rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Nov 27, 2018 14:32:32 GMT
Well, I've read it a few times now and slept on it (metaphorically!) - but I find nothing of significance which gives me any solace. I always believed that the FCA would be hanging us out to dry when they appointed BDO - but I'd previously dared to hold out a little hope I would be wrong and it would not be quite as bad as I feared. Regrettably, the reality of the interim report seems actually worse than even my most pessimistic previous assessment. From my perspective we are now well and truly in the (economic) killing field (with no cover in sight) and with the FCA licensed assassins BDO showing they have already zeroed their weapons to bring down accurate and sustained fire and thereby create maximum (economic) casualties amongst us. I see no sign whatsoever (even a pretence) that they are seriously working for investors/creditors benefit - in fact the report looks akin to a long detailed invoice to me (probably the first of many) 'for services not yet rendered' - and guess who's paying? I saw (I think it was bobo?) suggesting we'll perhaps get back 70% (ish)? At this juncture that would look a very good outcome to me. Furthermore, I note a few serial optimists are now showing above the ramparts - I can only hope that you are correct and I am wrong - as ever, time will tell.
I've written down to a 50% recovery - and I was 90% in bling and cash (and that might still be a tad optimistic). Sadly, I fear you may well not be too far off the final outcome - just have to wait and see now (and hope).
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Nov 27, 2018 14:36:56 GMT
I look at the fees being levied by BDO to date Yes, it's a big number, if viewed as £xxx,xxx. View it as a %age of the loan book, and it's currently a snidge over 2%, compared to the 17.5% of the loan book which BDO already have under their control. It's also a lower hourly rate than was originally quoted. I would rather look at the overall final return than the individual components that form it. Right now, we have absolutely no way of knowing what that will be. BUT... Do I have a LOT more confidence in BDO producing a better return than if Refresh had been retained? Yes. Have a very large part of the costs incurred to date been SOLELY due to Refresh's incompetence and/or conspiracy with Collateral's ex-management? Yes. Did Refresh's incompetence and/or conspiracy markedly significantly reduce our changes of a good return, compared to if it had gone straight to BDO (or similar)? Yes. Would a different competent administrator produce a markedly better return? Probably not. None of us know what has or has not been achieved to date, except what's in the report. All this report says is that they're still underway - we don't know which loans are repaid (although we may be able to take an educated guess from charges and other platforms). The creditor's committee may (or may not) get an update on progress to date on the loans that are still outstanding, as well as the IT work. They may (or may not) be able to share that information with us. Their last meeting saw, we're told by Monetus , a line-by-line breakdown of progress on the loanbook, but behind an NDA. The next meeting is a fortnight tomorrow - and I doubt this one will be different in terms of the either information given or whether it can be disseminated. As far as I'm concerned, there is no other game in town. BDO, with the creditor committee representing our interests, are the people who have the job of turning this ongoing mess into an actual return and closure for us. That is not going to change. So... should we be monday-morning-quarterbacks carping emptily from the sofa, or be critically trusting allies? I know which I think is the more positive way to proceed, both in terms of my ongoing blood pressure and my eventual wallet. There is indeed no other game in town and I admire your optimism and positivity - regrettably, I don't share it. As I said previously, time will tell.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,595
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 27, 2018 14:39:40 GMT
There is indeed no other game in town and I admire your optimism and positivity - regrettably, I don't share it. As I said previously, time will tell. "Optimism and positivity"? No, I don't hold out much hope for a particularly high return. But where will I lay the blame for that? At COL and RR. Because it is COL who wrote the loans on iffy security, sold them to us with iffy information, and then it was RR who allowed (through complicity or incompetence) COL's management to run away with the contents of the till AND the paperwork.
|
|
|
Post by mrclondon on Nov 27, 2018 14:40:51 GMT
The borrowers go under because of the lack of subsequent tranche funding, or the value of a unfinished developments plummeting because of delays in obtaining alternative funding. So the borrowers go into administration. Why couldn't the borrowers refinance elsewhere? The problem is if you are already borrowing from a lender of last resort (i.e. p2p in general, but COL specifically amongst p2p) then there is for many borrowers nowhere left to turn. Interestingly the progress report does hint (on pg 4, 3rd para from the bottom) that other p2p lenders are the main hope for refinance.
The Bolton loan (offshore borrower, background of some connected individuals 'interesting') there is only one obvious source of refinance - Lendy, but I'm not sure they would really want to take on another project of this ilk at this point.
I'm expecting the Scottish holiday park project will refinance in full, and probably M. St, Blackpool but the rest I think will struggle to find a willing lender.
|
|
poppyland
Member of DD Central
Posts: 237
Likes: 243
|
Post by poppyland on Nov 27, 2018 14:40:59 GMT
The FCA will get "sorted". Many on here are motivated & relentless and won't ever give up until The FCA admits their obvious culpability, and compensates. The only thing that really urinates me off is that the pathetic fatalists who go supine and do nothing will also benefit. Ozboy, I want to fight for justice in all of this, but I'm not really sure how. Like one of the other posters on here, I never sent back the FCA Collateral questionairre, mainly because it ended up asking me for documentation to back up what I has said about how much I was owed etc. I didn't like the idea of them asking me for proof that surely they already possess, and it made me suspect that they had ulterior motives. But I am going to attach any email confirmations of deposits that I can find, and send back the questionnaire today. Perhaps it's a good thing to do this - hard to know really. Did everyone else here send in their questionnaires?
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Nov 27, 2018 14:43:29 GMT
There is indeed no other game in town and I admire your optimism and positivity - regrettably, I don't share it. As I said previously, time will tell. "Optimism and positivity"? No, I don't hold out much hope for a particularly high return. But where will I lay the blame for that? At COL and RR. Because it is COL who wrote the loans on iffy security, sold them to us with iffy information, and then it was RR who allowed (through complicity or incompetence) COL's management to run away with the contents of the till AND the paperwork. Out of interest adrianc what do you believe is likely to be the final ball-park figure (as an average %) that will eventually be returned to lenders - given what we know to date (which admittedly is not a lot)?
|
|
elliotn
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,064
Likes: 2,681
|
Post by elliotn on Nov 27, 2018 14:44:02 GMT
Since febuary now that some of the dust has settled, we are getting a clearer picture of what really went on. In my opinion the FCA in their heavy handed handling of the situation destroyed a platform that was making me money with no signs of distress. I as an unsophisticated invester allways checked tthe regisrer to see if they were okay which they WERE! The FCA were set up to protect the invester , but there kneejerk reaction let everyone down ,and there disgraceful questionnaire filled with lots of questions to trip you up. I DID NOT FILL IN . In the past i have on occasion phoned the FCA and have asked for the person dealing with PtoP issues, they did not have one. I complained about a certain other PtoP platform along with many others on this forum but they are still tradinding! which i find incredible I HOLD THE FCA WHOLLY TO BLAME FOR THIS DEBACLE and feel they should cover all losses plus compensation I'm not convinced FCA are WHOLLY TO BLAME FOR THIS DEBACLE. They may be guilty of an over user- friendly register that allowed the registered to make certain edits of general data. They certainly look under resourced by the government to police the 1000s of companies that might make such edits. However, I think you should allow for apportioning some of the blame to the CUK directors. It may later be confirmed (some in a court of law) that they may have: - illegally run a regulated business - doctored public registers to deceive the public - continued to solicit funds via promotions whilst updating the T&Cs to leave investors as unsecured creditors - forced an administration without first informing the regulator (perhaps to contrive an outcome more desirable for themselves) - ensured the offices were vacated and all data left unrecovered to thwart the administration's progress - possibly misallocated client funds to developments they had not been drawdown in to - possibly used client monies for business purposes - may have held some borrower valuables at their homes instead of security boxes I'm not sure the FCA can be held WHOLLY TO BLAME for all of the above actions (if proven to be true); are you?
|
|
GeorgeT
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,321
Likes: 1,575
|
Post by GeorgeT on Nov 27, 2018 14:54:15 GMT
There is indeed no other game in town and I admire your optimism and positivity - regrettably, I don't share it. As I said previously, time will tell. "Optimism and positivity"? No, I don't hold out much hope for a particularly high return. But where will I lay the blame for that? At COL and RR. Because it is COL who wrote the loans on iffy security, sold them to us with iffy information, and then it was RR who allowed (through complicity or incompetence) COL's management to run away with the contents of the till AND the paperwork. You sound a bit like a government which has been in power for 10 years but is still blaming the previous government for any problems that arise! BDO was appointed in April I think. It is of course now late November. They have had a good 7 months on the job and they haven't even got the data in order yet let alone,seemingly, made any other meaningful progress. £350k in fees for that in the last 6 months though - nice work if you can get it.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 11,206
Likes: 11,396
|
Post by ilmoro on Nov 27, 2018 14:55:27 GMT
Unfortunately only people controlling 5% or more of the loan book can even question the fees and to actually make an official complaint to the court you need 10% under your wing. So that means that fatcats, hedge fund bosses and syndicate managers are holding all the aces here and can steer the administrators actions in their direction while the man and woman in the street type of investor has almost zero say in the goings on. Might need a third read on that.
Last couple of pages set out the law regarding challenges
an unsecured creditor with the concurrence of at least 5% in value of the unsecured creditors (including the creditor in question);
(b) an unsecured creditor with either— (i) the concurrence of at least 10% in value of the unsecured creditors (including that creditor), or (ii) the permission of the court,
ie you can seek additional info/challenge it if you can secure a collective 5%/10% of unsecured creditors.
I wouldnt currently want to add to the bill.
|
|
IFISAcava
Member of DD Central
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 3,008
|
Post by IFISAcava on Nov 27, 2018 14:57:03 GMT
"Optimism and positivity"? No, I don't hold out much hope for a particularly high return. But where will I lay the blame for that? At COL and RR. Because it is COL who wrote the loans on iffy security, sold them to us with iffy information, and then it was RR who allowed (through complicity or incompetence) COL's management to run away with the contents of the till AND the paperwork. You sound a bit like a government which has been in power for 10 years but is still blaming the previous government for any problems that arise!BDO was appointed in April I think. It is of course now late November. They have had a good 7 months on the job and they haven't even got the data in order yet let alone,seemingly, made any other meaningful progress. £350k in fees for that in the last 6 months though - nice work if you can get it. You mean: every government, ever?
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,595
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 27, 2018 14:59:47 GMT
Out of interest adrianc what do you believe is likely to be the final ball-park figure (as an average %) that will eventually be returned to lenders - given what we know to date (which admittedly is not a lot)? I don't have the first scooby, largely because of that caveat, but also because I simply wouldn't like to guess any details of the loans I was in - even if that's relevant. Force me to polish my crystal ball...? (My father had a glass eye, y'know...)If the lack of investor-loan mapping means we're lumped in with other unsecured creditors, then it will be far, FAR lower than otherwise. In that case, then I'll be pleasantly surprised by anything much over 30%. Otherwise, it's entirely dependent on what loans you're in, how nicely the borrowers play, and what value the security actually has. Ask me an easy one, like how Lendy'll pan out.
|
|
|
Post by Badly Drawn Stickman on Nov 27, 2018 15:03:08 GMT
Since febuary now that some of the dust has settled, we are getting a clearer picture of what really went on. In my opinion the FCA in their heavy handed handling of the situation destroyed a platform that was making me money with no signs of distress. I as an unsophisticated invester allways checked tthe regisrer to see if they were okay which they WERE! The FCA were set up to protect the invester , but there kneejerk reaction let everyone down ,and there disgraceful questionnaire filled with lots of questions to trip you up. I DID NOT FILL IN . In the past i have on occasion phoned the FCA and have asked for the person dealing with PtoP issues, they did not have one. I complained about a certain other PtoP platform along with many others on this forum but they are still tradinding! which i find incredible I HOLD THE FCA WHOLLY TO BLAME FOR THIS DEBACLE and feel they should cover all losses plus compensation I'm not convinced FCA are WHOLLY TO BLAME FOR THIS DEBACLE. They are guilty of a potentially over user- friendly register that allowed the registered to make certain edits of general data. They look under resourced by the government to police the 1000s of companies that might make such edits. However, I think you should allow for apportioning some of the blame to the CUK directors. It may later be confirmed (some in a court of law) that they may have: - illegally run a regulated business - doctored public registers to deceive the public - continued to solicit funds via promotions whilst updating the T&Cs to leave investors as unsecured creditors - forced an administration despite longing discussions with FCA - ensured the offices were vacated and all data left unrecovered to thwart the administration's progress - possibly misallocated client funds to developments they had not been drawdown in to - possibly used client monies for business purposes - may have held some borrower valuables at their homes instead of security boxes I'm not sure the FCA can be held WHOLLY TO BLAME for all of the above actions if proven to be true, are you? There would seem to be little doubt that most of your list is correct and could probably be added to. However, there is clearly an opinion based on recent events which hint that the FCA can be held responsible and consequently make recompense for losses. I am certainly shallow enough ethically to buy into that position, not so sure I am yet ready to put into all capital letters however.
|
|
rxdav
Member of DD Central
Posts: 354
Likes: 349
|
Post by rxdav on Nov 27, 2018 15:05:13 GMT
Out of interest adrianc what do you believe is likely to be the final ball-park figure (as an average %) that will eventually be returned to lenders - given what we know to date (which admittedly is not a lot)? I don't have the first scooby, largely because of that caveat, but also because I simply wouldn't like to guess any details of the loans I was in - even if that's relevant. Force me to polish my crystal ball...? (My father had a glass eye, y'know...)If the lack of investor-loan mapping means we're lumped in with other unsecured creditors, then it will be far, FAR lower than otherwise. In that case, then I'll be pleasantly surprised by anything much over 30%. Otherwise, it's entirely dependent on what loans you're in, how nicely the borrowers play, and what value the security actually has. Ask me an easy one, like how Lendy'll pan out. Oh, please sir, I know the answer to that one - It won't!!
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,692
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Nov 27, 2018 15:08:04 GMT
The FCA will get "sorted". Many on here are motivated & relentless and won't ever give up until The FCA admits their obvious culpability, and compensates. The only thing that really urinates me off is that the pathetic fatalists who go supine and do nothing will also benefit. Ozboy, I want to fight for justice in all of this, but I'm not really sure how. Like one of the other posters on here, I never sent back the FCA Collateral questionairre, mainly because it ended up asking me for documentation to back up what I has said about how much I was owed etc. I didn't like the idea of them asking me for proof that surely they already possess, and it made me suspect that they had ulterior motives. But I am going to attach any email confirmations of deposits that I can find, and send back the questionnaire today. Perhaps it's a good thing to do this - hard to know really. Did everyone else here send in their questionnaires?
I think sending in these questionnaires is one perhaps useful thing we can do. I think the really important questions are 11-14. Personally, I disregarded what I saw as pointless questions or gave glib answers, and where they asked for my bank details I've advised that if they wish to send me a refund then I'll gladly provide them as I can't imagine why they need them otherwise. I also didn't provide any supporting evidence, as why would I need to when the FCA can presumably cross-check with BDO should they so desire. NB: My favourite ill-formed question on there is "What did you understand about the lending process?" I mean, how dumb a question is that, what kind of response were they expecting?
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,595
Likes: 5,017
|
Post by adrianc on Nov 27, 2018 15:11:02 GMT
"Optimism and positivity"? No, I don't hold out much hope for a particularly high return. But where will I lay the blame for that? At COL and RR. Because it is COL who wrote the loans on iffy security, sold them to us with iffy information, and then it was RR who allowed (through complicity or incompetence) COL's management to run away with the contents of the till AND the paperwork. You sound a bit like a government which has been in power for 10 years but is still blaming the previous government for any problems that arise! BDO was appointed in April I think. It is of course now late November. They have had a good 7 months on the job and they haven't even got the data in order yet let alone,seemingly, made any other meaningful progress. £350k in fees for that in the last 6 months though - nice work if you can get it. I think you might be forgetting one minor detail here.
If RR had done their job, the IT would have been secured on day 1.
RR had two months to do that, remember?
How long did it take BDO to even get hold of the backups of the servers, before they could start to think about restoring them, before they could start to think about what they contained? By mid June, they had identified the IT providers, but no more. By late September, the data had been recovered and restored.
|
|