09dolphin
Member of DD Central
Posts: 638 
Likes: 866
|
Post by 09dolphin on Nov 19, 2016 7:00:50 GMT
I can't recall seeing anything about the fire when I decided to renew. IMHO this is substantive information investors should have been given before making the decision to renew. I do tend to make my renewal decisions a few days before the loan is due to be repaid when I review all the information + updates provided at the time I make my decision to reinvest or not.
My feeling is that FS have been less than totally honest with all investors who renewed their loans. However I may have still invested if I had had the information I now have - but it does reduce my confidence in FS and indicates that I should be more cautious when making decisions about renewal of property loans on this site.
|
|
fp
Posts: 1,008 
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Nov 19, 2016 8:05:44 GMT
TBH, if the insurance are paying out on this, the security is possibly worth more now than it was before. The issues with demolishing the property are possibly eradicated, and part of the new build costs will be funded from insurance.
|
|
kermie
Member of DD Central
Posts: 691
Likes: 462
|
Post by kermie on Nov 19, 2016 8:55:06 GMT
There was no update about this for the original loan. The info is only on the renewal loan -- added on 18/Nov -- and someone intending to renew might not have bothered to look at the details because they thought they knew what the loan was about. I've started to mark loans as "do not renew" for most loans, and then take a look at the renewal information before deciding - mentally this gives me a clearer head to assess the loan afresh. I often do end-up re-investing, but only after I can see some progress towards an eventual exit (e.g. development progress, refinance, etc). Only where I am really comfortable and I feel it's a very good price point do I now renew as a matter of course.
|
|
stevio
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 894
|
Post by stevio on Nov 19, 2016 9:05:15 GMT
TBH, if the insurance are paying out on this, the security is possibly worth more now than it was before. The issues with demolishing the property are possibly eradicated, and part of the new build costs will be funded from insurance. Demolition by fire will most likely need the site clearing in much the same way as a normal demolition The insurance will cover the reinstatement value (the actual costs to rebuild) and not necessarily include any value due to the location
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Nov 19, 2016 14:15:20 GMT
The incident report (16th Oct) on the London Fire Brigade website indicates that 4 fire engines and 21 firefighters and officers were called to a fire at a derelict house in B***** R***, E***** in the early hours of the morning, and that part of the first floor of the property was damaged by fire. The roof of the house was gutted by the blaze. IIRC the neighbouring property is a petrol station, so this would have been classed as a major incident. The sad thing abount this incident is that had any of the multiple attempts to secure planning to rebuild this property succeeded the probability of such a fire would have been reduced and there would have been no need for the firemen to put their lives at risk to ensure the fire didn't spread to the neighbouring site with potentially disastrous consequences if it had. As far as the loan renewal goes, I would be far happier if fundingsecure had made available (redacted as appropriate) correspondence from the insurers. |
|
fp
Posts: 1,008
Likes: 853
|
Post by fp on Nov 19, 2016 14:37:04 GMT
TBH, if the insurance are paying out on this, the security is possibly worth more now than it was before. The issues with demolishing the property are possibly eradicated, and part of the new build costs will be funded from insurance. Most certainly... One saving grace though is the fact it wont need planning permission to do this, so half the battle is already won, as they are currently having difficulty getting permission to demolish and rebuild... kind of a blessing in disguise. The insurance will cover the rebuild costs, or contribute towards the cost of building something else, just because the building is gone, this wont have any bearing on the value of the land, thats still there, it didn't burn, so the location value is always going to be there.... in the land.
|
|
n
Member of DD Central
Yet another Nick
Posts: 882
Likes: 461
|
Post by n on Nov 19, 2016 15:45:52 GMT
The incident report (16th Oct) on the London Fire Brigade website indicates that 4 fire engines and 21 firefighters and officers were called to a fire at a derelict house in B***** R***, E***** in the early hours of the morning, and that part of the first floor of the property was damaged by fire. The roof of the house was gutted by the blaze. IIRC the neighbouring property is a petrol station, so this would have been classed as a major incident. The sad thing abount this incident is that had any of the multiple attempts to secure planning to rebuild this property succeeded the probability of such a fire would have been reduced and there would have been no need for the firemen to put their lives at risk to ensure the fire didn't spread to the neighbouring site with potentially disastrous consequences if it had. As far as the loan renewal goes, I would be far happier if fundingsecure had made available (redacted as appropriate) correspondence from the insurers. Presumably you mean because works would already be under way and the site more secure. On first reading I had the impression that you were being cynical about how the fire might have started. 
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Nov 19, 2016 16:30:04 GMT
How do we expect things to proceed from here? The loan is for £730k. The insurance proceeds are expected to be £750k. If the proceeds go directly to FS, I'd expect those proceeds to be used to pay off the loan. There might be a need to the borrower to inject a little bit more funds to cover the interest accrued to the time of the insurance settlement, but surely they'd be better off doing that so as to relieve themselves of the interest accruing on the FS loan. I would have thought that, even if the PP is decided to the borrower's satisfaction before the insurance payout, they'd be better off with a development loan that started with a relatively low balance and increased in line with the money being spent on the project than they would starting with a £730k loan with interest accruing on money they're not needing yet. And if the PP saga drags on for a while, then they definitely won't want to be accruing interest on a loan they don't need. Perhaps fundingsecure would be so kind as to tell us what they expect to happen when the money from the insurance claim arrives. |
|
stevio
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,065
Likes: 894
|
Post by stevio on Nov 19, 2016 17:19:52 GMT
How do we expect things to proceed from here? The loan is for £730k. The insurance proceeds are expected to be £750k. If the proceeds go directly to FS, I'd expect those proceeds to be used to pay off the loan. There might be a need to the borrower to inject a little bit more funds to cover the interest accrued to the time of the insurance settlement, but surely they'd be better off doing that so as to relieve themselves of the interest accruing on the FS loan. I would have thought that, even if the PP is decided to the borrower's satisfaction before the insurance payout, they'd be better off with a development loan that started with a relatively low balance and increased in line with the money being spent on the project than they would starting with a £730k loan with interest accruing on money they're not needing yet. And if the PP saga drags on for a while, then they definitely won't want to be accruing interest on a loan they don't need. Perhaps fundingsecure would be so kind as to tell us what they expect to happen when the money from the insurance claim arrives. Was the valuation based on the GDV?
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Nov 19, 2016 18:03:01 GMT
Planning permission was rejected due to concerns about traffic access I think. The information says that it will be 3 months appeal but gives no start date making it meaningless.
N my cynicism is based on a well tuned bullxxxt detector seasoned by my observations over40+ years. I would not dare to indicate that I believed that the borrower in any way acted unlawfully in print even semi anonymously! That action is cowardly and unworthy of an investor imho!
I wonder how the £100k investor feels will be treated if they complain?
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Nov 19, 2016 18:55:57 GMT
Was the valuation based on the GDV? Yes and no. The initial value was based on a £2M GDV less £750k of development costs. Presuming the £750k included PP application costs, the developer's margin, and financing costs, the resulting £1.25M should be the 'value' of the land. Planning permission was rejected due to concerns about traffic access I think. The information says that it will be 3 months appeal but gives no start date making it meaningless. : Where did the 'information' come from? The only thing I see on the website -- in the description of the renewal loan -- says nothing at all about timing.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Nov 19, 2016 19:13:12 GMT
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Nov 19, 2016 20:30:09 GMT
Was the valuation based on the GDV? Yes and no. The initial value was based on a £2M GDV less £750k of development costs. Presuming the £750k included PP application costs, the developer's margin, and financing costs, the resulting £1.25M should be the 'value' of the land. Planning permission was rejected due to concerns about traffic access I think. The information says that it will be 3 months appeal but gives no start date making it meaningless. : Where did the 'information' come from? The only thing I see on the website -- in the description of the renewal loan -- says nothing at all about timing.
|
|
stub8535
Member of DD Central
personal opinions only. Not qualified to advise on investment products.
Posts: 1,447
Likes: 945
|
Post by stub8535 on Nov 19, 2016 20:35:42 GMT
Yes and no. The initial value was based on a £2M GDV less £750k of development costs. Presuming the £750k included PP application costs, the developer's margin, and financing costs, the resulting £1.25M should be the 'value' of the land. stub8535 : Where did the 'information' come from? The only thing I see on the website -- in the descripfdtion of the renewal loan -- says nothing at all about timing. E mail from fs to holders of original loan. mike1531. No data on timing on the appeal is exactly my point. fs do know an expected timeframe and when it started if their email in response to my questions is, and I have no evidence to the contrary, accurate and honest.
|
|
mikes1531
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,453
Likes: 2,320
|
Post by mikes1531 on Nov 20, 2016 2:31:49 GMT
E mail from fs to holders of original loan. mike1531. No data on timing on the appeal is exactly my point. fs do know an expected timeframe and when it started if their email in response to my questions is, and I have no evidence to the contrary, accurate and honest. I'll have to trawl through my email again to see if I can find that email. It doesn't help that fundingsecure don't use email subjects that allow one to know which loan a message applies to without opening it.
|
|
