PBL157/PBL158 - R*****a & C****t, H****** Court Rd DEFAULT

But that's not the point is it?

What matters here is a seemingly incompetent and/or grossly negligent Valuer who has arguably deliberately "mislead".

I think RICS and the FCA will be keen to know about their antics if ilmoro is correct regarding the Instructions they received:-


"The instructions to the valuer are pretty specific 4.1 & 4.14



'In your report you should specifically address the following



4.1 A full decription of the Property ....planning history



4.14 You shouild state what planning enquiries have been made & their results. Tou should specifically give details if planning permission in relation to the Property is subject to any special conditions ....'"

Well  you're certainly sounding a lot more relaxed than yesterday when, regarding planning permission,  you said : 

-----------
"one would hope that saving streams solicitors have picked up on this massive point in the last couple of days and that the loan will be withdrawn at the last minute ...."
------------

Are there 2  georget's   ?    

The concept is we are a peer to peer lending business and we want you to lend us your money so we will try and sell every loan to you by banging on about the good aspects and not mentioning very much the bad ones because we state in our terms and conditions it is up to you to do your own checks and due diligence and we hope that lots of lenders don't spot the skeletons in the cupboard before lending their money.

saving stream now offer loans at rates between 9% and 12% interest. as confirmed by them loans at 9% or 10% of lower risk and loans at 12% are top risk. they wanted to appeal to different lenders with different risk appetites those were there words. why anyone would think a new loan brought in at 12% would be as good as this one appears on the surface is beyond me. you have to dig deeper and some people have dug deeper and discovered the reason it is 12% and not 9 or 10%.

whether you invest is now a decision we can all make based on what we know. some of us will be happy to hold it for a little while with a view to an early disposal others will wish to steer well clear from the off. don't hang about too long pondering your decision though I expect they will let this one live early this afternoon

good luck everyone whatever you decide

Very well spotted Sir.    Has our borrower found 250k from elsewhere  ?    

I would have thought all that was required was to avoid the loan if you don't like the smell of it and take the matter up with saving stream. if you are not a lender in the loan then you are not a client of the valuer in any respect it is a matter for saving stream to take up if there has been a serious negligent error.

my thinking it is now all about liquidity and my feeling is that the larger loan on the c***** will be a lot more difficult to shift when and if the market turns and we don't have the secondary market liquidity we have today. for that reason I am going to have a nibble at the smaller R****** loan but avoid the c*****.

I agree that if the C***** does not have planning permission to be a single residential dwelling house then saving stream should not be offering this loan to investors even at 12%. maybe 20%.

georget, we are all VERY aware of what you keep repeating regarding interest rates and risk levels, we are not complete novices.

And I repeat therefore yet again, this highly salient and material fact information should/must be included as standard in any Valuation Report regardless of the interest on offer and risk level.

It is exactly this full disclosure which allows us to make informed decisions, any Report omitting such information could be construed as f***d, IMHO

No need to take my word for it, available for all to read, Appendix 1 of the valuation.