|
Post by charliebrown on May 30, 2018 15:09:05 GMT
The updates on every loan count for nothing when you read them back. The thing that makes me suspicious is that Lendy changed their T&C to state that monitoring loans is not their responsibility and they did that just before they dropped the bombshell that S****** was defaulted and only half finished. Not sure how we’re going to get out of this mess now. I queried this with Lendy who said: 'In order to monitor our development loans on our platform we instruct an Independent Monitoring Surveyor (IMS), who will certify build costs and satisfactory progress of the development, then monitors progress of a development finance project. Drawdowns from the loan will be made based on the IMS interim reports.'
Draw from that what you will. That kind of makes sense to me. So my next question is, what went wrong with S******, it was supposed to be finished but it’s not, surely the IMS must have noticed.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 30, 2018 13:04:25 GMT
There’s almost 11 million quid of investors’ money stuck in this loan that’s now not paying any interest. Lendy doesn’t appear to give a damn, as usual. How does that happen?
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 30, 2018 12:53:26 GMT
As reminder of how long people might need to sit tight on these loans, this post on the AC subforum is useful link.In late 2013 to ramp up their origination volumes, AC did a number of large (at the time) 6-month bridge loans, all paying 12%. Every single one of them defaulted. Now some of these loans have recovered, some at par, others at a haircut. Some, however, are still in recovery ... 4 years after they should have redeemed. Moreover, these were just bridge loans, not speculative development loans, and as such are far simpler. The costs racked up over that period are, unsurprisingly, rather large. As a side point, I'd also note the AC default rates for their 2013 and 2014 loan cohorts are 43% and 33%, respectively (AC's numbers are weighted by loan capitalization so these big bridges dominate their default numbers for those years). Not exactly miles away from where the SS numbers are now. It's sort of deja vu. This isn't an attempt to absolve SS of blame, since AC screwed up big time on the bridges and SS has done the same of many development loans. Both platforms' greed for a rapid rise in origination volumes resulted in them leaving investors with some fairly toxic loans. If you want, however, a positive spin on this, then AC did change their model to some degree on the back of this lesson and we can see that their default stats improved over the 2015 and 2016 loan cohorts (the 2017 cohort is not seasoned enough to be useful). That’s a really useful comparative. Lendy has obviously gone from hero to zero pretty quickly in the eyes of a lot of investors. The Lendy brand image, judging by forum comments, which I share, couldn’t get any worse. Was AC able to shake off the damage of 43% and 33% defaults rates? Did money keep flowing into new investments even after their brand took a beating? I don’t invest in AC nor follow their progress so I’m genuinely interested how they managed to stay in business following such disastrous performance.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 30, 2018 12:38:39 GMT
The updates on this loan count for nothing when you read them back. <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 20.360000000000014px; height: 3.640000000000015px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_28634777" scrolling="no" width="20.360000000000014" height="3.640000000000015"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 20.36px; height: 3.64px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 961px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_48557845" scrolling="no" width="20.360000000000014" height="3.640000000000015"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 20.36px; height: 3.64px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 122px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_97685397" scrolling="no" width="20.360000000000014" height="3.640000000000015"></iframe> <iframe style="position: absolute; width: 20.36px; height: 3.64px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 961px; top: 122px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_30767546" scrolling="no" width="20.360000000000014" height="3.640000000000015"></iframe> The updates on every loan count for nothing when you read them back. The thing that makes me suspicious is that Lendy changed their T&C to state that monitoring loans is not their responsibility and they did that just before they dropped the bombshell that S****** was defaulted and only half finished. Not sure how we’re going to get out of this mess now.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 30, 2018 12:29:14 GMT
Didn’t Lendy take additional security to backfill for the sold Freehold? I’m not disagreeing with the comment that Lendy haven’t managed it very well. On a positive note this developer does seem skilled, looking at the pictures the finishing looks great on both DFL5 and DFL19. However, it remains to be seen whether we investors can successfully exit these loans. I’m also still not a fan of the sheds, but hopefully it’s a success. If I’d have booked my holiday based on the artist’s impression then arrived and been greeted by a field full of sheds I’d be less than happy 😃
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 29, 2018 12:43:00 GMT
Why would anyone buy the 2nd charge loan at 12% when there’s plenty of the 1st charge loan available at 12%. Why would Lendy launch the 2nd charge under those circumstances, taking us for mugs, yet again. There’s not a snowball’s chance in hell they’re going to get the 1.7m they’re looking for. Lendy la la land. The answer is in latest update: "The second charge loan has been relaunched on the platform, following completion of the loan formalities. We intend to extend the loan to mature in December 2018, in line with the second charge loan, once sufficient funds have been raised to cover extension costs." In theory, this should appeal to investors who have a significant amount in DFL012 which is currently not performing - by raising 1.7m DFL012 will pay interest until December. I agree, the chances are very slim. Somebody just put 5k in DFL036 - Ly will need about 340 investors to make a similar contribution or more to invest smaller amounts, which doesn't look realistic. Hmmmm... that sounds like holding us to ransom, it’s worse than I thought.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 29, 2018 9:42:22 GMT
Why would anyone buy the 2nd charge loan at 12% when there’s plenty of the 1st charge loan available at 12%. Why would Lendy launch the 2nd charge under those circumstances, taking us for mugs, yet again. There’s not a snowball’s chance in hell they’re going to get the 1.7m they’re looking for. Lendy la la land.
|
|
|
Lendy (L) in Administration
Podcast
May 29, 2018 0:16:22 GMT
Post by charliebrown on May 29, 2018 0:16:22 GMT
It's just more smarmy Lendy BS ^^ Smarmy is the perfect word. Not sure when they’re going to wake up and smell the coffee. You’d think seeing <80k of the Liverpool 2nd charge fill would help them wake up but it doesn’t seem to have done, they’re still off in la la land. Very worrying.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 28, 2018 12:46:02 GMT
Suggest to carefully read the FAQs because you are very confused about a lot of points. The only viable strategy is to ride it out. A lot of people have invested when they are not happy with high risk. Another important thing is for you to come up with a long term investment strategy that is in keeping with your lower risk tolerance. Is there any way I can block this kind of drivel? Iainf made it quite clear it's platform inactivity he's concerned about (not the 'capital at risk' element). I'm beginning to suspect Hazellend may be on the Ly payroll. I too am tired of the suggestion that all the lies, mistakes and disasters are ok because LY told us our capital is at risk.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 28, 2018 12:30:19 GMT
The best exit strategy is don’t enter.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 28, 2018 12:07:05 GMT
As someone who makes videos professionally I lament when I see stuff like this. For the sake of spending a bit of money and producing something proper that sends out the right message they have put out something amateur that has the opposite effect. I see this all the time, even from FTSE100 companies. Let's do it ourselves in-house for free - it's fine we have no microphones because, y'know, 'Youtube'. These people are morons. They are wasting their time putting out any content when it is as badly made as this. I dont think it was the production that was this issue compare it to this interview with Stuart Law: www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=572&v=HcSlo8RbwLs . In my opinion he comes across as being confident, upfront about the facts of the business and having a set direction for the platform. I’d agree. In that interview there’s a lot of facts that are being brought into the conversation and Stuart comes across as being more in touch. Lendy, conversely, chose not to bring any facts into the conversation but instead give us the usual spiel about working tirelessly and putting things on the flight plan. The COO talks like a guy who is used to hiding behind corporate nonesense like running things up the flagpole and brainstorming. It was interesting to note that they said they now employ 25 people; what are they all doing all day? Couldn’t one of them have driven up to Wolverhampton to see that one of their biggest DFLs was in a mess. I really don’t get LY anymore, talking and behaving like world beaters but a glance at their IA/defaults tells a different story. Lost touch with reality.
|
|
|
Lendy (L) in Administration
Podcast
May 27, 2018 1:50:14 GMT
Post by charliebrown on May 27, 2018 1:50:14 GMT
Very interesting and I am certainly glad they did it but I suspect it will be the last. The S****** discussion (along with the comments about recoveries being costs) was particularly interesting to me as it seemed to show either a disproportionate level of monitoring or naivety about the borrower's ability and willingness to repay. The COO guy was IMO talking the talk with little conviction. How about a discussion about how to decide what proportion of the budget should be spent on recoveries? From their point of view, recovering our money is a cost that needs to be kept as low as possible. Its only with the current level of negative sentiment that L are finally having to raise the priority of recoveries. Here's an idea if a little off piste. Instead of recruiting that blah blah blah guy, wouldn't they have gained more confidence if they'd managed to appoint the COO from the set of larger investors? I feel sure there are people here that could do that job (assuming they'd want to) and they've just spoken to 4,000 of us. Such a person would be far more knowledgeable, motivated and respected that some guy driven mainly by his relatively large salary, bonuses and share options. They hired the blah, blah, blah guy because he was a great cultural fit. Looking at his profile he’s an IT guy, not COO material. He’s probably treating the job as a rolling contract, making as much money as he can before moving on; so again, a great cultural fit.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 27, 2018 1:30:46 GMT
No one's DD would have been able to have included Lendy failing to protect investors, refusing to provide information or letting the loan run on for nearly a full year without taking any action. That’s Lendy’s default behaviour. I’ve got 2k in this loan which I’ve written off in full. The way investors are being treated on this loan in particular is outrageous, but treating investors as fools and keeping them in the dark has always been Lendy’s style and always will be.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 24, 2018 12:02:06 GMT
LY are totally asleep at the wheel. Almost 1 year overdue and the only update they’ve posted is that they’ve seen a letter. It’s an utter disgrace.
|
|
|
Post by charliebrown on May 24, 2018 11:48:25 GMT
Outcome yet to be seen, but do you think they’ve put more effort into trying to recover these Exeter loans because (allegedly) they’d be liable to investors for any shortfall? Do you also think they’d top up any shortfall from the PF to absolve themselves of any liability. I really hope we can get a positive outcome on these Exeter loans. However, I’ll only believe it when I see it, really don’t want to attach any hope to LY updates.
|
|