nyneil
Member of DD Central
Posts: 349
Likes: 438
|
Post by nyneil on Apr 13, 2018 9:58:44 GMT
Worst case scenario gives c11% capital loss and best case gives full return of capital +c1% interest. Not taking into account any other recovery options which 'might' also be fruitful.
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Apr 13, 2018 10:01:34 GMT
I would expect no less from MT but I've just read the update and I am impressed and reassured. I note that Bollington is the next one for the Administrators to get their teeth stuck into.
Even when defaults strike on MT, the situation always seems to be under control with a good recovery rate and no skeletons start walking out of the cupboard. I have not changed my early opinion which was that MT is a well run, diligent, king among platforms.
And a reminder to those investors who have a little tucked away in the defaulted Prestbury loan - the sale completion date of April 17 is drawing very near so a repayment to look forward to in the very near horizon.
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,874
Likes: 7,919
|
Post by SteveT on Apr 13, 2018 10:02:04 GMT
Looks a well thought-through recovery plan to me.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 13, 2018 10:11:14 GMT
Only had a quick skim of the realisations statement (pdf) but two things don't make sense to me.
a) the worst case column contains £10k of costs associated with selling the freehold, but zero realisation from the freehold as the worst case assumes ground rents have been abolished. Hence costs appear to have been over stated by £10k
b) the bottom line is a c. 10% surplus or deficit on MT capital recovery depending on the scenario. But the statement doesn't include (unless I've missed it) any reference to the finance needed to complete the build, either the interest on the finance or its redemption. If there is no/minimal surplus after the MT capital is retrieved under the 1st charge, how is the additional finance going to be repaid ?
What am I missing ?
|
|
invester
P2P Blogger
Posts: 612
Likes: 618
|
Post by invester on Apr 13, 2018 10:15:01 GMT
A loss is disappointing but very impressed with that update. I hope MT bring some other opportunities to invest soon, with £5m on the secondary market it seems that most people have reached their limits.
Really in the case of certain other platforms this type of information should be provided before giving people a vote.
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Apr 13, 2018 10:24:22 GMT
Only had a quick skim of the realisations statement (pdf) but two things don't make sense to me. a) the worst case column contains £10k of costs associated with selling the freehold, but zero realisation from the freehold as the worst case assumes ground rents have been abolished. Hence costs appear to have been over stated by £10k b) the bottom line is a c. 10% surplus or deficit on MT capital recovery depending on the scenario. But the statement doesn't include (unless I've missed it) any reference to the finance needed to complete the build, either the interest on the finance or its redemption. If there is no/minimal surplus after the MT capital is retrieved under the 1st charge, how is the additional finance going to be repaid ? What am I missing ? b) in the Update these are stated as included within the build cost totals.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 13, 2018 10:29:12 GMT
Only had a quick skim of the realisations statement (pdf) but two things don't make sense to me. a) the worst case column contains £10k of costs associated with selling the freehold, but zero realisation from the freehold as the worst case assumes ground rents have been abolished. Hence costs appear to have been over stated by £10k b) the bottom line is a c. 10% surplus or deficit on MT capital recovery depending on the scenario. But the statement doesn't include (unless I've missed it) any reference to the finance needed to complete the build, either the interest on the finance or its redemption. If there is no/minimal surplus after the MT capital is retrieved under the 1st charge, how is the additional finance going to be repaid ? What am I missing ? b) in the Update these are stated as included within the build cost totals. Thanks, so the cost of the additional finance is included in the build costs, but that still doesn't answer how the finance is to be repaid.
|
|
Yintara
Member of DD Central
Posts: 61
Likes: 83
|
Post by Yintara on Apr 13, 2018 10:31:05 GMT
I see they've allowed funds for the standard 12 month snagging period, so does this mean that recovery won't be finalised for at least 12 months starting from the sale of the last unit?
There's also £13k and change allowed for snagging between the best and worst case scenarios. If Moneything has any control over what materials are used from now on then I'd suggest taking a careful look at the lighting scheme. I work in the building trade and there are an awful lot of poor quality brands around at the moment. I'm constantly hearing tales of woe from tradesmen who fit cheap stuff and are then back and forth during the snagging period changing faulty lights. This ends up costing far more than just fitting slightly better quality lights in the first place, or at least ones with replaceable lightbulbs instead of built-in LEDs.
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 786
Likes: 787
|
Post by eeyore on Apr 13, 2018 10:31:55 GMT
Does anyone have any insight on the value of the ground rent element in the freehold in the light of future legislation?
The value of the freehold in the 'best case' scenario is substantial at £xxxk, but if legislation is going to reduce that to zero at some point in the future, why would anyone pay such a substantial sum now when the value may shortly disappear?
|
|
SteveT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,874
Likes: 7,919
|
Post by SteveT on Apr 13, 2018 10:33:48 GMT
b) in the Update these are stated as included within the build cost totals. Thanks, so the cost of the additional finance is included in the build costs, but that still doesn't answer how the finance is to be repaid. Presumably out of the sale receipts from the leasehold property (from which the build costs are deducted to arrive at the Surplus / Shortfall)
|
|
rogerbu
Member of DD Central
Posts: 398
Likes: 213
|
Post by rogerbu on Apr 13, 2018 10:37:42 GMT
A loss is disappointing but very impressed with that update. I hope MT bring some other opportunities to invest soon, with £5m on the secondary market it seems that most people have reached their limits. Really in the case of certain other platforms this type of information should be provided before giving people a vote. I am not convinced that the AC & LY model of giving some limited information and asking us to vote, with little idea of the implications, is really the best way forward for MT. MT's model says that it will make the decisions on our behalf. So far, I haven't had a problem with any decisions they have made, so at the moment I am happy to get MT to make the decision they believe best.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 13, 2018 10:38:45 GMT
Does anyone have any insight on the value of the ground rent element in the freehold in the light of future legislation? The value of the freehold in the 'best case' scenario is substantial at £xxxk, but if legislation is going to reduce that to zero at some point in the future, why would anyone pay such a substantial sum now when the value may shortly disappear? The government has indicated that it is not considering retrospective action on existing ground rents (at least for now), so providing these units sell before the law changes they will continue with annual ground rent charges. The government has said primary leglislation is needed, so given the absence of current comment in the media, my guess is it won't be before the Aug/Sept completion dates for these sales.
|
|
niceguy37
Member of DD Central
Posts: 504
Likes: 254
|
Post by niceguy37 on Apr 13, 2018 10:45:19 GMT
A loss is disappointing but very impressed with that update. I hope MT bring some other opportunities to invest soon, with £5m on the secondary market it seems that most people have reached their limits. Really in the case of certain other platforms this type of information should be provided before giving people a vote. I am not convinced that the AC & LY model of giving some limited information and asking us to vote, with little idea of the implications, is really the best way forward for MT. MT's model says that it will make the decisions on our behalf. So far, I haven't had a problem with any decisions they have made, so at the moment I am happy to get MT to make the decision they believe best. I agree that I trust MT to make these decisions, particularly as I view that they are better informed and more experienced than most lenders. And they are less likely to get emotional about things, as sometimes happens.
|
|
ozboy
Member of DD Central
Mine's a Large One! (Snigger, snigger .......)
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 4,846
|
Post by ozboy on Apr 13, 2018 10:45:45 GMT
I would expect no less from MT but I've just read the update and I am impressed and reassured. I note that Bollington is the next one for the Administrators to get their teeth stuck into. Even when defaults strike on MT, the situation always seems to be under control with a good recovery rate and no skeletons start walking out of the cupboard. I have not changed my early opinion which was that MT is a well run, diligent, king among platforms. And a reminder to those investors who have a little tucked away in the defaulted Prestbury loan - the sale completion date of April 17 is drawing very near so a repayment to look forward to in the very near horizon. That's wot many said about COLL.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Apr 13, 2018 10:48:20 GMT
Thanks, so the cost of the additional finance is included in the build costs, but that still doesn't answer how the finance is to be repaid. Presumably out of the sale receipts from the leasehold property (from which the build costs are deducted to arrive at the Surplus / Shortfall) That was my first thought, but the GDV assumed in the realisation statement from sales is already a few hundred thousand above that the March 2017 valuation report thought achievable.
|
|