|
Post by loftankerman on May 12, 2018 8:14:24 GMT
It seems to me (on my very limited reading of this loan), that it was/is potentially fraudulent. There's a coincidence... I had just returned to looking at this forum and found your post after having a browse of the Serious Fraud Office dedicated web site.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 6, 2018 11:01:09 GMT
"You say many have moved on or are locked in but looking at amounts for sale on secondary market it looks like the substantial majority are holding on and staying calm."I read this before looking at the poster. I did however guess the poster. Pure delusion if you think or believe the above. PS my post is handy for those doing DD on Lendy. Well, I wouldn't want my position to be seen as an endorsement of Lendy, far from it. I am holding on because there is no better option and I am staying calm because I didn't bet the farm on it, or anything else.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 5, 2018 9:29:10 GMT
It looks like Lendy pulled the plug on funding for this in November 2017 with further advances coming from another lender (don't know if I can name) and they also now have an outstanding charge against the SPV. To be honest, I find this a little comforting. About that time I found some promotional blurb about the development. As shown in photos here, a lot of it had a far from a finished look about it, and having done some small scale development myself over the past few years, I couldn't help but think that the un-enticing 'show apartment' looked like it hadn't had more than a few quid spent on it. More concerning was the manner in which it was intended to let the apartments. It all sounded as though on completion it was going to be enormous but far less than desirable for anyone looking for other than a short stay. I couldn't really imagine an investor wanting to turn up and put enough money in to repay the loan, but was still hoping that the fairy tale repayment ending being forecast would happen. At least if the developer is now being funded and is in with a chance of finishing, it probably has more of a chance of coming good. I can't imagine what it might ultimately be worth though.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 3, 2018 7:38:07 GMT
Looking at the sm, it looks like you'll stay unsuccessful at selling! A large repayment or 2 may keep the lights on a little more but most money seems to leave the platform immediately - though Lendy's new found TP authors would of course tell us different. If Lendy go, and given Collateral, then the whole P2P arena might see panic. You do realise Lendy made 3 million profit last year? Don't misunderstand me, I have no wish at all to see Lendy fail, or even struggle. However, given the state of the loan book and suggested difficulty in filling loans, one has to wonder how much of that £3M could be allocated to, and how far it would go, in meeting the costs of recovering all or much of the outstanding potential losses. I fear that some borrowers may be feeling more comfortable being pursued by Lendy than they would a massively resourced bank.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 1, 2018 13:34:09 GMT
That's not healthy at all and suggests you're overexposed. I suggest cutting back to levels you're comfortable with. If only it were that simple. Yes, I am overstretched. Was comfortable with it at a point in time. I’m currently very uncomfortable and trying, unsuccessfully, to reduce my exposure. I understand where you are coming from. The cutting back proposition reminds me of an old joke. A motorist stops and asks a pedestrian for directions to some local landmark. The pedestrian prefaces his reply with "Well. If I were you, I wouldn't start from here." I was in a similar situation in my fifties watching a worst case scenario unfold with a very sizeable portion of my savings disappearing with Equitable Life. On the up-side it drove me into years of greater activity in a longer working life than I had anticipated were awaiting me in retirement, at the age of around 60. Additionally the greater cynicism the experience encouraged meant that my remaining funds weren't at risk in the hands of financial institutions when the banking crisis hit. Thankfully my confidence never recovered even when my finances did. I sensed a change in SS/Lendy after making a final purchase in March 2017. From then on I steadily disposed of almost everything Lendy when there was a near zero length queue of it on the SM. Had I not done I would now have nine Non Performing, five Claims Underway, four Interest Accruing and one IOA. I have a fairly modest, inexpensive, stress free lifestyle and I am content with it. I must have Hobbit DNA in there somewhere. I don't feel a great need to totally maximise my possible income. I worked out a moderate amount that if totally lost on P2P, would affect the size of my estate but within quite reasonable bounds, not my life. That moderate amount apart from several K on DFL004/005 is beavering away for me, well away from Lendy.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on May 1, 2018 7:55:54 GMT
This cup is cracked. Will you replace it please?
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 29, 2018 13:46:11 GMT
I've not had chance to read the media report that is being discussed here, but I think its worth noting that most accomodation classified as "student accomodation" can be let on a per room per night basis during the university vacations. Of course there may be specific clauses in the T&C's of this particular development which prevents this, but that would devalue the units as an investment property. I've stayed several times at the University of Kent via several major reputable booking agencies (walking distance to Canterbury centre) during the vacations - the standard of the accomodation is a world a way from my hall of residence of c. 40 years ago (Bloomsbury, Central London), which at the time was the most expensive in the country. What you say is not uncommon, but the readers' comments following the article suggest that students are concerned for their security and safety because the transient non students have unrestricted access to the student accommodation seemingly at all times. It is worth reading the report and the comments. If it is all fake news it has been very well constructed.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 29, 2018 11:22:34 GMT
/mod hat on The link IDs the borrower / assets thus falls foul of the open forum rules. I moved the post to DDC, so anyone with access can read it there .. if you, maybe in2tense will PM it to you if you ask nicely. Or you could Google the local area and the asset and probably arrive at the article, although all you really need to know if that the student flats seem to be being let as overnight stay rooms, in violation of their planning consents. Well, it's a bit juicier than that, as the place is allegedly being used as a base for drug dealing and prostitution while blatantly in breach of its planning permission and being advertised and reviewed on B*****gs.com. It brings a broader view to the concept of innovative finance. The general content of the local newspaper made a great read too.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 29, 2018 9:16:32 GMT
Some weeks ago I had a comment magically disappear. I asked if the new T&C that stated Lendy had no need to monitor loans or confirm that they were being used for the stated purpose of the loan, meant that our money could be used for criminality or worse and we'd never know unless it was confiscated as the proceeds of crime.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 29, 2018 9:03:51 GMT
I got caught up in reading the article and when I returned to the forum page the link had gone. I had bookmarked the article in any case. I have just been further confused by the fact that is has now returned, possibly temporarily. I imagine that the removal might have been prompted by some of the extensive reader comments which name names. It is possibly thought that comments might have been defamatory and were best avoided.
EDIT: Yep! Temporarily. It has gone again and interesting as it was, deletion was probably the safest call.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 28, 2018 7:37:03 GMT
Well I suppose some could say it constituted a public admission of and apology for incompetence. Others might think that the ever changing T&C now tend to absolve them of any responsibility for doing anything other than warning lenders of risks involved, such as platform incompetence. In that sense the update wouldn't demonstrate anything shambolic, just a job well done. Looks like another five star review from me. Since the banking crisis I've had the feeling that money not measured in trillions is below the noise level and in the world of finance this piffling loan doesn't warrant too much worrying about.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 27, 2018 16:31:40 GMT
"The ninth and final tranche of development funding was added to the platform this week. The borrower has been pursuing several repayment options, however these negotiations are not expected to be concluded before the loan matures in July 2018 and we have therefore agreed to extend the loan by two months, through to September 2018. The borrower expects to be in a position to fully repay the loan on or before the extended loan maturity date, through either the sale or refinance of the scheme. We have had sight of two of the repayment offers and are satisfied that the total loan funding will be less than 40% of the Gross Development Value of the scheme at the time that full repayment is achieved. The borrower has also advised that construction work on site is starting to focus on the interior as the studio apartments take shape." Well, that sounds terrifyingly familiar with its ultra positive vibes being so reminiscent of DFLs 004 and 005.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 26, 2018 18:48:01 GMT
Lendy.
Instead of telling us about an irrelevant event e.g. the May local election, which cannot have any effect on existing planning permissions, have you bothered to actually go and look at the planning file? You can just turn up and ask to see it.
If you do, you will be able to check the real positon against that which you are receiving from this Borrower and his solicitor (who of course is only acting on his clients instructions).
Go and see the file at the planning department at Hastings. Whilst I totally applaud your sentiment, I think there is one aspect to it that might deter some people from following such advice. Not accepting professional advice provided through formal channels and undertaking one's own detective work instead, might drive a coach and horses through any plausible deniability their company might in future wish to have.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 26, 2018 16:20:33 GMT
On the plus side the fact that Lendy have asked for some TrustPilot reviews to be removed indicates that they are rattled by the negative reviews, and hopefully will take note of the ones they can't get removed. I doubt it. It is less effort to get some stooges to counter them with a few five star "Brilliant I think everyone should put all their money here." reviews.
|
|
|
Post by loftankerman on Apr 26, 2018 11:31:01 GMT
For the loans which have already resulted in a loss to lenders (at least from our perspective - the asset has been sold, so we no longer have any security), Lendy could expedite these quite easily by using its discretion to pay out the full amount of the capital outstanding (from the provision fund, or from company profits) and transfer the right to receive an equivalent amount from the eventual claim to the provision fund (the accrued interest and bonus claims would still exist, but be subordinated to the PF's claim to recover the capital, so any further payment a welcome bonus rather than an expectation). The claims could proceed without as much of an ongoing risk of disgruntled investors picking over every detail and discussing in public details which (for the sake of the ongoing claims) should not be discussed in public. I would not be happy with Lendy paying capital outstanding out of company profits.
Company profits should be used to improve and grow the company and keep it financially healthy, not to bail out investors from investments that are high risk.
The provision fund was and is a stupid idea from the start. Perhaps it should be divided up amongst all 20,000 investors equally and dropped.
But do we all have a pressing need for the funds to buy a 2nd class postage stamp?
|
|