February 2011

Last Wednesday, Laura Swihart and I attended CREFC’s after-work seminar on the new model set of representations and warranties, which the group is set to release in coming weeks. The model set is the product of a patchwork committee of 50-odd individuals representing the full gamut of industry types – securitization issuers, bond investors, rating agencies, servicers, wall street banks, life insurance companies, law firms, third-party providers and other interested parties. As a member of the committee, I’ll second CEO John D’Amico’s statement applauding the hard work of the committee. It takes a special group of people to stay energized through 90 minutes of heated discussion on the phrasing of property insurance requirements; the enthusiasm so many of my fellow committee members brought to each meeting and conference call was astounding.

The initiative is, in large part, a response to the SEC’s new Exchange Act Rule 17g-7 (initially proposed last October and final rule released in January), which, among other things, requires that the rating agencies identify, on a deal-by-deal basis, deviations from industry-standard reps and warrants. CREFC hopes that the model set will serve as the basis upon which all deals will be judged. It’s not necessarily clear whether the model reps will be widely utilized by the market, or how the SEC rules will be implemented – deals have obviously been selling for over a year without industry-wide agreement on a form of reps and warrants.Continue Reading TriBeCa 2.0: CREFC Prepares to Release Model Loan Seller Reps and Warrants

2500 of my best friends and I spent three days at the MBA’s annual CREF meeting in San Diego last week. By now, it’s old news, but, indeed, the mood was very upbeat. Just like the days of yore, everyone spent every working moment in lender-mortgage banker meet and greets, exchanging braggadocio over pipelines, products and relationships. People even had the energy to return to old fights and grudges: portfolio lenders vs Wall Street squaring off after sharing a fox hole these past three years. Most heartwarming.Continue Reading Tales From The Conference Circuit: Can I Be Both Giddy and Anxious?

A colleague and good friend of mine is house shopping. She spent last weekend touring a home in Hingham – a popular, picturesque waterfront suburb south of the city where many travel to Boston’s financial district each morning by ferry (the trip across the Harbor shaves 40 minutes off the commute). The listing caught her eye because of the size of the home and the price – a little too big, a little too well-maintained for the asking price. Turns out the home was being offered by a developer that had acquired the property from a foreclosing lender – something commonplace throughout the country as the national housing market desperately seeks to achieve stability. But in post-Ibanez Massachusetts, where home ownership can rest on an (unelected) judge’s determination that mortgage assignment documentation was defective, buying a home that has been subject to foreclosure (at any point) is a risk that perhaps no reasonable purchaser can take.
 Continue Reading The Defeasance of Mr. Bevilacqua: Fallout from Ibanez Decision Continues in Massachusetts

ASF 2011 kicked off yesterday, February 6, at the Orlando World Center Marriott.  Dechert attorneys Malcolm Dorris, Ralph Mazzeo, Patrick Dolan, John Timperio, Cindy Williams, Andrew Pontano, Lorien Golaski and I are hosting a cocktail party for clients and friends here this evening.

Congressman Scott Garrett (R-NJ), Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government-Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs), delivered the featured address this morning, February 7. In his new role as Chairman, Congressman Garrett will be a key player in the debate over the future of the GSEs, the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act and the continued development of a legislative framework for a covered bonds market in the U.S.Continue Reading ASF 2011 Kicks Off in Orlando, Florida

On January 20th, the SEC finalized its first batch of many rules to come under Dodd-Frank, requiring issuers to perform reviews of the assets underlying their ABS securities and requiring them to disclose fulfilled and unfulfilled repurchase requests for alleged breaches of representations and warranties.  These have effective dates beginning with 2012 issuance so, to a certain extent, we can kick the anxiety can down the road for a while.  Nonetheless, this is a pretty clear window into what may be a bleak regulatory future.  And that’s important now.  More on this later.

Rule 193 (release here (pdf)) requires an issuer to know something about the assets it’s securitizing.  The issuer is supposed to do diligence to understand the assets it securitizes and tell the investor about the nature of its inquiry.  Curiously, and I’m not complaining here, Rule 193 does not purport to define what disclosures need be made, just that there ought to be “robust" and "transparent” diligence behind them. Its inquiry must be “designed and effected to provide reasonable assurances” that the disclosures about the assets are correct.

Hardly shocking.  Call me silly, but that seems to be what we do in structured finance.  I guess more information about exactly what the issuer did to understand the assets it securitizes could be useful, particularly in asset classes in which the asset level data is sketchy and aggregate.  It’s just silly in CMBS when we already deliver vast quantities of granular data in every deal.Continue Reading The FinReg Sheriff Arrives in Town: Do You Feel Safer?