bugs4me
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,845
Likes: 1,478
|
Post by bugs4me on Jun 8, 2018 21:58:55 GMT
<snip> Can't kick the can down the road forever. Yes they can and they will. Why default when you can keep up the pretense that 'no investor....'.
Then the 'for sale' sign will appear over the business and new owners will come rolling into town - with the usual 'under new management'.
|
|
Jeepers
Member of DD Central
Posts: 818 
Likes: 721
|
Post by Jeepers on Jun 8, 2018 22:28:16 GMT
The asset has sold. There's no realistic chance of recovery therefore the capital is lost.
If by some miracle it's recovered in the future, it's still lost now.
'No investor has lost a penny' is a blatant lie.
At what point can an application to the PF be made ?
|
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Jun 9, 2018 6:23:27 GMT
The asset has sold. There's no realistic chance of recovery therefore the capital is lost. At what point can an application to the PF be made ? At any time, just not by you or I, and it's entirely discretionary, hence it doesn't have to ever happen, and even then can pay out anything from 0-100%. However, as the PF has only £2m cash, and the deficit of Capital on loans that have had the Asset sold is in excess of £4m, ignoring any other disasters, the PF will never cover all your lost Capital.
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 1,963
|
Post by rocky1 on Jun 9, 2018 6:44:38 GMT
the PF would not even cover the lendy cowes week sponsorship money.maybe use it to cover that.
|
|
stevio
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 894
|
Post by stevio on Jun 9, 2018 7:17:11 GMT
The asset has sold. There's no realistic chance of recovery therefore the capital is lost. At what point can an application to the PF be made ? At any time, just not by you or I, and it's entirely discretionary, hence it doesn't have to ever happen, and even then can pay out anything from 0-100%. However, as the PF has only £2m cash, and the deficit of Capital on loans that have had the Asset sold is in excess of £4m, ignoring any other disasters, the PF will never cover all your lost Capital. It should at least be distributed proportionally, even if not covering the full amount As long as more "punters/lemmings" line up to throw money at this black hole/scheme company they will continue the facade The DFL empire will crumble at some point when there are no new "punters" willing to precariously balance at the top and they realise those investors that were forming the foundations of the company have left already
|
|
|
|
Post by picanto on Jun 9, 2018 9:17:10 GMT
Most of the update was the most informative we've seen for a long time. However, the same can't be said for the update for this loan: Legal proceedings to recover the outstanding capital, accrued interest and bonus accrual are progressing and an update will be provided as and when we are able. Exact same as the last update so what progress has been made? None. Can't kick the can down the road forever. Lendy have to be very careful about providing updates in any ongoing legal proceedings. Just because they haven't informed investors about any new information doesn't necessarily mean Lendy haven't made any progress in recovering lost capital.
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Jun 9, 2018 10:41:47 GMT
Many of the loans are in this position though.
At the moment, I am inclined to think the methodology here is 'extend and pretend'. At some stage in the future it'll be declared a loss, perhaps Lendy are waiting for a more palatable position in regard to the overall platform.... I admit that yesterday's updates were better than in a while and some successes with the bad loans may make people more forgiving when it comes to closing other duff ones at a loss.
We saw in Hastings that Lendy were scared to enforce the security because of the costs involved, yet we have multiple loans here where they are presumably paying lawyers to chase up these debts with only a small chance of it ever being recovered.
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Jun 9, 2018 11:55:33 GMT
Yeah I didn't mean most, or to suggest that others may produce the same loss.
But it is fair to say there are quite a number of 'claims underway' loans, and a number of the ones that are in the non-performing category that seem certain to join them one day.
Some of the repaid loans were before my time on here, but were there any where the security enforced and then monies were recovered after drawn-out legal action against guarantor/valuers?
Naturally I'd expect there to be some but seems to me that the success rate is not that high and the larger the loan the less likely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Sept 12, 2018 3:20:18 GMT
' Registration of charge' of CH dated 06/09/2018 Is this a PF acquired property ? If so i reckon this one could be in with a shout. Filling to be made available by the 14th, humm i wonder ... |
|
reinvestor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 194
Likes: 224
|
Post by reinvestor on Sept 12, 2018 4:18:35 GMT
The charge appears just to benefit Liam.......
|
|
withnell
Member of DD Central
Posts: 550
Likes: 491
|
Post by withnell on Sept 12, 2018 8:10:48 GMT
Looks like Liam forming up the security for any cash he has lent to the company - seems like fairly standard admin
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Sept 12, 2018 8:33:02 GMT
What does this have to do with the property? IIRC was sold at auction.
Given that my impression of Lendy is that they are in a fairly poor condition financially I don't think this looks like good news - virtually any change they make is detrimental to investors.
If they could choose to shut up shop at a specific time, perhaps it would be when one of the big DFL repays... assume the charge here ranks ahead of all of us.
|
|
reinvestor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 194
Likes: 224
|
Post by reinvestor on Sept 12, 2018 8:45:25 GMT
What does this have to do with the property? IIRC was sold at auction. Given that my impression of Lendy is that they are in a fairly poor condition financially I don't think this looks like good news - virtually any change they make is detrimental to investors. If they could choose to shut up shop at a specific time, perhaps it would be when one of the big DFL repays... assume the charge here ranks ahead of all of us. Indeed, looks very much like self serving interest for Mr Brooke.
He doesn't have a director's loan (as in owed to him not him owing the company) in the last accounts so unless he has pumped a load of his own money in recently (very doubtful) it looks like he is covering his own interests in the event of the company collapsing.
|
|
Monetus
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,179
Likes: 2,961
|
Post by Monetus on Sept 12, 2018 8:47:35 GMT
Indeed, looks very much like self serving interest for Mr Brooke.
He doesn't have a director's loan (as in owed to him not him owing the company) in the last accounts so unless he has pumped a load of his own money in recently (very doubtful) it looks like he is covering his own interests in the event of the company collapsing.
Agreed - this appears to be the case. If Lendy were to fall into administration or become insolvement it would ensure that he'd be at the front of the queue for cash (but wouldn't of course affect our funds or security which are ring-fenced).
|
|
empirica
Member of DD Central
Posts: 326
Likes: 235
|
Post by empirica on Sept 12, 2018 8:47:37 GMT
What does this have to do with the property? IIRC was sold at auction. Given that my impression of Lendy is that they are in a fairly poor condition financially I don't think this looks like good news - virtually any change they make is detrimental to investors. If they could choose to shut up shop at a specific time, perhaps it would be when one of the big DFL repays... assume the charge here ranks ahead of all of us. What has a charge a director has over its' own company have to do with investors in P2P loans where the assets and client funds are legally segregated? (Effectively the same question / point you've made in your first sentence.) Note the director holds no such charge over SSSH which is the beneficiary of charges against loan securities. (edit - at least on the ones I've looked at. there may be others)
(Struggling to think why a share-holding director would put a charge against their own company. Perhaps there's due to be a change to shareholders.)
edit - crossed with other posters.
|
|
