|
Post by loftankerman on May 24, 2018 10:20:34 GMT
Lendy have put up a video of DFL019 against the latest tranche on the available loans page.
The borrower sounds very confident about the build being completed by March 2019 and is excited about the quality of the works and the attractions of the local area.
Worth logging in and having a look.
I assume he was also confident about the the project being completed by March 2018 when it turned into DFL. It was a 12 months loan. I've seen this video a while ago, sounds very encouraging, but I'm not too hopeful for the happy ending. We're pretty much trapped in this loan, there is no chance getting out of it with 455k on SM and 2% CB offer on every new tranche. Quite. It doesn't take much effort to recall the months of confident assurances as to the anticipated timely, then delayed repayment of DFL005, that turned out instead to be a few bob plus an extension despite completion. Given the linkage between the two and the history of tall stories, I think it is a toss up between these two eventually crossing the line together, or DLF005 being milked to support the sheds and them both flailing. Unfortunately given that the word on the street seems to be that you can tell Lendy to whistle for their money, even a jointly successful commercial outcome may not bring the lenders their entitlement.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 23, 2018 19:54:16 GMT
No doubt about it Yorkshire has some truly beautiful places. I spent 12 years doing a 70 mile daily round trip commute over moorland, and through charming villages and towns. An absolute delight most of the time but a bit hairy in winter. It was like being on a touring holiday, minus the "are we nearly there yet" stuff. I'd like to point out however that the loan is to fund a field of sheds, and the security is not Yorkshire itself whatever the nostalgic impressions the video may leave one with. it's an upmarket lodge holiday park. Why call it a field full of sheds? I love holidaying in places like this rather than hotels. Not yet it isn't!
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 23, 2018 18:39:19 GMT
No doubt about it Yorkshire has some truly beautiful places. I spent 12 years doing a 70 mile daily round trip commute over moorland, and through charming villages and towns. An absolute delight most of the time but a bit hairy in winter. It was like being on a touring holiday, minus the "are we nearly there yet" stuff. I'd like to point out however that the loan is to fund a field of sheds, and the security is not Yorkshire itself whatever the nostalgic impressions the video may leave one with.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 23, 2018 12:06:25 GMT
I imagine that Lendy have a gun to their heads and the repayment of a linked West Country loan is being held to ransome.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 20, 2018 10:09:03 GMT
LY is in a terrible terrible terrible mess and not even their lack of caring, their spin and their obfuscation can disguise that. Any new investor looking at this mess will not invest and all us existing investors are trying to get out with at least some of our money. I don’t think any business can be as “unlucky” as Lendy, the business model was broken from the start and both Lendy and a lot of borrowers have taken full advantage. I was thinking that the business model was the root cause of the problem too. There is too much reliance on dodgy valuations of securities and not the slightest interest in the provenance of borrowers. I think I'd feel my money was a bit more secure if I could find a P2P lender that only took the borrower and their advisor's close family members as security and was contractually entitled to return them in the same proportion as the capital and accrued interest were paid. Call me old fashioned if you like, but I think it might bring a tad more integrity to the P2P borrowing scene.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 20, 2018 8:12:14 GMT
they say lack of comms is mainly due to legal stuff.lendy have already had their cut out of us and the borrowers on all these loans.lendy would rather now get all these out of the way.lenders will lose capital/interest and seem to be happy that lendy got the best deal out of it.lendy need new lenders/new money desperately and quickly.they see/hope TP as a way to do this. the lendy ship is now letting in water and many earlier and new lenders will go down with it.lendy have lost nothing and will have jumped into the life boats and sailed off into the sunset. Ah yes! MTS Oceanos the French-built and Greek-owned cruise ship that sank in 1991 due to uncontrolled flooding. Her captain and some of the crew were convicted of negligence for fleeing the ship without helping the passengers. In the absence of ship's officers, the evacuation was organised by some of the British entertainments team that were on board. You aren't suggesting that the cast of 'Hi de Hi' could make a better job of running Lendy are you? (Hi de Hi ... a TV comedy series from the 1980s set at a fictional Maplin's holiday camp in 1959)
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 17, 2018 22:38:23 GMT
It is my impression that all these chartered institutes started off as predominantly protectionist trade bodies that have become more formalised and glorified over time. They are now businesses in themselves. To that end it seems unlikely to me that they will be more protective of members’ clients than the members themselves. I suspect that the younger end of the Lendy investor spectrum might live to see the amusingly named Federation of Master Builders become a chartered institute, as its aims are pretty much the same as others that made the grade. Maybe bricklayers familiar with secret handshakes can help expedite the transition.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 16, 2018 13:42:09 GMT
If it wasn't so tragic it would be hilarious. The email tone almost makes out as if RICS and Lendy are somehow equals, yet Lendy is a merely a drop in the water. It's a bit like a guy who was forced to knock of £25,000 on his house sale saying that the entire valuations industry needs to look at themselves, for he cannot possibly be wrong. It is fact that the really poor recovery rates on some loans indicate there is something clearly wrong, but IMO the fault lies with the P2P platforms keen to finalise deals. Not just here but on other platforms some of the valuations have turned out to be surprisingly high, but also quite convieniently allowing for a 70% LTV loan to be made. It has always puzzled me that so many wanting to borrow on P2P, ( Lendy and elsewhere ) always wants an amount that is 70% of some asset they can offer as security. What's the chance of that? I have assumed that maybe they need less and think they are playing safe by giving themselves a hefty contingency. It also figures that if anyone is planning to grab the cash and dump a relatively worthless security on the lender, there's no point in doing things by halves.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 16, 2018 11:18:48 GMT
... Ly here’s a suggestion, why not get the guy who did the 2nd valuation to do the 1st valuation?... lol Thanks for the laugh. Reminds me of a great quote. " Not Plan B again!! Why don't we just go with plan B in the first place?"
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 14, 2018 22:59:48 GMT
I doubt they can really turn it round because they have made such a solid job of demonstrating they don't have a fight in them. Any big borrower right now is getting the message that they'd be an idiot not to try and haggle the bill down, or just do nothing. It's more like Lendy are providing a free show and inviting donations if customers liked it. I can't imagine Lendy having the funds not to be overwhelmed by this. Maybe they'll come up with a loan of their own, payable to them to fund the fight to get our money back. I don’t think Lendy borrowers have the luxury of haggling. If they did they would go to the bank In the cases of DFL004 and DFL005 Lendy have had rings run round them. The borrowers have declined or been unable to meet their obligations and have instead endeavoured to re-negotiate their positions and reduce the amounts to be paid. That is haggling. There's nothing luxurious about it once you have got the mug's money spent.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 14, 2018 19:10:13 GMT
I don’t think we should berate people who have overstretched themselves. Investor confidence is the main problem LY has. Confidence was already very low but the Wolverhampton last minute default has pushed it to rock bottom. LY is a small(ish) company acting like a big company. What do I mean by that? well, in my experience small companies truly care about their customers whereas big companies don’t care but spend all their time saying they do care. All the spin and weasel language, newsletters, podcasts, phone calls, marketing hype and razzamatazz, but, for me, none of it seems sincere. LY can turn this around but time is against them. Go back to basics, clean up the loan book, be honest, don’t procrastinate, take the tough decisions that might need to be taken. I think we all want and need LY to be successful. I doubt they can really turn it round because they have made such a solid job of demonstrating they don't have a fight in them. Any big borrower right now is getting the message that they'd be an idiot not to try and haggle the bill down, or just do nothing. It's more like Lendy are providing a free show and inviting donations if customers liked it. I can't imagine Lendy having the funds not to be overwhelmed by this. Maybe they'll come up with a loan of their own, payable to them to fund the fight to get our money back.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 13, 2018 19:46:50 GMT
Evidence would be needed that such is likely to be occurring with laws being broken. The police or intelligence services would presumably have an interest. Can't see it helping investors get their money back though. I don't think evidence is needed to demonstrate laws being broken as such. Demonstrating that a mechanism exists for Con Man A to magic away funds to provide a fine lifestyle, must equally demonstrate that should he have wished he could have diverted it to other activities. As a resident of Manchester, where we have been a successful terrorist target more than once, I'd be happier thinking that something was being done to prevent terrorism, rather than getting someone's money back. No one could have missed being told their capital might be at risk. It might have been better understood if they had been told 'Idiots will probably give your money to con men.' Nonetheless I think it most likely that Lendy getting serious words from the security services might buck their ideas up a bit more than irate comments here.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 13, 2018 16:15:52 GMT
Do you have someone in mind to ask "the serious questions through the right channels"? I am not sure there is anyone out there with the will and the resources. Small investors must either not invest and/or write off all or part of investments already made. Large investors might take legal advice and act accordingly. In the short term I don't think Lendy's behaviours will change. Just to clarify.. You don't think there is anyone out there with the will and resources to look into published processes which have the potential for providing a useful means of funding for terrorism?
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 13, 2018 14:54:47 GMT
Which is probably why they updated their T&Cs to state that it’s not LY’s responsibility to monitor DFLs. May I ask, whose responsibility it is then? Seems like they’ve just left it to the borrowers. So when the borrower makes an application for a drawdown based on works completed who is the IMS employed by, surely engaged by the lender - i.e Lendy - or are they just giving the funds without actually checking the works have been completed, or even worse front end funding.... Are Lendy saying they aren't responsible for the progress of the development? They appear to claim they have no responsibility for monitoring development or even checking that the funds supplied are used for the stated purpose that they were lent. It doesn't take much imagination to conclude that latter clause was slipped in to facilitate the field of sheds. However it opens a can of worms, for all we know we could be funding crime or global terrorism. If borrowers are able to make money disappear with nothing to show for it, then serious questions need to be asked through the right channels, not shrugged off.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 12, 2018 10:15:28 GMT
This is going to be a very unpopular post, but there are far too many posters here who practice an 'expect losses, but diversify' so will throw money at ANY loan, no matter how dodgy it looks. I'm sorry but this is just enabling what looks to me like a calculated fraud attempt (or sale by pawn if you want to be charitable) - people need to have a long hard look at this, because I think there is an ethical issue as well as well as a straighforward financial issue. It's not JUST about expecting losses, or loans to go bad - some loans should not be funded - they don't pass the smell tests. I'd like to think that people have a sense of ethics and a sense of responsibility not to throw money at this sort of thing, but sadly it appears far too many people act as enablers. The signs were all there in the first couple of pages! Let's face it, that doesn't just describe what might be the attitude of some posters but Lendy themselves. Setting out your market stall geared to selling the notion of investing in pipe dreams to optimists has to appeal to the unscrupulous above all.
|
|