ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,852
Likes: 11,080
|
Post by ilmoro on Jan 30, 2021 17:16:53 GMT
The next Administrator's report is due, I think, towards the end of March. Perhaps there is simply little of substance to say at present. We shall see. I have it written down that the next admin. report is to be expected by 14th Feb. You're a bit early, the period covered is up to the 22 Feb and must be filed at CH/provided to creditors within 1 month of that date, so deadline is 22 March. Plus any time for CH to process/MT to review prior to giving an update if the decide to.
|
|
|
Post by timsykes on Jan 30, 2021 21:09:38 GMT
I have it written down that the next admin. report is to be expected by 14th Feb. You're a bit early, the period covered is up to the 22 Feb and must be filed at CH/provided to creditors within 1 month of that date, so deadline is 22 March. Plus any time for CH to process/MT to review prior to giving an update if the decide to. Oops, thanks for setting the record straight ilmoro!
|
|
hazellend
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,361
Likes: 2,179
|
Post by hazellend on Feb 1, 2021 13:32:48 GMT
What a flipping mess. I voted initially to take the offer which would have given 30% recovery which now is a dream.
|
|
averageguy
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 841
|
Post by averageguy on Feb 1, 2021 13:33:03 GMT
Oh dear ..where’s my facepalm emoji
|
|
|
Post by queenvictoria on Feb 1, 2021 13:50:39 GMT
Can someone explain to me: - "the Joint Administrators now expect that there will be no return to lenders from the sale of the charged property" cannot mean there is absolutely no value in the upper site which has 6 recently completed if sub-standard houses on it (combined sale value we expected must have been £1.5-£1.8m at one point). So, does it mean that value of the site is now so low that it will only cover recovery costs? Is that what it means?
- There is mention of a possible PI claim against the contractor but surely Moorfields, who were contracted by MT to oversee the build, must have some responsibility. Is there not potential to claim against Moorfields?
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,603
Likes: 4,185
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 1, 2021 14:04:26 GMT
Can someone explain to me: - "the Joint Administrators now expect that there will be no return to lenders from the sale of the charged property" cannot mean there is absolutely no value in the upper site which has 6 recently completed if sub-standard houses on it (combined sale value we expected must have been £1.5-£1.8m at one point). So, does it mean that value of the site is now so low that it will only cover recovery costs? Is that what it means?
- There is mention of a possible PI claim against the contractor but surely Moorfields, who were contracted by MT to oversee the build, must have some responsibility. Is there not potential to claim against Moorfields?
100% projected loss, bloody marvelous
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 987
Likes: 1,194
|
Post by james100 on Feb 1, 2021 14:20:55 GMT
Can someone explain to me: - "the Joint Administrators now expect that there will be no return to lenders from the sale of the charged property" cannot mean there is absolutely no value in the upper site which has 6 recently completed if sub-standard houses on it (combined sale value we expected must have been £1.5-£1.8m at one point). So, does it mean that value of the site is now so low that it will only cover recovery costs? Is that what it means?
- There is mention of a possible PI claim against the contractor but surely Moorfields, who were contracted by MT to oversee the build, must have some responsibility. Is there not potential to claim against Moorfields?
100% projected loss, bloody marvelous
UPDATE: 20/11/2019
Moorfields have been let down by the contractor and timings and budgets have not been achieved. As a result, Moorfields are holding back payment and have stepped in to manage the completion of the build themselves.
Wow! These guys are absolutely shameless!
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,603
Likes: 4,185
|
Post by agent69 on Feb 1, 2021 14:32:29 GMT
100% projected loss, bloody marvelous
UPDATE: 20/11/2019
Moorfields have been let down by the contractor and timings and budgets have not been achieved. As a result, Moorfields are holding back payment and have stepped in to manage the completion of the build themselves.
Wow! These guys are absolutely shameless! When you say these guys, do you mean:
- the original borrower
- the platform
- the administrators
- Moorfields
- the contractor employed to complete the build
- all of the above
Come back COL all is forgiven
Edit: So even when the contractor bodged things up, they still couldn't keep to programme or budget
|
|
seb8072
Member of DD Central
Posts: 177
Likes: 99
|
Post by seb8072 on Feb 1, 2021 14:41:37 GMT
Can someone explain to me: - "the Joint Administrators now expect that there will be no return to lenders from the sale of the charged property" cannot mean there is absolutely no value in the upper site which has 6 recently completed if sub-standard houses on it (combined sale value we expected must have been £1.5-£1.8m at one point). So, does it mean that value of the site is now so low that it will only cover recovery costs? Is that what it means?
- There is mention of a possible PI claim against the contractor but surely Moorfields, who were contracted by MT to oversee the build, must have some responsibility. Is there not potential to claim against Moorfields?
1. That's how I read it. 2. Possibly but again I suspect any recovery will just about pay for costs.
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Feb 1, 2021 16:06:00 GMT
This is utterly scandalous. Moorfields advised that there would be a better outcome if this was built out. Moorfields arranged the external financing to carry it out. Moorfields appointed the contractor to undertake the work. Moorfields supervised their work (or not, as the case may be). This project should have been a fairly straightforward resdev project which has been so poorly managed that recovery costs are so high to mean that no return is likely. Chances of Moorfields putting their own hand in their pocket? nill.
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,120
Likes: 1,940
|
Post by rocky1 on Feb 1, 2021 17:34:29 GMT
were MT monitoring moorfields or were we being fed another load of BS as a few nests got feathered. disgraceful carry on MT. still you got plenty of chocolate with lots more to come the way moorfields have/ are going about this mess of a administration.build outs my ar*se.
|
|
Brainer
Member of DD Central
Posts: 186
Likes: 323
|
Post by Brainer on Feb 1, 2021 17:56:17 GMT
I wonder if Moorfields are going to challenge Moorfields for their appalling handling of this loan recovery? I wonder if Moorfields will then charge thousands of pounds to reply to Moorfields who will charge thousands of pounds to receive the replies from Moorfields, until all the money is gone. Oh no, wait, all the money has already gone... to Moorfields.
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 987
Likes: 1,194
|
Post by james100 on Feb 1, 2021 19:06:59 GMT
I wonder if Moorfields are going to challenge Moorfields for their appalling handling of this loan recovery? I wonder if Moorfields will then charge thousands of pounds to reply to Moorfields who will charge thousands of pounds to receive the replies from Moorfields, until all the money is gone. Oh no, wait, all the money has already gone... to Moorfields. I see MoneyThing are online. Perhaps they'd like to comment on the potential conflict of interest, legalities etc. of this? Maybe it's just a poorly worded update...let's give them a chance to clarify.
|
|
ptr120
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 1,346
|
Post by ptr120 on Feb 1, 2021 19:21:49 GMT
I wonder if Moorfields are going to challenge Moorfields for their appalling handling of this loan recovery? I wonder if Moorfields will then charge thousands of pounds to reply to Moorfields who will charge thousands of pounds to receive the replies from Moorfields, until all the money is gone. Oh no, wait, all the money has already gone... to Moorfields. I see MoneyThing are online. Perhaps they'd like to comment on the potential conflict of interest, legalities etc. of this? Maybe it's just a poorly worded update...let's give them a chance to clarify. You can't polish a turd, and because MoneyThing don't control the platform anymore, they can't comment. Lets face it, they haven't commented on this site for many months and I doubt one of their biggest car crashes is likely to be the occasion that causes them to change their policy. Slightly OT but I wonder when the creditors committee is being formed and if there is a chance that a lender representative might be appointed?
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 987
Likes: 1,194
|
Post by james100 on Feb 1, 2021 19:36:10 GMT
UPDATE: 20/11/2019
Moorfields have been let down by the contractor and timings and budgets have not been achieved. As a result, Moorfields are holding back payment and have stepped in to manage the completion of the build themselves.
Wow! These guys are absolutely shameless! When you say these guys, do you mean:
- the original borrower
- the platform
- the administrators
- Moorfields
- the contractor employed to complete the build
- all of the above
Come back COL all is forgiven
Edit: So even when the contractor bodged things up, they still couldn't keep to programme or budget
Haha we are a spoilt for choice aren't we. They are all shameless but Moorfields' role appears to be a particularly interesting one, based purely on the paltry loan updates provided. It is also bringing back Collateral nostalgia for me...
|
|