tarq
Member of DD Central
Posts: 126
Likes: 28
|
#204
Nov 23, 2016 21:00:08 GMT
Post by tarq on Nov 23, 2016 21:00:08 GMT
Any new info about the above & what is the general feeling about it?
|
|
|
#204
Nov 23, 2016 21:42:59 GMT
tarq likes this
Post by Ton ⓉⓞⓃ on Nov 23, 2016 21:42:59 GMT
Any new info about the above & what is the general feeling about it? I've not read anything in detail yet so can't really say. There is a short thread in the Pink section above. There have been previous loans from AC to the same or similar Borrower where I thought the loans were handled with great honesty. Check out the Repaid loans section Loan No.28, 31, 58 and 63.
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Nov 24, 2016 8:47:12 GMT
I always liked is loan, the story to me was of honest hardworking bussiness people who when things went wrong even if not in their control stood up and payed what they owed as best as possible. For one i did not go into peer to peer to put people out of their houses at the first call when there was a possible way out for them in repaying the loan, comming up to Christmas or any other time of the year.So its A for me , however if the deals not kept to all bets are off.I of course assume will still have access to the asset.
|
|
grahamg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 220
Likes: 62
|
#204
Nov 24, 2016 13:03:14 GMT
Post by grahamg on Nov 24, 2016 13:03:14 GMT
I have three issues
Does AC regard option A as viable?
If i agree to option A what happens if the agreement is broken?
Really what is option B looks like a Brexit=Brexit option
|
|
|
#204
Nov 24, 2016 13:22:57 GMT
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 24, 2016 13:22:57 GMT
We (AC) have legal charges over a couple of properties (though both 2nd charge). Those wouldn't be released as part of the deal so would remain (there is no request to release the charges as part of the deal). Therefore the specific assets backing up the PG value cannot be disposed off (without lenders approval). The appointed administrator for the business still has the same duties to perform whether they are appointed by us or someone else, so our priority in the pecking order for any recoverable value would remain (not that I am expecting any TBH).
The only additional risk would be in regard to the borrower having more time to dispose of other assets not covered by the specific charges, and that the value of the assets covered by the specific charges drops in the interim.
So overall, going with the borrower's plan seems from our perspective to be a case of plus ca change: if the deal is broken we can still step in with regard to the PG.
This is just my non-expert POV.
Over the pink pages AC have stated that they would not have put the option forward if they did not believe it to be credible.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,048
Likes: 4,438
|
#204
Nov 24, 2016 19:29:02 GMT
Post by agent69 on Nov 24, 2016 19:29:02 GMT
I received the voting e-mail. Not certain why, as I don't think I have ever been in this. Right from the start it always sounded a bit like the plumber, with security depending on work in progress. Problems include "issues with contracts previously secured together with failure to obtain additional work". Where have I heard that before?
Promise of jam tomorrow if the borrower can appoint his own administrator .... not in a million years son. If AC are so confident in the credibility of the guarantor then maybe they would like to underwrite the guarantee. If not then AC should keep quiet
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 638
Likes: 659
|
Post by warn on Nov 25, 2016 8:54:15 GMT
...If AC are so confident in the credibility of the guarantor then maybe they would like to underwrite the guarantee. If not then AC should keep quiet Totally agree. What the heck do they think they're doing -- answering questions from lenders; giving opinions, when asked, within the limits of confidentiality; patiently discussing aspects and internal behaviour of their systems as far as commercial constraints will allow. It's absolutely disgraceful. I for one am instantly selling all my holdings and taking my money to Ratesetter -- at least they've learned how to clam up. (I don't really need an emoticon here, do I?)
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,019
Likes: 5,147
|
#204
Nov 25, 2016 10:16:58 GMT
happy likes this
Post by adrianc on Nov 25, 2016 10:16:58 GMT
...If AC are so confident in the credibility of the guarantor then maybe they would like to underwrite the guarantee. If not then AC should keep quiet Totally agree. What the heck do they think they're doing -- answering questions from lenders; giving opinions, when asked, within the limits of confidentiality; patiently discussing aspects and internal behaviour of their systems as far as commercial constraints will allow. It's absolutely disgraceful. I for one am instantly selling all my holdings and taking my money to Ratesetter -- at least they've learned how to clam up. Let's just hope this silliness doesn't spread to other platforms. It'd never do!
|
|
|
Post by andrewholgate on Nov 25, 2016 14:34:24 GMT
I'd like to make a statement (subject to the restrictions of my compliance team).
I wan to say that and that I take . I understand that it will come as a shock saying this but the apples and oranges. Sometimes but they cant and cabbage.
I hope that makes sense.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Nov 25, 2016 14:46:38 GMT
why did your compliance team insist on removing the "t" from "want" ?
|
|
oldgrumpy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,087
Likes: 3,233
|
#204
Nov 25, 2016 15:23:43 GMT
Post by oldgrumpy on Nov 25, 2016 15:23:43 GMT
The new AC proof reader refused to allow the word "wanna". AH is of kockyng is/'er urse rite noo.
|
|
Bagman
Member of DD Central
Posts: 209
Likes: 131
|
#204
Nov 25, 2016 15:26:12 GMT
Post by Bagman on Nov 25, 2016 15:26:12 GMT
why did your compliance team insist on removing the "t" from "want" ? And they removed the apostrophe from cant
|
|
|
#204
Nov 25, 2016 15:51:53 GMT
Post by andrewholgate on Nov 25, 2016 15:51:53 GMT
why did your compliance team insist on removing the "t" from "want" ? And they removed the apostrophe from cant Cant - noun hypocritical and sanctimonious talk, typically of a moral, religious, or political nature
|
|
Bagman
Member of DD Central
Posts: 209
Likes: 131
|
Post by Bagman on Nov 25, 2016 15:57:26 GMT
And they removed the apostrophe from cant Cant - noun hypocritical and sanctimonious talk, typically of a moral, religious, or political nature As in "what a cant" I see now
|
|
DeafEater
Member of DD Central
Extremely Moderate
Posts: 228
Likes: 304
|
Post by DeafEater on Nov 25, 2016 19:43:15 GMT
Cant - noun hypocritical and sanctimonious talk, typically of a moral, religious, or political nature Hmmm. Given that "cant" was preceded by the word "they", your use of nouns is ground breaking .
|
|