83,057
edits
Template:Pgmsla nominee capsule: Difference between revisions
Template:Pgmsla nominee capsule (view source)
Revision as of 17:50, 20 September 2021
, 20 September 2021no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "The reference (in the pledge version only) to a {{pgmslaprov|Nominee}}, we think, is a flag to recognise that the {{pgmsla}} is typically suitable only for agency lending...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The reference (in the pledge version only) to a {{pgmslaprov|Nominee}}, we think, is a flag to recognise that the {{pgmsla}} is typically suitable only for [[agency lending]] arrangements, in which the principal {{pgmslaprov|Lender}}s to the {{pgmslaprov|Loan}}s will be wealth-management clients and funds whose assets are managed by an [[agent lender]], | The reference (in the pledge version only) to a {{pgmslaprov|Nominee}}, we think, is a flag to recognise that the {{pgmsla}} is typically suitable only for [[agency lending]] arrangements, in which the principal {{pgmslaprov|Lender}}s to the {{pgmslaprov|Loan}}s will be wealth-management clients and funds whose assets are managed by an [[agent lender]], and who have handed over responsibility for managing their {{pgmslaprov|Loan}}s to the [[agent lender]], who in turn has put the whole business in the hands of a [[triparty agent]], who will manage the collateral flows, pledges and all that good oil. Though why they didn’t say “ tri-party agent”, it is hard to say, since “nominee” has, in other custody contexts, a rather different meaning. And there is nothing to stop folks using a tri-party arrangement with a normal {{gmsla}} either, for that matter, and it has routinely been done for as long as anyone can remember. | ||