
|
|
|
|
Post by vicentini1 on Jul 10, 2019 21:44:20 GMT
Mr Webb has popped to his clearly substantial hat rack for a headwear change and, along with a colleague, provided his proposals for recovery on this one to view at CH. Note the current cap on fees at 101k
|
|
|
|
Post by vicentini1 on Jul 10, 2019 21:50:41 GMT
Need help on PBL135. Not received money back despite loan closed years ago My loan copy seems different from the standards. Any of you have a blank copy I can compare with my one?thanks
|
|
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 Jul 10, 2019 22:17:19 GMT
Need help on PBL135. Not received money back despite loan closed years ago My loan copy seems different from the standards. Any of you have a blank copy I can compare with my one?thanks Sorry, are you saying your account still shows a holding in PBL135? And no entry for the repayment on 26/4/17 in your transactions? What do you mean by loan copy?
|
|
|
|
Post by in2tense on Aug 9, 2019 10:56:53 GMT
All students have been evacuated due to fire risk - details here
<link removed by mod as it identifies the borrower. It has been on DD Central for a couple of days>
|
|
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 Aug 9, 2019 11:56:57 GMT
All students have been evacuated due to fire risk - details here <link removed by mod as it identifies the borrower. It has been on DD Central for a couple of days> But not from this block as they were never in it. The block in question is the complete one that isnt subject to this loan. It relates to DFL003 where it is captured by a floating charge but is unlikley to realise anything to Collateral having the fixed charge. More important, is the fire brigade's action will impact on the recovery of this loan and DFL003 as those blocks no doubt have the same major defects with compartmentalisation which is more serious than just the cladding issues previously indicated.
|
|
1stwaz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 57
Likes: 29
|
Post by 1stwaz on Aug 13, 2019 15:13:39 GMT
Sorry if this is a stupid question but would this be covered by NHBC insurance on defects to the building in first ten years? Talking about the cladding and other fire issues or does that only apply to sold flats?
|
|
gwenynwyr
Member of DD Central
Posts: 54
Likes: 23
|
Post by gwenynwyr on Aug 14, 2019 12:16:10 GMT
Sorry if this is a stupid question but would this be covered by NHBC insurance on defects to the building in first ten years? Talking about the cladding and other fire issues or does that only apply to sold flats? National House Building Council - is the clue in the name? 
|
|
nyneil
Member of DD Central
Posts: 349
Likes: 438
|
Post by nyneil on Nov 22, 2019 0:06:11 GMT
Where does fault lay in relation to the inadequate fire provisions? Architect, surveyor, builders? and is there likely to be a claim against them?
|
|
one21
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 265
|
Post by one21 on Nov 24, 2019 18:47:42 GMT
Where does fault lay in relation to the inadequate fire provisions? Architect, surveyor, builders? and is there likely to be a claim against them? Compartmentalisation issues typically involve fire stopping around service pipes etc and not usually so labour intensive! Unless entire fire break walls have been omitted within ceiling voids. Even this shouldn't amount to such great expense.Building Control Surveyors rely on the contractor to notify when works are ready to inspect.
|
|
