keystone
Member of DD Central
Posts: 713
Likes: 575
|
Post by keystone on Feb 1, 2021 20:29:34 GMT
It's all just one big scam, there is no accountability whatsoever in P2P, the FCA twiddling there thumbs as ever.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Feb 1, 2021 20:34:27 GMT
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? Admin proposals are due by 21 Feb which will include CC plans. Based on the FCA recent consultation on insolvency of regulated business they expect all stakeholders to be eligible so I would expect a fairly good chance that the situation will be much the same as other platforms. That said it will very much depend on the basis of participation as there is no point being on the CC if you are prevented from representing or communicating with investors
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Feb 2, 2021 0:09:56 GMT
On the face of it, it would seem to require a degree of incompetence to achieve this state of affairs and obliterate value to this extent. I hope I'm wrong.
In my experience, given all the unknowns and inevitably rising costs, build out rarely achieves a better outcome than early sale and it has the consequence of keeping various fee earners in business for much longer.
|
|
sussexlender
Member of DD Central
Cheat seeking missile
Posts: 550
Likes: 916
|
Post by sussexlender on Feb 4, 2021 15:25:56 GMT
Now we know why the disingenerous people at MT kept silent for so long on this scandalous loan.
They employed Moorfields to rectify the mess they had allowed to occur without taking action for so long.
Moorfields have no doubt carefully appointed a contractor who carried out work under their expensive and experienced supervison.
Who did Moorfields employ on the site to supervise the works on site No 1 ? There must be an addiotnal Indemnity policy somewhere in this mess.
Moorfields have sold site number 2, over 6 monhths ago, for a very small amount and withheld that information from the lenders and it now appear they have simply spent all the proceeds.
If so, then let's have a full acount of what they actually spent the money on. We are entitled to have full disclosure of this infromation as it is our cash.
Moorfileds have continued to mismanage site 1 (which actually has houses built on it). They would have us believe that the entire equity in the site has or will be gobbled up by Moorfields and presumably fees etc to the failed MT.
There will be 6 houses on the site when completed. How could the value of all of them combined [when sold] possibly be consummed by Moorfields and / or MT without even a £1 left over?
This is a shocking example of an incompetent Administration and for a complaint / investigation into Moorfields actions and / or a possible referral to other authorities.
I really did not expect MT to fall into the same cesspit as Le***, Co****** or other suspect P2P platforms.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Feb 4, 2021 16:49:06 GMT
Now we know why the disingenerous people at MT kept silent for so long on this scandalous loan. They employed Moorfields to rectify the mess they had allowed to occur without taking action for so long. Moorfields have no doubt carefully appointed a contractor who carried out work under their expensive and experienced supervison. Who did Moorfields employ on the site to supervise the works on site No 1 ? There must be an addiotnal Indemnity policy somewhere in this mess. Moorfields have sold site number 2, over 6 monhths ago, for a very small amount and withheld that information from the lenders and it now appear they have simply spent all the proceeds. If so, then let's have a full acount of what they actually spent the money on. We are entitled to have full disclosure of this infromation as it is our cash. Moorfileds have continued to mismanage site 1 (which actually has houses built on it). They would have us believe that the entire equity in the site has or will be gobbled up by Moorfields and presumably fees etc to the failed MT. There will be 6 houses on the site when completed. How could the value of all of them combined [when sold] possibly be consummed by Moorfields and / or MT without even a £1 left over? This is a shocking example of an incompetent Administration and for a complaint / investigation into Moorfields actions and / or a possible referral to other authorities. I really did not expect MT to fall into the same cesspit as Le***, Co****** or other suspect P2P platforms. Are you not missing the small point that Moorfields had to borrow money (£1m) to complete the build so they have 'spent; the money on paying down the borrowing as was explained in the update? I would assume that they expect the proceeds of the site to be gobbled up in repaying the rest of the loan, plus fees etc though this does seem somewhat pessimistic. Worth about £1.7m on the original valuation, plus lower site proceeds is £2m, costs £1.2m, fees £250k leaving a theoretical surplus of £500k. However, unknown what additional expense has been incurred since the last admin report. Fully agree that this may need to be raised with regulator of IP and maybe FCA (conflict of interest)
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 8,874
Likes: 4,753
|
Post by adrianc on Feb 4, 2021 16:54:51 GMT
Now we know why the disingenerous people at MT kept silent for so long on this scandalous loan. I presume you've read the updates on the loan on the site? Yes, they were appointed in February 2018. But you knew that from the updates. Yes, at auction after the only interest fell through. The proceeds went to pay down the build-out borrowing. But you knew that from the updates. Have you read the administrators' updates? If you don't want to look on MT's site, they're all on the CoHo filings tab for the borrower company. Three of the six are on Rightmove currently. Their total asking price is not much over £750k. The original loan doc estimated £700k build costs, completion by the end of 2017. Have you looked at Streetview? Their pics are June 2018, four months after the administration started. Three houses are pretty much weather-tight but clearly not much further, one is first-floor walls, the other two are groundwork. The lower site is a car park.
|
|
sussexlender
Member of DD Central
Cheat seeking missile
Posts: 550
Likes: 916
|
Post by sussexlender on Feb 4, 2021 22:40:06 GMT
Many thanks adrianc and ilmoro.
Answers a lot more questions than I had gathered to understand from reading the rare MT updates
Best wishes, SXLR
|
|
|
Post by Please turn me over on Mar 18, 2021 17:39:16 GMT
<polish-polish-polish> I predict that the Administrators Sixth Progress Report will say: - to date no fees have been drawn in respect of the Administration;
- anticipated distribution/dividend to the Secured creditor: uncertain; and
- the Administration has been extended until 22 February 2022.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 18, 2021 17:53:33 GMT
<polish-polish-polish> I predict that the Administrators Sixth Progress Report will say: - to date no fees have been drawn in respect of the Administration;
- anticipated distribution/dividend to the Secured creditor: uncertain; and
- the Administration has been extended until 22 February 2022.
Yeah, but will it say anything about the all the issues highlighted in the last update from MT and the administrators plans to remedy?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,788
Likes: 11,007
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 29, 2023 6:47:51 GMT
Next admin report on CH
Farce continues, houses complete only for 4 of them to get damaged by flooding so need major repairs.
|
|
iano
Member of DD Central
Posts: 139
Likes: 175
|
Post by iano on Mar 29, 2023 8:14:46 GMT
And another two year extension to 2025.
|
|
r1200gs
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,336
Likes: 1,883
|
Post by r1200gs on Mar 29, 2023 9:11:45 GMT
And another two year extension to 2025. It's now quite clear from the various administrations that they really do not want to stop until they have picked the carcass completely clean, and any excuse in the book is used to keep funds from those they rightly belong to. Some of the scraps I have had back could best be described as being grudgingly handed over, only when they have completely run out of ideas to rack up more fees. But this one is a real doozy.
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 739
Likes: 729
|
Post by eeyore on Mar 29, 2023 12:10:14 GMT
Next admin report on CH Farce continues, houses complete only for 4 of them to get damaged by flooding so need major repairs. Were the buildings insured? If not, why not? Would that be negligence by the administrators?
|
|
rocky1
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,113
Likes: 1,934
|
Post by rocky1 on Mar 29, 2023 13:55:39 GMT
i believe administrators accept no liability for anything once administration starts and do more or less anything they like for as long as they can extract costs and fees. all completely legal of course.
|
|
|
Post by pigbreeder on Mar 29, 2023 16:01:36 GMT
Where does the update come from.? I haven't seen one this year?
|
|