hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363 
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Feb 7, 2019 10:36:11 GMT
Im not sure there is a bubble. In some areas yes but demand seems high and increasing There's - at the very minimum - a massive increase in the supply of premium student accommodation over the last year or two. Notwithstanding external factors, it's uncertain how well demand will stand up to that, given the ever-increasing focus on post-study finances/debt. At the moment, universities are warning of imminent problems over attracting sufficient students, given the Brexit... situation...
Anybody who understands even the basics of the tertiary education sector knows damn well that all universities need to attract foreign students for financial reasons. Quite simply, they're a damn sight more lucrative than UK students... Obviously, EU students are facing specific issues currently (uncertainty at the very minimum), but the UK will be less attractive to non-EU students, too, because of problems around going on to further study or work in the EU27 countries.
I seem to remember it was the council that were keen for the borrower to add more units to the design. Seems like a strange thing for them to push for if they didn’t anticipate demand. This was after Brexit vote.
|
|
richox
Member of DD Central
Posts: 66
Likes: 120
|
Post by richox on Feb 7, 2019 12:17:12 GMT
This borrower has consistently said anything he can think of to justify doing nothing. Lendy then just regurgitate whatever he has said through their meaningless updates without questioning it. The chances of the council pushing for more rooms is pretty remote. The borrower is more likely to have planned to squeeze in as many rooms as he could right from the start. He just strung Lendy along with this idea for months, without ever submitting such a planning application to the council. This always smelled like a fabricated excuse to justify not starting the development while drawing down even more tranches from lenders.
Greed for short term income has eroded Lendy's diligence to next to nothing and their interpretation of a "good relationship" is based upon how much short term income they can generate from a borrower. This is an example of how they've allowed their house of cards to get bigger and bigger. The question is whether they didn't have the competence to sort out failing borrowers or whether they just turned a blind eye because they didn't want to know. Maybe the answer is both. We're now going to have to pay for the cavalry they're bringing in to sort out their mess and hopefully salvage a few crumbs for us.
|
|
Mucho P2P
Member of DD Central
Posts: 946
Likes: 1,635
|
Post by Mucho P2P on Feb 7, 2019 13:07:42 GMT
This borrower has consistently said anything he can think of to justify doing nothing. Lendy then just regurgitate whatever he has said through their meaningless updates without questioning it. The chances of the council pushing for more rooms is pretty remote. The borrower is more likely to have planned to squeeze in as many rooms as he could right from the start. He just strung Lendy along with this idea for months, without ever submitting such a planning application to the council. This always smelled like a fabricated excuse to justify not starting the development while drawing down even more tranches from lenders. Greed for short term income has eroded Lendy's diligence to next to nothing and their interpretation of a "good relationship" is based upon how much short term income they can generate from a borrower. This is an example of how they've allowed their house of cards to get bigger and bigger. The question is whether they didn't have the competence to sort out failing borrowers or whether they just turned a blind eye because they didn't want to know. Maybe the answer is both. We're now going to have to pay for the cavalry they're bringing in to sort out their mess and hopefully salvage a few crumbs for us. Since this bunch of loans all but collapsed to crumbs, I have seen the borrower on various web media blowing nothing but hot air for the months/years previous. I presume Lendy like to have borrowers approach them who spout hot air and pie in the sky unrealistic dreams like this borrower and the borrower of the London Loan.
|
|
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 Feb 7, 2019 13:40:34 GMT
I hate to point this out but think youll find that the revised planning application was indeed submitted and was passed last Febuary (S106 July). Its all verifiable on the relevant planning site or in DD central if you have access. No idea whether the borrower or the council pushed for the extra 100 rooms.
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Feb 7, 2019 14:51:56 GMT
Plus many would-be students are finally wising up to the lack of financial advantage (career-wise) of many of the 'soft' (downright floppy) degree courses on offer these days. Both my nieces decided employment was a better option, and given their course selection they were probably right.
|
|
richox
Member of DD Central
Posts: 66
Likes: 120
|
Post by richox on Feb 7, 2019 19:44:03 GMT
I hate to point this out but think youll find that the revised planning application was indeed submitted and was passed last Febuary (S106 July). Its all verifiable on the relevant planning site or in DD central if you have access. No idea whether the borrower or the council pushed for the extra 100 rooms. With apologies to ilmoro and all other readers I confused this loan with DFL013, (same borrower), where according to Lendy's update of 23/6/17: Following initial preparation works for commencement of development on site, the Borrower has advised that they have been approached by the local Council to increase the number of units on the site. Drawings for a revised scheme have now been drawn up and pre-application meetings have been held with the Council. Formal planning application to be submitted in July with planning expected to be approved by November.Lendy's updates continue to refer to the progress of this DFL013 planning application up until 16/03/18 after which it does not seem to be mentioned. I can't find evidence that it was ever submitted but maybe someone can correct me. Lendy's update of 23/06/17 for DFL06 does not make it clear whether the borrower of the Council came up with the idea of increasing the number of units, but something doesn't ring true somewhere.
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Feb 7, 2019 19:56:02 GMT
The planning permission for the extra unit was passed, there was an update
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,025
Likes: 5,152
Member is Online
|
Post by adrianc on Feb 8, 2019 8:31:02 GMT
The council aren't overly concerned with whether an increase in units is financially viable for the developer or not. They simply want to see as many students living and studying in their area as possible, especially if those students are out of the "traditional" HMO student ghettos, where they cause far more friction with other residents.
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Feb 8, 2019 11:43:51 GMT
We thought it would be helpful to clarify the position with respect to "unilateral notices" and how we deal with them at Saving Stream.
In cases of development of apartment blocks, developers frequently "pre-sell" units before they are built (sometimes called "off-plan investments"). The purchase contracts for those pre-sold apartments usually provide for deposits to be paid at defined intervals. Usually, there will be a deposit payable on exchange of contracts, and then subsequent deposits payable at set times to help the developer to fund the costs of building the project with a final payment due on completion of the building project. Developers usually require further finance to help with land acquisition and development costs.
Purchasers of individual off-plan units will be advised by their solicitors to protect their purchase contracts at the Land Registry by registering a Unilateral Notice against the developer’s Land Registry land title. This gives notice of the purchaser’s interest to anyone seeking to buy or take a charge over the property. Whilst this is not a first charge (as their interest would be over a small part of a site - and in the case of a second/third/fourth floor flat etc. could not even be distinguished) it is still important. If we took a mortgage over the property in question and there were no prior mortgages ahead of us, then our mortgage would be classed as a first charge.
If the Borrower defaulted on the loan and we had to sell the property under the powers contained in our mortgage, then we would need to bear in mind that the deposits paid pursuant to the collective apartment purchase contracts will need to be paid back to those purchasers who had registered a notice of their purchase contracts at the Land Registry. In such a case, we would therefore need to take into account the deposits that had been paid prior to the grant of our charge. And the way we do this is to deduct the collective deposits from the overall valuation, and then apply a Loan-to-Value percentage against this leftover sum.
If at the point of repossession the development was at a stage which would enable an individual apartment to be identifiable, then we could be compelled to sell the flat to the contracted purchaser. We would be able to collect the final purchase monies in this case.
So, in summary, what we are effectively doing is ring-fencing the deposits as a known cost of realisation in the case of a Borrower default. This would then leave us with an amount against which our investors can offer to lend against, at a set Loan-to-Value. We feel this is a prudent and sensible approach to lending. great stuff from back in the day from SS.it seems this borrower has turned over a lot of other people as well.identify your off plan apartment on this piece of land over 2and a half years later.i am suprised none of all this p2p sh*t hasent made the national papers or media.maybe these puchasers and people who paid deposits should consider class actions.
|
|
sarahcount
Member of DD Central
Posts: 359
Likes: 815
|
Post by sarahcount on Feb 8, 2019 15:20:30 GMT
1) Company enters Administration 17 January.
2) A creditor wins a court case 6 February and gets a CCJ for £ 36,377.
3) Creditor celebrates pyrrhic victory as a CCJ after administration is worthless.
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Feb 8, 2019 16:58:45 GMT
1) Company enters Administration 17 January.
2) A creditor wins a court case 6 February and gets a CCJ for £ 36,377.
3) Creditor celebrates pyrrhic victory as a CCJ after administration is worthless. Is this how it works? Once a company goes into administration, any CCJ against it awarded after the date of administration has no effect and is ignored by the administrators?
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Feb 8, 2019 18:39:03 GMT
Is this how it works? Once a company goes into administration, any CCJ against it awarded after the date of administration has no effect and is ignored by the administrators? Not ignored, but no preferential treatment. The creditor is an unsecured creditor of the company, along with all others. Can it have any benefit to the creditor (who 'won' the CCJ) at all?
|
|
sarahcount
Member of DD Central
Posts: 359
Likes: 815
|
Post by sarahcount on Feb 8, 2019 21:33:46 GMT
Not ignored, but no preferential treatment. The creditor is an unsecured creditor of the company, along with all others. Can it have any benefit to the creditor (who 'won' the CCJ) at all? No I don't believe so. Going to court to get a CCJ is the route that unsecured creditors have to take if they want to get paid. They hope that taking that route will encourage payment to be forthcoming. If the case goes to court and they win then they are in a position to enforce the debt through bailiffs or other means. The danger all the way along is that the business goes bust. Appointment of administrators legally protects a company from debt enforcement from the date of the appointment. None of this applies to Lendy investors as we have a legal charge over property belonging to the company. When the administrator sells the assets he will pay out with the following priority; 1) His fees, naturally 2) Secured creditors 3) Unsecured creditors if there's anything left over for them. Only advantage that I can think of for creditors holding a CCJ is that it might be harder for their unsecured claim to be rejected. It's just a sign though that the court process is so long that defendants can go bust before the case gets heard. As painful as it is for Lendy investors watching our loans crash and burn it has to be said that anyone who has paid up front to buy a flat that's not yet built or businesses that have supplied goods and services to the borrowers on credit terms are in a much worse position.
|
|
sydb
Member of DD Central
Posts: 345
Likes: 316
|
Post by sydb on Feb 8, 2019 23:47:46 GMT
Can it have any benefit to the creditor (who 'won' the CCJ) at all? No I don't believe so. Going to court to get a CCJ is the route that unsecured creditors have to take if they want to get paid. They hope that taking that route will encourage payment to be forthcoming. If the case goes to court and they win then they are in a position to enforce the debt through bailiffs or other means. The danger all the way along is that the business goes bust. Appointment of administrators legally protects a company from debt enforcement from the date of the appointment. None of this applies to Lendy investors as we have a legal charge over property belonging to the company. When the administrator sells the assets he will pay out with the following priority; 1) His fees, naturally 2) Secured creditors 3) Unsecured creditors if there's anything left over for them. Only advantage that I can think of for creditors holding a CCJ is that it might be harder for their unsecured claim to be rejected. It's just a sign though that the court process is so long that defendants can go bust before the case gets heard. As painful as it is for Lendy investors watching our loans crash and burn it has to be said that anyone who has paid up front to buy a flat that's not yet built or businesses that have supplied goods and services to the borrowers on credit terms are in a much worse position. Thank you for explaining that, sarahcount. Being a Lendy investor, I'm learning a lot about court processes, defaults, bad valuations and going into administration. I never expected it to be such an education. If the claimant creditor in the CCJ was awarded fees, is it likely that the payment of such fees would also wait in the unsecured creditor pile with the same priority as their damages/award (not sure of the terminology)?
|
|
sarahcount
Member of DD Central
Posts: 359
Likes: 815
|
Post by sarahcount on Feb 9, 2019 12:48:33 GMT
No I don't believe so. Going to court to get a CCJ is the route that unsecured creditors have to take if they want to get paid. They hope that taking that route will encourage payment to be forthcoming. If the case goes to court and they win then they are in a position to enforce the debt through bailiffs or other means. The danger all the way along is that the business goes bust. Appointment of administrators legally protects a company from debt enforcement from the date of the appointment. None of this applies to Lendy investors as we have a legal charge over property belonging to the company. When the administrator sells the assets he will pay out with the following priority; 1) His fees, naturally 2) Secured creditors 3) Unsecured creditors if there's anything left over for them. Only advantage that I can think of for creditors holding a CCJ is that it might be harder for their unsecured claim to be rejected. It's just a sign though that the court process is so long that defendants can go bust before the case gets heard. As painful as it is for Lendy investors watching our loans crash and burn it has to be said that anyone who has paid up front to buy a flat that's not yet built or businesses that have supplied goods and services to the borrowers on credit terms are in a much worse position. Thank you for explaining that, sarahcount. Being a Lendy investor, I'm learning a lot about court processes, defaults, bad valuations and going into administration. I never expected it to be such an education. If the claimant creditor in the CCJ was awarded fees, is it likely that the payment of such fees would also wait in the unsecured creditor pile with the same priority as their damages/award (not sure of the terminology)? Yes I would expect that a claimant's fees and things like interest on late payment would be included in the CCJ amount. I'm quite interested in debt recovery processes but am having more on a front seat than I would have liked. I've learned a lot about the rough side of asset backed lending 'thanks to' Lendy and their like. But I'm also getting regular updates from FC on their efforts to recover unsecured debts and personal guarantees.
|
|
