cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853 
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Dec 20, 2016 15:47:14 GMT
LIVE LOAN
PBL150 - Mount P******* T****** Park, H***, Christchurch | PBL151 - T*** T**** P***, H***, Christchurch | PBL152 - P*** V*** C****** Park, H***, Christchurch
|
|
| --------------- | ---------------
| ---------------
|
|
|
| PBL150
| PBL151
| PBL152 | | Loan | : | £ | 2,090,000
| 2,349,000
| 3,186,000
| | Security Value | : | £ | 4,000,000 | 4,500,000
| 6,372,500
| | SS Indicated LTV | : |
| 52% | 52%
| 50%
| | 90 Day Market Valuation | : | £ | 2,800,000 | 3,000,000
|
| | LTV Based on 90 day Market Valuation | : |
| 75% | 78% |
| | Term | : |
| 365 days
| 365 days
| 365 days
| % PA
| : |
| 12% | 12%
| 12% |
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Dec 20, 2016 18:57:49 GMT
Wasn't there another business on here valued on trading terms! How has that turned out?
|
|
|
|
Post by reeknralf on Dec 20, 2016 19:48:25 GMT
Wasn't there another business on here valued on trading terms! How has that turned out? Perhaps I read too fast. I understood that the LTV's were based on the purchase prices.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Dec 20, 2016 21:01:56 GMT
Wasn't there another business on here valued on trading terms! How has that turned out? Perhaps I read too fast. I understood that the LTV's were based on the purchase prices. I haven't looked into the details yet, but even if the valuation given is based on purchase price, for the trading business due diligence for prospective lenders includes checking whether the business generates enough income to justify the price. (I can't think of a reason why it should be the case, but if the three properties were bought as a job lot it is conceivable that the prices were structured for some reason, rather than valued and priced independently. We also have to worry as to whether the borrower is correct in their belief that they can transfer turnover from one operation to the other.)
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Dec 20, 2016 21:46:36 GMT
Can anybody explain where £6,372,500 comes for the valuation on PBL152?
Seems to be taken from the Development Uplift; I can't see how this can be used for MV...
Or am I missing something?
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Dec 20, 2016 21:56:27 GMT
" A survey of values and trends in the holiday and caravan park markets over the past year" A report from the trade that, on first reading, seems broadly positive but note that: a) it's dated Jan '16 and looks back to 2015 in relative term to previous years (when 13 /14 were reportedly poor for residential parks following sweeping changes in legislation); and b) given its publication date, it makes no mention of Brexit. Any thoughts on how might Brexit affect these parks? Seems to me that the devaluation of the GBP relative to EUR and USD (something like 10% and 15% respectively?) might cause holidaymakers to stay UK-bound which would drive up demand affecting both holiday and residential pitches. But I'm probably missing something obvious and the actual effect will be negative.  Cheers, Ian.. Common wisdom is that Brexit (or rather the devaluation of the pound) is positive for the UK tourism industry. But a quick google on staycation brings up a Guardian article reporting a possible negative factor - the Brexit campaign and vote made the UK seem like a less welcoming (even if cheaper) destination for European tourists. www.theguardian.com/travel/2016/jul/10/brexit-and-the-uk-tourist-industryPS: Your link is going to the wrong place - did you intend this?
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Dec 20, 2016 22:00:53 GMT
Can anybody explain where £6,372,500 comes for the valuation on PBL152? Seems to be taken from the Development Uplift; I can't see how this can be used for MV... Or am I missing something? The figure comes from page 50 of the valuation report, it is the final development uplift after all homes are in place and sold, and all profits taken by a developer (profits estimated at 30% and £9,000000). Speculation.....
|
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Dec 20, 2016 22:04:43 GMT
Can anybody explain where £6,372,500 comes for the valuation on PBL152? Seems to be taken from the Development Uplift; I can't see how this can be used for MV... Or am I missing something? The figure comes from page 50 of the valuation report, it is the final development uplift after all homes are in place and sold, and all profits taken by a developer (profits estimated at 30% and £9,000000). Speculation..... I see where they got the number from, but can't understand why savingstream are using it for the Valuation of the Security.
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Dec 20, 2016 22:17:56 GMT
Neither do I - and I don't understand the difference between the MV3 and MV4 figures - each assume three month sales. 7 million and 4 million.  |
|
cooling_dude
Bye Bye's for the PPI
Posts: 2,853
Likes: 4,298
|
Post by cooling_dude on Dec 20, 2016 22:29:50 GMT
Neither do I - and I don't understand the difference between the MV3 and MV4 figures - each assume three month sales. 7 million and 4 million. Hmmm Later on, it adds details MV4... So.... once the development has completed it looses value  I did see this in a previous valuation (on another loan) completed by the same surveyor. I think that they may be talking about after the sale of 120 mobile home units Still can't get my head around the headline security value
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Dec 20, 2016 22:38:16 GMT
Maybe once the development has been completed the developer has walked away with the profit on buying and siting the vans - so the completed site is then worth less.
If the site is sold before the vans have been bought and resold (at a huge profit) then its worth more......because the new buyer can then buy and resell the vans??.
Too late at night.
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Dec 20, 2016 22:40:52 GMT
Neither do I - and I don't understand the difference between the MV3 and MV4 figures - each assume three month sales. 7 million and 4 million. Hmmm Later on, it adds details MV4... So.... once the development has completed it looses value I did see this in a previous valuation (on another loan) completed by the same surveyor. I think that they may be talking about after the sale of 120 mobile home units Still can't get my head around the headline security value I think it loses value because they have cashed in by selling plots, and the only remains income will come from ground rent and profit from onsite facilities *crossed with seeingred
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Dec 20, 2016 22:59:26 GMT
Can anybody explain where £6,372,500 comes for the valuation on PBL152? Seems to be taken from the Development Uplift; I can't see how this can be used for MV... Or am I missing something? Development uplift doesn't strike me as the right term. I've found your figure of £6,372,500 in the VR, and it seems to be the residual valuation of the completed project after stripping out £9,000,000 of profit (from sales of whatever type of unit they're selling), but before adding back the value of the income stream from pitch fees (plus the value of the house on the property). savingstream seem to have used neither the value without planning permission (and without hope value), nor the value with planning permission. (It was suggested elsewhere on the forum that the purchase prices were being used, but while the sum of the valuations is close to the stated purchase price, it's not an exact match, so I think that hypothesis is incorrect.) The LTV is approximately 50% against purchase price, so perhaps we could wink at this, except that what the purchaser paid would be the value without planning permission but with hope value, but in the case of the loan going wrong that hope value has probably evaporated. (If planning permission is obtained PBL152 would likely be refinanced as a property development loan, at SS or elsewhere.) If I recall correctly we earlier had draft loan descriptions awaiting precise attribution of loan amounts to the individual properties. It's possible that they've accidentally pulled the wrong number out of the report in the rush to replace the draft with the final versions, but in that case I'm baffled as to what they intended to do.
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Dec 20, 2016 23:00:26 GMT
Hmmm Later on, it adds details MV4... So.... once the development has completed it looses value I did see this in a previous valuation (on another loan) completed by the same surveyor. I think that they may be talking about after the sale of 120 mobile home units Still can't get my head around the headline security value I think it loses value because they have cashed in by selling plots, and the only remains income will come from ground rent and profit from onsite facilities *crossed with seeingred p.47 explains it> "In addition, if your customer retains the property throughout the development period they have the potential to take a profit of £9 million. Accordingly, lending should be structured to pay back part of the development uplift as and when pitches are sold and the value moves towards the lower figure."
|
|
Liz
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,426
Likes: 1,297
|
Post by Liz on Dec 20, 2016 23:02:37 GMT
Cavet
"Number of Plots
We have adopted 120 plots as the number available. Should this transpire not to be the case
we reserve the right to review our valuation."
|
|
