Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Jun 7, 2019 10:09:23 GMT
Thanks for the quick reply and feedback. Transparent yes and just so confusing! Every-time there is light at the end of the tunnel, those guys come up with something else. I wish I knew that they hope to achieve!? Why add legal costs and more interest? Surely no judge will rule in their favour? It feels like a family dispute and we are collateral damage. Look on the bright side: at least your loan is with BridgeCrowd, probably the most tenacious platform there is for pursuing bad debts through the courts. I can't see Louis giving up on this particular fight! Totally agree. I personally look forward to the BC loan updates each month and consider them to be a shining example of "P2P loan enforcement done right" This borrower has just tried every trick in the book so it's dragged on and on.
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Jun 7, 2019 10:13:19 GMT
So the update yesterday: "Recent conversations between our legal team and the borrower’s indicate that a settlement is likely. The without prejudice/settlement letter is currently being drafted and should be sent to the borrower’s solicitor early next week. The settlement proposed is that Social Money retains all the sale proceeds from the property if it undertakes not to make the borrower bankrupt. An asset trace report confirms the borrower has no other significant assets of any value that Social Money could enforce against." Does anyone know that that means for us? Who is Social Money? Why do they retain the sale proceeds? Sorry for the silly questions. I think I am just getting old and losing the will........... 'Social Money' and BC are the same entity. Difficult to make a definitive interpretation, but (given the history) I read it that BC are proposing that the Borrower stop playing silly beggars, acknowledges a that BC have the legal upper-hand, legally accepts that BC will get the proceeds from sale of the property* and in return BC won't force the borrower into bankruptcy. But that is just a proposal and the borrower has a history of 'trying it on'. As we are now in June, I think a conclusion this year would be just about possible, but don't hold your breath! * - not sure if the borrower would have any rights to surplus from the sale if there should be any. The loan principal, interest, not to mention legal costs must be mounting up and may already exceed the property's current value. Also not sure if the borrower's legal reps would have any dibs on sale proceeds before the borrower but not BC. Thanks. SM and BC are the same, that helps.
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Jun 7, 2019 10:26:57 GMT
I would also hopefully assume that SM / BC would market the property and get the best offer and not rush (like Lendy would do with an auction).
We have waited over 2 years for this to pan out, another 6-12 months is fine with me.
|
|
iRobot
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 2,449
|
Post by iRobot on Jun 7, 2019 11:35:45 GMT
I would also hopefully assume that SM / BC would market the property and get the best offer and not rush (like Lendy would do with an auction). We have waited over 2 years for this to pan out, another 6-12 months is fine with me. I think this might be an aspect of the proposal, just not explicitly mentioned. AIUI, in 'normal' situation, the borrower can object to a sale if they think the price accepted by the charge holder(s) doesn't reflect the true value of the asset. Consequently, they can drag things out for a while longer while the courts do their thing which might - and the borrower could be keeping their fingers crossed it will - mean that the purchaser pulls out. What BC may have done here is effectively propose that the borrower will sign any rights away on the asset, such that they (the borrower) can't question the sale price once one has been agreed. So no challenges, no courts, no further delays, no (additional) potential for a lost sale. This would mean BC could market the asset at a figure which covers known costs to date plus a percentage to cover additional interest and fees and then a bit more on top to cover negotiating 'wriggle room'. This might be an indication that the total costs to date plus projections might be somewhere near what BC and their advisers believe the property in its' current condition might realise in the current market. That might seem pessimistic, but two things to keep in view are: The loan (£1.2M) plus 2 yrs interest at 18% (maybe more) is nudging £1.7M and legal fees and other costs might see the outstanding sum on this loan hovering around the £2m mark. The Valuation for this was £2.5m back in late 2016 and assumed extant PP. That PP expired in October of last year. (Shouldn't be too onerous to re-establish valid PP, but ... ) I'm confident BC will do the right thing and get the best possible result for lenders but given the elapsed time, I find it increasingly difficult to call the outcome on this one.
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Jun 7, 2019 13:11:46 GMT
I would also hopefully assume that SM / BC would market the property and get the best offer and not rush (like Lendy would do with an auction). We have waited over 2 years for this to pan out, another 6-12 months is fine with me. I think this might be an aspect of the proposal, just not explicitly mentioned. AIUI, in 'normal' situation, the borrower can object to a sale if they think the price accepted by the charge holder(s) doesn't reflect the true value of the asset. Consequently, they can drag things out for a while longer while the courts do their thing which might - and the borrower could be keeping their fingers crossed it will - mean that the purchaser pulls out. What BC may have done here is effectively propose that the borrower will sign any rights away on the asset, such that they (the borrower) can't question the sale price once one has been agreed. So no challenges, no courts, no further delays, no (additional) potential for a lost sale. This would mean BC could market the asset at a figure which covers known costs to date plus a percentage to cover additional interest and fees and then a bit more on top to cover negotiating 'wriggle room'. This might be an indication that the total costs to date plus projections might be somewhere near what BC and their advisers believe the property in its' current condition might realise in the current market. That might seem pessimistic, but two things to keep in view are: The loan (£1.2M) plus 2 yrs interest at 18% (maybe more) is nudging £1.7M and legal fees and other costs might see the outstanding sum on this loan hovering around the £2m mark. The Valuation for this was £2.5m back in late 2016 and assumed extant PP. That PP expired in October of last year. (Shouldn't be too onerous to re-establish valid PP, but ... ) I'm confident BC will do the right thing and get the best possible result for lenders but given the elapsed time, I find it increasingly difficult to call the outcome on this one. Thanks. If I have got my maths correct: 1: Loan to investors £1,234,200 2: Rolled interest to investors £317,265 (To June 2019, extrapolating my rolled interest at same ratio) 3: BC interest margin £158,633 (Using your 18% estimate, So take “2” / 12% x 18% – “2”) 4: Total fees (say) £289,902 (Balancing number to get to a round £2m) Total £2,000,000 So if property can be sold for this amount, everybody is repaid. If sold for say £1.7m and fees have to be repaid before interest (so interest pot reduced from £475k to £176k) 1: Do you know if BC and investors will take a share of the interest pot pro rata? (£117k to Investors and £58k to BC) 2: Or will BC take their full margin (£159k) before investors (leaving a disappointing £17k)? Other thoughts: Zoopla has a current value of £2,565,000 #54 sold in 2014 and current value of £2,115,000 At the beginning of this thread, Louis said valuation without PP was £1.75m I have also just noticed on Google street view (from March 2019) the property is boarded up with “FOR SALE with PP”. But it is not on the EA website.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,844
Likes: 2,758
|
Post by michaelc on Jun 8, 2019 21:20:05 GMT
First disclaimer in that I'm not in this loan but I'm interested in all loans on this platform because I'm interested in the platform and this loan is one of the longest running and is of particular interest - I recall reading the updates before we were blindfolded. I do very much hope it reaches a sucessful conclusion not only for the platform (and therefore selfishly me) but especially for anyone with a 5K or more interest in it .
I do wonder about any further legal agreement the borrower might sign or not sign. I mean even if he does sign and theoretically gives up more rights if the law allows, couldn't he simply perform similar legal tricks to get out of his end of the new legal agreement as he has done already with the main loan agreement ?
P.S. Good job this place isn't in Scotland !
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jun 9, 2019 5:29:39 GMT
I think we will get our capital back, not so sure about all the rolled interest. It would need a really good sale price to cover all of the legal costs, the capital and the interest; which is why the borrower was willing to sign, to get out of responsibility for the shortfall (although it seems he has no funds anyway).
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Jun 9, 2019 7:36:22 GMT
His father / family has. But I think they are pulling a fast one and lying / hiding their money. They even came up with a tale that the receiver stole a Renoir painting from the property. I hate them.
|
|
goofy115
Member of DD Central
Posts: 77
Likes: 69
|
Post by goofy115 on Aug 5, 2019 16:39:28 GMT
Just when you think things are coming to a head we have another twist in this saga.From the update posted today ‘the borrower lives in the Property now - where as previously the borrower was not living in the property and was living in Spain’.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Aug 5, 2019 18:12:06 GMT
Just when you think things are coming to a head we have another twist in this saga.From the update posted today ‘the borrower lives in the Property now - where as previously the borrower was not living in the property and was living in Spain’. The lengths some people will go to avoid paying their debts is amazing. Really glad this is BC pursuing this, most other platforms would have given up long ago due to the devious way the borrower has avoided payment time and time again. And the other guy is where (he probably should be), and for what but not too surprising not sure I should say exactly.
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Aug 7, 2019 11:32:00 GMT
Just when you think things are coming to a head we have another twist in this saga.From the update posted today ‘the borrower lives in the Property now - where as previously the borrower was not living in the property and was living in Spain’. The lengths some people will go to avoid paying their debts is amazing. Really glad this is BC pursuing this, most other platforms would have given up long ago due to the devious way the borrower has avoided payment time and time again. And the other guy is where (he probably should be), and for what but not too surprising not sure I should say exactly. And he is now in prison? How did BC and his solicitor not know this?
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,241
Likes: 2,686
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Aug 7, 2019 13:17:09 GMT
The lengths some people will go to avoid paying their debts is amazing. Really glad this is BC pursuing this, most other platforms would have given up long ago due to the devious way the borrower has avoided payment time and time again. And the other guy is where (he probably should be), and for what but not too surprising not sure I should say exactly. And he is now in prison? How did BC and his solicitor not know this? He is not the main borrower, he gave a 2nd level PG that BC would pursue if the property doesn't cover everything. He is not really directly involved with the case to get possession of the property, apart from being a nuisance. BC have probably found out now as they are starting to look at enforcing the PG as it might be needed, not sure how difficult that will be if he is 'not available' for a while. Edit: And it seems others may be looking for money from him.
|
|
|
Post by rhea117 on Aug 7, 2019 13:35:12 GMT
And he is now in prison? How did BC and his solicitor not know this? He is not the main borrower, he gave a 2nd level PG that BC would pursue if the property doesn't cover everything. He is not really directly involved with the case to get possession of the property, apart from being a nuisance. BC have probably found out now as they are starting to look at enforcing the PG as it might be needed, not sure how difficult that will be if he is 'not available' for a while. Edit: And it seems others may be looking for money from him. Thanks. I must admin, if I read the whole update - my head starts to hurt. Between Snr and Jnr - I don't know which one will be held accountable for this lying mess!
|
|
Steerpike
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,961
Likes: 1,680
|
Post by Steerpike on Aug 7, 2019 14:36:15 GMT
Could be protracted, one guarantor is indisposed and the other, allegedly, is incapable and once more domiciled in the asset, pursuing the former and evicting the latter are both troublesome prospects.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,844
Likes: 2,758
|
Post by michaelc on Aug 9, 2019 14:52:09 GMT
I'm still battling to view updates - some kind of IT issue they tell me. Very interested to see how this turns out and wish all investors in it well.
For now I'm hunkering down which started off because I thought they'd turned off updates for all investors and now I may as well wait to see what happens until Corbyn turns up at the palace in a cab. (Arrested hopefully)
|
|