ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,846
|
Post by ozboy on Apr 27, 2017 16:30:44 GMT
I rest my case M'Lud!
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 28, 2017 9:22:56 GMT
DFL021 drawn down at 10:19.
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 28, 2017 11:33:10 GMT
Hmmm... PBL173 pipeline loan in Poole seems to have disappeared.
That leaves only one 9% loan (£692k worth) in the pipeline.
Maybe, pulling this £2.73m out of the pipeline will free up the cash some will have reserved for this, enabling them to spend it on the SM?
|
|
n
Member of DD Central
Yet another Nick
Posts: 879
Likes: 461
|
Post by n on Apr 28, 2017 11:54:50 GMT
Hmmm... PBL173 pipeline loan in Poole seems to have disappeared.
That leaves only one 9% loan (£692k worth) in the pipeline.
Maybe, pulling this £2.73m out of the pipeline will free up the cash some will have reserved for this for spending on the SM? Not me. I am going to carry on suffering the cash drag on my £1 and wait for the next sub-12% loan to spend it on invest it in.
|
|
twoheads
Member of DD Central
Programming
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 1,192
|
Post by twoheads on Apr 28, 2017 12:29:10 GMT
Warrington DFL has become DFL024 (13:27).
|
|
grahamg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 220
Likes: 62
|
Post by grahamg on Apr 28, 2017 12:50:21 GMT
Warrington DFL has become DFL024 (13:27). Going Live tomorrow and still with a defective GDV Paul64
|
|
mikeh
Member of DD Central
Posts: 499
Likes: 370
|
Post by mikeh on Apr 28, 2017 12:58:42 GMT
I refuse to cooperate in this scheme to rob us of 3%!
|
|
|
Post by Paul64 on Apr 28, 2017 13:42:02 GMT
Warrington DFL has become DFL024 (13:27). Going Live tomorrow and still with a defective GDV Paul64 Hi. I am not sure what you mean. It is entirely reasonable, and usual practice, for a lender to add the value of the freehold ground rent interest (£400k) to the GDV of a development (£2.7m) to arrive at the security valuation (£3.1m).
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Apr 28, 2017 17:48:25 GMT
Going Live tomorrow and still with a defective GDV Paul64 Hi. I am not sure what you mean. It is entirely reasonable, and usual practice, for a lender to add the value of the freehold ground rent interest (£400k) to the GDV of a development (£2.7m) to arrive at the security valuation (£3.1m). It is not obvious that the ground rents, especially those for the other blocks, are included in the security. (Taking your provided loan details at face value the other blocks aren't included.) For some reason the VR excluded the capitalised value of the ground rents from the headline GDV, which leads potential participants in the loan to discount the value of the ground rents. Appendix C of the VR, covering the ground rents, is blanked out in the copy of the VR provided (is this deliberate, or the result of a computer problem?), which again leads potential participants in the loan to the opinion that they are not included. The VR indicates that an agreement in principle has been reached for the sale of the ground rents. No indication has been given that you have negotiated a covenant either disallowing sale until the loan has been repaid, or requiring that the proceeds be used to reduce the capital outstanding on the loan, unless this turns out to be covered under the terms of the debenture. In the absence of clarity on these points I have only prefunded with cash on account, rather than additionally trying to sell maturing loans to add the proceeds to the prefunding.
|
|
grahamg
Member of DD Central
Posts: 220
Likes: 62
|
Post by grahamg on Apr 28, 2017 20:39:59 GMT
Going Live tomorrow and still with a defective GDV Paul64 Hi. I am not sure what you mean. It is entirely reasonable, and usual practice, for a lender to add the value of the freehold ground rent interest (£400k) to the GDV of a development (£2.7m) to arrive at the security valuation (£3.1m). Is it really Paul. Nowhere in the details is this explained, and it is not reflected in the VR, where all rent detail is missing so we can't check it. What's the rational for adding just a single year of ground rent to the value. Also what matters to lenders is that the GDV represents the realistic value in a default situation, not a hyped valueassuming the borrower were selling, so not really £3.1m then.
|
|
am
Posts: 1,495
Likes: 601
|
Post by am on Apr 29, 2017 11:51:38 GMT
Hi. I am not sure what you mean. It is entirely reasonable, and usual practice, for a lender to add the value of the freehold ground rent interest (£400k) to the GDV of a development (£2.7m) to arrive at the security valuation (£3.1m). Is it really Paul. Nowhere in the details is this explained, and it is not reflected in the VR, where all rent detail is missing so we can't check it. What's the rational for adding just a single year of ground rent to the value. Also what matters to lenders is that the GDV represents the realistic value in a default situation, not a hyped valueassuming the borrower were selling, so not really £3.1m then. They haven't added a single year of ground rent to the value. They've added several years of ground rent (the capitalised value of the yearly ground rent) to that value. That isn't necessarily wrong - the ground rent values are included in the valuations for the Huddersfield loans. The problem is that it's not clear whether it's included in the security. See my previous reply.
|
|
seeingred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 470
Likes: 664
|
Post by seeingred on Apr 29, 2017 12:44:14 GMT
DFL024 - gone live 711 investors, £51,334 remaining, so presumably no restricted bids. Zero queue, now £42,700 available. This filled quite well even at 9%, and at a time when there was quite a bit of some older loans on the SM.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,846
|
Post by ozboy on Apr 29, 2017 13:40:46 GMT
Is it really Paul. Nowhere in the details is this explained, and it is not reflected in the VR, where all rent detail is missing so we can't check it. What's the rational for adding just a single year of ground rent to the value. Also what matters to lenders is that the GDV represents the realistic value in a default situation, not a hyped valueassuming the borrower were selling, so not really £3.1m then. They haven't added a single year of ground rent to the value. They've added several years of ground rent (the capitalised value of the yearly ground rent) to that value. That isn't necessarily wrong - the ground rent values are included in the valuations for the Huddersfield loans. The problem is that it's not clear whether it's included in the security. See my previous reply. Let's cut through all the BS and spin. It's obvious that there's two LTVs that should be given for all Loans, and calculated against a reasonable & honest VR which contains all the material facts. An LTV against the Current Fair Market Value if sold now, and a rather more nebulous second LTV against the GDV. What's so difficult about that? But they The Platforms don't and won't do it, wonder why?
|
|
warn
Member of DD Central
Curmudgeon
Posts: 624
Likes: 645
|
Post by warn on Apr 29, 2017 17:08:03 GMT
It seems not.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,846
|
Post by ozboy on Apr 29, 2017 17:12:11 GMT
|
|