Thomson Reuters News & Insight
Featured Content from WESTLAW

Legal

  •  
  •  

It's alive! Dexia's $775 mln MBS case vs JPMorgan back from the dead  read more »

Wal-Mart's whistle-blower problem: Public revelations trump privilege  read more »

The elephant in the (court)room: Amazon and the Apple e-books case  read more »

Marketing Popup

Deciphering ResCap's $8.7 billion deal with MBS investors

5/14/2012 COMMENTS (0)

At the moment it filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Monday morning, Residential Capital, the mortgage arm of Ally Financial, had outstanding 392 mortgage-backed securities offerings, with an original principal balance of $221 billion. Bond insurers MBIA, Assured Guaranty, and Financial Guaranty have all sued ResCap for breaching its representations and warranties on the mortgages underlying those notes, but private investors have only brought securities claims, which will be stayed under normal bankruptcy procedure.

Does that mean investors' reps and warranties claims, otherwise known as put-backs, have been extinguished by ResCap's filing? To the contrary: As ResCap prepared to enter Chapter 11, its lawyers at Morrison & Foerster, as well as Ally counsel from Kirkland & Ellis, were busy negotiating a deal with a group of 17 institutional investors in ResCap mortgage-backed trusts. The investors, who are represented by Gibbs & Bruns and Ropes & Gray, secured a settlement that grants ResCap MBS holders an $8.7 billion allowed claim to cover ResCap's reps and warranties breaches. In exchange, the institutional investors filed an agreement to support the fallen mortgage company's plan of reorganization. (It's available as Exhibit 10 to ResCap's first-day pleadings.)

The deal doesn't mean that MBS investors are first in line to collect from ResCap's estate, or, for that matter, that they'll collect the entire $8.7 billion. The settlement simply means that ResCap and Ally will not contest the put-back claim. The MBS investors are unsecured creditors in the bankruptcy, which means they're behind ResCap's secured creditors. One of the secured creditors is Ally, which has already agreed to release its claims and put $750 million into ResCap's estate, resolving any successor liability claims the private MBS investors might have asserted against Ally. The other secured creditors are bondholders with about $2.1 billion in ResCap debt. (Holders of about 37 percent of those notes also reached a pre-filing agreement with ResCap.)

But the $8.7 billion allowed claim will likely give MBS investors the biggest stake in the ResCap estate, guaranteeing them a major piece of what's left for unsecured creditors (including, in addition to MBS holders, certain ResCap debtholders). The eventual size of the estate isn't yet known; Fortress's Nationstar Mortgage has proposed a stalking-horse bid of $2.4 billion for ResCap's mortgage servicing business and Ally has agreed to buy other assets for $1.6 billion.

The $8.7 billion allowed claim settlement must still be approved by the four MBS trustees that oversee ResCap mortgage-backed trusts: Bank of New York Mellon, U.S. Bank, Deutsche Bank, and Wells Fargo. The 17 investors who negotiated the deal hold or manage $13 billion in ResCap MBS and have 25 percent voting rights in 290 of the 392 trusts in the deal, but their counsel at Gibbs & Bruns has argued in the proposed $8.5 billion Countrywide MBS settlement that trustees have the independent power to decide when to settle put-back claims on behalf of the trusts they oversee. It would be surprising if the ResCap trustees didn't line up behind the settlement, which puts an undisputed value on claims the MBS investors haven't even publicly asserted.

The settlement must ultimately be approved by the bankruptcy court, which is where things could get interesting with the bond insurers that have already brought suits against ResCap. The investors' settlement actually could resolve their claims as noteholders; when bond insurers pay MBS policyholder claims, they frequently take over the mortgage-backed certificates. The investor settlement would put monolines at or near the top of the waterfall for the estate's payments to MBS noteholders. But the insurers have also asserted insurance-law indemnity claims, which aren't addressed in the proposed put-back settlement. On those claims, the monolines are unsecured creditors, like MBS investors, but without an allowed claim. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Martin Glenn of Manhattan will have to figure out how to handle that potential problem.

If you're wondering, in particular, how the ResCap bankruptcy affects MBIA (as many folks at Monday's "not-trial trial" challenging MBIA's restructuring were), take a look at the company's May 10 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. MBIA has booked $3.2 billion in receivables from reps and warranties litigation. Some of it, as MBIA acknowledges, is claims against ResCap. And though MBIA's filing said it was anticipating ResCap's bankruptcy and "has not recognized" recoveries against issuers without sufficient capital to meet their obligations, it also said it may have to "substantially reduce" its expected recovery from ResCap.

(Reporting by Alison Frankel)

Follow us on Twitter @AlisonFrankel@ReutersLegal  | Like us on Facebook


Register or log in to comment.

© 2013 Thomson Reuters