Home Reit Share Discussion Threads

[spectoacc] 30/11/2023 13:15

Indeed, HOME is a scandal, set up to fleece the gullible like M&G (for whom in any case it's OPM).

But I'd say the main difference - since the outcomes may be similar in share price terms - is that DGI9 has always given the option to sell again. With HOME, the news keeps getting worse, but the shares have stayed suspended.

Still see no reason to change 10p-20p estimate on HOME - the one saving grace was the low LTV.

[williamcooper104] 30/11/2023 12:55

Good question Think it's HOMEHOME is incompetence, and potential F DGI9 is just incompetence The F part of HOME means it's got balance sheet and asset problems Whereas DGI just has balance sheet problems and that they bought assets totally not appropriate for an income vehicle Not to say though that the incompetence at DGI is so great as to make the eventual outcome between the two academic

[cc2014] 30/11/2023 12:25

Question is which is the biggest loser when this all washes out. HOME or DGI9?

[williamcooper104] 30/11/2023 08:05

Yep - and then the admission that they didn't actually know how much capex had been spent For the Board to know that and then rubbish the short report !!!!!!

[spectoacc] 30/11/2023 07:28

EPCs were enough on their own weren't they - clearly little to no CapEx been done.

Got to marvel at the "long-term" leases too - when most CIC lessees could barely get through their first 12 months of gifted rent!

[williamcooper104] 29/11/2023 07:06

The moment Alverium admitted they didn't know what the EPCs were despite supposedly millions in refurb capex having been spent That's the red flag that any board member with even the most basic property knowledge should have spotted; certainly any retail buy to let landlord would have spotted it

[spectoacc] 29/11/2023 06:59

@wskill - FCA will get there, eventually. Takes years.

That statement - and many of their others - was laughable, with much manifestly wrong. We all (ex Wallywoo) said so at the time. I want to believe the Board were just naive idiots, but wouldn't you do 10 minutes of Googling before putting out a statements like that? We could see it, why couldn't they?

As for M&G, & the other big institutions buying post-allegations..

(And I don't mean all of it - HOME have consistently been worse than my worse fears. But eg going on Rightmove to discover HOME property up for regular AST rental, or Googling the connections/crooks involved in SPV & CIC - or even just reading this BB).

[williamcooper104] 28/11/2023 22:26

I find it very hard to believe that Alverium did not know that their tenants were using capex money to pay the rent And further that when they said in their Q3 2022 update that all tenants were current on their rent that that was highly misleading (at best; and something beginning with F at worst)

[wskill] 28/11/2023 20:55

I think by now we all understand no one will ever get his collar felt for this fraud another reason not to invest in the UK ,its safer paying a higher multiple and having the benefit of some shareholder protection .Sad but very true the FCA what a farce they make of everything when they actually try and convict fraudsters might as well not bother.

One year ago this was their response to Viveroy the inaccurate response was by the HOME directors there is much that these directors have to answer for.

RESPONSE TO INACCURATE SHORT SELLING REPORT

Home REIT plc (ticker: HOME), which funds the acquisition and creation of high-quality properties across the UK that are dedicated to providing accommodation to homeless people, notes the recent report published by a Delaware-based firm specialising in short selling, meaning it profits from any falls in the Company's share price.

The report was published without any engagement with the Company's Board, Investment Advisor, or wider advisory team. It is the Board's belief that the report is inaccurate and misleading in its comments about the Company, being based on mistaken assumptions, misinformed comments, and disputable allegations.

The Company will publish a full and detailed response demonstrating the factual inaccuracies and selective use of information in due course. This will be published via RNS and on the Company's website as soon as reasonably practicable.

[spectoacc] 28/11/2023 17:32

A web of them, with further connections on to our +£80m Venice friend.

All still has a long way to run.

But have to wonder how, having been "seeded" with 12 months of rent to pay HOME from the SPV, some couldn't even manage that, yet have been getting plenty of rent in from tenants.

Looking forward to the revised HOME a/c's and valuations - Knight Frank must be nervous.

[1tx] 28/11/2023 17:25

Eden Safe seems to have connections witn other CIC's who leased Home properties.Lotus & Sanctuary in particular.

[spectoacc] 28/11/2023 07:08

"Eden Safe has not paid rent to the Company since October 2022".

Sums it up. Also, yet more PRS/AST's, giving the lie to "housing the homeless".

And where has the rent gone? AEW don't necessarily seem to be in a hurry to find out.

[spectoacc] 13/11/2023 08:21

Indeed. You'd hope because they don't want to prejudice recovery, but you'd fear it's because they're not going after them.

Yet you can take any individual property at any of the auctions, and see exactly what's gone on, and it's exactly what Viceroy said. HOME raises a stack of cash. Someone (usually the one we know about) scours the market/auctions and buys up all the HMO's they can lay their hands on, bought at generally market value.

Those are rapidly flipped on once or more to other SPVs, at inflated/fake prices.

Then sold on to HOME - within weeks - at double purchase price, now with "leases" in place. Some of that money paid by HOME goes to those lessees, some of which as far as I can tell were little more than nameplates.

The Board seemingly remain ignorant of what's going on even when they're explicitly told. Where's the fiduciary duty?

Knight Frank merrily issue their valuations - where's their perusal of Land Reg data?

Rent comes in - for a year, if HOME are luckly - but it's round-tripping shareholders cash. How much were the CIC stooges paid, where did the property income go?

Alvarium continue to "manage", and keep raising tens and hundreds of millions. They're still in place even once it's obvious what's gone on. Two prominent actors got out early.

When the alleged fraud's exposed, the Board issue IMO misleading statements denying it, Alvarium try to hive off the advisor, the main SPV crooks exit stage left, and the CICs start to go down like a house of cards. Rent collection hit 3%!

Knight Frank quietly walk away, and some insts (take a bow, M&G) continue buying the shares.

I'm re-hashing what we all know, but it's still jaw-dropping. Can see an argument for the early money being gone, but the con was rolled on for so long, with many more hundreds of millions raised, that it's hard not to see at least some sort of recovery angle.

Shareholders' best hope?

[flyer61] 12/11/2023 17:55

Spec enjoy your holiday. I must admit I was going to post after Wallywoos first post but thought better of it. WC104 has been very patient and polite with his responses.

You couldn't make it up that someone thinks this has a positive future.....

[wallywoo] 11/11/2023 18:53

OK perhaps I gave you a hard time.


I also think it depends when you invested here. I invested when it was a real mess at 37.4p (icl divi). If you invested at 100p+, I can understand a much greater degree of anger.


Still believe this situation will get sorted to my satisfaction. Though, it still has a good degree of uncertainty.


Sometimes buying when there is blood in the streets works really well, sometimes it doesn't. We shall have to wait, perhaps another 6 months (my guess when this will be relisted) to find out!!!

[williamcooper104] 11/11/2023 10:05

Please please tell me how the loans weren't in default How would the interest cover ratio have been met with sub 10 percent rent collection How would the LTV have been meet when assets are being sold at such massive discounts Of course covenants were broken; Lloyds will have temporarily waived these on the basis that the Board/manager are doing at less cost what an administrator would do Lloyds have always been very strict on loan docs/covenants - there's zero chance this is a cov light loan - as in zero

[wallywoo] 11/11/2023 07:43

I am confused. If the loans were in default, HOME would have a legal responsibility to inform shareholders. I believe you are trying to generate pi anger at this company. Much more likely is that a plan has been set out to reduce the loan amount to an agreed level and to carry on with a long term debt. Home have plenty of cash to pay interest in the meantime.


Also, you seem obsessed with legal action here. It is my firm belief that you are an "ambulance chaser" for this legal firm.


Please enlighten us on this BB. If zero (none) of the funds and institutions have joined your legal action (who own around 80% of Home shares), why should any private investors??


It is my firm belief that you are just trying to drum up investor anger here, so that your law firm will prosper. If 80% of professional investors think that is unlikely to maximise their investment here. Why should the rest of us??? I still believe Home will relist with 1500 to 2000 4/5 bedroom houses in rent with a lower debt (to a mix of homeless and other tenants). To me that looks the best way to stabilise this company and to achieve around 50p share target. We all know that there's huge demand for rental accommodation in the UK, which will only increase.

Legal action will just make lawyers rich and I believe shareholders would get very little. It would just line the pockets of lots of paper pushers!!

Progress is being made with both rental income and housing sales. We need to wait for that process to complete.

[williamcooper104] 09/11/2023 16:42

The loans clearly been in default and that's been waived by Lloyds so long as HOME continues to de-lever That they haven't (or appear not to) have overly rinsed HOME with covenant waiver fees/reset margins is likely that Lloyds don't want the reputational hit Likely they just want their loan repaid at par as soon as possible - that will of course be its own windfall for them as they will be able to re-lend at 2-3x the returns

[williamcooper104] 09/11/2023 11:16

Yep and mostly requiring significant capex With the money that was meant to be used for that capex having been used for rent So dodgy Do hope some of the working capital is being used to fund a litigation reserve

[hohum1] 09/11/2023 07:18

More property sales announced at 35% of purchase price. Someone should go to jail for this

[williamcooper104] 19/10/2023 17:33

Yep - I sat through a pitch for that - it was - you'll probably lose all your money and need to want to do this for partially philanthropic reasons plus if it does work you will make billions so no need to put anything other than a small amount of money Woodford went and did 10 percent (from memory) of his GAV - totally utterly crackers - 20-30bps is all they were looking and all he should have put in