MOODY'S AFFIRMS RATINGS ON CONSECO FINANCE'S MANUFACTURED HOUSING SECURITIZATIONS
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed its ratings on the outstanding classes of Conseco Manufactured Housing Pass-Through Certificates, following the Bankruptcy Court's Interim Order dated December 20, 2002, regarding servicing of the securitizations.
The Order directs the interim amendment of the Pooling and Servicing Agreements for over 60 manufactured housing securitizations being serviced by Conseco Finance Corporation for which U.S. Bank, N.A. is serving as trustee (the "Pooling Agreements"). These amendments to the Pooling Agreements provide that, among other things, Conseco Finance retains servicing under the MH securitizations, the Servicing Fee increases to 125 basis points per annum, and the Servicing Fee allocation becomes senior to the allocation of cash receipts to certificateholders. In addition, U.S. Bank and Conseco Finance are ordered to negotiate a final agreement as to servicing matters that the court would find to be fair and reasonable to the securitization trusts and the holders of certificates issued by the trusts.
The Order was issued at the request of Conseco Finance and U.S. Bank as Trustee, and covers only securitizations involving those parties. However, Wells Fargo (the current trustee for two Conseco manufactured housing securitizations) is expressly permitted to opt-in to the interim agreement.
Moody's notes that no provisions of the Pooling Agreements expressly grant the Trustee and Conseco Finance authority to amend the allocation of proceeds, although successor servicer provisions in some of the Pooling Agreements permit a smaller increase in servicing fee and an increase in priority of payment to successor servicers other than Conseco affiliates. However, notwithstanding these contract terms, the bankruptcy court has ordered the Trustee to modify the Pooling Agreements on an interim basis based on the agreement noted above, and granted the Trustee authority to negotiate a permanent resolution with Conseco Finance addressing servicing protocol, servicer fees, and related matters.
The court seems to be applying its equitable powers to protect the servicing asset for the benefit of Conseco Finance's creditors. The motion the court approved cited the court's authority under the Bankruptcy Rules to approve compromises in the best interests of the estate, and cited the interests of certificateholders and the Trustee. The court also cites the Trust's difficulty in finding an alternative servicer - a consideration directly related to the protection of certificateholders.
Going forward, it is unknown whether certificateholders and Conseco Finance will reach a similar permanent agreement (or any permanent agreement) on servicing. Under the Pooling Agreements, any such amendments would need the consent of at least 51% of certificateholders, depending on interpretation, or potentially 100% of certificateholders. Remaining unclear is the court's intentions as to any permanent agreement reached by Conseco Finance and the Trustee - the Order mandates that certificateholders objecting to any permanent agreement appear and object at a final hearing. Following a final hearing, the court envisions issuing a final order binding upon certificateholders as to the terms of the resolution.
Moody's believes that the continuation of Conseco Finance as servicer, if it continues its present system of operation, would contribute to rating stability for the certificates, even if the annual fee remains as high as 125 basis points. Conseco's established servicing platform, staff expertise in this sector, systems capability and familiarity with the obligors places it in a unique position to service the underlying loans. If servicing were to shift, Moody's would consider whether any changes in Conseco's servicing actions, any further increase in fees, or any outright transfer of servicing would adversely impact Trust cashflows: any disruption in servicing or a hiatus could create delinquency spikes, foreclosure delays and an increased level of losses. In considering the effect of changes to servicing arrangements, Moody's would also consider any impact from the Trustee's actions and obligations in respect of the trusts, possibly including its obligation to provide for replacement servicing under specified conditions.
Moody's rating affirmation is also based on the fact that Moody's had already largely incorporated into its analysis the adverse impact of a potential shift in Servicing Fee. The risk of a Conseco Finance bankruptcy has been a real possibility for some time, and Moody's analysis contemplated a range of outcomes. In particular, even though the Pooling Agreements do not allow for a 125 basis point fee for servicing following a Conseco Finance bankruptcy, recent experience with securitization participants in other servicer bankruptcy situations led Moody's to incorporate the possibility of higher costs or fees when it took its rating actions on the deals on December 3, 2002. This contingency was considered even though the Pooling Agreement provides for the Trustee to assume responsibility for servicing following a Conseco Finance bankruptcy or failure to perform.
Moody's affirmation also considers the limited scope of the Bankruptcy Court's actions to date. Thus far, bankruptcy-remoteness issues such as recharacterizing true sale or equitable consolidation do not appear to be at issue. In its order, the court in fact explicitly noted that Conseco Finance acknowledged that the proceeds of each securitization trust are the property of that trust. Moreover, the court suggests that any permanent modifications to the pooling agreements would have to at least consider the views of certificateholders at a hearing.
Nevertheless, the Trustee's ability to administer the provisions with respect to servicing the trusts' assets in the certificateholders' best interests is constrained due to Conseco Finance's bankruptcy. As a debtor-in-bankruptcy, Conseco Finance has the right to seek to reject or assume the Pooling Agreements, which are executory contracts. The Pooling Agreement provisions that make Conseco Finance's bankruptcy a servicer termination event would likely be unenforceable in any event under federal bankruptcy law. The inability of the Trustee to unilaterally replace Conseco Finance as servicer thus limits the Trustee's options for finding suitable servicing that were contemplated within the Pooling Agreement provisions, creating a situation potentially adverse to certificateholders.
Conseco Finance Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Conseco, Inc., is headquartered in St. Paul, Minnesota. The company is the largest servicer of manufactured housing contracts in the United States with a servicing portfolio of approximately $23 billion in receivables as of September 30, 2002.
© 2021 Moody’s Corporation, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., Moody’s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, “MOODY’S”). All rights reserved.
CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS AFFILIATES ARE THEIR CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MATERIALS, PRODUCTS, SERVICES AND INFORMATION PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S (COLLECTIVELY, “PUBLICATIONS”) MAY INCLUDE SUCH CURRENT OPINIONS. MOODY’S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT OR IMPAIRMENT. SEE APPLICABLE MOODY’S RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS PUBLICATION FOR INFORMATION ON THE TYPES OF CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS ADDRESSED BY MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS, NON-CREDIT ASSESSMENTS (“ASSESSMENTS”), AND OTHER OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S ANALYTICS, INC. AND/OR ITS AFFILIATES. MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLICATIONS DO NOT COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY’S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS AND OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLISHES ITS PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE.
MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS, AND PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS OR PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER.
ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY’S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.
MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS, ASSESSMENTS, OTHER OPINIONS AND PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY ANY PERSON AS A BENCHMARK AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED FOR REGULATORY PURPOSES AND MUST NOT BE USED IN ANY WAY THAT COULD RESULT IN THEM BEING CONSIDERED A BENCHMARK.
All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY’S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY’S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing its Publications.
To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY’S.
To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information.
NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY CREDIT RATING, ASSESSMENT, OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY’S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER.
Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody’s Corporation (“MCO”), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any credit rating, agreed to pay to Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. for credit ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,000 to approximately $5,000,000. MCO and Moody’s Investors Service also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of Moody’s Investors Service credit ratings and credit rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold credit ratings from Moody’s Investors Service and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com
under the heading “Investor Relations — Corporate Governance — Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy.”
Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY’S affiliate, Moody’s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody’s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to “wholesale clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY’S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a “wholesale client” and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to “retail clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY’S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors.
Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. (“MJKK”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody’s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody’s SF Japan K.K. (“MSFJ”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively.
MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any credit rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for credit ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY125,000 to approximately JPY550,000,000.
MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.