Browse All Tribes or choose a Tribe below:
By signing up I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Sign Up With Facebook, Twitter, or Google
By signing up, I agree to Property Tribes Terms and Conditions
Already a PT member? Log In
Don't have an account? Sign Up
To reset your password just enter the email address you registered with and we'll send you a link to access a new password.
Just been doing some DD on this organisation, https://westwayholdings.co.uk/, with Glenn Armstrong named on the site as "consultant"; appears to be a new venture though with a old story. It's a loan called a bond on which interest is then paid at a rate which makes one wonder why they don't just go commercial. The money is used for developing HMO's apparently.
I have looked through the Rolland v Armstrong case and further details but this seems to be a new venture for Armstrong. Anyone got any details on this or update on Rolland case just out of interest? Suffice to say I am not considering this in any way shape or form.
Thanks in advance.
Hmmm!The GA vs. TR case was concluded in an out of court settlement earlier this year where Teresa received an undisclosed sum in relation to the losses she suffered when she loaned GA money and paid him for portfolio building services that were unfulfilled.However, another dissatisfied lady has come forward and GA owes her a very significant sum. She is now taking legal action against him.Ironic that Westway thinks GA will help with financing!!GA's association with any company is a red flag to steer well clear of them imho. Just shows they don't understand the process of due diligence imho.
See - Glenn Armstrong and his (investors) millions
Vanessa Warwick Landlord and Co-Founder of PropertyTribes.com **If you have got value from Property Tribes, find out how you can support it in remaining a free to use community resource**
Hi Vanessa, that was quick! Yes he is definitely on there. I give the link, you need to scroll down a bit.
You found it, great.
The charge, by More Group Capital Services Ltd, relating to the bond that Westway is planning to offer is on there
Hi Jon,Forgive my ignorance, but what does that mean? Why can't they borrow the money for the properties from More Group?!Is the charge on the company or an asset of the company?
Hi, I would be interested to know what this charge means in relative layman's terms. Thanks again.
More Group Capital Services isn't really a lender. In this case it is acting as the security trustee - it holds the security on trust for the bondholders. In this case, fixed & floating charges over the assets of Westway.
That is much simpler to administer for the borrower than granting security separately to each individual bondholder.
The charge document indicates that the bond could be up to £10m
Similar things are seen in crowdfunding - some company appointed by the crowdfunding platform (often itself) acts as security trustee and manages the relationship / legals with each individual investor
The bond issue looks, given the involvement of Curzon, perfectly normal and is a wholly legitimate way of raising money. Without sight of the bond's Information Memorandum (prospectus), I am in no position to even start to attempt to judge how risky it might be or whether the reward (8.5% fixed annual return) is generous or not.
Thanks for that. I have a number of concerns over this, not limited to the apparently very small portfolio of current properties none of which appear to be generating revenue stream. Three on the website, two of which are yet to be converted to HMO and one, an ex pub, where it is not clear whether planning permission has yet been granted.The involvement of Glenn Armstrong as adviser on cash flow etc is noted.
Everyone has to start somewhere and this a new company.
AIUI it has 3 properties in the pipeline for conversion to HMOs and it intends to fund itself with a 'publicly offered' bond carrying 8.5% annual interest.
The headroom on the bond is up to £10m, which will surely cover a few more purchases and developments of the type shown on the website.
Without a look at the bond information memorandum, I have no idea about the current situation in terms of ownership / planning / other funding etc. and can't really comment.
It was clearly a deliberate choice to involve GA and to publicise his involvement.
What prospective bondholders surface in their due diligence and how that might influence their decision to invest in the bond, or not, is a matter for each of them of course.
Why didn't Westway Holdings do any due diligence on GA, I wonder? If they had, they would not have brought him in as an advisor on finance or suffer the reputational risk of being associated with him imho. It shows a degree of niavety at best, and that should perhaps cause investors concern as to what else they are niave about?