agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 4,225
|
Post by agent69 on Oct 26, 2021 16:02:52 GMT
In case anybody hasn't had the email, more Court documents have just been uploaded to the Moneything website. Only 226 pages to read.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Oct 26, 2021 16:03:34 GMT
In case anybody hasn't had the email, more Court documents have just been uploaded to the Moneything website. A very strange read. Makes folk talking about wet wipes seem almost gripping. Edit, somebody really should tell them they have identified a lender.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,921
Likes: 11,148
|
Post by ilmoro on Oct 26, 2021 17:11:05 GMT
In case anybody hasn't had the email, more Court documents have just been uploaded to the Moneything website. A very strange read. Makes folk talking about wet wipes seem almost gripping. Edit, somebody really should tell them they have identified a lender. I thought the point was that they hadn't, assuming we are talking about the named individual in the 2nd witness statement survey of respondents responses?
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Oct 26, 2021 17:50:05 GMT
A very strange read. Makes folk talking about wet wipes seem almost gripping. Edit, somebody really should tell them they have identified a lender. I thought the point was that they hadn't, assuming we are talking about the named individual in the 2nd witness statement survey of respondents responses? Somewhat indirect, page Pakistan's score today minus 11 times the wickets lost
|
|
|
Post by Proptechfish on Oct 26, 2021 20:26:41 GMT
In case anybody hasn't had the email, more Court documents have just been uploaded to the Moneything website. Only 226 pages to read. Page 150, 'what does this mean for lenders?' all that matters
|
|
freedyy
New Member
Posts: 3
Likes: 2
|
Post by freedyy on Oct 26, 2021 22:37:45 GMT
Outrageous shite! Sorry but this feels like a total scam regarding investors money. Why aren’t they running the books, taking payments and distributing monies? Cant it be that simple for many loans? I don’t think there will ever be any money returned now………..
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 6,596
|
Post by Mousey on Oct 27, 2021 15:35:43 GMT
Daily Cause List In the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts in Manchester
Insolvency and Companies (ChD) Before His Honour Judge Cawson QC Sitting as a Judge of the High Court
Any media representative, mice or any other member of the public wishing to witness a hearing being conducted remotely should contact BPC.Manchester@justice.gov.uk for information on how to be joined into the hearing.
Sitting in Court 41 At the Manchester Civil Justice Centre, 1 Bridge Street West, Manchester On 28 October 2021
In Public
10:30am CR-2020-MAN-001030 Moneything (Security Trustee) Limited In Administration
2 hr directions Teams
|
|
boundah
Member of DD Central
Posts: 367
Likes: 430
|
Post by boundah on Oct 27, 2021 15:52:54 GMT
Outrageous shite! Sorry but this feels like a total scam regarding investors money. Why aren’t they running the books, taking payments and distributing monies? Cant it be that simple for many loans? I don’t think there will ever be any money returned now……….. If it were that simple MT wouldn’t have gone belly-up, the administrators wouldn’t have been called in and we wouldn’t be using this forum to shout about how unfair it all is.
|
|
11025
Member of DD Central
Posts: 719
Likes: 833
|
Post by 11025 on Oct 28, 2021 8:00:11 GMT
So basically we have had a bunch of chancers and cowboys playing loose and fast with our money , making sure they get a nice little earner ,
then managing to get the cover for themselves afforded by Administration and all under the watchful eye of the FCA using the worthless badge of FCA authorisation by the Financial Conduct Authority (No. 703549)
What a great new initiative this was !
Sounds like it had been really well thought out and planned , by the chancers that is , not the FCA or the powers that be.
Fortunately I had a little left in MT but my thoughts go out to those that have substantial amounts remaining.
|
|
Mousey
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 6,596
|
Post by Mousey on Oct 29, 2021 11:08:03 GMT
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,656
Likes: 4,225
|
Post by agent69 on Oct 29, 2021 12:48:39 GMT
In the Collateral board I asked a question regarding what the end game was (and didn't get a particularly warm response). I feel compelled to ask the same question here.
Having read through this thread, the lender emails in the court bundle (starting about page 112) and the skeleton argument (including the letter from the person who appears to be promoting the legal challenge) I've seen lots of emotion, but little by way of reasoned analysis of why there shouldn't be a change to the way the administrator is reimbursed. So far I've seen a few suggestions on how things could progress that I would class as fanciful (at best), including:
- lenders starting their own company to run the administration ....... not going to happen
- the FCA taking over, running and funding the administration ......... not going to happen
- the appearance of a white knight galloping over the horizon, who will complete the administration for significantly less than the incumbent ........ not going to happen
The administrator is being paid on a recorded hours basis, and if the current reimbusement models doesn't cover his costs then he will obviously pull out. So in the short term there appears to be only 2 options:
- let the administrator dip into the lenders pot to top up their fees, or
- let the encumbent walk, and see what happens
I don't know what follows on from option 2, but I can't believe that it would end up better than option 1. What reputable administrator (I wonder what Gordon is doing these days) is going to take on the work on effectively a % basis when the encumbent couldn't make it pay?
So people can jump up and down and stamp their feet, they can shout and scream and have a hissy fit, but that's not going to change anything. Ultimately the administrator is always going to get paid before investors, otherwise there will be no administrator.
|
|
eeyore
Member of DD Central
Posts: 750
Likes: 742
|
Post by eeyore on Oct 29, 2021 14:35:52 GMT
.......
So people can jump up and down and stamp their feet, they can shout and scream and have a hissy fit, but that's not going to change anything. Ultimately the administrator is always going to get paid before investors, otherwise there will be no administrator.
Unfortunately, any intervention which fails does change something - it results in higher costs from the administrator and a reduced return for lenders. Since the whole team of administrators involved in this court appearance will return in February - I wonder how much the barrister's aborted appearance yesterday will cost? - so already there are additional costs. Meanwhile, will the process of recovery slow down whilst the administrators await the judge's decision? Another six weeks of delay? [Update: Sorry, I misread Mousey's report - it's now more like 12 weeks!] Unless, of course, someone can pull a rabbit from a hat... I wish them every success, but I fear that any return I might get has already diminished. PS: The Financial Times is read by those with real influence - there was an article a month or so ago which was critical of the scope of plans for the proposed regulator for insolvency practice. So maybe there is hope but don't hold your breath!
|
|
shw
Posts: 51
Likes: 90
|
Post by shw on Oct 29, 2021 16:43:12 GMT
Without Prejudice. Mousy assuming you are on David's side V Goliath why did you omit to say clearly. 1.extended time to respond to Application probably with a strong witness statement ? 2.ability given to contact 2494 Lenders who make up the loanbook thro MT platform ? 3.NO LEGAL support despite the Applicant being fully represented,probably to cost Lenders from loan realisations ? That is the outcome for Lenders at this point in time.
|
|
corto
Member of DD Central
one-syllabistic
Posts: 851
Likes: 356
|
Post by corto on Oct 29, 2021 20:58:27 GMT
The granting of the six weeks means that the judge has heard the lenders. This is genuinely good. There were some good arguments in the lenders' documents to push now. The administrators or whoever would not run away if their fees would get reduced somewhat.
|
|
shw
Posts: 51
Likes: 90
|
Post by shw on Oct 30, 2021 4:58:54 GMT
Agents The Lender realisations pot,whatever that might be in value,a forecast by loan having completed a risk analysis might help determine likely outcome by loan. Hope,some hope,no hope. That is what Moorfields have probably done already to see how big the honey pot could be. If it were your cash in the pot would you want just anyone dipping in with a clock hour record and paying themselves. If the intermediary were neutral ie.not appointed by Moorfields or Lenders you might trust that service provider. Then agreement by loan might be a fees cap %,who does the work,£15 an hour clerk to chase borrowers or up to Moorfields partner rates £500+ an hour. Why would you just let an Administrator take what they want until as you quite rightly say " sorry lenders we got some cash back from the shyster who borrowed your money after being matched up by MT platform,we got 25% of your cash back but we have now spent it in fees so you have 5% back or even ZERO like some loans. Where is that boat the borrower convinced MT was moored up and a good investment for Lenders. Oh sorry it sailed off into dreamland or the Borrower did not own it or it never existed. Lenders need to trust who is dipping into the pot of depleted realisations.MRAG Lenders don't that is why we got together in a matter of days. Glad you trust Administrators or do you work for one !
|
|