elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Jan 6, 2018 14:23:33 GMT
I may be missing something But how on Earth can it be realistic to hope that this development will reach completion given that atm Only 169 days remain and no ground works have begun yet? Edit: loftankerman, driveway's? Must be Paddy, Dermot & Co... Per Overview build is c12m, per update 10/11 (and following) this loan is due to be extended now borrower build out confirmed.
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Jan 24, 2018 13:46:04 GMT
For some reason or other that I just can't put my finger on, I don't like this one.
I hope I am wrong for the sake of all the people who invest in it, but I get the feeling from this one that it is going to be the sacrificial lamb once all other projects have been completed and it is time to cut and run.
I sold this one on a long time ago and intend to watch with great interest. I hope I am proven wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Jan 24, 2018 14:22:11 GMT
For some reason or other that I just can't put my finger on, I don't like this one.
I hope I am wrong for the sake of all the people who invest in it, but I get the feeling from this one that it is going to be the sacrificial lamb once all other projects have been completed and it is time to cut and run.
I sold this one on a long time ago and intend to watch with great interest. I hope I am proven wrong. Not withstanding my concerns over the residual land value (as per the post linked to above), I have a perception that SD (and associated companies) will see a project through to completion once development has started, and that Lendy will (via ourselves) provide the necessary funds. The Huddersfield projects appear to be running relatively smoothly, and should over the next 12 months or so redeem. I have greater concerns regarding risk when its not clear as to the extent to which SD is committed to building out the project, and is treating the site as a cash cow to fund other projects (and increasing the cash cow by enhancing the planning consent).
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Jan 24, 2018 14:48:27 GMT
I totally agree with you, they do seem to finish off projects..................... But this one hasn't been started and until recently they hadn't even confirmed that they were going to build out the project.
The way I see this is that currently they have borrowed roughly 60% LTV of the land (Assuming a valid RICS valuation). If they were to obtain agreement to convert to a DFL and drew £2m of funds on the first trache, they would be at roughly 100% LTV (Not GDV) until they actually started building. At this point, they could walk away having used the land to complete their other developments, £2m in the bank and the disposal of the land resting on the shoulders of Lendy/Lenders again.
As I said, I hope I am wrong
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,363 
Likes: 2,180
|
Post by hazellend on Jan 24, 2018 17:50:24 GMT
I totally agree with you, they do seem to finish off projects..................... But this one hasn't been started and until recently they hadn't even confirmed that they were going to build out the project.
The way I see this is that currently they have borrowed roughly 60% LTV of the land (Assuming a valid RICS valuation). If they were to obtain agreement to convert to a DFL and drew £2m of funds on the first trache, they would be at roughly 100% LTV (Not GDV) until they actually started building. At this point, they could walk away having used the land to complete their other developments, £2m in the bank and the disposal of the land resting on the shoulders of Lendy/Lenders again.
As I said, I hope I am wrong Not meaning to be rude, but you don’t seem to understand how DFLs work. They are based on final developed value which is 17m, and funds are released as the build progresses up to 60% GDV assuming adequate progress. This is also why DFLs are potentially riskier than PBLs. Your gut feeling is off the mark here IMO. I get slightly irked by these kind of posts.
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jan 24, 2018 20:09:11 GMT
I think the point is that DFL tranches are generally released AHEAD of the work they are supposed to pay for .. so yeah, you can take a £2M loan (tranche 1) against a £17M GDV, but until you do some development the lenders are swinging in the breeze.
|
|
|
|
Post by skint4achange on Jan 24, 2018 20:28:53 GMT
I think the point is that DFL tranches are generally released AHEAD of the work they are supposed to pay for .. so yeah, you can take a £2M loan (tranche 1) against a £17M GDV, but until you do some development the lenders are swinging in the breeze. And that is my point, if the funds are released to this borrower and no work is done, they can walk away and be no worse off. The investors will be left with the baby.
But I don't want to Irk anyone by having an opinion (Even if I don't know how a DFL works!) 
|
|
|
|
Post by valuehunter on Jan 26, 2018 8:45:38 GMT
I think the point is that DFL tranches are generally released AHEAD of the work they are supposed to pay for .. so yeah, you can take a £2M loan (tranche 1) against a £17M GDV, but until you do some development the lenders are swinging in the breeze. Ah! I didn't know this; I thought it was standard practise to pay in arrears...time to take another look through the dfl part of my portfolio!
|
|
|
|
Post by GSV3MIaC on Jan 26, 2018 10:03:12 GMT
"Pay in arrears" only works if either the contractor, or the borrower he is building for, can carry the odd £m or two until the tranche gets released. Most can't (or at least choose not to). The unacceptable (to my mind) risk comes in when the platform doesn't even check after the fact that T1 has been spent as intended, but release T2 on the borrower's say-so. FS Whitehaven springs to mind.
|
|
brummiefred
Member of DD Central
Posts: 313
Likes: 427
Member is Online
|
Post by brummiefred on Jan 26, 2018 10:19:30 GMT
Sorry but I don't understand. Under normal JCT terms of engagement between an employer (our borrower) and the Contractor, payments are made monthly in arrears 28 days after a valuation of works completed to date. The Contractor will normally pay for the materials 30 days after the end of the month in which they were purchased, thus, if all parties comply with their obligations, this should enable the cash to fall down the supply chain, and the main costs the Contractor has to finance are the wages. So, in my view, there is no case for payments in advance as all tranches have up to 28 days to be funded after presentation of the IQS valuation.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Feb 26, 2018 22:47:57 GMT
Anyone know if anything has happened on the ground at this site? How much has been doled out so far?
I just read the latest updates and they seem to say "...building gonna start soon....report that building has started due soon......building is really gonna start soon.....report due in very soon...."
A related question. Why did Lendy allow the developer to use "some" (hopefully not all) of the funds provided so far on another site when that wasn't the original plan?
I have a horrible feeling I know the answer to that last question and it is along the lines of Lendy making more money the more cash flows from investors to borrowers thus they don't care.
|
|
mary
Member of DD Central
Posts: 698 
Likes: 711
|
Post by mary on Feb 27, 2018 7:44:28 GMT
The new tranche (number 4) looks like the amount required to cover the interest for the 9 month extension mentioned in the last update.
I have no idea if any money has been spent on improvement, but it appears not from the updates, in which case this will take the LTV to over 90% of the land value and ~170% of the original purchase price!
So much for "we will never lend more than 70%". This, therefore, does not meet my risk criteria and I will be passing.
|
|
southport
Member of DD Central
Posts: 125
Likes: 88
|
Post by southport on Feb 27, 2018 11:16:16 GMT
Tranche 4 has gone live. Asked for 15k got 15k, nothing on the SM.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,875
Likes: 7,924
|
Post by SteveT on Mar 9, 2018 10:52:38 GMT
Is there any obvious reason why DFL020 is still showing 107 days remaining, rather than 400-odd days, given that much of the recent tranche was supposed to pay for a 9 months extension?
|
|
izigor
Member of DD Central
Posts: 162
Likes: 86
|
Post by izigor on Mar 9, 2018 18:37:11 GMT
Is there any obvious reason why DFL020 is still showing 107 days remaining, rather than 400-odd days, given that much of the recent tranche was supposed to pay for a 9 months extension? I would very much like to know the answer to this question. When I funded the recent part, it was showing over 400 days, now it has merged with the original part and all showing 106 days remaining term. Hopefully, it is an unexpected technical glitch, otherwise it will be unacceptable.
|
|
