10-Q
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File No. 1-7797
PHH CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
MARYLAND
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
52-0551284
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number) |
|
|
|
3000 LEADENHALL ROAD
MT. LAUREL, NEW JERSEY
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
08054
(Zip Code) |
856-917-1744
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days: Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated
filer in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act:
Large accelerated filer þ Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act): Yes o No þ
As
of March 15, 2007, 53,506,822 shares of common stock were outstanding.
Except as expressly indicated or unless the context otherwise requires, the Company, PHH,
we, our or us means PHH Corporation, a Maryland corporation, and its subsidiaries. During
2006, our former parent company, Cendant Corporation, changed its name to Avis Budget Group, Inc.
(see Note 18, Subsequent Events in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (Form 10-Q));
however, within this Form 10-Q, PHHs former parent company, now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc.
(NYSE: CAR) is referred to as Cendant.
EXPLANATORY NOTE
During the preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements for the
year ended December 31, 2005, we determined that it was necessary to restate
previously issued financial statements to record adjustments for corrections of
errors resulting from various accounting matters. As a result, all amounts as
of and for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and comparisons to those
amounts reflect the balances and amounts on a restated basis. Accordingly, some
of the data set forth in this Form 10-Q is not comparable to the discussions
and data in our previously filed Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three
months ended March 31, 2005. For additional information about the effects of
the restatement adjustments on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
included in this Form 10-Q, see Note 15, Prior Period Adjustments in the
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included herein. For
additional information about the effects of the restatement adjustments on our
Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2005, see the
Explanatory Note and Note 2, Prior Period Adjustments in the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the 2005 Form 10-K).
CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. These forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and
other factors and were derived utilizing numerous important assumptions that may cause our actual
results, performance or achievements to differ materially from any future results, performance or
achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned not
to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.
Statements preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words believes, expects,
anticipates, intends, projects, estimates, plans, may increase, may fluctuate and
similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as will, should, would, may and
could are generally forward-looking in nature and are not historical facts. Forward-looking
statements in this Form 10-Q include, but are not limited to, the following: (i) the beliefs
regarding the increasing competition in the mortgage industry and the contraction of margins and
volumes in the industry and our intention to take advantage of this environment by leveraging our
existing mortgage origination services platform to enter into new outsourcing relationships; (ii)
the expected level of savings in 2007 from cost-reducing initiatives implemented in our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments; (iii) the expectation that any existing legal claims or
proceedings other than the several class actions filed against us as discussed in this Form 10-Q
will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows and our intent to vigorously defend against the several class actions filed against us as
discussed in this Form 10-Q; (iv) the expectation that our agreements and arrangements with Cendant
and Realogy Corporation (Realogy) will continue to be material to our business; (v) the
expectation that our sources of liquidity are adequate to fund
operations for the next twelve months;
(vi) the expectations regarding the impact of the adoption of recently issued accounting
pronouncements on our financial statements and (vii) the expectation that fees and expenses
relating to the preparation of our financial results in 2007 will be significantly higher than
historical fees and expenses.
The factors and assumptions discussed below and the risks and uncertainties described in Item
1A. Risk Factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in such
forward-looking statements:
|
§ |
|
the material weaknesses that we identified in our internal control over financial
reporting and the ineffectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures; |
|
|
§ |
|
the outcome of civil litigation pending against us, our Directors, Chief Executive
Officer, and former Chief Financial Officer and whether our indemnification obligations for
such Directors and executive officers will be covered by our Directors and officers
insurance; |
|
|
§ |
|
our ability to meet the extended deadlines for the delivery of our quarterly and annual
financial statements under our waivers under financing agreements and, if not, our ability
to obtain additional waivers under our financing agreements and to satisfy our obligations
under certain of our contractual and regulatory requirements for the delivery of our
quarterly and annual financial statements; |
|
|
§ |
|
the effects of environmental, economic or political conditions on the international,
national or regional economy, the outbreak or escalation of hostilities or terrorist
attacks and the impact thereof on our businesses; |
|
|
§ |
|
the effects of a decline in the volume or value of U.S. home sales, due to adverse
economic changes or otherwise, on our mortgage services business; |
2
§ the effects of changes in current interest rates on our Mortgage Production and Mortgage
Servicing segments and on our financing costs;
§ the effects of changes in spreads between mortgage rates and swap rates, option
volatility and the shape of the yield curve, particularly on the performance of our risk
management activities;
§ our ability to develop and implement operational, technological and financial systems to
manage growing operations and to achieve enhanced earnings or effect
cost savings;
§ the effects of competition in our existing and potential future lines of business,
including the impact of competition with greater financial resources and broader product
lines;
§ the impact of the proposed merger on our business and the price of
our Common stock, including our ability to satisfy the conditions
required to consummate the merger, the impact of the announcement of the
merger on our business relationships and operating results and the
impact of costs, fees and expenses related to the merger;
§ our ability to quickly reduce overhead and infrastructure costs in response to a
reduction in revenue;
§ our ability to implement fully integrated disaster recovery technology solutions in the
event of a disaster;
§ our ability to obtain financing on acceptable terms to finance our growth strategy, to
operate within the limitations imposed by financing arrangements and to maintain our credit
ratings;
§ our ability to establish and maintain a functional corporate structure and to operate as
an independent organization;
§ our ability to implement changes to our internal control over financial reporting in
order to remediate identified material weaknesses and other control
deficiencies;
§ our ability to maintain our relationships with our existing clients;
§ a deterioration in the performance of assets held as collateral for secured borrowings,
a downgrade in our credit ratings below investment grade or any failure to comply with
certain financial covenants could negatively impact our access to the secondary market for
mortgage loans and our ability to act as servicer for mortgage loans sold into the
secondary market; and
§ changes in laws and regulations, including changes in accounting standards, mortgage-
and real estate-related regulations and state, federal and foreign
tax laws.
Other factors and assumptions not identified above were also involved in the derivation of
these forward-looking statements, and the failure of such other assumptions to be realized as well
as other factors may also cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. Most of
these factors are difficult to predict accurately and are generally beyond our control.
The factors and assumptions discussed above may have an impact on the continued accuracy of
any forward-looking statements that we make. Except for our ongoing obligations to disclose
material information under the federal securities laws, we undertake no obligation to release
publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements, to report events or to report the
occurrence of unanticipated events unless required by law. For any forward-looking statements
contained in any document, we claim the protection of the safe harbor for forward-looking
statements contained in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
3
PART I FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage fees |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
44 |
|
Fleet management fees |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net fee income |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet lease income |
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Mortgage interest expense |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income |
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net derivative loss related to mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan servicing income |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
Occupancy and other office expenses |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Depreciation on operating leases |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Fleet interest expense |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
Spin-Off related expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and minority interest |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations before minority interest |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
Minority interest in loss of consolidated entities, net of income taxes of $1 |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes of $0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
4
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(In millions, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
143 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
443 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net |
|
|
2,286 |
|
|
|
2,395 |
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
Net investment in fleet leases |
|
|
4,082 |
|
|
|
3,966 |
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
|
2,073 |
|
|
|
1,909 |
|
Investment securities |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
10,086 |
|
|
$ |
9,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
$ |
565 |
|
Debt |
|
|
6,834 |
|
|
|
6,744 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
796 |
|
|
|
790 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
8,541 |
|
|
|
8,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 11) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value;
10,000,000 shares authorized; none
issued or outstanding at March 31, 2006
or December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value;
100,000,000 shares authorized;
53,474,248 shares issued and outstanding
at March 31, 2006; 53,408,728 shares
issued and outstanding at December 31,
2005 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
983 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
556 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Deferred compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
1,513 |
|
|
|
1,521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
10,086 |
|
|
$ |
9,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
5
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
Three Months Ended March 31, 2006
(Unaudited)
(In millions, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
Paid-In |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Deferred |
|
|
Stockholders |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
(Loss) |
|
|
Compensation |
|
|
Equity |
|
Balance at December 31, 2005 |
|
|
53,408,728 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
983 |
|
|
$ |
556 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
(31 |
) |
|
$ |
1,521 |
|
Effect of adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
Other
comprehensive loss,
net of income taxes
of $(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Stock
compensation
expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Stock options
exercised, net of
income taxes of $0 |
|
|
65,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
March 31, 2006 |
|
|
53,474,248 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
956 |
|
|
$ |
545 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,513 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
6
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
Cash flows from operating activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
12 |
|
Adjustment for discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
Adjustments
to reconcile (Loss) income from continuing operations to net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option expense related to the Spin-Off |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Capitalization of originated mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(77 |
) |
Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Net unrealized loss on mortgage servicing rights and related derivatives |
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Vehicle depreciation |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Origination of mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
(7,476 |
) |
|
|
(7,025 |
) |
Proceeds on sale of and payments from mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
7,577 |
|
|
|
6,811 |
|
Other adjustments and changes in other assets and liabilities, net |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities of continuing
operations |
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in vehicles |
|
|
(636 |
) |
|
|
(553 |
) |
Proceeds on sale of investment vehicles |
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
Purchase of mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Cash paid on derivatives related to mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
Net settlement proceeds for derivatives related to mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
234 |
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Net assets acquired, net of cash acquired and acquisition-related payments |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Decrease in Restricted cash |
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
392 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities of continuing
operations |
|
|
(483 |
) |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities of continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in short-term borrowings |
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
Proceeds from borrowings |
|
|
5,666 |
|
|
|
1,185 |
|
Principal payments on borrowings |
|
|
(5,643 |
) |
|
|
(1,748 |
) |
Issuances of
Company Common stock |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of
Company Common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Capital contribution from Cendant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities of continuing
operations |
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
(242 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
7
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
Cash provided by (used in) discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
184 |
|
Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(292 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
Discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
143 |
|
|
$ |
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
8
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Throughout these Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, all referenced amounts
as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and
comparisons to those amounts reflect the balances and amounts on a restated basis. For information on the restatement,
see Note 15, Prior Period Adjustments included herein and the Explanatory Note and Note 2,
Prior Period Adjustments in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in PHH
Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the 2005 Form
10-K) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
PHH Corporation and subsidiaries (PHH or the Company) is a leading outsource provider of
mortgage and fleet management services operating in the following business segments:
|
|
|
Mortgage Production provides mortgage loan origination services and sells mortgage loans. |
|
|
|
|
Mortgage Servicing provides servicing activities for originated and purchased loans. |
|
|
|
|
Fleet Management Services provides commercial fleet management services. |
As of December 31, 2004, PHH was a wholly owned subsidiary of Cendant Corporation that
provided homeowners with mortgages, serviced mortgage loans, facilitated employee relocations and
provided vehicle fleet management and fuel card services to commercial clients. During 2006,
Cendant Corporation changed its name to Avis Budget Group, Inc. (see Note 18, Subsequent Events);
however, within these Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, PHHs former parent
company, now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc. (NYSE: CAR) is referred to as Cendant. On February
1, 2005, PHH began operating as an independent, publicly traded company pursuant to a spin-off from
Cendant (the Spin-Off). During 2005, prior to the Spin-Off, PHH underwent an internal
reorganization whereby it distributed its former relocation and fuel card businesses to Cendant,
and Cendant contributed its former appraisal business, Speedy Title and Appraisal Review Services
LLC (STARS), to PHH. STARS was previously a wholly owned subsidiary of PHH until it was
distributed, in the form of a dividend, to a wholly owned subsidiary of Cendant not within the PHH
ownership structure on December 31, 2002. Cendant then owned STARS through its subsidiaries outside
of PHH from December 31, 2002 until it contributed STARS to PHH as part of the internal
reorganization discussed above.
The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts and transactions of PHH
and its subsidiaries, as well as entities in which the Company directly or indirectly has a
controlling interest. PHH Home Loans, LLC (the Mortgage Venture) is consolidated within PHHs
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Realogy Corporations ownership interest is
presented as Minority interest in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and Minority interest
in loss of consolidated entities, net of income taxes in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of
Operations. Pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 141, Business
Combinations, Cendants contribution of STARS to PHH was accounted for as a transfer of net assets
between entities under common control. Accordingly, the financial position and results of
operations for STARS are included in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in continuing
operations for all periods presented. Pursuant to SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, the financial position and results of operations of the Companys
former relocation and fuel card businesses have been segregated and reported as discontinued
operations for all periods presented (see Note 17, Discontinued Operations for more information).
The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) for interim financial
information and pursuant to the rules and regulations of the SEC. Accordingly, they do not include
all of the information and
9
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
disclosures required by GAAP for complete financial statements. In managements opinion, the
unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements contain all normal, recurring adjustments
necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and results of operations for the
interim periods presented. The results of operations reported for interim periods are not
necessarily indicative of the results of operations for the entire year or any subsequent interim
period. These unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction
with the Companys 2005 Form 10-K.
During
the preparation of the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as
of and for the three months ended March 31, 2006, the Company
identified and corrected errors related to prior periods. The effect
of correcting these errors on the Condensed Consolidated Statement of
Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2006 was to
reduce Net loss by $3 million (net of income taxes of
$2 million). The corrections included an adjustment for
franchise tax accruals previously recorded during the years ended
December 31, 2002 and 2003 and certain other miscellaneous
adjustments related to the year ended December 31, 2005. The
Company evaluated the impact of the adjustments and determined that
they are not material, individually or in the aggregate, to the three
months ended March 31, 2006 or the years ended December 31,
2006, 2005, 2003 or 2002.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported
amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from
those estimates.
Changes in Accounting Policies
Share-Based Payments. In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the FASB)
issued SFAS No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment (SFAS No. 123(R)), which eliminates the alternative
to measure stock-based compensation awards using the intrinsic value approach permitted by
Accounting Principles Board Opinion (APB) No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees
(APB No. 25) and SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS No. 123). Prior
to the Spin-Off and since Cendants adoption on January 1, 2003 of the fair value method of
accounting for stock-based compensation provisions of SFAS No. 123 and the transitional provisions
of SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based CompensationTransition and Disclosure (SFAS No.
148), the Company was allocated compensation expense upon Cendants issuance of stock-based awards
to the Companys employees. As a result, the Company has been recording stock-based compensation
expense since January 1, 2003 for employee stock awards that were granted or modified subsequent to
December 31, 2002.
On March 29, 2005, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 107, Share-Based
Payment (SAB 107). SAB 107 summarizes the views of the staff regarding the interaction between
SFAS No. 123(R) and certain SEC rules and regulations and provides the staffs views regarding the
valuation of share-based payment arrangements for public companies. Effective April 21, 2005, the
SEC issued an amendment to Rule 4-01(a) of Regulation S-X amending the effective date for
compliance with SFAS No. 123(R) so that each registrant that is not a small business issuer will be
required to prepare financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R) beginning with the
first interim or annual reporting period of the registrants first fiscal year beginning on or
after June 15, 2005.
The Company adopted SFAS No. 123(R) effective January 1, 2006 using the modified prospective
application method. The modified prospective application method applies to new awards and to awards
modified, repurchased or cancelled after the effective date. Compensation cost for the portion of
outstanding awards of stock-based compensation for which the requisite service has not been
rendered as of the effective date of SFAS No. 123(R) is recognized as the requisite service is
rendered based on their grant-date fair value under SFAS No. 123. Compensation cost for stock-based
awards granted after the effective date will be based on the grant-date fair value estimated in
accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R).
The Company previously recognized the effect of forfeitures on compensation expense in the
period that the forfeitures occurred. SFAS No. 123(R) requires the accrual of compensation cost
based on the estimated number of instruments for which the requisite service is expected to be
rendered. In addition, the Company previously presented tax benefits in excess of the value
recognized for financial reporting purposes related to equity
10
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
instruments issued under stock-based payments arrangements as cash flows from operating
activities in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. SFAS No. 123(R) requires the
cash flows from these excess tax benefits to be classified as cash inflows from financing
activities.
The Company previously reported the entire fair value of its restricted stock unit (RSU)
awards within Stockholders equity as an increase to Additional paid-in capital with an offsetting
increase to Deferred compensation, a contra-equity account, at the date of grant. With the adoption
of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company records increases to Additional paid-in capital for grants of RSUs
as compensation cost is recognized. As of the effective date of adopting SFAS No. 123(R), the
Deferred compensation related to the unrecognized compensation cost for RSUs was eliminated against
Additional paid-in capital in accordance with the modified prospective application method.
The adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) did not have a significant effect on any line item of the
Companys Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2006.
Additionally, the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) did not have a significant effect on the Companys
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31, 2006. In
accordance with the transition provisions of SFAS No. 123(R)s modified prospective application
method of adoption, the Companys Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for prior periods
have not been restated.
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections. In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154,
Accounting Changes and Error Corrections (SFAS No. 154), which replaces APB No. 20, Accounting
Changes. SFAS No. 154 changes the accounting for, and reporting of, a change in accounting
principle. SFAS No. 154 requires retrospective application to prior period financial statements
when voluntary changes in accounting principles are adopted and upon adopting changes required by
new accounting standards when the standard does not include specific transition provisions, unless
it is impracticable to do so. SFAS No. 154 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2005. The adoption of SFAS No. 154 on January 1, 2006 did not impact the Companys Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Servicing of Financial Assets. In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156, Accounting for
Servicing of Financial Assets (SFAS No. 156). SFAS No. 156: (i) clarifies when a servicing asset
or servicing liability should be recognized; (ii) requires all separately recognized servicing
assets and servicing liabilities to be initially measured at fair value, if practicable; (iii)
subsequent to initial measurement, permits an entity to choose either the amortization method or
the fair value measurement method for each class of separately recognized servicing assets or
servicing liabilities and (iv) at its initial adoption, permits a one-time reclassification of
available-for-sale securities to trading securities by entities with recognized servicing rights.
SFAS No. 156 is effective for all separately recognized servicing assets and liabilities
acquired or issued after the beginning of an entitys fiscal year that begins after September 15,
2006. Earlier adoption is permitted as of the beginning of an entitys fiscal year, provided the
entity has not yet issued financial statements, including interim financial statements for any
period of that fiscal year. The Company adopted SFAS No. 156 effective January 1, 2006. As a result
of adopting SFAS No. 156, servicing rights created through the sale of originated loans are
recorded at the fair value of the servicing right on the date of sale whereas prior to the
adoption, the servicing rights were recorded based on the relative fair values of the loans sold
and the servicing rights retained. The Company services residential
mortgage loans, which represent its single class of servicing rights
and has elected the fair value measurement method for
subsequently measuring these servicing rights. The election of the fair value measurement method will
subject the Companys earnings to increases and decreases in the value of its servicing assets.
Previously, servicing rights were (i) carried at the lower of cost or fair value based on defined
strata, (ii) amortized in proportion to estimated net servicing income and (iii) evaluated for
impairment at least quarterly. The effects of measuring servicing rights at fair value after the
adoption of SFAS No. 156 are recorded in Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights in the
Companys Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2006.
The effects of carrying servicing rights at the lower of cost or fair value prior to the adoption
of SFAS No. 156 are recorded in Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing
rights in the Companys Condensed Consolidated
11
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005.
The adoption of SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006 did not have a material impact on the
Companys Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as all of the servicing asset strata were
impaired as of December 31, 2005.
2. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
Accounting for Hybrid Instruments. In February 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 155,
Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments (SFAS No. 155). SFAS No. 155 permits an
entity to elect fair value measurement of any hybrid financial instrument that contains an embedded
derivative that otherwise would have required bifurcation, clarifies which interest-only and
principal-only strips are not subject to the requirements of SFAS No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133) and establishes a requirement to
evaluate interests in securitized financial assets to identify interests that are freestanding
derivatives or that are hybrid financial instruments that contain an embedded derivative requiring
bifurcation. SFAS No. 155 is effective January 1, 2007. The Company is currently evaluating the
impact of adopting SFAS No. 155 on its Consolidated Financial Statements.
Uncertainty in Income Taxes. In July 2006, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes (FIN 48). FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold
and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position
taken in a tax return. The Company must presume the tax position will be examined by the relevant
tax authority and determine whether it is more likely than not that the tax position will be
sustained upon examination, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes,
based on the technical merits of the position. A tax position that meets the more-likely-than-not
recognition threshold is measured to determine the amount of benefit to recognize in the financial
statements. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties,
accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition. FIN 48 is effective January 1, 2007. The
cumulative effect of applying the provisions of FIN 48 represents a change in accounting principle
and shall be reported as an adjustment to the opening balance of Retained earnings. The Company is
currently evaluating the impact of adopting FIN 48 on its Consolidated Financial Statements.
Fair Value Measurements. In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements (SFAS No. 157). SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles and expands disclosures about fair
value measurements. The changes to current practice resulting from the application of SFAS No. 157
relate to the definition of fair value, the methods used to measure fair value and the expanded
disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements
issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. Earlier application is encouraged,
provided that the reporting entity has not yet issued financial statements for that fiscal year,
including financial statements for an interim period within that fiscal year. The provisions of
SFAS No. 157 should be applied prospectively as of the beginning of the fiscal year in which it is
initially applied, except for certain financial instruments which require retrospective application
as of the beginning of the fiscal year of initial application (a limited form of retrospective
application). The transition adjustment, measured as the difference between the carrying amounts
and the fair values of those financial instruments at the date SFAS No. 157 is initially applied,
should be recognized as a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of Retained earnings.
The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS No. 157 on its Consolidated
Financial Statements and whether to adopt its provisions prior to the required effective date.
Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans. In September 2006, the FASB issued
SFAS No. 158, Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans
(SFAS No. 158). SFAS No. 158 requires an employer to recognize the overfunded or underfunded
status of a defined benefit postretirement plan (other than a multiemployer plan) as an asset or
liability in its statement of financial position and to recognize changes in that funded status in
the year in which the changes occur through
12
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
comprehensive income, net of income taxes. SFAS No. 158 also requires an employer to measure
the funded status of a plan as of the date of its year-end statement of financial position. The
recognition provisions of SFAS No. 158 are effective on December 31, 2006, and the requirement to
measure plan assets and benefit obligations as of the date of the employers fiscal year-end
statement of financial position is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2008.
Prospective application is required. The Company does not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 158 to
have a significant impact on its Consolidated Financial Statements.
Effects of Prior Year Misstatements. In September 2006, the SEC issued SAB No. 108,
Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year
Financial Statements (SAB 108). SAB 108 requires that registrants quantify errors using both a
balance sheet and income statement approach and evaluate whether either approach results in a
misstated amount that, when all relevant quantitative and qualitative factors are considered, is
material. SAB 108 permits public companies to initially apply its provisions either by (i)
restating prior year financial statements or (ii) recording the cumulative effect as adjustments to
the carrying values of assets and liabilities with an offsetting adjustment recorded to the opening
balance of Retained earnings. SAB 108 is effective for fiscal years ending after November 15, 2006.
The Company does not expect the adoption of SAB 108 to have a significant impact on its
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Fair Value Option. In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (SFAS No. 159). SFAS No. 159 permits entities to
choose, at specified election dates, to measure eligible items at fair value (the Fair Value
Option). Unrealized gains and losses on items for which the Fair Value Option has been elected are
reported in earnings. The Fair Value Option is applied instrument by instrument (with certain
exceptions), is irrevocable (unless a new election date occurs) and is applied only to an entire
instrument. The effect of the first remeasurement to fair value is reported as a cumulative-effect
adjustment to the opening balance of Retained earnings. SFAS No. 159 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007 with earlier application permitted, subject to certain
conditions. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS No. 159 on its
Consolidated Financial Statements and whether to adopt its provisions prior to the required
effective date.
3. (Loss) Earnings Per Share
Basic (loss) earnings per share was computed by dividing net (loss) earnings during the period
by the weighted-average number of shares outstanding during the period. Diluted (loss) earnings per
share was computed by dividing net (loss) earnings by the weighted-average number of shares
outstanding, assuming all potentially dilutive common shares were issued. The calculation of
diluted loss per share for the three months ended March 31, 2006 does not include 588,104 and
383,545 weighted-average shares of common stock potentially issuable for stock options and RSUs,
respectively, because the effect would be anti-dilutive.
13
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The following table summarizes the basic and diluted (loss) earnings per share calculations
for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions, except share and |
|
|
|
per share data) |
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding basic |
|
|
53,481,316 |
|
|
|
52,618,146 |
|
Effect of potentially dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
329,334 |
|
RSUs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
314,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding diluted |
|
|
53,481,316 |
|
|
|
53,261,920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Mortgage Loans Held for Sale
Mortgage loans held for sale, net consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale (MLHS) |
|
$ |
2,045 |
|
|
$ |
2,091 |
|
Home equity lines of credit |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
Construction loans |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
Net deferred loan origination fees and expenses |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net |
|
$ |
2,286 |
|
|
$ |
2,395 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31, 2006, the Company pledged $1.6 billion of Mortgage loans held for sale, net as
collateral in asset-backed debt arrangements.
5. Mortgage Servicing Rights
The activity in the Companys loan servicing portfolio associated with its capitalized
mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
145,827 |
|
|
$ |
138,494 |
|
Additions |
|
|
7,505 |
|
|
|
5,865 |
|
Payoffs and curtailments |
|
|
(6,918 |
) |
|
|
(7,251 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
$ |
146,414 |
|
|
$ |
137,108 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The activity in the Companys capitalized MSRs consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005(2) |
|
|
|
2006(1) |
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Mortgage Servicing Rights: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
2,152 |
|
|
$ |
2,173 |
|
Effect of adoption of SFAS No. 156 |
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Additions |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
Changes in fair value due to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realization of expected cash flows |
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Changes in market inputs or assumptions used in the valuation model |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and deletions |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(102 |
) |
Other-than-temporary impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
|
2,073 |
|
|
|
2,134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Allowance: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
(567 |
) |
Effect of adoption of SFAS No. 156 |
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery of impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
112 |
|
Other-than-temporary impairment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(441 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
$ |
2,073 |
|
|
$ |
1,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
After the adoption of SFAS No. 156 effective January 1, 2006, MSRs are recorded
at fair value. See Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. |
|
(2) |
|
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 156 effective January 1, 2006, MSRs were
recorded at the lower of fair value or amortized basis based on defined strata. See Note 1,
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies. |
The significant assumptions used in estimating the fair value of MSRs at March 31, 2006
and 2005 were as follows (in annual rates):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Prepayment speed |
|
|
18% |
|
|
|
18% |
|
Discount rate |
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
12% |
|
Volatility |
|
|
14% |
|
|
|
18% |
|
The value of the Companys MSRs is driven by the net positive cash flows associated with the
Companys servicing activities. These cash flows include contractually specified servicing fees,
late fees and other ancillary servicing revenue. The Company recorded contractually specified
servicing fees, late fees and other ancillary servicing revenue within Loan servicing income in the
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Net service fee revenue |
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
Late fees |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Other ancillary servicing revenue |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
15
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
As of March 31, 2006, the Companys MSRs had a weighted-average life of approximately 5.0
years. Approximately 69% of the MSRs associated with the loan servicing portfolio as of March 31,
2006 were restricted from sale without prior approval from the Companys private label clients or
investors.
The following summarizes certain information regarding the initial and ending capitalization
rates of the Companys MSRs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
Initial capitalization rate of additions to MSRs |
|
|
1.29% |
|
|
|
1.31% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
Capitalized servicing rate (based on fair value) |
|
|
1.42% |
|
|
|
1.23% |
Capitalized servicing multiple (based on fair value) |
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
Weighted-average servicing fee (in basis points) |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
33 |
The net impact to the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations resulting from changes
in the fair value of the Companys MSRs, amortization and related derivatives was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2005 As Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Amortization of mortgage servicing rights |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(102 |
) |
Recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
112 |
|
Changes in fair value of mortgage servicing rights due to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realization of expected cash flows |
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Changes in market inputs or assumptions used in the valuation model |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net derivative loss related to mortgage servicing rights (See Note 7) |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
$ |
(112 |
) |
|
$ |
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. Loan Servicing Portfolio
The following tables summarize certain information regarding the Companys mortgage loan
servicing portfolio for the periods indicated. Unless otherwise noted, the information presented
includes both loans held-for-sale and loans subserviced for others.
Portfolio Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
154,843 |
|
|
$ |
143,056 |
|
Additions |
|
|
8,441 |
|
|
|
7,945 |
|
Payoffs and curtailments |
|
|
(7,217 |
) |
|
|
(7,508 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period(1) |
|
$ |
156,067 |
|
|
$ |
143,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Portfolio Composition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Owned servicing portfolio |
|
$ |
149,676 |
|
$ |
141,459 |
Subserviced portfolio |
|
|
8,727 |
|
|
4,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total servicing portfolio |
|
$ |
158,403 |
|
$ |
146,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate |
|
$ |
97,195 |
|
$ |
82,652 |
Adjustable rate |
|
|
61,208 |
|
|
63,380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total servicing portfolio |
|
$ |
158,403 |
|
$ |
146,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conventional loans |
|
$ |
147,143 |
|
$ |
134,461 |
Government loans |
|
|
6,848 |
|
|
7,651 |
Home equity lines of credit |
|
|
4,412 |
|
|
3,920 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total servicing portfolio |
|
$ |
158,403 |
|
$ |
146,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average interest rate(1) |
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portfolio Delinquency (1) (2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
|
Number |
|
Unpaid |
|
Number |
|
Unpaid |
|
|
of Loans |
|
Balance |
|
of Loans |
|
Balance |
30 days |
|
|
1.49 |
% |
|
|
1.23 |
% |
|
|
1.69 |
% |
|
|
1.33 |
% |
60 days |
|
|
0.28 |
% |
|
|
0.22 |
% |
|
|
0.31 |
% |
|
|
0.22 |
% |
90 or more days |
|
|
0.35 |
% |
|
|
0.26 |
% |
|
|
0.36 |
% |
|
|
0.23 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total delinquency |
|
|
2.12 |
% |
|
|
1.71 |
% |
|
|
2.36 |
% |
|
|
1.78 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreclosure/real estate owned/bankruptcies |
|
|
0.90 |
% |
|
|
0.58 |
% |
|
|
0.98 |
% |
|
|
0.60 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes certain home equity loans subserviced for others. These amounts were
approximately $2.3 billion and $2.5 billion as of March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. |
|
(2) |
|
Represents the loan servicing portfolio delinquencies as a percentage of
the total number of loans and the total unpaid balance of the portfolio. |
7. Derivatives and Risk Management Activities
The Companys principal market exposure is to interest rate risk, specifically long-term U.S.
Treasury (Treasury) and mortgage interest rates due to their impact on mortgage-related assets
and commitments. The Company also has exposure to the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and
commercial paper interest rates due to their impact on variable-rate borrowings, other interest
rate sensitive liabilities and net investment in variable-rate lease assets. The Company uses
various financial instruments, including swap contracts, forward delivery commitments, futures and
options contracts to manage and reduce this risk.
The following is a description of the Companys risk management policies related to interest
rate lock commitments (IRLCs), MLHS, MSRs and debt:
Interest Rate Lock Commitments. IRLCs represent an agreement to extend credit to a mortgage
loan applicant whereby the interest rate on the loan is set prior to funding. The loan commitment
binds the Company (subject to the loan approval process) to lend funds to a potential borrower at
the specified rate, regardless of whether interest rates have changed between the commitment date
and the loan funding date. The Companys loan commitments generally range between 30 and 90 days;
however, the borrower is not obligated to obtain the loan.
17
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
As such, the Companys outstanding IRLCs are subject to interest rate risk and related price
risk during the period from the IRLC through the loan funding date or expiration date. In addition,
the Company is subject to fallout risk, which is the risk that an approved borrower will choose not
to close on the loan. The Company uses a combination of forward delivery commitments and option
contracts to manage these risks. The Company considers historical commitment-to-closing ratios to
estimate the quantity of mortgage loans that will fund within the terms of the IRLCs.
IRLCs are defined as derivative instruments under SFAS No. 133, as amended by SFAS No. 149,
Amendment of Statement No. 133 on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 149).
Because IRLCs are considered derivatives, the associated risk management activities do not qualify
for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133. Therefore, the IRLCs and the related derivative
instruments are considered freestanding derivatives and are classified as Other assets or Other
liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets with changes in their fair values recorded
as a component of Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Mortgage Loans Held for Sale. The Company is subject to interest rate and price risk on its
MLHS from the loan funding date until the date the loan is sold into the secondary market. The
Company uses mortgage forward delivery commitments to hedge these risks. These forward delivery
commitments fix the forward sales price that will be realized in the secondary market and thereby
reduce the interest rate and price risk to the Company. Such forward delivery commitments are
designated and classified as fair value hedges to the extent they qualify for hedge accounting
under SFAS No. 133. Forward delivery commitments that do not qualify for hedge accounting are
considered freestanding derivatives. The forward delivery commitments are included in Other assets
or Other liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Changes in the fair value of all
forward delivery commitments are recorded as a component of Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net in
the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. Changes in the fair value of MLHS are recorded
as a component of Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net to the extent they qualify for hedge
accounting under SFAS No. 133. Changes in the fair value of MLHS are not recorded to the extent the
hedge relationship is deemed to be ineffective under SFAS No. 133.
The Company uses forward loan sales commitments, Treasury futures and options on Treasury
securities in its risk management activities related to its IRLCs and MLHS.
18
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The following table provides a summary of the changes in the fair values of IRLCs, MLHS and
the related derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Change in value of IRLCs |
|
$ |
(20 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
Change in value of MLHS |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total change in value of IRLCs and MLHS |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark-to-market of derivatives designated as hedges of MLHS |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Mark-to-market of freestanding derivatives(1) |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain on derivatives |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain on hedging activities (2) |
|
$ |
21 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amount includes $4 million and $5 million of ineffectiveness recognized on
hedges of MLHS during the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, due to the
application of SFAS No. 133. In accordance with SFAS No. 133, the change in the value of MLHS
is only recorded to the extent the related derivatives are considered hedge effective. The
ineffective portion of designated derivatives represents the change in the fair value of
derivatives for which there were no corresponding changes in the value of the loans that did
not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133. |
|
(2) |
|
During the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company recognized $(3)
million and $(12) million, respectively, of hedge ineffectiveness on derivatives designated as
hedges of MLHS that qualified for hedge accounting under SFAS No. 133. |
Mortgage Servicing Rights. The Companys MSRs are subject to substantial interest rate
risk as the mortgage notes underlying the MSRs permit the borrowers to prepay the loans. Therefore,
the value of the MSRs tends to diminish in periods of declining interest rates (as prepayments
increase) and increase in periods of rising interest rates (as prepayments decrease). The Company
uses a combination of derivative instruments to offset potential adverse changes in the fair value
of its MSRs that could affect reported earnings. The gain or loss on derivatives is intended to
react in the opposite direction of the change in the fair value of MSRs. The MSRs derivatives
generally increase in value as interest rates decline and decrease in value as interest rates rise.
For all periods presented, all of the derivatives associated with the MSRs were freestanding
derivatives and were not designated in a hedge relationship pursuant to SFAS No. 133. These
derivatives are classified as Other assets or Other liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets with changes in their fair values recorded in Net derivative gain (loss) related to
mortgage servicing rights in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Company uses interest rate swap contracts, interest rate futures contracts, interest rate
forward contracts, mortgage forward contracts, options on forward contracts, options on futures
contracts, options on swap contracts and principal-only swaps in its risk management activities
related to its MSRs.
19
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The net activity in the Companys derivatives related to MSRs consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Net balance, beginning of period |
|
$ |
44 |
(1) |
|
$ |
60 |
(2) |
Additions |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
Changes in fair value |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
Net settlement proceeds |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(234 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance, end of period |
|
$ |
(40) |
(3) |
|
$ |
20 |
(4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The net balance represents the gross asset of $73 million (recorded within Other
assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet) net of the gross liability of $29 million
(recorded within Other liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet). |
|
(2) |
|
The net balance represents the gross asset of $79 million (recorded within
Other assets) net of the gross liability of $19 million (recorded within Other liabilities). |
|
(3) |
|
The net balance represents the gross asset of $33 million (recorded within
Other assets in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet) net of the gross liability of $73
million (recorded within Other liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet). |
|
(4) |
|
The net balance represents the gross asset of $78 million (recorded within
Other assets) net of the gross liability of $58 million (recorded within Other liabilities). |
Debt. The Company uses various hedging strategies and derivative financial instruments
to create a desired mix of fixed- and variable-rate assets and liabilities. Derivative instruments
used in these hedging strategies include swaps, interest rate caps and instruments with purchased
option features. To more closely match the characteristics of the related assets, including the
Companys net investment in variable-rate lease assets, the Company either issues variable-rate
debt or fixed-rate debt, which may be swapped to variable LIBOR-based rates. The derivatives used
to manage the risk associated with the Companys fixed-rate debt include instruments that were
designated as fair value hedges as well as instruments that were not designated as fair value
hedges. The terms of the derivatives that were designated as fair value hedges match those of the
underlying hedged debt resulting in no net impact on the Companys results of operations during the
three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, except to create the accrual of interest expense at
variable rates. Losses recognized during the three months ended March 31, 2006 related to
instruments which do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment pursuant to SFAS No. 133 were not
significant and were recorded in Mortgage interest expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statement
of Operations. The Company recognized losses of $3 million related to instruments which do not
qualify for hedge accounting treatment pursuant to SFAS No. 133 for the three months ended March
31, 2005, which were recorded in Mortgage interest expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statement
of Operations.
From time to time, the Company uses derivatives that convert variable cash flows to fixed cash
flows to manage the risk associated with its variable-rate debt and net investment in variable-rate
lease assets. Such derivatives may include freestanding derivatives and derivatives designated as
cash flow hedges. Net losses related to instruments that were not designated as cash flow hedges
for the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005 were not significant and were recorded in Fleet
interest expense in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
20
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
8. Vehicle Leasing Activities
The components of Net investment in fleet leases were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Operating Leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicles under open-end operating leases |
|
$ |
6,580 |
|
|
$ |
6,588 |
|
Vehicles under closed-end operating leases |
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicles under operating leases |
|
|
6,873 |
|
|
|
6,809 |
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(3,202 |
) |
|
|
(3,273 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in operating leases |
|
|
3,671 |
|
|
|
3,536 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Financing Leases: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease payments receivable |
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
Less: Unearned income |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in direct financing leases |
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Lease Vehicles: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicles not yet subject to a lease |
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
Vehicles held for sale |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in off-lease vehicles |
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in fleet leases |
|
$ |
4,082 |
|
|
$ |
3,966 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
9. Debt and Borrowing Arrangements
The following tables summarize the components of the Companys indebtedness at March 31, 2006
and December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
Vehicle |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management |
|
|
Warehouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Term notes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
1,049 |
|
|
$ |
1,849 |
|
Variable funding notes |
|
|
3,347 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,548 |
|
Subordinated debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
Commercial paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
829 |
|
|
|
905 |
|
Borrowings under credit facilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
Other |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,359 |
|
|
$ |
1,495 |
|
|
$ |
1,980 |
|
|
$ |
6,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
Vehicle |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management |
|
|
Warehouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Term notes |
|
$ |
1,318 |
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
1,136 |
|
|
$ |
3,254 |
|
Variable funding notes |
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,947 |
|
Subordinated debt |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
468 |
|
Commercial paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
747 |
|
|
|
831 |
|
Borrowings under credit facilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
181 |
|
Other |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,406 |
|
|
$ |
1,451 |
|
|
$ |
1,887 |
|
|
$ |
6,744 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed Debt
Vehicle Management Asset-Backed Debt
As of December 31, 2005, vehicle management asset-backed debt primarily represented
variable-rate term notes and variable funding notes issued by Chesapeake Funding LLC, a wholly
owned subsidiary. Variable-rate term notes and variable funding notes outstanding under this
arrangement as of December 31, 2005 aggregated $3.0 billion. As of December 31, 2005, subordinated
notes issued by Terrapin Funding LLC (Terrapin), a consolidated entity, aggregated $367 million.
This debt was issued to support the acquisition of vehicles used by the Fleet Management Services
segments leasing operations.
On March 7, 2006, Chesapeake Funding LLC changed its name to Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC
(Chesapeake Finance), and it and Terrapin redeemed all of their outstanding term notes, variable
funding notes and subordinated notes (with aggregate outstanding principal balances of $1.1
billion, $1.7 billion and $367 million, respectively) and terminated the agreements associated with
those borrowings. Concurrently, Chesapeake Funding LLC (Chesapeake), a newly formed wholly owned
subsidiary, issued variable funding notes under Series 2006-1, with capacity of $2.7 billion, and
Series 2006-2, with capacity of $1.0 billion, to fund the redemption of this debt and provide
additional committed funding for the Fleet Management Services operations. The Company recorded a
$4 million loss on the extinguishment of the Chesapeake Finance and Terrapin debt that was included
in Other operating expenses in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three
months ended March 31, 2006.
22
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
As of March 31, 2006, variable funding notes outstanding under this arrangement aggregated
$3.3 billion and were issued to redeem the Chesapeake Finance and Terrapin debt and support the
acquisition of vehicles used by the Fleet Management Services segments leasing operations. The
debt issued as of March 31, 2006 was collateralized by approximately $4.0 billion of leased
vehicles and related assets, which are primarily included in Net investment in fleet leases in the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet and are not available to pay the Companys general
obligations. The titles to all the vehicles collateralizing the debt issued by Chesapeake are held
in a bankruptcy remote trust, and the Company acts as a servicer of all such leases. The bankruptcy
remote trust also acts as lessor under both operating and direct financing lease agreements. As of
March 31, 2006, the agreements governing the Series 2006-1 and Series 2006-2 notes were scheduled
to expire on March 6, 2007 and December 1, 2006, respectively (the Scheduled Expiry Dates). These
agreements are renewable on or before the Scheduled Expiry Dates, subject to agreement by the
parties. If the agreements are not renewed, monthly repayments on the notes are required to be made
as certain cash inflows are received relating to the securitized vehicle leases and related assets
beginning in the month following the Scheduled Expiry Dates and ending up to 125 months after the
Scheduled Expiry Dates. The weighted-average interest rate of vehicle management asset-backed debt
arrangements was 5.1% and 4.8% as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively.
As of March 31, 2006, the total capacity under vehicle management asset-backed debt
arrangements was approximately $3.7 billion, and the Company had $353 million of unused capacity
available. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for a discussion of modifications made to vehicle
management asset-backed debt arrangements after March 31, 2006.
Mortgage Warehouse Asset-Backed Debt
Bishops Gate Residential Mortgage Trust (Bishops Gate) is a consolidated bankruptcy remote
special purpose entity that is utilized to warehouse mortgage loans originated by the Company prior
to their sale into the secondary market. The activities of Bishops Gate are limited to (i)
purchasing mortgage loans from the Companys mortgage subsidiary, (ii) issuing commercial paper,
senior term notes, subordinated certificates and/or borrowing under a liquidity agreement to effect
such purchases, (iii) entering into interest rate swaps to hedge interest rate risk and certain
non-credit-related market risk on the purchased mortgage loans, (iv) selling and securitizing the
acquired mortgage loans to third parties and (v) engaging in certain related transactions. As of
both March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Bishops Gate term notes (the Bishops Gate Notes)
issued under the Base Indenture dated as of December 11, 1998 (the Bishops Gate Indenture) between The
Bank of New York, as Indenture Trustee (the Bishops Gate Trustee) and Bishops Gate aggregated
$800 million. The Bishops Gate Notes are variable-rate instruments and, as of March 31, 2006, were
scheduled to mature between September 2006 and November 2008. The weighted-average interest rate on
the Bishops Gate Notes as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 5.0% and 4.7%, respectively.
As of both March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Bishops Gate subordinated certificates (the
Bishops Gate Certificates) aggregated $101 million. As of March 31, 2006, the Bishops Gate
Certificates were primarily variable-rate instruments and were scheduled to mature between
September 2006 and May 2008. The weighted-average interest rate on the Bishops Gate Certificates
as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 6.1% and 5.8%, respectively. As of March 31, 2006
and December 31, 2005, the Bishops Gate commercial paper, issued under the Amended and Restated
Liquidity Agreement, dated as of December 11, 1998, as further amended and restated as of December
2, 2003, among Bishops Gate, certain banks listed therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as Agent (the
Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement), aggregated $76 million and $84 million, respectively. As of
March 31, 2006, the capacity under the Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement was $1.5 billion. The
Bishops Gate commercial paper are fixed-rate instruments and, as of March 31, 2006, were scheduled
to mature in April 2006. The weighted-average interest rate on the Bishops Gate commercial paper
as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 4.9% and 4.3%, respectively. As of March 31, 2006,
the debt issued by Bishops Gate was collateralized by approximately $1.0 billion of underlying
mortgage loans and related assets, primarily recorded in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. See Note 18,
23
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Subsequent Events for a discussion of modifications made to Bishops Gates mortgage
warehouse asset-backed debt arrangements after March 31, 2006.
The Company also maintains a $500 million committed mortgage repurchase facility (the
Mortgage Repurchase Facility) that is used to finance mortgage loans originated by PHH Mortgage
Corporation (PHH Mortgage), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The Company generally uses
this facility to supplement the capacity of Bishops Gate and unsecured borrowings used to fund the
Companys mortgage warehouse needs. As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, borrowings under
this variable-rate facility were $201 million and $247 million, respectively. The Mortgage
Repurchase Facility was collateralized by underlying mortgage loans of $225 million, included in
Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2006,
and is funded by a multi-seller conduit. As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, borrowings
under the Mortgage Repurchase Facility bore interest at 4.9% and 4.3%, respectively. The Mortgage
Repurchase Facility was scheduled to expire on January 12, 2007. See Note 18, Subsequent Events
for a discussion of modifications made to the Mortgage Repurchase Facility after March 31, 2006.
The Mortgage Venture maintains a secured line of credit agreement with Barclays Bank PLC, Bank
of Montreal and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. that is used to finance mortgage loans originated by the
Mortgage Venture. The capacity of this line of credit was $350 million as of March 31, 2006.
Borrowings outstanding under this line of credit were $269 million and $177 million as of March 31,
2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively, and, as of March 31, 2006, were collateralized by
underlying mortgage loans and related assets of $338 million, primarily included in Mortgage loans
held for sale, net in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. This variable-rate credit agreement
was scheduled to expire on October 5, 2006 and bore interest at 5.7% and 5.2% on March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005, respectively. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for a discussion of modifications
made to the Mortgage Ventures mortgage warehouse asset-backed debt arrangements after March 31,
2006.
As of March 31, 2006, the total capacity under mortgage warehouse asset-backed debt
arrangements was approximately $3.3 billion, and the Company had approximately $1.8 billion of
unused capacity available.
Unsecured Debt
Term Notes
The outstanding carrying value of term notes at March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 consisted
of $1.0 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively, of medium-term notes (the MTNs) publicly issued
under the Indenture, dated as of November 6, 2000 (as amended and supplemented, the MTN
Indenture) by and between PHH and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, N.A., as successor trustee for Bank
One Trust Company, N.A. (the MTN Indenture Trustee) that mature between January 2007 and April
2018. The effective rate of interest for the MTNs outstanding as of March 31, 2006 and December 31,
2005 was 6.7% and 6.8%, respectively. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for a discussion of
repurchases of the MTNs and modifications made to the Companys MTN Indenture after March 31, 2006.
Commercial Paper
The Companys policy is to maintain available capacity under its committed credit facilities
(described below) to fully support its outstanding unsecured commercial paper. The Company had
unsecured commercial paper obligations of $829 million and $747 million as of March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005, respectively. This commercial paper is primarily fixed-rate and matures within
270 days of issuance. The weighted-average interest rate on outstanding unsecured commercial paper
as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 5.1% and 4.7%, respectively.
24
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Credit Facilities
As of December 31, 2005, the Company was party to a $1.25 billion Three Year Competitive
Advance and Revolving Credit Agreement (the Credit Facility), dated as of June 28, 2004 and
amended as of December 21, 2004, among PHH Corporation, a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as administrative agent. On January 6, 2006, the Company entered into the Amended and
Restated Competitive Advance and Revolving Credit Agreement (the Amended Credit Facility), among
PHH Corporation, a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent, which
increased the capacity of the Credit Facility from $1.25 billion to $1.30 billion, extended the
termination date from June 28, 2007 to January 6, 2011 and created a $50 million United States
dollar equivalent Canadian sub-facility, which is available to the Companys Fleet Management
Services operations in Canada. Pricing under the Amended Credit Facility is based upon the
Companys senior unsecured long-term debt ratings. If the ratings on the Companys senior unsecured
long-term debt assigned by Moodys Investors Service, Standard & Poors and Fitch Ratings are not
equivalent to each other, the second highest credit rating assigned by them determines pricing
under the Amended Credit Facility. Borrowings under the Amended Credit Facility bore interest at
LIBOR plus a margin of 38 basis points (bps) as of March 31, 2006. The Amended Credit Facility
also requires the Company to pay utilization fees if its usage exceeds 50% of the
aggregate commitments under the Amended Credit Facility and per annum facility fees. As of March
31, 2006, the per annum utilization and facility fees were 10 bps and 12 bps, respectively.
Borrowings under the Amended Credit Facility were $96 million as of March 31, 2006. There were no
borrowings under the Credit Facility as of December 31, 2005.
The Company maintains other unsecured credit facilities in the ordinary course of business as
set forth in Debt Maturities below. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for a discussion of
modifications made to the Companys unsecured credit facilities and changes in the Companys senior
unsecured long-term debt ratings after March 31, 2006.
Debt Maturities
The following table provides the contractual maturities of the Companys indebtedness at March
31, 2006 except for the Companys vehicle management asset-backed notes, where estimated payments
have been used assuming the underlying agreements were not renewed (the indentures related to
vehicle management asset-backed notes require principal payments based on cash inflows relating to
the securitized vehicle leases and related assets if the indentures are not renewed on or before
the Scheduled Expiry Dates):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Within one year |
|
$ |
1,140 |
|
|
$ |
835 |
|
|
$ |
1,975 |
|
Between one and two years |
|
|
1,068 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
1,513 |
|
Between two and three years |
|
|
1,404 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1,410 |
|
Between three and four years |
|
|
683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
683 |
|
Between four and five years |
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
491 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,854 |
|
|
$ |
1,980 |
|
|
$ |
6,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
As of March 31, 2006, available funding under the Companys asset-backed debt arrangements and
unsecured committed credit facilities consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilized |
|
|
Available |
|
|
Capacity(1) |
|
|
Capacity |
|
|
Capacity |
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Asset-Backed Funding Arrangements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicle management |
|
$ |
3,712 |
|
|
$ |
3,359 |
|
|
$ |
353 |
Mortgage warehouse |
|
|
3,303 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,808 |
|
Unsecured Committed Credit Facilities (2) |
|
|
1,302 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Capacity is dependent upon maintaining compliance with, or obtaining waivers of,
the terms, conditions and covenants of the respective agreements. With respect to asset-backed
funding arrangements, capacity may be further limited by the availability of asset eligibility
requirements under the respective agreements. |
|
(2) |
|
Available capacity reflects a reduction in availability due to an allocation against
the facilities of $829 million which fully supports the outstanding unsecured commercial paper
issued by the Company as of March 31, 2006. Under the Companys policy, all of the outstanding
unsecured commercial paper is supported by available capacity under its unsecured committed
credit facilities. In addition, utilized capacity reflects $2 million of letters of credit
issued under the Amended Credit Facility. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for information
regarding changes in the Companys capacity under asset-backed debt arrangements and unsecured
committed credit facilities after March 31, 2006. |
Beginning on March 16, 2006, access to the Companys shelf registration statement for
public debt issuances was no longer available due to the Companys non-current filing status with
the SEC.
Debt Covenants
Certain of the Companys debt arrangements require the maintenance of certain financial ratios
and contain restrictive covenants, including, but not limited to, restrictions on indebtedness of
material subsidiaries, mergers, liens, liquidations and sale and leaseback transactions. The
Amended Credit Facility requires that the Company maintain: (i) on the last day of each fiscal
quarter, net worth of $1.0 billion plus 25% of net income, if positive, for each fiscal quarter
ended after December 31, 2004 and (ii) at any time, a ratio of indebtedness to tangible net worth
no greater than 10:1. The MTN Indenture requires that the Company maintain a debt to tangible
equity ratio of not more than 10:1. The MTN Indenture also restricts the Company from paying
dividends if, after giving effect to the dividend, the debt to equity ratio exceeds 6.5:1. At March
31, 2006, the Company was in compliance with all of its financial covenants related to its debt
arrangements.
Under many of the Companys financing, servicing, hedging and related agreements and
instruments (collectively, the Financing Agreements), the Company is required to provide
consolidated and/or subsidiary-level audited annual financial statements, unaudited quarterly
financial statements and related documents. The delay in completing the 2005 audited financial
statements, the restatement of financial results for periods prior to the quarter ended December
31, 2005 and the delay in completing the unaudited quarterly financial statements for 2006 created
the potential for breaches under certain of the Financing Agreements for failure to deliver the
financial statements and/or documents by specified deadlines, as well as potential breaches of
other covenants. On March 17, 2006, the Company obtained waivers under its Amended Credit Facility
and its Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement which extended the deadlines for the delivery of the 2005
annual audited financial statements, the unaudited financial statements for the quarter ended March
31, 2006 and related documents to June 15, 2006 and waived certain other potential breaches. See
Note 18, Subsequent Events for a discussion of additional debt waivers obtained by the Company
which extended the deadlines for the delivery of financial statements and related documents under
certain of the Financing Agreements.
Under certain of the Financing Agreements, the lenders or trustees have the right to notify
the Company if they believe it has breached a covenant under the operative documents and may
declare an event of default. If one or more notices of default were to be given, the Company
believes it would have various periods in which to cure
26
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
such events of default. If it does not cure the events of default or obtain necessary waivers
within the required time periods or certain extended time periods, the maturity of some of its debt
could be accelerated and its ability to incur additional indebtedness could be restricted. In
addition, events of default or acceleration under certain of the Companys Financing Agreements
would trigger cross-default provisions under certain of its other Financing Agreements. See Note
18, Subsequent Events for a further discussion of potential events of default under the Financing
Agreements.
10. Income Taxes
The Company records its interim tax provisions by applying a projected full-year effective
income tax rate to its quarterly Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest for results that it deems to be reliably estimable in accordance with FASB
Interpretation No. 18, Accounting for Income Taxes in Interim Periods. Certain results dependent
on fair value adjustments of the Companys Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments are
considered not to be reliably estimable and therefore the Company records discrete year-to-date
income tax provisions on those results.
During
the three months ended March 31, 2006, the Provision for income taxes was $13 million
and was significantly impacted by a $15 million increase in income tax contingency reserves and a
$1 million increase in valuation allowances for state net operating losses (NOLs) generated
during the three months ended March 31, 2006 for which the Company believes it is more likely than
not that the NOLs will not be realized. In addition, the Company recorded a state income tax
benefit of $4 million. Due to the Companys year-to-date and projected full-year mix of income and
loss from its operations by entity and state income tax jurisdiction in 2006, there was a
significant change in the 2006 state income tax effective rate in comparison to 2005.
During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Provision for income taxes was $23 million
and was significantly impacted by a net deferred income tax charge related to the Spin-Off of $5
million representing the change in estimated deferred state income taxes for state apportionment
factors and an increase in valuation allowances of $3 million for state NOLs generated during the
three months ended March 31, 2005 for which the Company believed it was more likely than not that
the NOLs would not be realized.
11. Commitments and Contingencies
Tax Contingencies
In connection with the Spin-Off, the Company and Cendant entered into a tax sharing agreement
dated January 31, 2005, which was amended on December 21, 2005 (the Amended Tax Sharing
Agreement). The Amended Tax Sharing Agreement governs the allocation of liabilities for taxes
between Cendant and the Company, indemnification for certain tax liabilities and responsibility for
preparing and filing tax returns and defending tax contests, as well as other tax-related matters.
The Amended Tax Sharing Agreement contains certain provisions relating to the treatment of the
ultimate settlement of Cendant tax contingencies that relate to audit adjustments due to taxing
authorities review of income tax returns. The Companys tax basis in certain assets may be
adjusted in the future, and the Company may be required to remit tax benefits ultimately realized
by the Company to Cendant in certain circumstances. Certain of the effects of future adjustments
relating to years the Company was included in Cendants income tax returns that change the tax
basis of assets, liabilities and net operating loss and tax credit carryforward amounts may be
recorded in equity rather than as an adjustment to the tax provision.
Also, pursuant to the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement, the Company and Cendant have agreed to
indemnify each other for certain liabilities and obligations. The Companys indemnification
obligations could be significant in certain circumstances. For example, the Company is required to
indemnify Cendant for any taxes incurred by it and its affiliates as a result of any action,
misrepresentation or omission by the Company or its affiliates that causes the distribution of the
Companys Common stock by Cendant or the internal reorganization transactions
27
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
relating thereto to fail to qualify as tax-free. In the event that the Spin-Off or the
internal reorganization transactions relating thereto do not qualify as tax-free for any reason
other than the actions, misrepresentations or omissions of Cendant or the Company or its respective
subsidiaries, then the Company would be responsible for 13.7% of any taxes resulting from such a
determination. This percentage was based on the relative pro forma net book values of Cendant and
the Company as of September 30, 2004, without giving effect to any adjustments to the book values
of certain long-lived assets that may be required as a result of the Spin-Off and the related
transactions. The Company cannot determine whether it will have to indemnify Cendant or its
affiliates for any substantial obligations in the future. The Company also has no assurance that if
Cendant or any of its affiliates is required to indemnify the Company for any substantial
obligations, they will be able to satisfy those obligations.
Cendant and its subsidiaries are the subject of an Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) audit for the tax years ended December 31, 2003 through 2006.
The Company, since it was a subsidiary of Cendant through January 31, 2005, is
included in this IRS audit of Cendant. Under certain provisions of
the IRS
regulations, the Company and its subsidiaries are subject to several liability
to the IRS (together with Cendant and certain of its affiliates (the
Cendant Group) prior to the Spin-Off) for any consolidated federal income tax liability of the Cendant
Group arising in a taxable year during any part of which they were members of
the Cendant Group. Cendant disclosed in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2006 (filed on March 1, 2007 under Avis Budget Group,
Inc.) that it settled the IRS audit for the taxable years 1998 through 2002
that included the Company. As provided in the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement,
Cendant is responsible for and required to pay to the IRS all taxes required to
be reported on the consolidated federal returns for taxable periods ended on or
before January 31, 2005. Pursuant to the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement, Cendant
is solely responsible for separate state taxes on a significant number of the
Companys income tax returns for years 2003 and prior. In addition, Cendant is
solely responsible for paying tax deficiencies arising from adjustments to the
Companys federal income tax returns and for the Companys state and local
income tax returns filed on a consolidated, combined or unitary basis with
Cendant for taxable periods ended on or before the Spin-Off, except for those
taxes which might be attributable to the Spin-Off or internal reorganization
transactions relating thereto, as more fully discussed above. The Company will
be solely responsible for any tax deficiencies arising from adjustments to
separate state and local income tax returns for taxable periods ending after
2003 and for adjustments to federal and all state and local income tax returns
for periods after the Spin-Off.
The June 1999 disposition of the fleet businesses by Cendant was structured as a tax-free
reorganization by Cendant pursuant to the IRS guidance at the time of the transaction. Accordingly,
no income tax expense was recorded on a majority of the gain from this transaction. However,
pursuant to an interpretive ruling, the IRS has subsequently taken the position that similarly
structured transactions do not qualify as tax-free reorganizations under the Internal Revenue Code
Section 368(a)(1)(A). An adverse ruling by the IRS on the tax-free structure of this transaction
could create a tax benefit to the Company, and the Company would be required to pay Cendant any tax
benefits that are realized by the Company as a result of such ruling. Any cash payments that would
be made for federal or state taxes in connection with an adverse ruling are not expected to be
significant.
Legal Contingencies
The Company is party to various claims and legal proceedings from time to time related to
contract disputes and other commercial, employment and tax matters. Except as disclosed below, the
Company is not aware of any legal proceedings that it believes could have, individually or in the
aggregate, a material adverse effect on its financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In March and April 2006, several class actions were filed against the Company, its Chief
Executive Officer and its former Chief Financial Officer in the United States District Court for
the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs purport to represent a class consisting of all persons
(other than the Companys officers and Directors and their affiliates) who purchased the Companys
Common stock during certain time periods beginning March 15,
2005 in one case and May 12, 2005 in the other cases and ending March 1, 2006 (the Class Period). The plaintiffs allege,
among other things, that the defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5
thereunder. Additionally, two derivative actions were filed in the United States District Court for
the District of New Jersey against the Company, its former Chief Financial Officer and each member
of its Board of Directors. One of these derivative actions has since been voluntarily dismissed by
the plaintiffs. The remaining derivative action alleges breaches of fiduciary duty and related
claims based on substantially the same factual allegations as in the
class action suits. See Note 18, Subsequent Events
for additional discussion of legal contingencies.
28
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, and because these actions are at a
preliminary stage, the Company cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of these matters at
this time. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the alleged claims in each of these
matters. The ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material adverse effect on the
Companys financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Loan Servicing Portfolio
The Company sells a majority of its loans on a non-recourse basis. The Company also provides
representations and warranties to purchasers and insurers of the loans sold. In the event of a
breach of these representations and warranties, the Company may be required to repurchase a
mortgage loan or indemnify the purchaser, and any subsequent loss on the mortgage loan may be borne
by the Company. If there is no breach of a representation and warranty provision, the Company has
no obligation to repurchase the loan or indemnify the investor against loss. The Companys owned
servicing portfolio represents the maximum potential exposure related to representations and
warranty provisions.
Conforming conventional loans serviced by the Company are securitized through Federal National
Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) or Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac)
programs. Such servicing is performed on a non-recourse basis, whereby foreclosure losses are
generally the responsibility of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The government loans serviced by the
Company are generally securitized through Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)
programs. These government loans are either insured against loss by the Federal Housing
Administration or partially guaranteed against loss by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Additionally, jumbo mortgage loans are serviced for various investors on a non-recourse basis.
While the majority of the mortgage loans serviced by the Company were sold without recourse,
the Company has a program in which it provides credit enhancement for a limited period of time to
the purchasers of mortgage loans by retaining a portion of the credit risk. The retained credit
risk, which represents the unpaid principal balance of the loans, was $4.5 billion as of March 31,
2006. In addition, the outstanding balance of loans sold with recourse by the Company was $599
million as of March 31, 2006.
As of March 31, 2006, the Company had a liability of $31 million, recorded in Other
liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet, for probable losses related to the
Companys loan servicing portfolio.
Mortgage Reinsurance
Through the Companys wholly owned mortgage reinsurance subsidiary, Atrium Insurance
Corporation, the Company has entered into contracts with several primary mortgage insurance
companies to provide mortgage reinsurance on certain mortgage loans in the Companys loan servicing
portfolio. Through these contracts, the Company is exposed to losses on mortgage loans pooled by
year of origination. Loss rates on these pools are determined based on the unpaid principal balance
of underlying loans. The Company indemnifies the primary mortgage insurers for loss rates that fall
between a stated minimum and maximum. In return for absorbing this loss exposure, the Company is
contractually entitled to a portion of the insurance premium from the primary mortgage insurers. As
of March 31, 2006, the Company provided such mortgage reinsurance for approximately $11.0 billion
of mortgage loans in its servicing portfolio. As stated above, the Companys contracts with the
primary mortgage insurers limit its maximum potential exposure to reinsurance losses, which was
$737 million as of March 31, 2006. The Company is required to hold securities in trust related to
this potential obligation, which were included in Restricted Cash in the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2006. As of March 31, 2006, a liability of $14 million was recorded
in Other liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet for estimated losses associated
with the Companys mortgage reinsurance activities.
29
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Loan Funding Commitments
As of March 31, 2006, the Company had commitments to fund mortgage loans with agreed-upon
rates or rate protection amounting to $6.3 billion. Additionally, as of March 31, 2006, the Company
had commitments to fund open home equity lines of credit of $2.7 billion and construction loans of
$110 million.
Forward Delivery Commitments
Commitments to sell loans generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses
and may require the payment of a fee. The Company can settle the forward delivery commitments on a
net basis; therefore, the commitments outstanding do not necessarily represent future cash
obligations. The Companys $3.8 billion of forward delivery commitments as of March 31, 2006
generally will be settled within 90 days of the individual commitment date.
Indemnification of Cendant
In connection with the Spin-Off, the Company entered into a separation agreement with Cendant
(the Separation Agreement), pursuant to which, the Company has agreed to indemnify Cendant for
any losses (other than losses relating to taxes, indemnification for which is provided in the
Amended Tax Sharing Agreement) that any party seeks to impose upon Cendant or its affiliates that
relate to, arise or result from: (i) any of the Companys liabilities, including, among other
things: (a) all liabilities reflected in the Companys pro forma balance sheet as of September 30,
2004 or that would be, or should have been, reflected in such balance sheet, (b) all liabilities
relating to the Companys business whether before or after the date of the Spin-Off, (c) all
liabilities that relate to, or arise from any performance guaranty of Avis Group Holdings, Inc. in
connection with indebtedness issued by Chesapeake, (d) any liabilities relating to the Companys
or its affiliates employees, and (e) all liabilities that are expressly allocated to the Company
or its affiliates, or which are not specifically assumed by Cendant or any of its affiliates,
pursuant to the Separation Agreement, the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement or a transition services
agreement the Company entered into in connection with the Spin-Off (the Transition Services
Agreement); (ii) any breach by the Company or its affiliates of the Separation Agreement, the
Amended Tax Sharing Agreement or the Transition Services Agreement and (iii) any liabilities
relating to information in the registration statement on Form 8-A filed with the SEC on January 18,
2005, the information statement filed by the Company as an exhibit to its Current Report on Form
8-K filed on January 19, 2005 (the January 19, 2005 Form 8-K) or the investor presentation filed
as an exhibit to the January 19, 2005 Form 8-K, other than portions thereof provided by Cendant.
There are no specific limitations on the maximum potential amount of future payments to be
made under this indemnification, nor is the Company able to develop an estimate of the maximum
potential amount of future payments to be made under this indemnification, if any, as the
triggering events are not subject to predictability.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Guarantees
In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into numerous agreements that contain
standard guarantees and indemnities whereby the Company indemnifies another party for breaches of
representations and warranties. Such guarantees or indemnifications are granted under various
agreements, including those governing leases of real estate, access to credit facilities and use of
derivatives and issuances of debt or equity securities. The guarantees or indemnifications issued
are for the benefit of the buyers in sale agreements and sellers in purchase agreements, landlords
in lease contracts, financial institutions in credit facility arrangements and derivative contracts
and underwriters in debt or equity security issuances. While some of these guarantees extend only
for the duration of the underlying agreement, many survive the expiration of the term of the
agreement or extend into perpetuity (unless subject to a legal statute of limitations). There are
no specific limitations on the maximum potential amount of future payments that the Company could
be required to make under these guarantees, and the Company is unable to develop an estimate of the
maximum potential amount of future payments to be made under
30
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
these guarantees, if any, as the triggering events are not subject to predictability. With
respect to certain of the aforementioned guarantees, such as indemnifications of landlords against
third-party claims for the use of real estate property leased by the Company, the Company maintains
insurance coverage that mitigates any potential payments to be made.
12. Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
The components of comprehensive (loss) income are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum pension liability, net of income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
Currency translation adjustments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities, net of income taxes |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive (loss) income |
|
$ |
(12 |
) |
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The after-tax components of Accumulated other comprehensive income were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Minimum |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
Currency |
|
|
(Losses) on |
|
|
Pension |
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
Translation |
|
|
Available-for- |
|
|
Liability |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
|
Adjustment |
|
|
Sale Securities |
|
|
Adjustment |
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
12 |
|
Change during 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2006 |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All components of Accumulated other comprehensive income presented above are net of income
taxes except for currency translation adjustments, which exclude income taxes related to
essentially permanent investments in foreign subsidiaries.
31
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
13. Stock-Based Compensation
Prior to the Spin-Off, the Companys employees were awarded stock-based compensation in the
form of Cendant common shares, stock options and RSUs. On February 1, 2005, in connection with the
Spin-Off, certain Cendant stock options and RSUs previously granted to the Companys employees were
converted into stock options and RSUs of the Company under the PHH Corporation 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan (the Plan). The conversion, which was accounted for as a modification, was based
on maintaining the intrinsic value of each employees previous Cendant grants through an adjustment
of both the number of stock options or RSUs and, in the case of stock options, the exercise price.
This computation resulted in a change in the fair value of the stock option awards immediately
prior to the conversion compared to immediately following the conversion, and accordingly, a $4
million charge was recorded during the three months ended March 31, 2005, which was included in
Spin-Off related expenses in the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations. The fair value of
the stock options was estimated using the Black-Scholes option valuation model using the following
pre-modification and post-modification weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-Modification |
|
|
Post-Modification |
|
|
|
(Cendant Awards) |
|
|
(PHH Awards) |
|
Exercise price |
|
$ |
20.64 |
|
|
$ |
18.88 |
|
Expected life (in years) |
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
3.60% |
|
|
|
3.60% |
|
Expected volatility |
|
|
30.0% |
|
|
|
30.0% |
|
Dividend yield |
|
|
1.5% |
|
|
|
|
|
At the modification date, 3,167,602 Cendant stock options with a weighted-average fair value
of $7.61 per option were converted into 3,461,376 of the Companys stock options with a
weighted-average fair value of $8.11 per option. Additionally, 1,460,720 Cendant RSUs with a fair
value of $23.55 per RSU based on the closing price of Cendants common stock on January 31, 2005
were converted into 1,595,998 of the Companys RSUs with a fair value of $21.55 per RSU based on
the opening price of the Companys Common stock on February 1, 2005. The conversion affected 292
employees holding stock options and 348 employees holding RSUs.
Subsequent to the Spin-Off, certain Company employees were awarded stock-based compensation in
the form of RSUs and stock options to purchase shares of the Companys Common stock under the Plan.
The stock option awards have a maximum contractual term of ten years after the grant date.
Service-based stock awards vest solely upon the fulfillment of a service condition (i) ratably over
four years from the grant date, (ii) four years after the grant date or (iii) ratably in each of
years four through six after the grant date with the possibility of accelerated vesting of 25% of
the total award in each of years one through four on the anniversary of the grant date if certain
Company performance criteria are achieved. Performance-based stock awards require the fulfillment
of a service condition and the achievement of certain Company performance criteria and vest ratably
over four years from the grant date if both conditions are met. In addition, all outstanding and
unvested stock options and RSUs vest immediately upon a change in
control. (See Note 18, Subsequent
Events for additional information regarding a potential change in control.) Additionally, the
Company grants RSUs to its non-employee Directors as part of their compensation for services
rendered as members of the Companys Board of Directors. These RSUs vest immediately when granted.
The Company issues new shares of Common stock to employees and Directors to satisfy its stock
option exercise and RSU conversion obligations. The Plan also allows awards of stock appreciation
rights, restricted stock and other stock- or cash-based awards. RSUs granted by the Company entitle
the Companys employees to receive one share of PHH Common stock upon the vesting of each RSU. The
maximum number of shares of PHH Common stock issuable under the Plan is 7,500,000, including those
Cendant awards that were converted into PHH awards in connection with the Spin-Off.
32
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The Company generally recognizes compensation cost for service-based stock awards on a
straight-line basis over the requisite service period. Compensation cost for performance-based
stock awards is recognized when it is probable that the performance condition will be achieved.
Since the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company recognizes compensation cost, net of estimated
forfeitures. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), the Company recognized forfeitures in the
period that the forfeitures occurred.
Stock options vested and expected to vest and RSUs expected to be converted into shares of
Common stock reflected in the tables below summarizing stock option and RSU activity include the
awards for which achievement of performance conditions is considered probable and exclude the
awards estimated to be forfeited.
The following table summarizes stock option activity during the three months ended March 31,
2006:
Performance-Based Stock Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
Number |
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Term |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
of Options |
|
|
Price |
|
|
(in years) |
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 and March 31, 2006 |
|
|
73,643 |
|
|
$ |
21.16 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
9,204 |
|
|
$ |
21.16 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options vested and expected to vest (1) |
|
|
9,204 |
|
|
$ |
21.16 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service-Based Stock Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
Number |
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Term |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
of Options |
|
|
Price |
|
|
(in years) |
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 |
|
|
3,467,736 |
|
|
$ |
19.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(65,520 |
) |
|
|
19.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(19,153 |
) |
|
|
20.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
3,383,063 |
|
|
$ |
19.36 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
2,506,287 |
|
|
$ |
18.83 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options vested and expected to vest (1) |
|
|
3,237,752 |
|
|
$ |
19.28 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Total Stock Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
Number |
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Term |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
of Options |
|
|
Price |
|
|
(in years) |
|
|
(in millions) |
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 |
|
|
3,541,379 |
|
|
$ |
19.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(65,520 |
) |
|
|
19.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired |
|
|
(19,153 |
) |
|
|
20.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
3,456,706 |
|
|
$ |
19.40 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
2,515,491 |
|
|
$ |
18.84 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options vested and expected to vest (1) |
|
|
3,246,956 |
|
|
$ |
19.29 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All outstanding and unvested stock options vest immediately upon a change in
control. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for additional information regarding a potential
change in control. |
The Companys policy is to grant options with exercise prices at the then-current fair market
value of the Companys shares of Common stock. In 2005, in accordance with its policy at the time,
the Company calculated the fair market value of its shares of Common
stock for purposes of determining exercise prices for options
granted by averaging the opening and closing share price for the Companys Common stock for the day prior to the grant. As a
result, all of the options granted by the Company during the eleven months ended December 31, 2005
were granted at exercise prices that were less than the market price of the stock on the grant
date. In 2006, the Company changed its policy for calculating the fair market value for purposes of
determining exercise prices for options granted such that the fair market value will be the closing
share price for the Companys Common stock on the date of grant.
There
were no stock options granted during the three months ended
March 31, 2006. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of $7.61 per option for awards granted during
the three months ended March 31, 2005 was estimated using the Black-Scholes option valuation model
using the following weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2005 |
|
Expected life (in years) |
|
|
5.5 |
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
4.05% |
|
Expected volatility |
|
|
30.0% |
|
Dividend yield |
|
|
|
|
The Company estimated the expected life of the stock options based on their vesting and
contractual terms. The risk-free interest rate reflected the yield on zero-coupon Treasury
securities with a term approximating the expected life of the stock options. Due to the limited
trading history of the Companys Common stock since the Spin-Off, the expected volatility was based
on the historical volatility of the Companys peer groups common stock.
The intrinsic value of options exercised was $1 million during the three months ended March
31, 2006. No stock options were exercised during the three months ended March 31, 2005.
The table below summarizes RSU activity during the three months ended March 31, 2006:
Performance-Based RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant- |
|
|
Number |
|
|
Date Fair |
|
|
of RSUs |
|
|
Value |
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 |
|
|
964,296 |
|
|
$ |
21.55 |
Forfeited |
|
|
(16,664 |
) |
|
|
21.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
947,632 |
|
|
$ |
21.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs expected to be converted into shares of Common stock (1) |
|
|
135,108 |
|
|
$ |
21.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
Service-Based RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant- |
|
|
Number |
|
|
Date Fair |
|
|
of RSUs |
|
|
Value |
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 |
|
|
752,691 |
|
|
$ |
24.14 |
Granted (2) |
|
|
4,155 |
|
|
|
26.70 |
Forfeited |
|
|
(12,793 |
) |
|
|
24.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
744,053 |
|
|
$ |
24.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs expected to be converted into shares of Common stock (1) |
|
|
653,118 |
|
|
$ |
24.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant- |
|
|
Number |
|
|
Date Fair |
|
|
of RSUs |
|
|
Value |
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 |
|
|
1,716,987 |
|
|
$ |
22.69 |
Granted (2) |
|
|
4,155 |
|
|
|
26.70 |
Forfeited |
|
|
(29,457 |
) |
|
|
22.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2006 |
|
|
1,691,685 |
|
|
$ |
22.69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs expected to be converted into shares of Common stock (1) |
|
|
788,226 |
|
|
$ |
23.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) All outstanding and unvested RSUs vest immediately upon a change in control. See
Note 18, Subsequent Events for additional information regarding a potential change in
control.
(2) These grants are
comprised entirely of RSUs earned by the Companys non-employee
Directors for services rendered as members of the Companys Board of
Directors.
For RSUs converted from Cendant RSUs to the Companys RSUs in connection with the
Spin-Off, the fair value used to calculate the weighted-average grant-date fair value presented
above is $21.55 per RSU, which was the opening price of the Companys Common stock on February 1,
2005. The original weighted-average grant-date fair value of the Cendant RSUs that were converted
to the Companys RSUs, after applying the conversion ratio, was $18.88 per RSU. The
weighted-average grant-date fair value of RSUs granted during the three months ended March 31, 2005
was $21.87 per RSU. No RSUs were converted into shares of Common stock during either the three
months ended March 31, 2006 or 2005.
The table below summarizes expense recognized related to stock-based compensation arrangements
during the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
Income tax benefit related to stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense, net of income taxes |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 31, 2006, there was $32 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to
outstanding and unvested stock options and RSUs all of which would be recognized upon a change in
control. See Note 18, Subsequent Events for additional information regarding a potential change
in control. As of March 31, 2006, there was $12 million of unrecognized compensation cost related
to outstanding and unvested stock options and RSUs that are expected to vest and be recognized over
a weighted-average period of 3.9 years.
35
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
14. Segment Information
The Company conducts its operations through three business segments: Mortgage Production,
Mortgage Servicing and Fleet Management Services. Certain income and expenses not allocated to the
three reportable segments are reported under the heading Other.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, the Company changed the composition of its reportable business
segments by separating the business that was formerly called the Mortgage Services segment into two
segmentsthe Mortgage Production segment and the Mortgage Servicing segment. All prior period
segment information has been revised for comparability to reflect the Companys new reportable
segments presentation.
Due to the commencement of operations of the Mortgage Venture in the fourth quarter of 2005,
the Companys management began evaluating the operating results of each of its reportable segments
based upon Net revenues and segment profit or loss, which is presented as the income or loss from
continuing operations before income tax provisions and after Minority interest in loss of
consolidated entities, net of income taxes. The Mortgage Production segment profit or loss excludes
Realogy Corporations minority interest in the profits and losses of the Mortgage Venture. Prior to
the commencement of the Mortgage Venture operations, PHH Mortgage was party to marketing agreements
with Realogy Corporations (formerly Cendants) owned real estate brokerage business, NRT
Incorporated (NRT) and its owned relocation business, Cartus Corporation (Cartus), (formerly
known as Cendant Mobility Services Corporation), wherein PHH Mortgage paid fees for services
provided. These marketing agreements terminated when the Mortgage Venture commenced operations. The
provisions of a strategic relationship agreement and marketing agreements entered into in
connection with the Spin-Off govern the manner in which the Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage,
respectively, are recommended by NRT, Cartus and Realogys (formerly Cendants) owned settlement
services business, Title Resource Group LLC (TRG) (formerly known as Cendant Settlement Services
Group, Inc.).
36
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The Companys segment results were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Revenues |
|
|
Segment (Loss) Profit (1) |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage Production segment |
|
$ |
88 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
|
$ |
(19 |
) |
|
$ |
(29 |
) |
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
Mortgage Servicing segment |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Services |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
Fleet Management Services segment |
|
|
428 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments |
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
617 |
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
Other (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company |
|
$ |
549 |
|
|
$ |
617 |
|
|
$ |
(68 |
) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The following is a reconciliation of Income from continuing operations
before income taxes and minority interest to segment profit: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and minority interest |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
Minority interest in loss of consolidated entities, net of income taxes |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Expenses reported under the heading Other for the three months ended March 31, 2005
were primarily $41 million of Spin-Off related expenses. |
15. Prior Period Adjustments
As
previously disclosed in Note 2, Prior Period Adjustments in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in the Companys 2005 Form 10-K, during the preparation of the
Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company determined that
it was necessary to restate previously issued financial statements to record adjustments for
corrections of errors resulting from various accounting matters.
Certain of these adjustments for corrections of errors restated the
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as of and for the three months
ended March 31, 2005 and related to the following:
1. Goodwill and other intangible assets:
The Company discovered errors in the accounting for the allocation of the
purchase price, and therefore, goodwill and other intangible assets resulting
from its 2001 acquisition of Avis Group Holdings, Inc. The goodwill impairment
charge originally recorded in the first quarter of 2005 of
$239 million ($236 million after tax) was
reversed in the restatement.
2. Exclusion of reinsurance premiums from capitalized MSRs:
Prior to the second quarter of 2003, the Company inappropriately
capitalized the estimated future cash flows related to mortgage reinsurance
premiums as part of its MSRs. The Company ceased capitalizing new mortgage
reinsurance premiums in the second quarter of 2003 and the balance of
previously capitalized mortgage reinsurance premiums was fully amortized as of
the end of 2005. The restatement adjustments for the first quarter of 2005
eliminated the related amortization and increased income from
continuing operations before income taxes by $3 million
($2 million after tax).
3. Accounting for derivatives and hedging activities:
The Companys reevaluation of the application of SFAS No. 133 hedge
accounting to certain financial instruments used to hedge interest rate risk
resulted in the disallowance of hedge accounting previously used for these
hedging arrangements due to inadequate contemporaneous documentation and errors
in applying certain other requirements of SFAS No. 133. The
effect on the first quarter of 2005 was to decrease income from
continuing operations before income taxes by $2 million
($1 million after tax).
4. Recognition of motor company monies and depreciation methodologies:
The restatement corrects the timing of recognition of motor company monies
that impact the basis in the Companys leased assets and therefore Depreciation
on operating leases. The effect on the first quarter of 2005 was to
increase income from continuing operations before income taxes by
$1 million ($1 million after tax).
5. Other miscellaneous:
Adjustments were made to recognize the effects of other miscellaneous
errors corrected as part of the restatement, which decreased income
from continuing operations before income taxes by $1 million
($0 million after tax) for the first quarter of 2005.
6. STARS income tax liability:
The Company previously recorded an income tax expense in the first quarter
of 2005 associated with the Spin-Off relating to a tax liability the Company
incurred associated with its distribution of STARS to Cendant in 2002. The
restatement corrects this accounting treatment by recording the income tax
liability in 2002 as an equity adjustment associated with the distribution of
STARS to Cendant and by reversing the income tax expense originally recorded in
the first quarter of 2005 of $24 million.
In addition, certain other adjustments were made which have no net income
or equity impact, but restate the classification of prior period amounts. These
reclassifications included in the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
principally relate to the items set forth below:
1. Reclassification of Depreciation on operating leases from a contra revenue
account to an expense account:
In previous periods, Depreciation on operating leases was reported as a
contra revenue account in the determination of Net revenues. As a result of the
restatement adjustments, Depreciation on operating leases is reported as a
component of Total expenses rather than as a component of Net revenues and
certain items
previously reported in Depreciation on operating leases were reclassified to
various other revenue and expense line items.
2. Reclassification of dealership cost of goods sold from Other income to Other
operating expenses:
In previous periods, both the revenue generated by the Companys
dealership businesses and the associated cost of goods sold was included in
Other income, a component of Net revenues. As a result of the restatement
adjustments, dealership cost of goods sold was reclassified to Other operating
expenses.
3. Presentation of cash flow from discontinued operations:
The Company revised its Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows to
separately disclose the operating, investing and financing cash flows and the
effect of exchange rate changes attributable to its discontinued operations.
4. Presentation of cash flow activity related to MSRs:
The Company revised the presentation in its Condensed Consolidated
Statement of Cash Flows to include the capitalization of originated MSRs in
cash flows from operating activities and purchases of MSRs in cash flows from
investing activities.
5. Other miscellaneous reclassifications:
Certain reclassifications have been made to prior period amounts to
conform to the current period presentation.
The following table sets forth the effects of the restatement adjustments on the Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005. For the three
months ended March 31, 2005, the Companys restatement of its financial statements resulted in
increases to Net income, basic earnings per share and diluted earnings per share of $262 million,
$4.97 and $4.97, respectively.
37
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
As Previously |
|
|
Effect of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reported |
|
|
Adjustments |
|
|
As Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data) |
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage fees |
|
$ |
55 |
|
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
44 |
|
Fleet management fees |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net fee income |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet lease income |
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases |
|
|
(319 |
) |
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet interest expense |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Mortgage interest expense |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income |
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
124 |
|
Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage
servicing rights, net |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan servicing income |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
94 |
|
Occupancy and other office expenses |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
Depreciation on operating leases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Fleet interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
Spin-Off related expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill impairment |
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations before income taxes |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
|
(249 |
) |
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations, net of income taxes of
$0, $0 and $0 |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(250 |
) |
|
$ |
262 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(4.73 |
) |
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(4.75 |
) |
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(4.73 |
) |
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(4.75 |
) |
|
$ |
4.97 |
|
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
The Companys Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the three months ended March
31, 2005 was also restated. The restatement adjustments (decreased) increased cash flows from
operating activities and investing activities of continuing operations by $(203) million and $79
million, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2005. Cash flows from financing
activities of continuing operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005 were not affected by
the restatement adjustments.
16. Spin-Off from Cendant
During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Company recognized Spin-Off related expenses
of $41 million, consisting of a charge of $37 million resulting from the prepayment of debt
described more fully below and a charge of $4 million associated with the conversion of certain
Cendant stock options held by PHH employees to PHH stock options described in Note 13, Stock-Based
Compensation.
On February 9, 2005, the Company prepaid $443 million aggregate principal amount of
outstanding privately placed senior notes in cash at an aggregate prepayment price of $497 million,
including accrued and unpaid interest. The prepayment was made to avoid any potential debt covenant
compliance issues arising from the distributions made prior to the Spin-Off and the related
reduction in the Companys Stockholders equity. The prepayment price included an aggregate
make-whole amount of $44 million. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, the Company
recorded a net charge of $37 million in connection with this prepayment of debt, which consisted of
the $44 million make-whole payment and a write-off of unamortized deferred financing costs of $1
million, partially offset by net interest rate swap gains of $8 million.
17. Discontinued Operations
As described in Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, prior to and in
connection with the Spin-Off and subsequent to January 1, 2005, the Company underwent an internal
reorganization whereby it distributed its former relocation and fuel card businesses to Cendant.
The results of operations of these businesses are presented in the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements as discontinued operations.
Summarized statement of operations data for the discontinued operations follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
Fuel Card |
|
|
Relocation |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
31 |
|
|
$ |
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
(Benefit from) provision for income taxes |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18. Subsequent Events
On April 6, 2006, the Company entered into a $500 million unsecured revolving credit agreement
(the Supplemental Credit Facility) with a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
administrative agent, that expires on April 5, 2007. Pricing, transaction terms and financial
covenants, including the net worth and ratio of indebtedness to tangible net worth restrictions
under the Supplemental Credit Facility were substantially the same as those under the Amended
Credit Facility with the addition of a facility fee of 10 bps against the outstanding commitments
under the facility as of October 6, 2006.
On May 26, 2006, the Company obtained waivers under its Supplemental Credit Facility and its
Amended Credit Facility which extended the deadlines for the delivery of the 2005 annual audited
financial statements, the unaudited financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and
June 30, 2006 and related documents to September 30, 2006 and waived certain other potential
breaches.
39
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
On June 1, 2006, the Mortgage Venture entered into a $350 million repurchase facility (the
Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility) with Bank of Montreal and Barclays Bank PLC as Bank
Principals and Fairway Finance Company, LLC and Sheffield Receivables Corporation as Conduit
Principals. The obligations under the Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility are collateralized by
underlying mortgage loans and related assets. The cost of the facility is based upon the commercial
paper issued by the Conduit Principals plus a program fee of 30 bps. In addition, the Mortgage
Venture pays an annual liquidity fee of 20 bps on 102% of the program size. The maturity date for
this facility is June 1, 2009, subject to annual renewals of certain underlying conduit liquidity
arrangements.
Effective June 27, 2006, the Company amended the Mortgage Ventures $350 million secured line
of credit to reduce the capacity under this credit facility to $200 million following the execution
of the Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility.
On July 12, 2006, Bishops Gate received a notice (the Notice), dated July 10, 2006, from
the Bishops Gate Trustee, that certain events of default had occurred under the Bishops Gate
Indenture. The Notice indicated that events of default occurred as a result of Bishops Gates
failure to provide the Bishops Gate Trustee with the Companys and certain other audited and
unaudited quarterly financial statements as required under the Bishops Gate Indenture. While the
Notice further informed the holders of the Bishops Gate Notes of these events of default, the
Notice received did not constitute a notice of acceleration of repayment of the Bishops Gate
Notes. The Notice created an event of default under the Bishops
Gate Liquidity Agreement. The Company sought waivers of any events of
default from the holders of the Bishop's Gate Notes as well as the
lenders under the Bishop's Gate Liquidity Agreement.
On July 21, 2006, the Company entered into a $750 million unsecured credit agreement (the
Tender Support Facility) with a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative
agent, that expires on April 5, 2007. The Tender Support Facility provided $750 million of capacity
solely for the repayment of the MTNs, and was put in place in conjunction with the Companys tender
and consent offer discussed below. Pricing under the Tender Support Facility is based upon the
Companys senior unsecured long-term debt ratings assigned by Moodys Investors Service and
Standard & Poors. If those ratings are not equivalent to each other, the higher credit rating
assigned by them determines pricing under this agreement, unless there is more than one rating
level difference between the two ratings, in which case the rating one level below the higher
rating is applied. Borrowings under this agreement bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 60 bps
on or before December 14, 2006 and 75 bps from December 15, 2006 until Standard & Poors downgraded
its rating on the Companys senior unsecured debt on January 22, 2007. (See further discussion of
the effects of the downgrade below.) The Tender Support Facility also required the Company to pay
an initial fee of 10 bps of the commitment and a per annum commitment fee of 12 bps prior to the
downgrade. In addition, the Company paid a one-time fee of 15 bps against borrowings of $415
million drawn under the Tender Support Facility. The net worth and net ratio of indebtedness to
tangible net worth restrictions under the Tender Support Facility are the same as those under the
Amended Credit Facility and the Supplemental Credit Facility.
On July 31, 2006, Cendant executed a spin-off of both Realogy Corporation and Wyndham
Worldwide Corporation (the Cendant Spin-Offs). The 49.9% ownership in the Mortgage Venture was
included in the spin-off of Realogy Corporation, which owns NRT and Cartus and franchises to real
estate brokerage companies under the Century 21, Coldwell Banker, ERA and Sothebys International
Realty brands. On September 1, 2006, Cendant changed its name to Avis Budget Group, Inc. The
structure and operation of the Mortgage Venture was not impacted by the Cendant Spin-Offs.
As of August 15, 2006, the Company received all of the required approvals and executed a
Supplemental Indenture to the Bishops Gate Indenture waiving any event of default arising as a
result of the failure to provide
40
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
the Bishops Gate Trustee with the Companys 2005 annual audited financial statements, the
Companys unaudited financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006
and certain other documents as required under the Bishops Gate
Indenture. This Supplemental Indenture also extended the deadline for
the delivery of the required financial statements to the Bishops Gate Trustee and
the rating agencies to the earlier of December 31, 2006 or the date on or after September 30, 2006
by which such financial statements were required to be delivered to the bank group under the
Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement. Also effective on
August 15, 2006 was a related waiver of any default under the
Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement caused by the Notice under the Bishops Gate Indenture for
failure to deliver the required financial statements. See below for a further discussion of debt
waivers obtained.
On September 14, 2006, the Company concluded a tender offer and consent solicitation (the
Offer) for MTNs issued under the MTN Indenture. The Company received consents on behalf of $585
million and tenders and consents on behalf of $416 million of the aggregate notional principal
amount of the $1.1 billion of the MTNs. Borrowings of $415 million were drawn under the Companys
Tender Support Facility to fund the bulk of the tendered MTNs. Upon receipt of the required
consents related to the Offer on September 14, 2006, Supplemental Indenture No. 4 to the MTN
Indenture (Supplemental Indenture No. 4), dated August 31, 2006, between the Company and the MTN
Indenture Trustee became effective. Supplemental Indenture No. 4 extended the deadline for the
delivery of the Companys financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2005, the quarterly
periods ended March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and September 30, 2006 and related documents to
December 31, 2006. In addition, Supplemental Indenture No. 4 provided for the waiver of all
defaults that occurred prior to August 31, 2006 relating to the Companys financial statements and
other delivery requirements.
On September 19, 2006, the Company obtained waivers under its Amended Credit Facility,
Supplemental Credit Facility, the Tender Support Facility and the Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement
which extended the deadline for the delivery of the 2005 annual audited financial statements and
related documents to November 30, 2006. The waivers also extended the deadline for the delivery of
the unaudited financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and
September 30, 2006 and related documents to December 29, 2006.
On September 20, 2006, Bishops Gate retired $400 million of the Bishops Gate Notes and $51
million of the Bishops Gate Certificates in accordance with their scheduled maturity dates.
Accordingly, availability under the Companys mortgage warehouse asset-backed debt arrangements was
reduced by $451 million. Funds for the retirement of this debt were provided by a combination of
the sale of mortgage loans and the issuance of commercial paper by Bishops Gate.
On September 28, 2006, the maturity date of the Mortgage Ventures $200 million secured line
of credit was extended to January 3, 2007.
On September 29, 2006, the Company received an extension to file its 2005 Form 10-K from the
New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). This extension allowed for the continued listing of its Common
stock through January 2, 2007, subject to review by the NYSE on an ongoing basis. The Company filed
its 2005 Form 10-K with the SEC on November 22, 2006.
On October 30, 2006, the Company further amended the Mortgage Repurchase Facility by executing
the Fifth Amended and Restated Master Repurchase Agreement (the Repurchase Agreement) and the
Servicing Agreement (together with the Repurchase Agreement, the Amended Repurchase Agreements).
The Amended Repurchase Agreements increased the capacity of the Mortgage Repurchase Facility from
$500 million to $750 million, expanded the eligibility of underlying mortgage loan collateral and
modified certain other covenants and terms. The Mortgage Repurchase Facility as amended by the
Amended Repurchase Agreements expires on October 29, 2007 and is renewable on an annual basis,
subject to agreement by the parties. The assets collateralizing this facility are not available to
pay the Companys general obligations.
41
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
On December 1, 2006, Chesapeake amended the agreement governing its Series 2006-2 notes to
extend the Scheduled Expiry Date to November 30, 2007.
On December 1, 2006, the Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement was amended to extend its
expiration date to November 30, 2007 and reduce the maximum committed borrowings allowed under the
agreement from $1.5 billion to $1.0 billion.
On December 22, 2006, the maturity date of the Mortgage Ventures $200 million secured line of
credit was extended to October 5, 2007.
On January 22, 2007, Standard & Poors removed the Companys debt ratings from CreditWatch
Negative and downgraded its rating on the Companys senior unsecured long-term debt to BBB-. As a
result, the fees and interest rates on borrowings under the Companys Amended Credit Facility,
Supplemental Credit Facility and Tender Support Facility increased pursuant to the terms of each
agreement. After the downgrade, borrowings under the Companys Amended Credit Facility and
Supplemental Credit Facility bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 47.5 bps. In addition, the
Amended Credit Facilitys and the Supplemental Credit Facilitys per annum utilization and facility
fees were increased to 12.5 bps and 15 bps, respectively. In the event that both of the Companys
second highest and lowest credit ratings are downgraded in the future, the margin over LIBOR would
become 70 bps, the utilization fee would remain 12.5 bps and the facility fee would become 17.5
bps. After the downgrade, borrowings under the Tender Support Facility bore interest at LIBOR plus
a margin of 100 bps and the per annum commitment fee was increased to 17.5 bps. In the event that
both of the Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors ratings are downgraded in the future,
the margin over LIBOR would become 150 bps and the per annum commitment fee would become 22.5 bps.
On February 22, 2007, the Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender Support Facility were
amended to extend their expiration dates to December 15, 2007, reduce total commitments to $200
million and $415 million, respectively, and modify the interest rates paid on outstanding
borrowings. Pricing under these facilities is based upon the Companys senior unsecured long-term
debt ratings assigned by Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors. If those ratings are not
equivalent to each other, the higher credit rating assigned by them determines pricing under the
agreements, unless there is more than one rating level difference between the two ratings, in which
case the rating one level below the higher rating is applied. As a result of these amendments,
borrowings under the Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender Support Facility bear interest at
LIBOR plus a margin of 82.5 bps and 100 bps, respectively. The Supplemental Credit Facility also
has a per annum facility fee of 17.5 bps. The amendments eliminated the per annum utilization fee
under the Supplemental Credit Facility and the per annum commitment fee under the Tender Support
Facility. In the event that both of the Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors ratings are
downgraded in the future, the margin over LIBOR and the per annum
facility fee under the
Supplemental Credit Facility would become 127.5 bps and 22.5 bps, respectively, and the margin over
LIBOR under the Tender Support Facility would become 150 bps.
On March 6, 2007, Chesapeake amended the agreement governing the Series 2006-1 notes to extend
the Scheduled Expiry Date to March 4, 2008 and increase the maximum borrowings allowed under the
agreement from $2.7 billion to $2.9 billion.
On
March 15, 2007, the Company entered into a definitive agreement
(the Merger Agreement) with General Electric Capital
Corporation (GE) and its wholly owned subsidiary, Jade Merger
Sub, Inc. to
be acquired (the Merger). In conjunction with the Merger, GE has
entered into an agreement to sell the mortgage operations of the Company to an affiliate of The
Blackstone Group (Blackstone), a global private investment and advisory firm. On March 14, 2007,
prior to the execution of the Merger Agreement, the Company entered into an amendment to the Rights
Agreement (the Rights Agreement), dated as of January 28, 2005, between the Company and The Bank
of New York. The amendment revises certain terms of the Rights Agreement to render it inapplicable
to the Merger and the other transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement. The Merger is
subject to approval by the Companys stockholders, antitrust, state licensing
42
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
and other regulatory approvals, as well as various other closing conditions. Under the terms
of the Merger Agreement, at closing, the Companys stockholders will receive $31.50 per share in
cash and shares of the Companys Common stock will no longer be listed on the NYSE.
Following
the announcement of the Merger in March 2007, two class actions were
filed against the Company and each member of its
Board of Directors in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County,
Maryland; one of these actions also named GE and Blackstone.
The plaintiffs purport to represent a class consisting of all persons (other than the Companys
officers and Directors and their affiliates) holding the Companys Common stock. In support of
their request for injunctive and other relief, the plaintiffs allege
that the members of the Board of Directors breached their fiduciary
duties by failing to maximize stockholder value in approving the Merger Agreement.
On March 15, 2007 following the announcement of the Merger, the Companys senior unsecured
long-term debt ratings were placed under review for upgrade by Moodys Investor Services, on
CreditWatch with positive implications by Standard & Poors and on Rating Watch Positive by Fitch
Ratings. There can be no assurance that the ratings and ratings
outlooks on the Company's senior unsecured long-term debt and other
debt will remain at these levels.
On March 19, 2007, the Company received notice from the NYSE that it would be subject to the
procedures specified in Section 802.01E, SEC Annual Report Timely Filing Criteria, of the NYSEs
Listed Company Manual as a result of not meeting the deadline for filing its Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the 2006 Form 10-K). Section 802.01E of the
NYSEs Listed Company Manual provides, among other things, that the NYSE will monitor the Company
and the filing status of its 2006 Form 10-K. If the Company has not filed its 2006 Form 10-K within
six months of the filing due date of the 2006 Form 10-K, the NYSE may, in its sole discretion,
allow the Companys securities to be traded for up to an additional six-month trading period or, if
the NYSE determines that such additional trading period is not appropriate, it will commence
suspension and delisting procedures. In addition, the Company concluded that it will be unable to
satisfy the requirements of Section 203.01 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual to distribute its
annual report containing its financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 to
stockholders within 120 days of the 2006 fiscal year end.
As discussed in Note 9, Debt and Borrowing Arrangements, under many of the Companys
Financing Agreements, the Company is required to provide consolidated and/or subsidiary-level
audited annual financial statements, unaudited quarterly financial statements and related
documents. The delay in completing the 2005 audited financial statements, the restatement of
financial results for periods prior to the quarter ended December 31, 2005 and the delay in
completing the unaudited quarterly financial statements for 2006 created the potential for breaches
under certain of the Financing Agreements for failure to deliver the financial statements and/or
documents by specified deadlines, as well as potential breaches of other covenants. As discussed
above, waivers were obtained to extend certain deadlines. During the fourth quarter of 2006, the
Company obtained additional waivers under the Amended Credit Facility, the Supplemental Credit
Facility, the Tender Support Facility, the Amended Repurchase Agreements, the financing agreements
for Chesapeake and Bishops Gate and other agreements which waive certain potential breaches of
covenants under those instruments and extend the deadlines (the Extended Deadlines) for the
delivery of its financial statements and related documents to the various lenders under those
instruments. With respect to the delivery of the Companys quarterly financial statements for the
quarters ended March 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006, the Extended Deadline is March 30, 2007. The
Extended Deadline for the delivery of the Companys quarterly financial statements for the quarter
ended September 30, 2006 is April 30, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of the Companys
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the quarter ending March 31, 2007 is
June 29, 2007. Due to the existence of material weaknesses in the Companys internal control over
financial reporting and delays in completing the 2005 audited financial statements and the 2006
unaudited quarterly financial statements, the Company has not yet delivered its financial
statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and the year ended December 31, 2006 and it
remains uncertain whether the Company will be able to deliver its 2007 quarterly financial
statements within the deadlines prescribed in its Financing Agreements or by the SEC. If
the Company is not able to deliver its financial statements by the deadlines, it intends
to negotiate with the lenders and trustees to the Financing Agreements to extend the existing
waivers.
43
PHH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
(Unaudited)
If the Company is unable to obtain sufficient extensions and financial statements are not
delivered timely, the lenders have the right to demand payment of amounts due under the Financing
Agreements either immediately or after a specified grace period. In addition, because of
cross-default provisions, amounts owed under other borrowing arrangements may become due or, in the
case of asset-backed debt arrangements, new borrowings may be precluded. Since repayments are
required on asset-backed debt arrangements as cash inflows are received relating to the securitized
assets, new borrowings are necessary for the Company to continue normal operations. Therefore,
unless the Company can obtain any necessary further extensions or negotiate alternative borrowing
arrangements, the uncertainty about the Companys ability to meet its financial statement delivery
requirements raises substantial doubt about the Companys ability to continue as a going concern.
Under certain of the Financing Agreements, the lenders or trustees have the right to notify
the Company if they believe it has breached a covenant under the operative documents and may
declare an event of default. If one or more notices of default were to be given, the Company
believes it would have various periods in which to cure such events of default. If it does not cure
the events of default or obtain necessary waivers within the required time periods or certain
extended time periods, the maturity of some of its debt could be accelerated and its ability to
incur additional indebtedness could be restricted. In addition, events of default or acceleration
under certain of the Companys Financing Agreements would trigger cross-default provisions under
certain of its other Financing Agreements. The Company has not yet delivered its financial
statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and the year ended December 31, 2006 to the MTN
Indenture Trustee, which were required to be delivered no later than December 31, 2006 and March
16, 2007, respectively, under the MTN Indenture. The MTN Indenture Trustee could provide the
Company with a notice of default for its failure to deliver these financial statements. In the
event that the Company receives such notice, it would have 90 days from receipt to cure this
default or to seek additional waivers of the financial statement delivery requirements under the
MTN Indenture. No assurances can be given that the Company will be able to deliver the required
financial statements within the cure period or that additional waivers will be obtained.
The Company also obtained certain waivers and may need to seek additional waivers extending
the date for the delivery of the financial statements of its subsidiaries and other documents
related to such financial statements to certain regulators, investors in mortgage loans and other
third parties in order to satisfy state mortgage licensing regulations and certain contractual
requirements. The Company will continue to seek similar waivers as may be necessary in the future.
There can be no assurance that any additional waivers will be received on a timely basis, if
at all, or that any waivers obtained, including the waivers the Company has already obtained, will
extend for a sufficient period of time to avoid an acceleration event, an event of default or other
restrictions on its business operations. The failure to obtain such waivers could have a material
and adverse effect on the Companys business, liquidity and financial condition.
44
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Except as expressly indicated or unless the context otherwise requires, the Company, PHH,
we, our, or us means PHH Corporation, a Maryland corporation, and its subsidiaries. During
2006, our former parent company, Cendant Corporation, changed its name to Avis Budget Group, Inc.
(see Note 18, Subsequent Events in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 (Form 10-Q));
however within this Form 10-Q, PHHs former parent
company, now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc.
(NYSE:CAR) is referred to as Cendant. This Item 2 should be read in conjunction with the
Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements set forth above, Item 1. Business, Item
7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and our
Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 (our 2005 Form 10-K) and the risks and uncertainties
described in Item 1A. Risk Factors.
All amounts for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and comparisons to those amounts reflect
the balances and amounts on a restated basis. Accordingly, some of the data set forth in this
section is not comparable to the discussions and data in our previously filed Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005. For additional information on the
restatement, see the Explanatory Note and Note 15, Prior Period Adjustments in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements included herein and the Explanatory Note and Note 2, Prior Period
Adjustments in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in our 2005 Form 10-K. Our
review and evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting concluded that we did not
maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2006. For additional
information regarding the material weaknesses, see Item 4. Controls and Procedures.
Overview
We are a leading outsource provider of mortgage and fleet management services. We conduct our
business through three operating segments, a Mortgage Production segment, a Mortgage Servicing
segment and a Fleet Management Services segment. Our Mortgage Production segment originates,
purchases and sells mortgage loans through PHH Mortgage Corporation and its subsidiaries
(collectively, PHH Mortgage), which includes PHH Home Loans, LLC (PHH Home Loans or the
Mortgage Venture). PHH Home Loans is a mortgage venture that we maintain with Realogy Corporation
(Realogy) which began operations in October 2005. Our Mortgage Production segment generated 16%
of our Net revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006. Our Mortgage Servicing segment
services mortgage loans that either PHH Mortgage or PHH Home Loans originates. Our Mortgage
Servicing segment also purchases mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) and acts as a subservicer for
certain clients that own the underlying MSRs. Our Mortgage Servicing segment generated 6% of our
Net revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2006. Our Fleet Management Services segment
provides commercial fleet management services to corporate clients and government agencies
throughout the United States and Canada through PHH Vehicle Management Services Group LLC (PHH
Arval). Our Fleet Management Services segment generated 78% of our Net revenues for the three
months ended March 31, 2006.
As of December 31, 2004, we were a wholly owned subsidiary of Cendant that provided homeowners
with mortgages, serviced mortgage loans, facilitated employee relocations and provided vehicle
fleet management and fuel card services to commercial clients. On February 1, 2005, we began
operating as an independent, publicly traded company pursuant to a spin-off from Cendant (the
Spin-Off). See Note 16, Spin-Off from Cendant in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this Form 10-Q for a discussion of the Spin-Off.
Prior to the Spin-Off and subsequent to December 31, 2004, we underwent an internal
reorganization whereby we distributed our former relocation and fuel card businesses to Cendant,
and Cendant contributed its former appraisal business, Speedy Title and Appraisal Review Services
LLC (STARS), to us. STARS was previously our wholly owned subsidiary until it was distributed, in
the form of a dividend, to a wholly owned subsidiary of Cendant not within our ownership structure
on December 31, 2002. Cendant then owned STARS through its subsidiaries outside of our ownership
structure from December 31, 2002 until it contributed STARS to us as part of the internal
reorganization discussed above.
45
Pursuant to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 141, Business
Combinations, Cendants contribution of STARS to us was accounted for as a transfer of net assets
between entities under common control and, therefore, the financial position and results of
operations for STARS are included in all periods presented. Pursuant to SFAS No. 144, Accounting
for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, the financial position and results of
operations of our former relocation and fuel card businesses have been segregated and reported as
discontinued operations for all periods presented (see Note 17, Discontinued Operations in the
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-Q for more
information).
In connection with the Spin-Off, we entered into several agreements and arrangements with
Cendant and its former real estate services division, Realogy, that we expect to continue to be
material to our business going forward. For a discussion of these agreements and arrangements, see
Item 1. BusinessArrangements with Cendant and Arrangements with Realogy in our 2005 Form
10-K. Cendant completed the spin-off of its real estate services division (the Realogy Spin-Off)
effective July 31, 2006. The structure and operation of the Mortgage Venture was not impacted by
the Realogy Spin-Off.
We, through our subsidiary, PHH Broker Partner Corporation (PHH Broker Partner), and
Realogy, through its subsidiary, Realogy Services Venture Partner Inc. (Realogy Venture Partner)
(formerly known as Cendant Real Estate Services Venture Partner, Inc.), formed the Mortgage
Venture. The Mortgage Venture originates and sells mortgage loans primarily sourced through
Realogys owned real estate brokerage business, NRT Incorporated (NRT), its owned relocation
business, Cartus Corporation (Cartus) (formerly known as Cendant Mobility Services Corporation),
and its owned settlement services business, Title Resource Group LLC (TRG) (formerly known as
Cendant Settlement Services Group, Inc.). All mortgage loans originated by the Mortgage Venture are
sold to PHH Mortgage or unaffiliated third-party investors on a servicing-released basis. The
Mortgage Venture does not hold any mortgage loans for investment purposes or retain MSRs for any
loans it originates. The Mortgage Venture did not materially impact our Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for the three months ended March 31, 2006 or 2005.
We contributed assets and transferred employees that have historically supported originations
from NRT and Cartus to the Mortgage Venture in October 2005. The Mortgage Venture is principally
governed by the terms of the operating agreement of the Mortgage Venture between PHH Broker Partner
and Realogy Venture Partner (as amended, the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement) and a
strategic relationship agreement whereby Realogy and we have agreed on non-competition,
indemnification and exclusivity arrangements (the Strategic Relationship Agreement). See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture Between Realogy and PHH and Strategic
Relationship Agreement in our 2005 Form 10-K for a description of the terms of the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement and the Strategic Relationship Agreement. The Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement has a 50-year term, subject to earlier termination, under certain
circumstances, including after the twelfth year, upon a two-year notice, or non-renewal by us
after 25 years subject to the delivery of notice. In the event that we do not deliver a non-renewal
notice after the 25th year, the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement will be renewed for
an additional 25-year term. The provisions of the Strategic Relationship Agreement govern the
manner in which the Mortgage Venture is recommended by NRT, Cartus and TRG as the exclusive
recommended provider of mortgage loans to (i) the independent sales associates affiliated with
Realogy Services Group LLC (formerly known as Cendant Real Estate Services Group, LLC) and Realogy
Venture Partner (together with their subsidiaries, the Realogy Entities) (excluding the
independent sales associates of any brokers associated with Realogys franchised brokerages
(Realogy Franchisees) acting in such capacity), (ii) all customers of Realogy Entities (excluding
Realogy Franchisees or any employees or independent sales associate thereof acting in such
capacity) and (iii) the U.S.-based employees of Cendant. See Item 1. BusinessArrangements with
RealogyMortgage Venture Between Realogy and PHH and Strategic Relationship Agreement in our
2005 Form 10-K. We own 50.1% of the Mortgage Venture through PHH Broker Partner and Realogy owns
the remaining 49.9% through Realogy Venture Partner.
The Mortgage Venture is consolidated within our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements,
and Realogy Venture Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture is reflected in our Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements as a minority interest. Subject to certain regulatory and
financial covenant requirements, net income generated by the Mortgage Venture is distributed
quarterly to its members pro rata based upon their respective ownership interests. The Mortgage
Venture may also require additional capital contributions from us and Realogy
46
under the terms of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement if it is required to meet minimum
regulatory capital and reserve requirements imposed by any governmental authority or any creditor
of the Mortgage Venture or its subsidiaries.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, we changed the composition of our reportable business segments
by separating the business that was formerly called the Mortgage Services segment into two segments
the Mortgage Production segment and the Mortgage Servicing segment. All prior period segment
information has been restated to reflect our three reportable segments.
Because our business has changed substantially due to the internal reorganization in
connection with the Spin-Off, and we now conduct our business as an independent, publicly traded
company, our historical financial information does not reflect what our results of operations,
financial position or cash flows would have been had we been an independent, publicly traded
company during all of the periods presented. Therefore, the historical financial information for
such periods is not indicative of what our results of operations, financial position or cash flows
will be in the future.
During 2006, we devoted substantial internal and external resources to the completion of our
2005 Form 10-K and related matters. As a result of these efforts, along with efforts to complete
our assessment of internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, as required
by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we incurred incremental fees and expenses for
additional auditor services, financial and other consulting services, legal services and liquidity
waivers of approximately $44 million through December 31, 2006. An insignificant portion of this
amount was recorded in the first quarter of 2006. While we do not expect fees and expenses relating
to the preparation of our financial results for future periods to remain at this level, these fees
and expenses will remain significantly higher than historical fees and expenses for subsequent
periods in 2006, and we expect them to remain significantly higher than historical fees and
expenses in 2007.
On
March 15, 2007, we entered into a definitive agreement (the
Merger Agreement) with General Electric Capital
Corporation (GE) and its wholly owned subsidiary, Jade
Merger Sub, Inc. to be
acquired (the Merger). In conjunction with the Merger, GE has
entered into an agreement to sell our mortgage operations to an
affiliate of The Blackstone Group (Blackstone),
a global private investment and advisory firm. The Merger is subject to approval by our
stockholders, antitrust, state licensing and other regulatory approvals, as well as various other
closing conditions. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, at closing, our stockholders will
receive $31.50 per share in cash and shares of our Common stock will no longer be listed on the New
York Stock Exchange (NYSE).
Mortgage Industry Trends
The aggregate demand for mortgage loans in the U.S. is a primary driver of
the Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments operating results. The
demand for mortgage loans is affected by external factors including prevailing
mortgage rates and the strength of the U.S. housing market. The Federal
National Mortgage Associations (Fannie Maes) Economic and Mortgage Market
Developments estimates that industry originations during 2006 were $2.5
trillion, a 16% decline from 2005. Lower origination volume, ongoing pricing
pressures and a flat yield curve have negatively impacted the results of
operations of our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments for the
remainder of 2006. As of January 2007, Economic and Mortgage Market
Developments forecasted a decline in industry originations during 2007 of
approximately 7% from estimated 2006 levels, due to an 11% expected decline in
purchase originations and a 1% expected decline in refinance originations.
Volatility in interest rates may have a significant impact on our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments, including a negative impact on
origination volumes and the value of our MSRs and related hedges. Volatility in
interest rates may also result in unexpected changes in the shape or slope of
the yield curve, which is a key factor in our MSR valuation model and the
effectiveness of our hedging strategy. Furthermore, recent developments in the
industry could result in more restrictive credit standards that may negatively
impact the demand for housing and origination volumes for the mortgage
industry. As a result of these factors, we expect that the mortgage industry
will become increasingly competitive in 2007 as lower origination volumes put
pressure on production margins and ultimately result in further industry
consolidation. We intend to take advantage of this environment by leveraging
our existing mortgage origination services platform to enter into new
outsourcing relationships as more companies determine that it is no longer
economically feasible to compete in the industry, however, there can be no
assurance that we will be successful in this effort whether as a result of the
delays in the availability of our financial statements, the Merger or
otherwise. During the year ended December 31, 2006, we sought to reduce costs
in our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments to better align our
resources and expenses with anticipated mortgage origination volumes. We expect
that these cost-reduction initiatives will favorably impact 2007 results by
approximately $40 million.
Fleet Market Trends
The market size for the U.S. commercial fleet management services market
has displayed little or no growth over the last several years as reported by
the Automotive Fleet 2005, 2004 and 2003 Fact Books. Growth in our Fleet
Management Services segment is driven principally by increased fee-based
services, increased market share in the large fleet market (greater than 500
units) and increased service provided to the national fleet market (75 to 500
units), which growth we anticipate will be negatively impacted during 2007 by the
delays in the availability of our financial statements and the Merger.
47
Results of Operations First Quarter 2006 vs. First Quarter 2005
Consolidated Results
Our consolidated results of continuing operations for the first quarters of 2006 and 2005 were
comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
$ |
549 |
|
|
$ |
617 |
|
|
$ |
(68 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spin-Off related expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
Other expenses |
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations before minority interest |
|
$ |
(12 |
) |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During
the first quarter of 2006, our Net revenues decreased by $68 million (11%) compared to
the first quarter of 2005, due to $79 million and $19 million decreases in our Mortgage Servicing
and Mortgage Production segments, respectively, partially offset by a $30 million increase in our
Fleet Management Services segment. Our Income from continuing operations before income taxes
and minority interest during the first quarter of 2005 included $41 million of Spin-Off related
expenses, which were excluded from the results of our reportable segments. Our (Loss) income from
continuing operations before income taxes and minority interest
unfavorably changed by $35 million
during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005 due to unfavorable changes
of $80 million and $4 million in the Mortgage Servicing and Mortgage Production segments,
respectively, that were partially offset by the Spin-Off related expenses recorded in 2005, a
favorable change of $7 million in the Fleet Management Services segment and a $1 million decrease
in other expenses not allocated to our reportable segments.
During
the preparation of the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as
of and for the three months ended March 31, 2006, we identified
and corrected errors related to prior periods. The effect of
correcting these errors on the Condensed Consolidated Statement of
Operations for the first quarter of 2006 was to reduce Net loss by
$3 million (net of income taxes of $2 million). The
corrections included an adjustment for franchise tax accruals
previously recorded during the years ended December 31, 2002 and
2003 and certain other miscellaneous adjustments related to the year
ended December 31, 2005. We evaluated the impact of the
adjustments and determined that they are not material, individually
or in the aggregate, to the first quarter of 2006 or the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005, 2003 or 2002.
We record our interim tax provisions by applying a projected full-year effective income tax
rate to our quarterly pre-tax income or loss for results that we deem to be reliably estimable in
accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 18, Accounting for Income Taxes in Interim Periods.
Certain results dependent on fair value adjustments of our Mortgage Production and Mortgage
Servicing segments are considered not to be reliably estimable and therefore we record discrete
year-to-date income tax provisions on those results.
During
the first quarter of 2006, the Provision for income taxes was $13 million and was
significantly impacted by a $15 million increase in income tax contingency reserves and a $1
million increase in valuation allowances for state net operating losses (NOLs) generated during
the first quarter of 2006 for which we believe it is more likely than not that the NOLs will not be
realized. In addition, we recorded a state income tax benefit of $4 million. Due to our
year-to-date and projected full-year mix of income and loss from our operations by entity and state
income tax jurisdiction in 2006, there was a significant change in the 2006 state income tax
effective rate in comparison to 2005.
During the first quarter of 2005, the Provision for income taxes was $23 million and was
significantly impacted by a net deferred income tax charge related to the Spin-Off of $5 million
representing the change in estimated deferred state income taxes for state apportionment factors
and an increase in valuation allowances of
48
$3 million for state NOLs generated during the first quarter of 2005 for which we believed it
was more likely than not that the NOLs would not be realized.
Segment Results
Discussed below are the results of operations for each of our reportable segments. Certain
income and expenses not allocated to our reportable segments are reported under the heading Other.
Due to the commencement of operations of the Mortgage Venture in the fourth quarter of 2005, our
management began evaluating the operating results of each of our reportable segments based upon Net
revenues and segment profit or loss, which is presented as the income or loss from continuing
operations before income tax provisions and after Minority interest in loss of consolidated
entities, net of income taxes. The Mortgage Production segment profit or loss excludes Realogys
minority interest in the profits and losses of the Mortgage Venture. Prior to the commencement of
the Mortgage Venture operations, PHH Mortgage was party to marketing agreements with NRT and
Cartus, wherein PHH Mortgage paid fees for services provided. These marketing agreements terminated
when the Mortgage Venture commenced operations. The provisions of the Strategic Relationship
Agreement and the marketing agreement thereafter began to govern the manner in which the Mortgage
Venture and PHH Mortgage, respectively, are recommended by NRT, Cartus and TRG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Revenues |
|
|
Segment (Loss) Profit (1) |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
Mortgage Production segment |
|
$ |
88 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
|
|
$ |
(19 |
) |
|
$ |
(29 |
) |
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
Mortgage Servicing segment |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Services |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
Fleet Management Services segment |
|
|
428 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments |
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
617 |
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
Other (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company |
|
$ |
549 |
|
|
$ |
617 |
|
|
$ |
(68 |
) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The following is a reconciliation of Income from continuing operations
before income taxes and minority interest to segment profit: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and minority interest |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
Minority interest in loss of consolidated entities, net of income taxes |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Expenses reported under the heading Other for the three months ended March 31, 2005
were primarily $41 million of Spin-Off related expenses. |
Mortgage Production Segment
Net
revenues decreased by $19 million (18%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first
quarter of 2005. As discussed in greater detail below, Net revenues were impacted by decreases of
$14 million, $2 million, $2 million and $1 million in Mortgage fees, Gain on sale of mortgage
loans, net, Mortgage net finance income and Other income, respectively.
Segment loss increased by $3 million (12%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first
quarter of 2005 driven by the $19 million decrease in Net revenues, which was partially offset by a
$15 million (11%) decrease in Total expenses. In addition, during the first quarter of 2006, the
Mortgage Production segment recognized a
49
$1 million
Minority interest in loss of consolidated entities, net of income taxes. The $15
million reduction in Total expenses was primarily due to decreases in Salaries and related expenses
of $9 million and Other operating expenses of $6 million.
The following tables present a summary of our financial results and key related drivers for
the Mortgage Production segment, and are followed by a discussion of each of the key components of
Net revenues and Total expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
average loan amount) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans closed to be sold |
|
$ |
7,205 |
|
|
$ |
6,815 |
|
|
$ |
390 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
Fee-based closings |
|
|
2,036 |
|
|
|
2,600 |
|
|
|
(564 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings |
|
$ |
9,241 |
|
|
$ |
9,415 |
|
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase closings |
|
$ |
6,158 |
|
|
$ |
6,158 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refinance closings |
|
|
3,083 |
|
|
|
3,257 |
|
|
|
(174 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings |
|
$ |
9,241 |
|
|
$ |
9,415 |
|
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate |
|
$ |
4,857 |
|
|
$ |
3,828 |
|
|
$ |
1,029 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
Adjustable rate |
|
|
4,384 |
|
|
|
5,587 |
|
|
|
(1,203 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings |
|
$ |
9,241 |
|
|
$ |
9,415 |
|
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of loans closed (units) |
|
|
46,416 |
|
|
|
46,724 |
|
|
|
(308 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average loan amount |
|
$ |
199,091 |
|
|
$ |
201,502 |
|
|
$ |
(2,411 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans sold |
|
$ |
7,278 |
|
|
$ |
6,416 |
|
|
$ |
862 |
|
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage fees |
|
$ |
30 |
|
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
(14 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
21 |
% |
Mortgage interest expense |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
)% |
Occupancy and other office expenses |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
)% |
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
20 |
% |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
)% |
Minority interest in loss of
consolidated entities, net of
income taxes |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
n/m |
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment loss |
|
$ |
(29 |
) |
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
n/m Not meaningful. |
Mortgage Fees
Mortgage fees consist primarily of fees collected on loans originated for others (including
brokered loans and loans originated through our financial institutions channel), fees on cancelled
loans, and appraisal and other
50
income generated by our appraisal services business. Mortgage fees
collected on loans originated through our financial institutions channel are recorded in Mortgage
fees when the financial institution retains the underlying loan. Loans purchased from financial
institutions are included in loans closed to be sold while loans retained by financial institutions
are included in fee-based closings.
Fee income on loans closed to be sold is deferred until the loans are sold and recognized in
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net in accordance with SFAS No. 91, Accounting for Nonrefundable
Fees and Costs Associated with Originating or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases
(SFAS No. 91). Fee income on fee-based closings is recorded in Mortgage fees and is recognized at
the time of closing.
Loans closed to be sold and fee-based closings are the key drivers of Mortgage fees. Fees
generated by our appraisal services business are recorded when the services are performed,
regardless of whether the loan closes and are associated with both loans closed to be sold and
fee-based closings.
Mortgage fees decreased by $14 million (32%) from the first quarter of 2005 to the first
quarter of 2006. This decrease was primarily attributable to the decline in fee-based closings of
$564 million (22%), partially offset by a $390 million (6%) increase in loans closed to be sold.
The change in mix between fee-based closings and loans closed to be sold was primarily due to a
decrease in brokered loan production as well as a decrease in fee-based closings from our financial
institution clients during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005. The
$174 million (2%) decline in total closings from the first quarter of 2005 to the first quarter of
2006 was attributable to a decline in refinancing activity. Refinancing activity is sensitive to
interest rate changes relative to borrowers current interest rates, and typically increases when
interest rates fall and decreases when interest rates rise.
Gain on Sale of Mortgage Loans, Net
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net consists of the following:
|
§ |
|
Gain on loans sold, including the changes in the fair value of all loan-related
derivatives including our interest rate lock commitments (IRLCs), freestanding
loan-related derivatives and loan derivatives designated in a hedge relationship. See Note
7, Derivatives and Risk Management Activities in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this Form 10-Q. To the extent the derivatives are
considered effective hedges under SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and
Hedging Activities (SFAS No. 133), changes in the fair value of the mortgage loans would
be recorded; |
|
|
§ |
|
The initial value of capitalized servicing, which represents a non-cash increase to our
MSRs. Subsequent changes in the fair value of MSRs are recorded in Net loan servicing
income in the Mortgage Servicing segment; and |
|
|
§ |
|
Recognition of net loan origination fees and expenses previously deferred under SFAS No.
91. |
The components of Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on loans sold |
|
$ |
48 |
|
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
Initial value of capitalized servicing |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
19 |
% |
Recognition of deferred fees and costs, net |
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net |
|
$ |
57 |
|
|
$ |
59 |
|
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net decreased by $2 million (3%) from the first quarter of
2005 to the first quarter of 2006. Gain on loans sold net of the recognition of deferred fees and
costs (the effects of SFAS No. 91) declined by $17 million from the first quarter of 2005 to the
first quarter of 2006 due to $26 million decline in
51
margins on loans sold that was partially offset
by a $9 million favorable variance from economic hedge ineffectiveness resulting from our risk
management activities related to IRLCs and mortgage loans. Typically, when industry loan volumes
decline due to a rising interest rate environment or other factors, competitive pricing pressures
occur as mortgage companies compete for fewer customers, which results in lower margins. The $9
million favorable variance from economic hedge ineffectiveness resulting from our risk management
activities related to IRLCs and mortgage loans was due to a decrease in losses recognized from $10
million during the first quarter of 2005 to $1 million during the first quarter of 2006. A $15
million increase in the initial value of capitalized servicing was caused by a higher volume of
loans sold and an increase of 6 basis points (bps) in the capitalized servicing rate in the first
quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005.
Mortgage Net Finance Income
Mortgage net finance income allocable to the Mortgage Production segment consists of interest
income on mortgage loans held for sale (MLHS) and interest expense allocated on debt used to fund
MLHS and is driven by the average volume of loans held for sale, the average volume of outstanding
borrowings, the note rate on loans held for sale and the cost of funds rate of our outstanding
borrowings. Mortgage net finance income allocable to the Mortgage
Production segment declined by $2
million (67%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005 due to a $9
million increase in Mortgage interest expense that was partially
offset by a $7 million increase
in Mortgage interest income. The $9 million increase in Mortgage interest expense was attributable
to increases of $6 million due to a higher cost of funds from our outstanding borrowings and $3
million due to higher average borrowings. A significant portion of our loan originations are funded
with variable-rate short-term debt. At March 31, 2006 and 2005, one-month London Interbank Offered
Rate (LIBOR), which is used as a benchmark for short-term rates, was 4.95% and 2.93%,
respectively, an increase of 202 bps. The $7 million increase in Mortgage interest income was
primarily due to higher note rates associated with loans held for sale and higher average loans
held for sale.
Salaries and Related Expenses
Salaries and related expenses allocable to the Mortgage Production segment are reflected net
of loan origination costs deferred under SFAS No. 91 and consist of commissions paid to employees
involved in the loan origination process, as well as compensation, payroll taxes and benefits paid
to employees in our mortgage production operations and allocations for overhead. Salaries and
related expenses decreased by $9 million (14%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first
quarter of 2005 primarily due to a decrease in average staffing levels due to lower origination
volumes and employee attrition. The decrease in Salaries and related expenses is also attributable
to an increase in deferred commission expenses under SFAS No. 91 primarily associated with the
higher blend of loans closed to be sold compared to fee-based closings during the first quarter of
2006 in comparison to the first quarter of 2005. The increased expense deferrals caused a $4
million decrease in Salaries and related expenses during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the
first quarter of 2005.
Other Operating Expenses
Other operating expenses allocable to the Mortgage Production segment are reflected net of
loan origination costs deferred under SFAS No. 91 and consist of production-direct expenses,
appraisal expense and allocations for overhead. Other operating
expenses decreased by $6 million
(12%) during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005. This decrease was
primarily attributable to a 2% decrease in total closings during the first quarter of 2006 compared
to those closed during the first quarter of 2005, as well as an increase in deferred expenses under
SFAS No. 91 primarily associated with the higher blend of loans closed to be sold compared to
fee-based closings during the first quarter of 2006 in comparison to the first quarter of 2005.
Mortgage Servicing Segment
Net revenues decreased by $79 million (71%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first
quarter of 2005. As discussed in greater detail below, an unfavorable change in Amortization and
valuation adjustments related to
mortgage servicing rights, net of $94 million was partially offset by increases in Mortgage
net finance income of $9 million and Loan servicing income of $6 million.
52
Segment profit decreased by $80 million (92%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the
first quarter of 2005 driven by the $79 million decrease in Net revenues and a $1 million (4%)
increase in Total expenses. The $1 million increase in Total expenses was due to increases of $2
million in Other operating expenses and $1 million in Occupancy and other office expenses that were
partially offset by a $2 million decrease in Other
depreciation and amortization.
The following tables present a summary of our financial results and key related drivers for
the Mortgage Servicing segment, and are followed by a discussion of each of the key components of
Net revenues and Total expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average loan servicing portfolio |
|
$ |
157,931 |
|
|
$ |
145,974 |
|
|
$ |
11,957 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Mortgage interest expense |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(75 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
150 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income |
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage
servicing rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
)% |
Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
n/m |
(1) |
Net derivative loss related to mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(152 |
) |
|
|
(543 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation adjustments related to
mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
(522 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan servicing income |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
(83 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Occupancy and other office expenses |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
50 |
% |
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(100 |
)% |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit |
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
(80 |
) |
|
|
(92 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
n/m Not meaningful. |
Mortgage Net Finance Income
Mortgage net finance income allocable to the Mortgage Servicing segment consists of interest
income credits from escrow balances, interest income from investment balances (including
investments held by our reinsurance subsidiary) and interest expense allocated on debt used to fund
our MSRs, and is driven by the average volume of outstanding borrowings and the cost of funds rate
of our outstanding borrowings. Mortgage net finance income increased by $9 million (150%) in the
first quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005, primarily due to higher income from
escrow balances, partially offset by higher interest expense on debt allocated to the funding of
MSRs. These increases were primarily due to higher short-term interest rates in the first
quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005 since the escrow balances earn income based
upon one-month LIBOR.
53
Loan Servicing Income
Loan servicing income includes recurring servicing fees, other ancillary fees and net
reinsurance income from our wholly owned reinsurance subsidiary, Atrium Insurance Corporation
(Atrium). Recurring servicing fees are recognized upon receipt of the coupon payment from the
borrower and recorded net of guaranty fees. Net reinsurance income represents premiums earned on
reinsurance contracts, net of ceding commission and adjustments to the allowance for reinsurance
losses. The primary driver for Loan servicing income is average loan servicing portfolio.
The components of Loan servicing income were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net service fee revenue |
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
Late fees and other ancillary servicing revenue |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
25 |
% |
Curtailment interest paid to investors |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
)% |
Net reinsurance income |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income |
|
$ |
130 |
|
|
$ |
124 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income increased by $6 million (5%) in the first quarter of 2006 from the first
quarter of 2005. This increase is primarily related to higher net service fee revenue and late fees
and other ancillary servicing revenue associated with the 8% increase in the average loan servicing
portfolio during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first quarter of 2005.
Amortization and Valuation Adjustments Related to Mortgage Servicing Rights, Net
Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net includes
Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing rights, Change in fair value of
mortgage servicing rights and Net derivative loss related to mortgage servicing rights. We adopted
the provisions of SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006 and elected the fair value measurement method for
valuing our MSRs. The unfavorable change of $94 million (522%) from the first quarter of 2005 to
the first quarter of 2006 was attributable to a $152 million unfavorable change in net derivative
losses between periods and $10 million of Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage
servicing rights recorded in the first quarter of 2005 that were partially offset by a $68 million
increase in the fair value of mortgage servicing rights recorded during the first quarter of 2006.
The components of Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net
are discussed separately below.
Amortization and Recovery of Impairment of Mortgage Servicing Rights: Prior to our adoption
of SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006, MSRs were carried at the lower of cost or fair value based on
defined strata and were amortized based upon the ratio of the current month net servicing income
(estimated at the beginning of the month) to the expected net servicing income over the life of the
servicing portfolio. In addition, MSRs were evaluated for impairment by strata and a valuation
allowance was recognized when the fair value of the strata was less than the amortized basis of the
strata. During the first quarter of 2005, we recorded $102 million of amortization of MSRs and a
$112 million recovery of impairment of MSRs.
Change in Fair Value of Mortgage Servicing Rights: The fair value of our MSRs is estimated
based upon estimates of expected future cash flows from our MSRs considering prepayment estimates,
our historical prepayment rates, portfolio characteristics, interest rates based on interest rate
yield curves, implied volatility and other economic factors. Generally, the value of our MSRs is
expected to increase when interest rates rise and decrease when interest rates decline due to the
effect those changes in interest rates have on prepayment estimates. Other factors noted above as
well as the overall market demand for MSRs may also affect the MSRs valuation. The MSRs valuation
is validated quarterly by comparison to a third-party market valuation of our portfolio.
54
The Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights is attributable to the realization of
expected cash flows and market factors which impact the market inputs and assumptions used in our
valuation model. The change in value of MSRs due to the realization of expected cash flows is
comparable to the amortization expense recorded for periods prior to January 1, 2006. During the
first quarter of 2006, the fair value of our MSRs was reduced by $84 million due to the realization
of expected cash flows. The change in fair value due to changes in market inputs or assumptions
used in the valuation model was a favorable change of $152 million. This favorable change was
primarily due to the increase in mortgage interest rates during the first quarter of 2006 leading
to lower expected prepayments. The 10-year U.S. Treasury (Treasury) rate, which is widely
regarded as a benchmark for mortgage rates, increased by 46 bps during the first quarter of 2006.
During the first quarter of 2005, the 10-year Treasury rate increased by 28 bps.
Net Derivative Loss Related to Mortgage Servicing Rights: We use a combination of derivatives
to protect against potential adverse changes in the value of our MSRs resulting from a decline in
interest rates. See Note 7, Derivatives and Risk Management Activities in the Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-Q. The amount and composition of
derivatives used will depend on the exposure to loss of value on our MSRs, the expected cost of the
derivatives and the increased earnings generated by origination of new loans resulting from the
decline in interest rates (the natural business hedge). The natural business hedge provides a
benefit when increased borrower refinancing activity results in higher production volumes which
would partially offset losses in the valuation of our MSRs thereby reducing the need to use
derivatives. The benefit of the natural business hedge depends on the decline in interest rates
required to create an incentive for borrowers to refinance their mortgages and lower their rates.
During the first quarter of 2006, the value of derivatives related to our MSRs decreased by
$180 million. During the first quarter of 2005, the value of derivatives related to our MSRs
decreased by $28 million. As described below, our net results from MSRs risk management activities
were a loss of $28 million and a gain of $57 million during the first quarters of 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Refer to Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk for an
analysis of the impact of 25 bps, 50 bps and 100 bps changes in interest rates on the valuation of
our MSRs and related derivatives at March 31, 2006.
The following table outlines Net (loss) gain on MSRs risk management activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Net derivative loss related to mortgage servicing rights |
|
$ |
(180 |
) |
|
$ |
(28 |
) |
Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights due to
changes in market inputs or assumptions used in the
valuation model |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing rights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
112 |
|
Application of amortization rate to the valuation allowance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) gain on MSRs risk management activities |
|
$ |
(28 |
) |
|
$ |
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Operating Expenses
Other operating expenses allocable to the Mortgage Servicing segment include servicing-direct
expenses, costs associated with foreclosure and real estate owned (REO) and allocations for
overhead. Other operating expenses increased by $2 million (17%) during the first quarter of 2006
compared to the first quarter of 2005. This increase was primarily attributable to an increase in
foreclosure losses and reserves associated with loans sold with recourse.
Fleet Management Services Segment
Net revenues increased by $30 million (8%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the first
quarter of 2005. As discussed in greater detail below, the increase in Net revenues was due to
increases of $27 million in Fleet lease income and $3 million in Fleet management fees.
55
Segment
profit increased by $7 million (41%) in the first quarter of 2006 compared to the
first quarter of 2005 due to the $30 million increase in Net
revenues, partially offset by a $23
million (6%) increase in Total expenses. The $23 million increase in Total expenses was due to
increases of $15 million, $12 million and $1 million in Depreciation on operating leases, Fleet
interest expense and Salaries and related expenses, respectively, that were partially offset by a
decrease of $5 million in Other operating expenses.
The following tables present a summary of our financial results and related drivers for the
Fleet Management Services segment, and are followed by a discussion of each of the key components
of our Net revenues and Total expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average for the |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
(In thousands of units) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased vehicles |
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
Maintenance service cards |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Fuel cards |
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
Accident management vehicles |
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet management fees |
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
Fleet lease income |
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
Other income |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues |
|
|
428 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
Occupancy and other office expenses |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
5 |
% |
Fleet interest expense |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
39 |
% |
Other depreciation and amortization |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit |
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
|
41 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet Management Fees
Fleet management fees consist primarily of the revenues of our principal fee-based products:
fuel cards, maintenance services, accident management services and monthly management fees for
leased vehicles. Fleet management fees increased by $3 million (8%) in the first quarter of 2006
compared to the first quarter of 2005 primarily due to increases in revenue from our principal
fee-based products, which accounted for approximately $2 million of the increase. Individual fees
increased in line with our unit count growth. Total growth benefited from increased spending in
maintenance services, fuel cards and accident management vehicles.
Fleet Lease Income
Fleet lease income increased by $27 million (8%) during the first quarter of 2006 compared to
the first quarter of 2005 due to higher total lease billings resulting from the 3% increase in
leased vehicles. Additionally, increased billings due to higher interest rates on variable-interest
rate leases and new leases increased Fleet lease income.
56
Other Income
Other income consists principally of the revenue generated by our dealerships and other
miscellaneous revenues. During the first quarter of 2006, Other income remained at the same level
as during the first quarter of 2005.
Salaries and Related Expenses
Salaries
and related expenses increased by $1 million (5%) in the first quarter of 2006
compared to the first quarter of 2005, primarily due to annual compensation increases and increased
staffing levels.
Depreciation on Operating Leases
Depreciation on operating leases is the depreciation expense associated with our leased asset
portfolio. Depreciation on operating leases during the first quarter of 2006 increased by $15
million (5%) compared to the first quarter of 2005, primarily due to the 3% increase in leased
units and higher average depreciation expense on replaced vehicles in the existing vehicle
portfolio. These increases were partially offset by an increase in motor company monies retained by
the business and recognized during the first quarter of 2006, which are accounted for as
adjustments to the basis of the leased units and increase as volumes increase.
Fleet Interest Expense
Fleet interest expense increased by $12 million (39%) during the first quarter of 2006
compared to the first quarter of 2005, primarily due to rising short-term interest rates.
Other Operating Expenses
Other operating expenses decreased by $5 million (16%) during the first quarter of 2006
compared to the first quarter of 2005, primarily due to a decrease in cost of goods sold as a
result of a reduction in lease syndication volume that was partially
offset by a loss on extinguishment of debt.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
General
Our liquidity is dependent upon our ability to fund maturities of indebtedness, to fund growth
in assets under management and business operations and to meet contractual obligations. We estimate
how these liquidity needs may be impacted by a number of factors including fluctuations in asset
and liability levels due to changes in our business operations, levels of interest rates and
unanticipated events. The primary operating funding needs arise from the origination and
warehousing of mortgage loans, the purchase and funding of vehicles under management and the
retention of MSRs. Sources of liquidity include equity capital including retained earnings, the
unsecured debt markets, bank lines of credit, secured borrowing including the asset-backed debt
markets and the liquidity provided by the sale or securitization of assets.
In order to ensure adequate liquidity throughout a broad array of operating environments, our
funding plan relies upon multiple sources of liquidity. We maintain liquidity at the parent company
level through access to the unsecured debt markets and through contractually committed unsecured
bank facilities. Unsecured debt markets include commercial paper issued by the parent company which
we fully support with committed bank facilities. These various unsecured sources of funds are
utilized to provide for a portion of the operating needs of our mortgage and fleet management
businesses. In addition, secured borrowings, including asset-backed debt, asset sales and
securitization of assets are utilized to fund both vehicles under management and mortgages held for
resale.
Given our expectation for business volumes, we believe that our sources of liquidity are
adequate to fund our operations for the next twelve months. Aggregate capital expenditures
during the year ended December 31, 2006 were approximately $27 million.
57
Cash Flows
At March 31, 2006, we had $143 million of Total Cash and cash equivalents, an increase of $36
million from $107 million at December 31, 2005. The following table summarizes the changes in Total
Cash and cash equivalents during the three months ended March 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Restated |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in) continuing operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
$ |
432 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
$ |
453 |
|
Investing activities |
|
|
(483 |
) |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
(542 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash used in discontinued operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
(184 |
) |
Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
Financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
(292 |
) |
|
$ |
328 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing Operations
Operating Activities
During
the first quarter of 2006, we generated $453 million more cash from operating
activities than the first quarter of 2005 as net cash inflows related to the origination and sale
of mortgage loans during the first quarter of 2006 were $315 million higher than the net cash
outflows that occurred during the first quarter of 2005. Cash flows related to the origination and
sale of mortgage loans may fluctuate significantly from period to period due to the timing of the
underlying transactions.
Investing Activities
During
the first quarter of 2006, we used $542 million more cash in investing activities than
during the first quarter of 2005. During the first quarter of 2005, we redeemed $400 million of
senior notes issued under our Bishops Gate Residential Mortgage Trust (Bishops Gate) mortgage
warehouse asset-backed debt arrangement, which caused a significant decrease in Restricted cash
during that period. The remaining increase in cash used in investing activities was primarily
attributable to a decrease of $304 million in net settlement proceeds for derivatives related to
MSRs and an $83 million increase in cash used by our Fleet Management Services segment to acquire
vehicles that were partially offset by a $196 million decrease in cash paid on derivatives related
to MSRs.
Financing Activities
During
the first quarter of 2006, we generated $329 million more cash from financing
activities than during the first quarter of 2005. During the first quarter of 2006, we recorded
$4.5 billion of higher proceeds from borrowings, primarily due to borrowings incurred to redeem the
Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC (Chesapeake Finance) and Terrapin Funding LLC (Terrapin) debt.
This increase in cash provided by financing activities was partially offset by $3.9 billion more
cash used for the repayment of debt, including the repayment of $3.2 billion of outstanding term
notes, variable funding notes and subordinated notes issued by Chesapeake Finance and Terrapin and
a $159 million lower increase in net short-term borrowings during the first quarter of 2006
compared to the first quarter of 2005. In addition, during the first quarter of 2005, we recorded a
$100 million cash contribution from Cendant related to the Spin-Off.
58
Discontinued Operations
During the first quarter of 2005, our discontinued operations generated (used) $184 million,
$(30) million and $(242) million of cash from operating activities, investing activities and
financing activities, respectively. The discontinued operations were distributed to our former
parent company, Cendant, during the first quarter of 2005.
Secondary Mortgage Market
We rely on the secondary mortgage market for a substantial amount of liquidity to support our
operations. Nearly all mortgage loans that we originate are sold in the secondary mortgage market,
primarily in the form of mortgage-backed securities (MBS), asset-backed securities and whole-loan
transactions. A large component of the MBS we sell is guaranteed by Fannie Mae, the Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) or the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie
Mae) (collectively, Agency MBS). We also issue non-agency (or non-conforming) MBS and
asset-backed securities. We publicly issue both non-conforming MBS and asset-backed securities that
are registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), and we also issue private
non-conforming MBS and asset-backed securities. Generally, these types of securities have their own
credit ratings and require some form of credit enhancement, such as over-collateralization,
senior-subordinated structures, primary mortgage insurance, and/or private surety guarantees.
The Agency MBS market, whole-loan and non-conforming markets for prime mortgage loans provide
substantial liquidity for our mortgage loan production. We focus our business process on
consistently producing quality mortgages that meet investor requirements to continue to be able to
access these markets.
Indebtedness
We utilize both secured and unsecured debt as key components of our financing strategy. Our
primary financing needs arise from our assets under management programs which are summarized in the
table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash |
|
$ |
443 |
|
|
$ |
497 |
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net |
|
|
2,286 |
|
|
|
2,395 |
|
Net investment in fleet leases |
|
|
4,082 |
|
|
|
3,966 |
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
|
2,073 |
|
|
|
1,909 |
|
Investment securities |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets under management programs |
|
$ |
8,922 |
|
|
$ |
8,808 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59
The following tables summarize the components of our indebtedness at March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
Vehicle |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management |
|
|
Warehouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Term notes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
1,049 |
|
|
$ |
1,849 |
|
Variable funding notes |
|
|
3,347 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,548 |
|
Subordinated debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
Commercial paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
829 |
|
|
|
905 |
|
Borrowings under credit facilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
Other |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,359 |
|
|
$ |
1,495 |
|
|
$ |
1,980 |
|
|
$ |
6,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
Vehicle |
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management |
|
|
Warehouse |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Debt |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Term notes |
|
$ |
1,318 |
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
1,136 |
|
|
$ |
3,254 |
|
Variable funding notes |
|
|
1,700 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,947 |
|
Subordinated debt |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
468 |
|
Commercial paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
747 |
|
|
|
831 |
|
Borrowings under credit facilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
181 |
|
Other |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,406 |
|
|
$ |
1,451 |
|
|
$ |
1,887 |
|
|
$ |
6,744 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed Debt
Vehicle Management Asset-Backed Debt
As of December 31, 2005, vehicle management asset-backed debt primarily represented
variable-rate term notes and variable funding notes issued by Chesapeake Funding LLC, a wholly
owned subsidiary. Variable-rate term notes and variable funding notes outstanding under this
arrangement as of December 31, 2005 aggregated $3.0 billion. As of December 31, 2005, subordinated
notes issued by Terrapin, a consolidated entity, aggregated $367 million. This debt was issued to
support the acquisition of vehicles used by the Fleet Management Services segments leasing
operations.
On March 7, 2006, Chesapeake Funding LLC changed its name to Chesapeake Finance, and it and
Terrapin redeemed all of their outstanding term notes, variable funding notes and subordinated
notes (with aggregate outstanding principal balances of $1.1 billion, $1.7 billion and $367
million, respectively) and terminated the agreements associated with those borrowings.
Concurrently, Chesapeake Funding LLC (Chesapeake), a newly formed wholly owned subsidiary, issued
variable funding notes under Series 2006-1, with capacity of $2.7 billion, and Series 2006-2, with
capacity of $1.0 billion, to fund the redemption of this debt and provide additional committed
funding for the Fleet Management Services operations. We recorded a $4 million loss on the
extinguishment of the Chesapeake Finance and Terrapin debt that was included in Other operating
expenses in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months
ended March 31, 2006.
As of March 31, 2006, variable funding notes outstanding under this arrangement aggregated
$3.3 billion and were issued to redeem the Chesapeake Finance and Terrapin debt and support the
acquisition of vehicles used by the Fleet Management Services segments leasing operations. The
debt issued as of March 31, 2006 was collateralized by approximately $4.0 billion of leased
vehicles and related assets, which are primarily included in Net investment in fleet leases in the
accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet and are not available to pay our general
obligations. The titles to all the vehicles collateralizing the debt issued by Chesapeake are held
60
in a bankruptcy remote trust, and we act as a servicer of all such leases. The bankruptcy
remote trust also acts as lessor under both operating and direct financing lease agreements. As of
March 31, 2006, the agreements governing the Series 2006-1 and Series 2006-2 notes were scheduled
to expire on March 6, 2007 and December 1, 2006, respectively (the Scheduled Expiry Dates). These
agreements are renewable on or before the Scheduled Expiry Dates, subject to agreement by the
parties. If the agreements are not renewed, monthly repayments on the notes are required to be made
as certain cash inflows are received relating to the securitized vehicle leases and related assets
beginning in the month following the Scheduled Expiry Dates and ending up to 125 months after the
Scheduled Expiry Dates. The weighted-average interest rate of vehicle management asset-backed debt
arrangements was 5.1% and 4.8% as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively.
On December 1, 2006, Chesapeake amended the agreement governing its Series 2006-2 notes to
extend the Scheduled Expiry Date to November 30, 2007.
On March 6, 2007, Chesapeake amended the agreement governing the Series 2006-1 notes to extend
the Scheduled Expiry Date to March 4, 2008 and increase the maximum borrowings allowed under the
agreement from $2.7 billion to $2.9 billion.
The availability of this asset-backed debt could suffer in the event of: (i) the deterioration
of the assets underlying the asset-backed debt arrangement; (ii) our inability to access the
asset-backed debt market to refinance maturing debt or (iii) termination of our role as servicer of
the underlying lease assets in the event that we default in the performance of our servicing
obligations or we declare bankruptcy or become insolvent.
As of March 31, 2006, the total capacity under vehicle management asset-backed debt
arrangements was approximately $3.7 billion, and we had $353 million of unused capacity available.
Mortgage Warehouse Asset-Backed Debt
Bishops Gate is a consolidated bankruptcy remote special purpose entity that is utilized to
warehouse mortgage loans originated by us prior to their sale into the secondary market. The
activities of Bishops Gate are limited to (i) purchasing mortgage loans from our mortgage
subsidiary, (ii) issuing commercial paper, senior term notes, subordinated certificates and/or
borrowing under a liquidity agreement to effect such purchases, (iii) entering into interest rate
swaps to hedge interest rate risk and certain non-credit-related market risk on the purchased
mortgage loans, (iv) selling and securitizing the acquired mortgage loans to third parties and (v)
engaging in certain related transactions. As of both March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the
Bishops Gate term notes (the Bishops Gate
Notes) issued under the Base Indenture dated as of December
11, 1998 (the Bishops Gate Indenture) between The Bank of New York, as Indenture Trustee (the
Bishops Gate Trustee) and Bishops Gate aggregated $800 million. The Bishops Gate Notes are
variable-rate instruments and, as of March 31, 2006, were scheduled to mature between September
2006 and November 2008. The weighted-average interest rate on the Bishops Gate Notes as of March
31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 5.0% and 4.7%, respectively. As of both March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005, the Bishops Gate subordinated certificates (the Bishops Gate Certificates)
aggregated $101 million. As of March 31, 2006, the Bishops Gate Certificates were primarily
variable-rate instruments and were scheduled to mature between September 2006 and May 2008. The
weighted-average interest rate on the Bishops Gate Certificates as of March 31, 2006 and December
31, 2005 was 6.1% and 5.8%, respectively. As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Bishops
Gate commercial paper, issued under the Amended and Restated Liquidity Agreement, dated as of
December 11, 1998, as further amended and restated as of December 2, 2003, among Bishops Gate,
certain banks listed therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as Agent (the Bishops Gate Liquidity
Agreement), aggregated $76 million and $84 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2006, the
capacity under the Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement was $1.5 billion. The Bishops Gate commercial
paper are fixed-rate instruments and, as of March 31, 2006, were scheduled to mature in April 2006.
The weighted-average interest rate on the Bishops Gate commercial paper as of March 31, 2006 and
December 31, 2005 was 4.9% and 4.3%, respectively. As of March 31, 2006, the debt issued by
Bishops Gate was collateralized by approximately $1.0 billion of underlying mortgage loans and
related assets, primarily recorded in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
61
On September 20, 2006, Bishops Gate retired $400 million of the Bishops Gate Notes and $51
million of the Bishops Gate Certificates in accordance with their scheduled maturity dates.
Accordingly, availability under our mortgage warehouse asset-backed debt arrangements was reduced
by $451 million. Funds for the retirement of this debt were provided by a combination of the sale
of mortgage loans and the issuance of commercial paper by Bishops Gate.
On December 1, 2006, the Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement was amended to extend its
expiration date to November 30, 2007 and reduce the maximum committed borrowings allowed under the
agreement from $1.5 billion to $1.0 billion.
As
of March 27, 2007, Bishops Gates commercial paper was rated A1/P1/F1, the Bishops
Gate Notes were rated AAA/Aaa/AAA and the Bishops Gate Certificates were rated BBB/Baa2/BBB by
Standard & Poors, Moodys Investors Service and Fitch Ratings, respectively. These ratings are
largely dependent upon the performance of the underlying mortgage assets, the maintenance of
sufficient levels of subordinated debt and the timely sale of mortgage loans into the secondary
market. The assets of Bishops Gate are not available to pay our general obligations. The
availability of this asset-backed debt could suffer in the event of: (i) the deterioration in the
performance of the mortgage loans underlying the asset-backed debt arrangement; (ii) our inability
to access the asset-backed debt market to refinance maturing debt; (iii) our inability to access
the secondary market for mortgage loans or (iv) termination of our role as servicer of the
underlying mortgage assets in the event that (a) we default in the performance of our servicing
obligations, (b) we declare bankruptcy or become insolvent or (c) our senior unsecured credit
ratings fall below BB+ or Ba1 by Standard and Poors and Moodys Investors Service, respectively.
We also maintain a $500 million committed mortgage repurchase facility (the Mortgage
Repurchase Facility) that is used to finance mortgage loans originated by PHH Mortgage, a wholly
owned subsidiary. We generally use this facility to supplement the capacity of Bishops Gate and
unsecured borrowings used to fund our mortgage warehouse needs. As of March 31, 2006 and December
31, 2005, borrowings under this variable-rate facility were $201 million and $247 million,
respectively. The Mortgage Repurchase Facility was collateralized by underlying mortgage loans of
$225 million, included in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the accompanying Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2006, and is funded by a multi-seller conduit. As of
March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, borrowings under the Mortgage Repurchase Facility bore
interest at 4.9% and 4.3%, respectively. The Mortgage Repurchase Facility was scheduled to expire
on January 12, 2007.
On October 30, 2006, we further amended the Mortgage Repurchase Facility by executing the
Fifth Amended and Restated Master Repurchase Agreement (the Repurchase Agreement) and the
Servicing Agreement (together with the Repurchase Agreement, the Amended Repurchase Agreements).
The Amended Repurchase Agreements increased the capacity of the Mortgage Repurchase Facility from
$500 million to $750 million, expanded the eligibility of underlying mortgage loan collateral and
modified certain other covenants and terms. The Mortgage Repurchase Facility as amended by the
Amended Repurchase Agreements expires on October 29, 2007 and is renewable on an annual basis,
subject to agreement by the parties. The assets collateralizing this facility are not available to
pay our general obligations.
On June 1, 2006, the Mortgage Venture entered into a $350 million repurchase facility (the
Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility) with Bank of Montreal and Barclays Bank PLC as Bank
Principals and Fairway Finance Company, LLC and Sheffield Receivables Corporation as Conduit
Principals. The obligations under the Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility are collateralized by
underlying mortgage loans and related assets. The cost of the facility is based upon the commercial
paper issued by the Conduit Principals plus a program fee of 30 bps. In addition, the Mortgage
Venture pays an annual liquidity fee of 20 bps on 102% of the program size. The maturity date for
this facility is June 1, 2009, subject to annual renewals of certain underlying conduit liquidity
arrangements.
The Mortgage Venture maintains a secured line of credit agreement with Barclays Bank PLC, Bank
of Montreal and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. that is used to finance mortgage loans originated by the
Mortgage Venture. The capacity of this line of credit was $350 million as of March 31, 2006.
Borrowings outstanding under this line of credit were $269 million and $177 million as of March 31,
2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively, and, as of March 31, 2006, were collateralized by
underlying mortgage loans and related assets of $338 million,
62
primarily included in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the accompanying Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheet. Effective June 27, 2006, we amended this agreement to reduce the
capacity under this credit facility to $200 million following the execution of the Mortgage Venture
Repurchase Facility. This variable-rate credit agreement was scheduled to expire on October 5, 2006
and bore interest at 5.7% and 5.2% on March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively. On
September 28, 2006, the maturity date of this facility was extended to January 3, 2007, and on
December 22, 2006, it was extended again to October 5, 2007.
As of March 31, 2006, the total capacity under mortgage warehouse asset-backed debt
arrangements was approximately $3.3 billion, and we had approximately $1.8 billion of unused
capacity available.
Unsecured Debt
The public debt markets are a key source of financing for us, due to their efficiency and low
cost relative to certain other sources of financing. Typically, we access these markets by issuing
unsecured commercial paper and medium-term notes. As of March 31, 2006, we had a total of
approximately $1.9 billion in unsecured public debt outstanding. Our maintenance of investment
grade ratings as an independent company is a significant factor in preserving our access to the
public debt markets. Our credit ratings as of March 27, 2007 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moodys |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investors |
|
Standard |
|
Fitch |
|
|
Service |
|
& Poors |
|
Ratings |
Senior debt
|
|
Baa3
|
|
BBB-
|
|
BBB+ |
Short-term debt
|
|
P-3
|
|
A-3
|
|
F-2 |
On January 22, 2007, Standard & Poors removed our debt ratings from CreditWatch Negative and
downgraded its ratings on our senior unsecured long-term debt from BBB to BBB- and our short-term
debt from A-2 to A-3. As of February 28, 2007, the ratings outlooks on our senior unsecured
long-term debt provided by Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors were Negative and Fitch
Ratings was Rating Watch Negative.
On March 15, 2007 following the announcement of the Merger, our senior unsecured long-term
debt ratings were placed under review for upgrade by Moodys Investor Services, on CreditWatch with
positive implications by Standard & Poors and on Rating
Watch Positive by Fitch Ratings. There can be no assurance that the
ratings and ratings outlooks on our senior unsecured long-term debt
and other debt will remain at these levels.
Among other things, maintenance of our investment grade ratings requires that we demonstrate
high levels of liquidity, including access to alternative sources of funding such as committed bank
stand-by lines of credit, as well as a capital structure and leverage appropriate for companies in
our industry. A security rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities and is
subject to revision or withdrawal by the assigning rating organization. Each rating should be
evaluated independently of any other rating.
In the event our credit ratings were to drop below investment grade, our access to the public
debt markets may be severely limited. The cutoff for investment grade is generally considered to be
a long-term rating of Baa3, BBB- and BBB- for Moodys Investors Service, Standard & Poors and
Fitch Ratings, respectively. In the event of a ratings downgrade below investment grade, we may be
required to rely upon alternative sources of financing, such as bank lines and private debt
placements (secured and unsecured). A drop in our credit ratings could also increase our cost of
borrowing under our credit facilities. Furthermore, we may be unable to retain all of our existing
bank credit commitments beyond the then existing maturity dates. As a consequence, our cost of
financing could rise significantly, thereby negatively impacting our ability to finance some of our
capital-intensive activities, such as our ongoing investment in MSRs and other retained interests.
Term Notes
The outstanding carrying value of term notes at March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 consisted
of $1.0 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively, of medium-term notes (the MTNs) publicly issued
under the Indenture, dated as of November 6, 2000 (as amended and supplemented, the MTN
Indenture) by and between PHH and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, N.A., as successor trustee for Bank
One Trust Company, N.A. (the MTN
63
Indenture Trustee) that mature between January 2007 and April 2018. The effective rate of
interest for the MTNs outstanding as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 6.7% and 6.8%,
respectively.
On September 14, 2006, we concluded a tender offer and consent solicitation (the Offer) for
MTNs issued under the MTN Indenture. We received consents on behalf of $585 million and tenders and
consents on behalf of $416 million of the aggregate notional principal amount of the $1.1 billion
of the MTNs. Borrowings of $415 million were drawn under our Tender Support Facility (defined and
described below) to fund the bulk of the tendered MTNs.
Commercial Paper
Our policy is to maintain available capacity under our committed credit facilities (described
below) to fully support our outstanding unsecured commercial paper. We had unsecured commercial
paper obligations of $829 million and $747 million as of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005,
respectively. This commercial paper is primarily fixed-rate and matures within 270 days of
issuance. The weighted-average interest rate on outstanding unsecured commercial paper as of March
31, 2006 and December 31, 2005 was 5.1% and 4.7%, respectively.
Credit Facilities
As of December 31, 2005, we were party to a $1.25 billion Three Year Competitive Advance and
Revolving Credit Agreement (the Credit Facility), dated as of June 28, 2004 and amended as of
December 21, 2004, among PHH Corporation, a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
administrative agent. On January 6, 2006, we entered into the Amended and Restated Competitive
Advance and Revolving Credit Agreement (the Amended Credit Facility), among PHH Corporation, a
group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent, which increased the
capacity of the Credit Facility from $1.25 billion to $1.30 billion, extended the termination date
from June 28, 2007 to January 6, 2011 and created a $50 million United States dollar equivalent
Canadian sub-facility, which is available to our Fleet Management Services operations in Canada.
Pricing under the Amended Credit Facility is based upon our senior unsecured long-term debt
ratings. If the ratings on our senior unsecured long-term debt assigned by Moodys Investors
Service, Standard & Poors and Fitch Ratings are not equivalent to each other, the second highest
credit rating assigned by them determines pricing under the Amended Credit Facility. Borrowings
under the Amended Credit Facility bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 38 bps as of March 31,
2006. The Amended Credit Facility also requires us to pay utilization fees if our usage
exceeds 50% of the aggregate commitments under the Amended Credit Facility and per annum facility
fees. As of March 31, 2006, the per annum utilization and facility fees were 10 bps and 12 bps,
respectively. As discussed above, on January 22, 2007, Standard & Poors downgraded its rating on
our senior unsecured long-term debt to BBB-. As a result, borrowings under our Amended Credit
Facility after the downgrade bear interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 47.5 bps. In addition, the per
annum utilization and facility fees were increased to 12.5 bps and 15 bps, respectively. In the
event that both of our second highest and lowest credit ratings are downgraded in the future, the
margin over LIBOR would become 70 bps, the utilization fee would remain 12.5 bps and the facility
fee would become 17.5 bps. Borrowings under the Amended Credit Facility were $96 million as of
March 31, 2006. There were no borrowings under the Credit Facility as of December 31,
2005.
On April 6, 2006, we entered into a $500 million unsecured revolving credit agreement (the
Supplemental Credit Facility) with a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
administrative agent, that expires on April 5, 2007. Pricing, transaction terms and financial
covenants, including the net worth and ratio of indebtedness to tangible net worth restrictions
under the Supplemental Credit Facility were substantially the same as those under the Amended
Credit Facility both before and after the Standard & Poors rating downgrade until the amendment of
the Supplemental Credit Facility described below with the addition of a facility fee of 10 bps
against the outstanding commitments under the facility as of October 6, 2006.
On February 22, 2007, the Supplemental Credit Facility was amended to extend its expiration
date to December 15, 2007, reduce total commitments to $200 million and modify the interest rates
paid on outstanding borrowings. Pricing is based upon our senior unsecured long-term debt ratings.
If the ratings on our senior unsecured long-term debt assigned by Moodys Investors Service and
Standard & Poors are not equivalent to each other, the higher credit rating assigned by them
determines pricing under the agreement, unless there is more
64
than one rating level difference between the two ratings, in which case the rating one level
below the higher rating is applied. As a result of this amendment, borrowings under the
Supplemental Credit Facility bear interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 82.5 bps and the per annum
facility fee is 17.5 bps. The amendment eliminated the per annum utilization fee. In the event that
both of the Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors ratings are downgraded in the future,
the margin over LIBOR would become 127.5 bps and the per annum facility fee would become 22.5 bps.
On July 21, 2006, we entered into a $750 million unsecured credit agreement (the Tender
Support Facility) with a group of lenders and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent,
that expires on April 5, 2007. The Tender Support Facility provided $750 million of capacity solely
for the repayment of the MTNs, and was put in place in conjunction with the Offer. Pricing under
the Tender Support Facility is based upon our senior unsecured long-term debt ratings assigned by
Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors. If those ratings are not equivalent to each other,
the higher credit rating assigned by them determines pricing under this agreement, unless there is
more than one rating level difference between the two ratings, in which case the rating one level
below the higher rating is applied. Borrowings under this agreement bore interest at LIBOR plus a
margin of 60 bps on or before December 14, 2006 and 75 bps from December 15, 2006 until Standard &
Poors downgraded its rating on our senior unsecured debt on January 22, 2007. The Tender Support
Facility also required us to pay an initial fee of 10 bps of the commitment and a per annum
commitment fee of 12 bps prior to the downgrade. In addition, we paid a one-time fee of 15 bps
against borrowings of $415 million drawn under the Tender Support Facility. As discussed above, on
January 22, 2007, Standard & Poors downgraded its rating on our senior unsecured long-term debt to
BBB-. As a result, borrowings under our Tender Support Facility after the downgrade bore interest
at LIBOR plus a margin of 100 bps and the per annum commitment fee was increased to 17.5 bps. The
net worth and net ratio of indebtedness to tangible net worth restrictions under the Tender Support
Facility are the same as those under the Amended Credit Facility and the Supplemental Credit
Facility.
On February 22, 2007, the Tender Support Facility was amended to extend its expiration date to
December 15, 2007, reduce total commitments to $415 million and modify the interest rates paid on
outstanding borrowings. As a result of this amendment, borrowings under the Tender Support Facility
bear interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 100 bps. The amendment eliminated the per annum commitment
fee. In the event that both of the Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors ratings are
downgraded in the future, the margin over LIBOR would become 150 bps.
We maintain other unsecured credit facilities in the ordinary course of business as set forth
in Debt Maturities below.
Debt Maturities
The following table provides the contractual maturities of our indebtedness at March 31, 2006
except for our vehicle management asset-backed notes, where estimated payments have been used
assuming the underlying agreements were not renewed (the indentures related to vehicle management
asset-backed notes require principal payments based on cash inflows relating to the securitized
vehicle leases and related assets if the indentures are not renewed on or before the Scheduled
Expiry Dates):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed |
|
|
Unsecured |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Within one year |
|
$ |
1,140 |
|
|
$ |
835 |
|
|
$ |
1,975 |
|
Between one and two years |
|
|
1,068 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
1,513 |
|
Between two and three years |
|
|
1,404 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1,410 |
|
Between three and four years |
|
|
683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
683 |
|
Between four and five years |
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
491 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,854 |
|
|
$ |
1,980 |
|
|
$ |
6,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65
As of March 31, 2006, available funding under our asset-backed debt arrangements and unsecured
committed credit facilities consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilized |
|
|
Available |
|
|
|
Capacity(1) |
|
|
Capacity |
|
|
Capacity |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed Funding Arrangements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicle management |
|
$ |
3,712 |
|
|
$ |
3,359 |
|
|
$ |
353 |
|
Mortgage warehouse |
|
|
3,303 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
1,808 |
|
Unsecured Committed Credit Facilities (2) |
|
|
1,302 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Capacity is dependent upon maintaining compliance with, or obtaining waivers of,
the terms, conditions and covenants of the respective agreements. With respect to asset-backed
funding arrangements, capacity may be further limited by the availability of asset eligibility
requirements under the respective agreements. |
|
(2) |
|
Available capacity reflects a reduction in availability due to an allocation against
the facilities of $829 million which fully supports the outstanding unsecured commercial paper
issued by us as of March 31, 2006. Under our policy, all of the outstanding unsecured
commercial paper is supported by available capacity under our unsecured committed credit
facilities. In addition, utilized capacity reflects $2 million of letters of credit issued
under the Amended Credit Facility. |
Beginning on March 16, 2006, access to our shelf registration statement for public debt
issuances was no longer available due to our non-current filing status with the SEC.
Debt Covenants
Certain of our debt arrangements require the maintenance of certain financial ratios and
contain restrictive covenants, including, but not limited to, restrictions on indebtedness of
material subsidiaries, mergers, liens, liquidations and sale and leaseback transactions. The
Amended Credit Facility, the Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender Support Facility require
that we maintain: (i) on the last day of each fiscal quarter, net worth of $1.0 billion plus 25% of
net income, if positive, for each fiscal quarter ended after December 31, 2004 and (ii) at any
time, a ratio of indebtedness to tangible net worth no greater than 10:1. The MTN Indenture
requires that we maintain a debt to tangible equity ratio of not more than 10:1. The MTN Indenture
also restricts us from paying dividends if, after giving effect to the dividend, the debt to equity
ratio exceeds 6.5:1. At March 31, 2006, we were in compliance with all of our financial covenants
related to our debt arrangements. (See below for further discussion of compliance with our debt
covenants.)
Under many of our financing, servicing, hedging and related agreements and instruments
(collectively, our Financing Agreements), we are required to provide consolidated and/or
subsidiary-level audited annual financial statements, unaudited quarterly financial statements and
related documents. The delay in completing the 2005 audited financial statements, the restatement
of financial results for periods prior to the quarter ended December 31, 2005 and the delay in
completing the unaudited quarterly financial statements for 2006 created the potential for breaches
under certain of the Financing Agreements for failure to deliver the financial statements and/or
documents by specified deadlines, as well as potential breaches of other covenants.
On March 17, 2006, we obtained waivers under our Amended Credit Facility and our Bishops Gate
Liquidity Agreement which extended the deadlines for the delivery of our 2005 annual audited
financial statements, our unaudited financial statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 and
related documents to June 15, 2006 and waived certain other potential breaches.
On May 26, 2006, we obtained waivers under our Supplemental Credit Facility and our Amended
Credit Facility which extended the deadlines for the delivery of our 2005 annual audited financial
statements, our unaudited financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and June 30,
2006 and related documents to September 30, 2006 and waived certain other potential breaches.
On July 12, 2006, Bishops Gate received a notice (the Notice), dated July 10, 2006, from
the Bishops Gate Trustee, that certain events of default had occurred under the Bishops Gate
Indenture. The Notice indicated that events of default occurred as a result of Bishops Gates
failure to provide the Bishops Gate Trustee with our and certain other audited and unaudited
quarterly financial statements as required under the Bishops Gate Indenture.
66
While the Notice further informed the holders of the Bishops Gate Notes of these events of
default, the Notice received did not constitute a notice of acceleration of repayment of the
Bishops Gate Notes. The Notice created an event of default under the Bishops Gate Liquidity
Agreement. We sought waivers of any events of default from the
holders of the Bishop's Gate Notes as well as the lenders under the
Bishop's Gate Liquidity Agreement.
As of August 15, 2006, we received all of the required approvals and executed a Supplemental
Indenture to the Bishops Gate Indenture waiving any event of default arising as a result of the
failure to provide the Bishops Gate Trustee with our 2005 annual audited financial statements, our
unaudited financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006 and certain
other documents as required under the Bishops Gate Indenture.
This Supplemental Indenture also extended the deadline for the
delivery of the required financial statements to the Bishops Gate Trustee and the rating agencies
to the earlier of December 31, 2006 or the date on or after September 30, 2006 by which such
financial statements were required to be delivered to the bank group under the Bishops Gate
Liquidity Agreement. Also effective August 15, 2006 was a related
waiver of any default under the Bishops Gate
Liquidity Agreement caused by the Notice under the Bishops Gate Indenture for failure to deliver
the required financial statements.
Upon receipt of the required consents related to the Offer on September 14, 2006, Supplemental
Indenture No. 4 to the MTN Indenture (Supplemental Indenture No. 4), dated August 31, 2006,
between us and the MTN Indenture Trustee became effective. Supplemental Indenture No. 4 extended
the deadline for the delivery of our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2005, the
quarterly periods ended March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and September 30, 2006 and related documents
to December 31, 2006. In addition, Supplemental Indenture No. 4 provided for the waiver of all
defaults that occurred prior to August 31, 2006 relating to our financial statements and other
delivery requirements.
On September 19, 2006, we obtained waivers under our Amended Credit Facility, Supplemental
Credit Facility, our Tender Support Facility and our Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement which
extended the deadline for the delivery of our 2005 annual audited financial statements and related
documents to November 30, 2006. The waivers also extended the deadline for the delivery of our
unaudited financial statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and September
30, 2006 and related documents to December 29, 2006.
During the fourth quarter of 2006, we obtained additional waivers under the Amended Credit
Facility, the Supplemental Credit Facility, the Tender Support Facility, the Amended Repurchase
Agreements, the financing agreements for Chesapeake and Bishops Gate and other agreements which
waive certain potential breaches of covenants under those instruments and extend the deadlines (the
Extended Deadlines) for the delivery of our financial statements and related documents to the
various lenders under those instruments. With respect to the delivery of our quarterly financial
statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006, the Extended Deadline is March
30, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of our quarterly financial statements for the
quarter ended September 30, 2006 is April 30, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of our
financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the quarter ending March 31, 2007 is
June 29, 2007.
We may require additional waivers in the future if we are unable to meet the
deadlines for the delivery of our financial statements. If we are not able to deliver our financial
statements by the deadlines, we intend to negotiate with the lenders and trustees to the
Financing Agreements to extend the existing waivers. Our independent registered public accounting
firms audit report with respect to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in our 2005 Form
10-K contained an explanatory paragraph stating that the uncertainty about our ability to comply
with certain of our Financing Agreements covenants relating to the timely filing of our financial
statements raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.
If we are unable to obtain sufficient extensions and financial statements are not delivered
timely, the lenders have the right to demand payment of amounts due under the Financing Agreements
either immediately or after a specified grace period. In addition, because of cross-default
provisions, amounts owed under other borrowing arrangements may become due or, in the case of
asset-backed debt arrangements, new borrowings may be
67
precluded. Since repayments are required on asset-backed debt arrangements as cash inflows are
received relating to the securitized assets, new borrowings are necessary for us to continue normal
operations. Therefore, unless we can obtain any necessary further extensions or negotiate
alternative borrowing arrangements, the uncertainty about our ability to meet our financial
statement delivery requirements raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern.
Under certain of our Financing Agreements, the lenders or trustees have the right to notify us
if they believe we have breached a covenant under the operative documents and may declare an event
of default. If one or more notices of default were to be given, we believe we would have various
periods in which to cure such events of default. If we do not cure the events of default or obtain
necessary waivers within the required time periods or certain extended time periods, the maturity
of some of our debt could be accelerated and our ability to incur additional indebtedness could be
restricted. In addition, events of default or acceleration under certain of our Financing
Agreements would trigger cross-default provisions under certain of our other Financing Agreements.
We have not yet delivered our financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and the
year ended December 31, 2006 to the MTN Indenture Trustee, which were required to be delivered no
later than December 31, 2006 and March 16, 2007, respectively, under the MTN Indenture. The MTN
Indenture Trustee could provide us with a notice of default for our failure to deliver these
financial statements. In the event that we receive such notice, we would have 90 days from receipt
to cure this default or to seek additional waivers of the financial statement delivery requirements
under the MTN Indenture. No assurances can be given that we will be able to deliver the required
financial statements within the cure period or that additional waivers will be obtained.
We also obtained certain waivers and may need to seek additional waivers extending the date
for the delivery of the financial statements of our subsidiaries and other documents related to
such financial statements to certain regulators, investors in mortgage loans and other third
parties in order to satisfy state mortgage licensing regulations and certain contractual
requirements. We will continue to seek similar waivers as may be necessary in the future.
There can be no assurance that any additional waivers will be received on a timely basis, if
at all, or that any waivers obtained, including the waivers we have already obtained, will extend
for a sufficient period of time to avoid an acceleration event, an event of default or other
restrictions on our business operations. The failure to obtain such waivers could have a material
and adverse effect on our business, liquidity and financial condition.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Guarantees
In the ordinary course of business, we enter into numerous agreements that contain standard
guarantees and indemnities whereby we indemnify another party for breaches of representations and
warranties. Such guarantees or indemnifications are granted under various agreements, including
those governing leases of real estate, access to credit facilities and use of derivatives and
issuances of debt or equity securities. The guarantees or indemnifications issued are for the
benefit of the buyers in sale agreements and sellers in purchase agreements, landlords in lease
contracts, financial institutions in credit facility arrangements and derivative contracts and
underwriters in debt or equity security issuances. While some of these guarantees extend only for
the duration of the underlying agreement, many survive the expiration of the term of the agreement
or extend into perpetuity (unless subject to a legal statute of limitations). There are no specific
limitations on the maximum potential amount of future payments that we could be required to make
under these guarantees, and we are unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of
future payments to be made under these guarantees, if any, as the triggering events are not subject
to predictability. With respect to certain of the aforementioned guarantees, such as
indemnifications of landlords against third-party claims for the use of real estate property leased
by us, we maintain insurance coverage that mitigates any potential payments to be made.
68
Critical Accounting Policies
There have not been any significant changes to the critical accounting policies discussed
under Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Critical Accounting Policies of our 2005 Form 10-K, except as discussed below.
Mortgage Servicing Rights
Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 156, Accounting for Servicing of Financial
Assets (SFAS No. 156). SFAS No. 156: (i) clarifies when a servicing asset or servicing liability
should be recognized; (ii) requires all separately recognized servicing assets and servicing
liabilities to be initially measured at fair value, if practicable; (iii) subsequent to initial
measurement, permits an entity to choose either the amortization method or the fair value
measurement method for each class of separately recognized servicing assets or servicing
liabilities and (iv) at its initial adoption, permits a one-time reclassification of
available-for-sale securities to trading securities by entities with recognized servicing rights.
As a result of adopting SFAS No. 156, servicing rights created through the sale of originated
loans are recorded at the fair value of the servicing right on the date of sale whereas prior to
the adoption, the servicing rights were recorded based on the relative fair values of the loans
sold and the servicing rights retained. We have elected the fair value measurement method for
subsequently measuring our servicing rights. The election of the fair value measurement method will
subject our earnings to increases and decreases in the value of our servicing assets. Previously,
servicing rights were (i) carried at the lower of cost or fair value based on defined strata, (ii)
amortized in proportion to estimated net servicing income and (iii) evaluated for impairment at
least quarterly. The effects of measuring servicing rights at fair value after the adoption of SFAS
No. 156 are recorded in Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights in our Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2006. The effects of
carrying servicing rights at the lower of cost or fair value prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 156
are recorded in Amortization and recovery of impairment of mortgage servicing rights in our
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2005.
The adoption of SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006 did not have a material impact on our
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as all of the servicing asset strata were impaired as
of December 31, 2005.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
For detailed information regarding recently issued accounting pronouncements and the expected
impact on our business, see Note 2, Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements in the Notes to
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Form 10-Q.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Our principal market exposure is to interest rate risk, specifically long-term Treasury and
mortgage interest rates due to their impact on mortgage-related assets and commitments. We also
have exposure to LIBOR and commercial paper interest rates due to their impact on variable-rate
borrowings, other interest rate sensitive liabilities and net investment in variable-rate lease
assets. We anticipate that such interest rates will remain a primary market risk for the
foreseeable future.
Interest Rate Risk
Mortgage Servicing Rights
Our MSRs are subject to substantial interest rate risk as the mortgage notes underlying the
MSRs permit the borrowers to prepay the loans. Therefore, the value of the MSRs tends to diminish
in periods of declining interest rates (as prepayments increase) and increase in periods of rising
interest rates (as prepayments decrease). We use a combination of derivative instruments to offset
potential adverse changes in the fair value of our MSRs that could affect reported earnings.
69
Other Mortgage-Related Assets
Our other mortgage-related assets are subject to interest rate and price risk created by (i)
our commitments to fund mortgages to borrowers who have applied for loan funding and (ii) loans
held in inventory awaiting sale into the secondary market (which are presented as Mortgage loans
held for sale, net in the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets). We use a combination
of forward delivery commitments and option contracts to economically hedge our commitments to fund
mortgages. Interest rate and price risk related to MLHS are hedged with mortgage forward delivery
commitments. These forward delivery commitments fix the forward sales price that will be realized
in the secondary market and thereby reduce the interest rate and price risk to us.
Indebtedness
The debt used to finance much of our operations is also exposed to interest rate fluctuations.
We use various hedging strategies and derivative financial instruments to create a desired mix of
fixed- and variable-rate assets and liabilities. Derivative instruments used in these hedging
strategies include swaps, interest rate caps and instruments with purchase option features.
Consumer Credit Risk
Conforming conventional loans serviced by us are securitized through Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac
programs. Such servicing is performed on a non-recourse basis, whereby foreclosure losses are
generally the responsibility of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The government loans serviced by us are
generally securitized through Ginnie Mae programs. These government loans are either insured
against loss by the Federal Housing Administration or partially guaranteed against loss by the
Department of Veterans Affairs. Additionally, jumbo mortgage loans are serviced for various
investors on a non-recourse basis.
While the majority of the mortgage loans serviced by us are sold without recourse, we have a
program in which we provide credit enhancement for a limited period of time to the purchasers of
mortgage loans by retaining a portion of the credit risk. The retained credit risk, which
represents the unpaid principal balance of the loans, was $4.5 billion as of March 31, 2006. In
addition, the outstanding balance of loans sold with recourse by us was $599 million as of March
31, 2006.
We also provide representations and warranties to purchasers and insurers of the loans sold.
In the event of a breach of these representations and warranties, we may be required to repurchase
a mortgage loan or indemnify the purchaser, and any subsequent loss on the mortgage loan may be
borne by us. If there is no breach of a representation and warranty provision, we have no
obligation to repurchase the loan or indemnify the investor against loss. Our owned servicing
portfolio represents the maximum potential exposure related to representations and warranty
provisions.
As of March 31, 2006, we had a liability of $31 million, recorded in Other liabilities in our
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet, for probable losses related to our loan servicing portfolio.
Through our wholly owned mortgage reinsurance subsidiary, Atrium, we have entered into
contracts with several primary mortgage insurance companies to provide mortgage reinsurance on
certain mortgage loans in our loan servicing portfolio. Through these contracts, we are exposed to
losses on mortgage loans pooled by year of origination. Loss rates on these pools are determined
based on the unpaid principal balance of the underlying loans. We indemnify the primary mortgage
insurers for loss rates that fall between a stated minimum and maximum. In return for absorbing
this loss exposure, we are contractually entitled to a portion of the insurance premium from the
primary mortgage insurers. As of March 31, 2006, we provided such mortgage reinsurance for
approximately $11.0 billion of mortgage loans in our servicing portfolio. As stated above, our
contracts with the primary mortgage insurers limit our maximum potential exposure to reinsurance
losses, which was $737 million as of March 31, 2006. We are required to hold securities in trust
related to this potential obligation, which were included in Restricted Cash in the accompanying
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2006. As of March 31, 2006, a liability of $14
million was recorded in Other liabilities in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet for estimated
losses associated with our mortgage reinsurance activities.
70
Commercial Credit Risk
We are exposed to commercial credit risk for our clients under the lease and service
agreements for PHH Arval. We manage such risk through an evaluation of the financial position and
creditworthiness of the client, which is performed on at least an annual basis. The lease
agreements allow PHH Arval to refuse any additional orders; however, PHH Arval would remain
obligated for all units under contract at that time. The service agreements can generally be
terminated upon 30 days written notice. PHH Arval has no significant client concentrations as no
client represents more than 5% of the Net revenues of the business during the year ended December
31, 2005. PHH Arvals historical net losses as a percentage of the ending dollar amount of leases
have not exceeded 0.07% in any of the last five fiscal years.
Counterparty Credit Risk
We are exposed to counterparty credit risk in the event of non-performance by counterparties
to various agreements and sales transactions. We manage such risk by evaluating the financial
position and creditworthiness of such counterparties and/or requiring collateral, typically cash,
in instances in which financing is provided. We mitigate counterparty credit risk associated with
our derivative contracts by monitoring the amount for which we are at risk with each counterparty
to such contracts, requiring collateral posting, typically cash, above established credit limits,
periodically evaluating counterparty creditworthiness and financial position, and where possible,
dispersing the risk among multiple counterparties.
As of March 31, 2006 there were no significant concentrations of credit risk with any
individual counterparty or groups of counterparties. Concentrations of credit risk associated with
receivables are considered minimal due to our diverse customer base. With the exception of the
financing provided to customers of our mortgage business, we do not normally require collateral or
other security to support credit sales.
Sensitivity Analysis
We assess our market risk based on changes in interest rates utilizing a sensitivity analysis.
The sensitivity analysis measures the potential impact on fair values based on hypothetical changes
(increases and decreases) in interest rates.
We use a duration-based model in determining the impact of interest rate shifts on our debt
portfolio, certain other interest-bearing liabilities and interest rate derivatives portfolios. The
primary assumption used in these models is that an increase or decrease in the benchmark interest
rate produces a parallel shift in the yield curve across all maturities.
We utilize a probability weighted option adjusted spread (OAS) model to determine the fair
value of MSRs and the impact of parallel interest rate shifts on MSRs. The primary assumptions in
this model are prepayment speeds, OAS (discount rate) and implied volatility. However, this
analysis ignores the impact of interest rate changes on certain material variables, such as the
benefit or detriment on the value of future loan originations and non-parallel shifts in the spread
relationships between MBS, swaps and Treasury rates. For mortgage loans, IRLCs, forward delivery
commitments and options, we rely on market sources in determining the impact of interest rate
shifts. In addition, for IRLCs, the borrowers propensity to close their mortgage loans under the
commitment is used as a primary assumption.
Our total market risk is influenced by a wide variety of factors including market volatility
and the liquidity of the markets. There are certain limitations inherent in the sensitivity
analysis presented, including the necessity to conduct the analysis based on a single point in time
and the inability to include the complex market reactions that normally would arise from the market
shifts modeled.
We used March 31, 2006 market rates on our instruments to perform the sensitivity analysis.
The estimates are based on the market risk sensitive portfolios described in the preceding
paragraphs and assume instantaneous, parallel shifts in interest rate yield curves.
71
The following table summarizes the estimated change in the fair value of our assets and
liabilities sensitive to interest rates as of March 31, 2006 given hypothetical instantaneous
parallel shifts in the yield curve:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in Fair Value |
|
|
|
Down |
|
|
Down |
|
|
Down |
|
|
Up |
|
|
Up |
|
|
Up |
|
|
|
100 bps |
|
|
50 bps |
|
|
25 bps |
|
|
25 bps |
|
|
50 bps |
|
|
100 bps |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net |
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
18 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
|
$ |
(48 |
) |
Interest rate lock commitments |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(138 |
) |
Forward loan sale commitments |
|
|
(73 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
Options |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage loans held for
sale, net, interest rate lock
commitments and related
derivatives |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net |
|
|
(532 |
) |
|
|
(248 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
Mortgage servicing rights derivatives |
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage servicing rights,
net and related derivatives |
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Assets |
|
|
(163 |
) |
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
Total Vehicle Assets |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
Total Liabilities |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total, net |
|
$ |
(163 |
) |
|
$ |
(89 |
) |
|
$ |
(42 |
) |
|
$ |
37 |
|
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
$ |
110 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this Form 10-Q, management performed, with the
participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Our disclosure controls
and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be
disclosed in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms, and that
such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. As
part of this evaluation, our management considered the material weaknesses described in our 2005
Form 10-K filed with the SEC on November 22, 2006. Based on the evaluation and the identification
of the material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting described in the 2005 Form
10-K, as well as our inability to file this Form 10-Q within the statutory time period, management
concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not
effective as of
March 31, 2006.
Management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005
as required under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). A material weakness is a
control deficiency (within the meaning of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Auditing
Standard No. 2), or combination of control deficiencies, that results in there being more than a
remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will
not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by employees in the normal course of their assigned
functions. As more fully set forth in Item 9A. Controls and Procedures, of the 2005 Form 10-K,
although management was unable to complete its review and testing of certain information technology
controls, it identified five material weaknesses (the 2005 Material Weaknesses) and concluded that
our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2005.
In conducting its assessment of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2005, management was unable to complete its review and testing of certain controls for information
technology systems
72
operated by a third party and provided in support of our financial reporting, general ledger,
accounts payable, accounts receivable, customer billing and human resource and payroll system
processes (the Outsourced IT Services). Pursuant to our transition services agreement, dated
January 31, 2005 with Cendant, Cendant provided certain information technology services to us
following the Spin-Off, including maintaining the software, databases and servers for the
Outsourced IT Services. The servers were housed in a data center operated by a third party with
whom we did not have a separate contractual arrangement. In addition, we did not complete all
necessary testing of our internal controls over the human resource and payroll processes (the HR
Processes) in 2005 prior to a material change in our control environment resulting from the
transition of the HR Processes from Cendant to a third-party payroll processing provider, effective
January 1, 2006, and were unable to recreate this control environment following the transition.
Because we were unable to complete our review and testing of all the internal controls surrounding
the Outsourced IT Services and HR Processes, there can be no assurance that there were not
additional material weaknesses relating to the Outsourced IT Services and HR Processes.
Management identified five material weaknesses in our internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2005:
I. We did not have adequate controls in place to establish and maintain an effective control
environment. Specifically, we identified the following deficiencies that in the aggregate
constituted a material weakness:
|
§ |
|
Our senior management did not establish and maintain a proper tone as to internal
control over financial reporting. Specifically, senior management did not emphasize,
through consistent communication, the importance of internal control over financial
reporting. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain a sufficient complement of personnel with the appropriate level of
knowledge, experience and training in the application of accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States (GAAP) and in internal control over financial reporting
commensurate with our financial reporting obligations. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain sufficient, formalized and consistent finance and accounting
policies nor did we maintain adequate controls with respect to the review, supervision and
monitoring of our accounting operations. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not establish and maintain adequate segregation of duties, assignments and
delegation of authority with clear lines of communication to provide reasonable assurance
that we were in compliance with existing policies and procedures. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not establish and maintain a sufficient internal audit function and did not
complete an adequate fraud risk assessment to determine the appropriate internal audit
scope. |
The material weakness in our control environment increases the likelihood of material
misstatements of our annual or interim Consolidated Financial Statements that would not be
prevented or detected and contributed to the existence of the material weaknesses discussed in the
items below.
II. We did not maintain effective controls, including monitoring, to provide reasonable
assurance that our financial closing and reporting process was timely and accurate. Specifically,
we identified the following deficiencies that in the aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain sufficient, formalized written policies and procedures governing the
financial closing and reporting process. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective controls to provide reasonable assurance that management
oversight and review procedures were properly performed over the accounts and disclosures
in our Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, we did not maintain effective
controls over the reporting of information to management to provide reasonable assurance
that the preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements and disclosures were complete
and accurate. |
73
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective controls over the recording of journal entries.
Specifically, effective controls were not designed and in place to provide reasonable
assurance that journal entries were prepared with sufficient supporting documentation and
reviewed and approved to provide reasonable assurance of the completeness and accuracy of
the entries recorded. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective controls to provide reasonable assurance that accounts
were complete and accurate and agreed to detailed supporting documentation and that
reconciliations of accounts were properly performed, reviewed and approved. |
III. We did not maintain effective controls, including policies and procedures, over
accounting for certain derivative financial instruments in accordance with SFAS No. 133.
Specifically, we identified the following deficiencies in the process of accounting for derivative
instruments that in the aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
§ |
|
In our transition to an independent, publicly traded company, we did not implement
effective policies and procedures to transition the responsibilities related to ongoing
monitoring of debt-related derivative transactions and the application of appropriate
accounting for debt-related derivative transactions to our corporate treasury and
accounting functions. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not establish and maintain sufficient policies and procedures relating to the
application of the proper accounting treatment for derivative financial instruments and we
did not maintain sufficient documentation to meet the criteria for hedge accounting
treatment under SFAS No. 133. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not monitor and maintain adequate documentation relating to compliance with
existing policies and procedures to provide reasonable assurance of the proper accounting
treatment for derivatives. |
IV. We did not maintain effective controls, including policies and procedures, over accounting
for contracts. Specifically, we did not have sufficient policies and procedures to provide
reasonable assurance that contracts were reviewed by the accounting department to evaluate and
document the appropriate application of GAAP which resulted in a material weakness related to
contract administration.
V. We did not design and maintain effective controls over accounting for income taxes.
Specifically, we identified the following deficiencies in the process of accounting for income
taxes that in the aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective policies and procedures to provide reasonable assurance
that management oversight and review procedures were adequately performed for the proper
reporting of income taxes in our Consolidated Financial Statements. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective controls over the calculation, recording and
reconciliation of federal and state income taxes to provide reasonable assurance of the
appropriate accounting treatment in our Consolidated Financial Statements. |
Because of these material weaknesses identified in our evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, we performed additional procedures, where necessary, so that our Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for the period covered by this Form 10-Q are presented in
accordance with GAAP. These procedures included, among other things, validating data to independent
source documentation; reviewing our existing contracts to determine proper financial reporting;
performing additional closing procedures, including detailed reviews of journal entries,
re-performance of account reconciliations and analyses of balance sheet accounts.
Furthermore, we have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures for the quarter
ended June 30, 2006 were not effective. We also anticipate that our disclosure controls and
procedures for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, the year ended December 31, 2006 and the
quarter ending March 31, 2007 will be determined not to be effective.
74
Status of Managements Assessment of Internal Controls as of December 31, 2006
We have not completed our assessment of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006, as required by Section 404 of SOX. We have, however, identified a number of
significant deficiencies, some of which, alone or in the aggregate with other significant
deficiencies, have been classified as material weaknesses by management. Based upon our evaluation
as of the filing date of this Form 10-Q, we do not expect to conclude that the 2005 Material
Weaknesses were fully remediated as of December 31, 2006. As a result, we expect to conclude that
our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006 was not effective. In
addition to the continuing 2005 Material Weaknesses, we expect to report that material weaknesses
existed as of December 31, 2006 in the following areas:
I. We did not design and maintain effective controls over accounting for human resources and
payroll processes (HR Processes). Specifically, management identified the following deficiencies
in the process of accounting for HR Processes that in the aggregate constituted a material
weakness:
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective controls over HR Processes, including reconciliation and
reporting processes, performed by third-party service providers. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain effective controls over funding authorization for payroll processes. |
|
|
§ |
|
We did not maintain formal, written policies and procedures governing the HR Processes. |
II. We did not design and maintain effective controls over accounting for expenditures.
In addition to the material weaknesses identified above, we are also evaluating significant
deficiencies identified through managements assessment of internal control over financial
reporting for the 2005 Form 10-K and other significant deficiencies identified since the date of
that assessment to determine if any such significant deficiencies were continuing through December
31, 2006. If any such significant deficiencies continued through December 31, 2006, we anticipate
that we will be required to identify certain of those significant deficiencies, either alone or in
combination with other significant deficiencies, as material weaknesses for the year ended December
31, 2006.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
We have engaged in, and continue to engage in, substantial efforts to address the material
weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and the ineffectiveness of our
disclosure controls and procedures. During the three months ended March 31, 2006, the following
changes to our internal control over financial reporting were made:
|
§ |
|
We significantly strengthened our executive management ranks by appointing a new Chief
Financial Officer. We also engaged outside consultants to address the delay in the
preparation of our financial statements. |
|
|
§ |
|
We changed our third-party payroll processing provider and continued to implement
monitoring controls over the functions performed by this third-party provider. |
|
|
§ |
|
As it relates to the Outsourced IT Services, we migrated our consolidation and reporting
application to an in-house server. |
Our continuing remediation efforts are subject to our internal control assessment, testing and
evaluation processes. While these efforts continue, we will rely on additional substantive
procedures and other measures as needed to assist us with meeting the objectives otherwise
fulfilled by an effective control environment.
There have been no other changes in our internal control over financial
reporting during the three months ended March 31, 2006 that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
75
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
We are party to various claims and legal proceedings from time to time related to contract
disputes and other commercial, employment and tax matters. Except as disclosed below, we are not
aware of any legal proceedings that we believe could have, individually or in the aggregate, a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In March and April 2006, several class actions were filed against us, our Chief Executive
Officer and our former Chief Financial Officer in the United States District Court for the District
of New Jersey. The plaintiffs purport to represent a class consisting of all persons (other than
our officers and Directors and their affiliates) who purchased our
Common stock during certain time periods beginning March 15, 2005 in
one case and May 12, 2005 in the other cases and ending March 1, 2006 (the Class Period). The plaintiffs allege, among other things, that the
defendants violated Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. Additionally, two
derivative actions were filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
against us, our former Chief Financial Officer and each member of our Board of Directors. One of
these derivative actions has since been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs. The remaining
derivative action alleges breaches of fiduciary duty and related claims based on substantially the
same factual allegations as in the class action suits.
Following
the announcement of the Merger in March 2007, two class actions were filed against us and each member of our Board of Directors
in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, Maryland; one of these
actions also named GE and Blackstone. The plaintiffs
purport to represent a class consisting of all persons (other than our officers and Directors and
their affiliates) holding our Common stock. In support of their request for injunctive
and other relief, the plaintiffs allege that the members of the Board
of Directors breached their fiduciary duties by failing to maximize
stockholder value in approving
the Merger Agreement. See Note 18, Subsequent Events in the Notes to Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this Form 10-Q for more information regarding the Merger
Agreement.
Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation, and because these actions are at a
preliminary stage, we cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of these matters at this time.
We intend to vigorously defend against the alleged claims in each of these matters. The ultimate
resolution of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results
of operations or cash flows.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
This Item 1A should be read in conjunction with Item 1A. Risk Factors in our 2005 Form 10-K.
Other than with respect to the risk factors below, there have been no material changes from the
risk factors disclosed in Item 1A. Risk Factors of our 2005 Form 10-K.
Failure to complete the proposed merger could negatively affect us.
On
March 15, 2007, we entered into the Merger Agreement with GE
and its wholly owned subsidiary, Jade Merger Sub, Inc. In conjunction with the Merger, GE has
entered into an agreement (the Mortgage Sale Agreement) to
sell our mortgage operations (the Mortgage Sale) to Blackstone. The Merger is subject to approval by our
stockholders, antitrust, state licensing and other regulatory approvals, as well as various other
closing conditions. There is no assurance when or if the Merger Agreement and the Merger will be approved
by our stockholders, and there is no assurance that the other conditions to the completion of the
Merger will be satisfied. In connection with the Merger, we may be impacted by the following risks:
|
§ |
|
the current market price of our common stock may reflect a market assumption that the
Merger will occur, and a failure to complete the Merger could result in a decline in the
market price of our common stock; |
76
|
§ |
|
the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to a
termination of the Merger Agreement; |
|
|
§ |
|
the outcome of any legal proceedings that have been or may be instituted against us,
members of our Board of Directors and others relating to the Merger including any
settlement of such legal proceedings that may be subject to court approval; |
|
|
§ |
|
the inability to complete the Merger due to the failure to obtain stockholder approval
or the failure to satisfy other conditions to consummation of the Merger; |
|
|
§ |
|
the failure of the Merger to close for any other reason; |
|
|
§ |
|
the failure to obtain the necessary financing arrangements set forth
in commitment letters received by Blackstone in connection with the
Mortgage Sale; |
|
|
§ |
|
our remedies against GE and its affiliates with respect to certain
breaches of the Merger Agreement may not be adequate to cover our
damages; |
|
|
§ |
|
the proposed transactions disrupt current business plans and operations and the
potential difficulties in attracting and retaining employees as a result of the Merger; |
|
|
§ |
|
the effect of the announcement of the Merger and the Mortgage
Sale on our business relationships, operating
results and business generally; and |
|
|
§ |
|
the costs, fees, expenses and charges we have and may incur
related to the Merger and the Mortgage Sale. |
We have identified numerous material weaknesses in our internal control over financial
reporting.
During the preparation of our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2005, we
identified a number of control deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting. A
number of these control deficiencies were classified as material weaknesses or significant
deficiencies that in the aggregate constituted material weaknesses. A material weakness is a
control deficiency that results in there being more than a remote likelihood that a material
misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis by employees in the normal course of their assigned functions. Additionally,
management was unable to complete its review and testing of certain outsourced information
technology services provided in support of our financial reporting, general ledger, accounts
payable, accounts receivable, customer billing and human resource and payroll system processes. As
a result, there can be no assurance that there were not additional material weaknesses relating to
these outsourced IT services. Based on these material weaknesses, management concluded that our
internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2005.
As of the end of the period covered in this Form 10-Q, management performed an evaluation of
the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures. Our disclosure controls and procedures
are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our periodic reports is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules
and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management to allow
timely decisions regarding disclosures. Based on the evaluation and the identification of the
material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting described above which were not
fully remediated as of March 31, 2006, as well as our inability to file this Form 10-Q within the
statutory time period, management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not
effective as of March 31, 2006.
Furthermore, we have concluded
that our disclosure controls and procedures for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 were not effective. We also anticipate that our disclosure controls and procedures for the
quarter ended September 30, 2006, the year ended December 31, 2006 and the quarter ending March 31, 2007 will be determined not to be
effective. There can be no assurance that our internal control over financial reporting or our
disclosure controls and procedures will prevent future error or fraud in connection with our
financial statements. See Item 4. Controls and Procedures for additional information.
77
As a result of the delays in filing our periodic reports, we have obtained certain waivers
regarding the delivery of financial statements under our financing agreements and certain other
contractual and regulatory requirements. We may require additional waivers in the future,
particularly if we are unable to meet the deadlines for the delivery of our quarterly and annual
financial statements. Failure to deliver these financial statements within those deadlines or to
obtain additional waivers could be material and adverse to our business, liquidity and financial
condition.
We have previously obtained certain waivers and may need to seek additional waivers extending
the deadlines for the delivery of our financial statements, the financial statements of our
subsidiaries and related documents to certain lenders, trustees and other third parties in
connection with our Financing Agreements. We have not yet completed our financial statements for
the quarter ended September 30, 2006. We obtained waivers under certain of our Financing Agreements
which waive certain potential breaches of covenants under those instruments and establish the
extended deadlines for the delivery of our financial statements and related documents to the
various lenders under those instruments. The extended deadline for the delivery of our quarterly
financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 is April 30, 2007. Due to the
continued existence of material weaknesses identified in our internal control over financial
reporting and delays in completing the 2005 audited financial statements and the 2006 unaudited
quarterly financial statements, we have not yet delivered our financial statements for the quarter
ended September 30, 2006 and our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 and it
remains uncertain whether we can deliver our 2007 quarterly financial statements within the
deadlines prescribed in our Financing Agreements or by the SEC. As a result, we obtained waivers
for certain of our Financing Agreements extending the deadline for the delivery of our financial
statements for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the quarter ending March 31, 2007 until June
29, 2007. Our independent registered public accounting firms audit report with respect to the
Consolidated Financial Statements included in our 2005 Form 10-K contained an explanatory paragraph
stating that the uncertainty about our ability to comply with certain of our Financing Agreements
covenants relating to the timely filing of our financial statements raises substantial doubt about
our ability to continue as a going concern.
Under certain of our Financing Agreements, the lenders or trustees have the right to notify us
if they believe we have breached a covenant under the operative documents and may declare an event
of default. If one or more notices of default were to be given, we believe we would have various
periods in which to cure such events of default. If we do not cure the events of default or obtain
necessary waivers within the required time periods or certain extended time periods, the maturity
of some of our debt could be accelerated and our ability to incur additional indebtedness could be
restricted. In addition, events of default or acceleration under certain of our Financing
Agreements would trigger cross-default provisions under certain of our other Financing Agreements.
We have not yet delivered our financial statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and the
year ended December 31, 2006 to the MTN Indenture Trustee, which were required to be delivered no
later than December 31, 2006 and March 16, 2007, respectively, under the MTN Indenture. The MTN
Indenture Trustee could provide us with a notice of default for our failure to deliver these
financial statements. In the event that we receive such notice, we would have 90 days from receipt
to cure this default or to seek additional waivers of the financial statement delivery requirements
under the MTN Indenture. No assurances can be given that we would be able to deliver the required
financial statements within the cure period or that waivers could be obtained.
We also obtained certain waivers and may need to seek additional waivers extending the date
for the delivery of the financial statements of our subsidiaries and other documents related to
such financial statements to certain regulators, investors in mortgage loans and other third
parties in order to satisfy state mortgage licensing regulations and certain contractual
requirements. We will continue to seek similar waivers as may be necessary in the future.
There can be no assurance that any additional waivers will be received on a timely basis, if
at all, or that any waivers obtained, including the waivers we have already obtained, will extend
for a sufficient period of time to avoid an acceleration event, an event of default or other
restrictions on our business operations. The failure to obtain such waivers could have a material
and adverse effect on our business, liquidity and financial condition.
78
The delays in filing our periodic reports with the SEC could cause the NYSE to commence
suspension or delisting procedures with respect to our common stock.
As a result of the delay in filing our periodic reports, we are in breach of the continued
listing requirements of the NYSE and received written notice from the NYSE on March 19, 2007
advising us that we have six months from the original filing deadline
to file our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2006 with the SEC. We may be required to seek a waiver from the NYSE for our financial statements for
the year ended December 31, 2006. There can be no assurance that any such waiver will be granted.
Further delays in the filing of our periodic reports could cause the NYSE to commence suspension or
delisting procedures in respect of our common stock. The commencement of any suspension or
delisting procedures by the NYSE remains, at all times, at the discretion of the NYSE and would be
publicly announced by the NYSE. The delisting of our common stock from the NYSE prior to the Merger
may have a material adverse effect on us by, among other things, limiting:
|
§ |
|
the liquidity of our common stock; |
|
|
§ |
|
the market price of our common stock; |
|
|
§ |
|
the number of institutional and other investors that will consider investing in our common stock; |
|
|
§ |
|
the availability of information concerning the trading prices and volume of our common stock; |
|
|
§ |
|
the number of broker-dealers willing to execute trades in shares of our common stock; and |
|
|
§ |
|
our ability to obtain equity financing for the continuation of our operations. |
Prior to the Spin-Off, we were not an independent company and, following
the Spin-Off, there is continuing uncertainty that we will be able to make, on
a timely or cost-effective basis, the changes necessary to operate as an
independent company.
Prior to the Spin-Off, our business was operated by Cendant as part of its
broader corporate organization, rather than as an independent company. Cendant
or one of its affiliates performed various corporate functions for us,
including, but not limited to:
|
§ |
|
selected human resources related functions; |
|
§ |
|
selected legal and accounting functions as well as external
reporting, treasury administration, investor relations, internal audit,
insurance and facilities functions and selected information technology
and telecommunications services. |
Neither Cendant nor any of its affiliates, including Realogy, has any
obligation to provide these functions to us other than the transition services
that were provided by Cendant and its affiliates under the transition services
agreement. (See Item 1. BusinessArrangements with CendantTransition
Services Agreement included in our 2005 Form 10-K for more information.) Once
the transition services agreement expires in 2007, if we do not (i) have in
place our own systems, corporate staff and business functions, (ii) have
agreements with other providers of these services or (iii) make these changes
cost-effectively, we may not be able to operate our business effectively and
our profitability may decline. If Cendant or its affiliates do not continue to
perform effectively the services that are called for under the transition
services agreement, we may not be able to operate our business effectively. On
February 27, 2007, PHH Vehicle Management Services, LLC, our wholly owned
subsidiary, and International Business Machines Corporation (IBM) entered
into an Information Technology Services Agreement (the ITS Agreement). As of
April 1, 2007, we will no longer receive the Outsourced IT Services from IBM
through Cendant pursuant to the transition services agreement and will receive
the Outsourced IT Services directly from IBM under the ITS Agreement. There can
be no assurance that we will be able to make, on a timely or cost-effective
basis, any further changes necessary to operate as an independent company.
A failure to maintain our investment grade ratings could impact our
ability to obtain financing on favorable terms and could negatively impact our
business.
In the event our credit ratings were to drop below investment grade, our
access to the public corporate debt markets may be severely limited. The
cut-off for investment grade is generally considered to be a long-term rating
of Baa3, BBB- and BBB- for Moodys Investors Service, Standard & Poors and
Fitch Ratings, respectively. In the event of a ratings downgrade below
investment grade, we may be required to rely upon alternative sources of
financing, such as bank lines and private debt placements (secured and
unsecured). A drop in our credit ratings could also increase our cost of
borrowing under our credit facilities. Furthermore, we may be unable to retain
all of our existing bank credit commitments beyond the then existing maturity
dates. As a consequence, our cost of financing could rise significantly,
thereby negatively impacting our ability to finance some of our
capital-intensive activities, such as our ongoing investment in MSRs and other
retained interests. Among other things, maintenance of our investment grade
ratings requires that we demonstrate high levels of liquidity, including access
to alternative sources of funding such as committed lines of credit, as well as
a capital structure and leverage appropriate for companies in our industry.
As of March 27, 2007, our short-term debt credit ratings from Moodys
Investors Service and Fitch Ratings remained unchanged at P-3 and F-2,
respectively. On January 22, 2007, Standard & Poors downgraded its rating on
our senior unsecured long-term debt to BBB-. As a result, the fees and interest
rates on borrowings under our Amended Credit Facility, Supplemental Credit
Facility and Tender Support Facility increased pursuant to the terms of each
agreement.
After the downgrade, borrowings under the Amended Credit Facility bear
interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 47.5 bps. In addition, the Amended Credit
Facilitys per annum utilization and facility fees are 12.5 bps and 15 bps,
respectively. In the event that both of our second highest and lowest credit
ratings are downgraded in the future, the margin over LIBOR would become 70
bps, the utilization fee would remain 12.5 bps and the facility fee would
become 17.5 bps.
On February 22, 2007, the Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender
Support Facility were amended to extend their expiration dates to December 15,
2007, reduce total commitments to $200 million and $415 million, respectively,
and modify the interest rates paid on outstanding borrowings. After the
downgrade and the amendments to these agreements, borrowings under the
Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender Support Facility bear interest at
LIBOR plus a margin of 82.5 bps and 100 bps, respectively. The Supplemental
Credit Facility also has a per annum facility fee of 17.5 bps. The amendments
eliminated the per annum utilization fee under the Supplemental Credit Facility
and the per annum commitment fee under the Tender Support Facility. In the
event that both the Moodys Investors Service and Standard & Poors ratings are
downgraded in the future, the margin over LIBOR and the per annum utilization
fee under the Supplemental Credit Facility would become 127.5 bps and 22.5 bps,
respectively, and margin over LIBOR under the Tender Support Facility would
become 150 bps.
If certain change in control transactions occur some of our mortgage loan origination
arrangements with financial institutions could be subject to termination at the election of such
institutions.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, approximately 50% of our mortgage loan originations were
derived from our financial institutions channel, pursuant to which we provide outsourced mortgage
loan services for customers of our financial institution clients such as Merrill Lynch Credit
Corporation (Merrill Lynch), TD Banknorth, N.A. and Charles Schwab Bank. Our agreements with some
of these financial institutions provide the applicable financial institution with the right to
terminate its relationship with us prior to the expiration of the contract term if we complete a
change in control transaction with certain third-party acquirers. Although in some cases these
contracts would require the payment of liquidated damages in such event, such amounts may not fully
compensate us for all of our actual or expected loss of business opportunity for the remaining
duration of the contract term. Accordingly, completion of the Merger could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows. We have entered
into a Waiver and Amendment Agreement, dated March 14, 2007 with Merrill Lynch which provides for a
waiver of its rights in connection with a change in control. There can be no assurance that we will
be able to obtain similar waivers and amendments from our other financial institution clients.
There may be a limited public market for our common stock and our stock price may experience
volatility.
Prior to the Spin-Off, there was no public market for our common stock. In connection with the
Spin-Off, our common stock was listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol PHH. From
February 1, 2005 through March 22, 2007, the closing trading price for our common stock has ranged
from $20.34 to $31.10. However, there can be no assurance that an active trading market for our
common stock will be sustained in the future. In addition, the stock market has from time to time
experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that often have been unrelated to the operating
performance of particular companies. Changes in earnings estimates by analysts and economic and
other external factors may have a significant impact on the market price of our common stock.
Fluctuations or decreases in the trading price of our common stock may adversely affect the
liquidity of the trading market for our common stock and our ability to raise capital through
future equity financing. In addition, on March 15, 2007, we announced the Merger which would
entitle stockholders to receive $31.50 per share of our common stock. There is no assurance that
the Merger will be approved by our stockholders, and there is no assurance that the other
conditions to the completion of the Merger will be satisfied.
79
Provisions in our charter documents, the Maryland General Corporation Law (the MGCL) and our
stockholder rights plan may delay or prevent our acquisition by a third party.
Our charter and by-laws contain several provisions that may make it more difficult for a third
party to acquire control of us without the approval of our Board of Directors. These provisions
include, among other things, a classified Board of Directors, advance notice for raising business
or making nominations at meetings and blank check preferred stock. Blank check preferred stock
enables our Board of Directors, without stockholder approval, to designate and issue additional
series of preferred stock with such dividend, liquidation, conversion, voting or other rights,
including the right to issue convertible securities with no limitations on conversion, as our Board
of Directors may determine, including rights to dividends and proceeds in a liquidation that are
senior to the common stock.
We are also subject to certain provisions of the MGCL which could delay, prevent or deter a
merger, acquisition, tender offer, proxy contest or other transaction that might otherwise result
in our stockholders receiving a premium over the market price for their common stock or may
otherwise be in the best interest of our stockholders. These include, among other provisions:
|
§ |
|
The business combinations statute which prohibits transactions between a Maryland
corporation and an interested stockholder or an affiliate of an interested stockholder for
five years after the most recent date on which the interested stockholder becomes an
interested stockholder and |
|
|
§ |
|
The control share acquisition statute which provides that control shares of a Maryland
corporation acquired in a control share acquisition have no voting rights except to the
extent approved by a vote of two-thirds of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. |
On March 11, 2007, our Board of Directors took action to exempt from the
business combination statute to the fullest extent permitted by the MGCL any
business combination contemplated by the Merger Agreement, the Mortgage Sale
Agreement and any transactions contemplated by each agreement, including the
Merger and Mortgage Sale.
Our by-laws contain a provision exempting any share of our capital stock from the control
share acquisition statute to the fullest extent permitted by the MGCL. However, our Board of
Directors has the exclusive right to amend our by-laws and, subject to their fiduciary duties,
could at any time in the future amend the by-laws to remove this exemption provision.
In addition, we entered into a Rights Agreement (the Rights Agreement), dated as of January
28, 2005, with The Bank of New York, as rights agent. This agreement entitles our stockholders to
acquire shares of our common stock at a price equal to 50% of the then-current market value in
limited circumstances when a third party acquires beneficial ownership of 15% or more of our
outstanding common stock or commences a tender offer for at least 15% of our common stock, in each
case, in a transaction that our Board of Directors does not approve. Because, under these limited
circumstances, all of our stockholders would become entitled to effect discounted purchases of our
common stock, other than the person or group that caused the rights to become exercisable, the
existence of these rights would significantly increase the cost of acquiring control of our company
without the support of our Board of Directors. The existence of the rights agreement could
therefore deter potential acquirers and reduce the likelihood that stockholders receive a premium
for our common stock in an acquisition.
On March 14, 2007, prior to the execution of the Merger Agreement, we entered into
an amendment to the Rights Agreement. The amendment revises certain terms of the Rights Agreement
to render it inapplicable to the Merger and the other transactions contemplated by the Merger
Agreement.
Certain provisions of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement that we have with Realogy could
discourage third parties from seeking to acquire us or could reduce the amount of consideration
they would be willing to pay our stockholders in an acquisition transaction.
Pursuant to the terms of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, as amended on May 12, 2005
and March 31, 2006, Realogy has the right to terminate the Mortgage Venture, at its election, at
any time on or after February 1, 2015 by providing two years notice to us. In addition, under the
Mortgage Venture operating agreement, Realogy may terminate the Mortgage Venture if we effect a
change in control transaction involving certain competitors or other third parties. In connection
with such termination, we would be required to make a liquidated damages payment in cash to Realogy
of an amount equal to the sum of (i) two times the Mortgage
80
Ventures trailing twelve months net income (except that, in the case of a termination by
Realogy following a change in control of us, we may be required to make a cash payment to Realogy
in an amount equal to its allocable share of the Mortgage Ventures trailing twelve months net
income multiplied by (a) if the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement is terminated prior to its
twelfth anniversary, the number of years remaining in the first twelve years of the term of the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, or (b) if the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement is
terminated after its tenth anniversary, two years), and (ii) all costs reasonably incurred by
Cendant and its subsidiaries in unwinding its relationship with us pursuant to the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement and the related agreements, including the strategic relationship agreement,
marketing agreement and trademark license agreements. The existence of these termination provisions
could discourage third parties from seeking to acquire us or could reduce the amount of
consideration they would be willing to pay to our stockholders in an acquisition transaction.
On
March 14, 2007, we along with certain of our affiliates entered
into a Consent and Amendment (the Consent) with certain
affiliates of Realogy which, among other things,
provided for Realogys consent under the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement and certain other agreements between the parties
to the Merger, Mortgage Sale and transactions contemplated by the
Merger Agreement and the Mortgage Sale Agreement. See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture Between Realogy and PHH of our 2005 Form 10-K.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
None.
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
The 2006 Annual Meeting of Stockholders was held on January 24, 2007 for the election of
Directors. A total of 50,499,770 of the 53,506,867 votes entitled to be cast at the meeting were
present in person or by proxy. At the meeting, the stockholders elected the following Directors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
Votes Cast For |
|
|
Votes Withheld |
|
Terence W. Edwards |
|
|
47,832,604 |
|
|
|
2,667,166 |
|
A.B. Krongard |
|
|
46,027,137 |
|
|
|
4,472,633 |
|
Francis J. Van Kirk |
|
|
46,805,555 |
|
|
|
3,694,215 |
|
In addition, the terms of office of the following Directors continued after the meeting:
James W. Brinkley, George J. Kilroy, Ann D. Logan and Jonathan D. Mariner.
Item 5. Other Information
None.
Item 6. Exhibits
Information in response to this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the Exhibit Index
to this Form 10-Q.
81
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has
duly caused this report on Form 10-Q to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly
authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
PHH CORPORATION
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards |
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
Date:
March 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine |
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Duly Authorized Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer) |
|
|
Date:
March 30, 2007
82
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
2.1
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger by and
among Cendant Corporation, PHH
Corporation, Avis Acquisition Corp,
and Avis Group Holdings, Inc., dated
as of November 11, 2000.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to
our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
2.2*
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated
March 15, 2007 by and among General
Electric Capital Corporation, a
Delaware corporation, Jade Merger
Sub, Inc., a Maryland corporation,
and PHH Corporation, a Maryland
corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to
our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 15, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
Amended and Restated Articles of
Incorporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to
our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Amended and Restated By-Laws.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to
our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Amended and Restated Limited
Liability Company Operating
Agreement, dated as of January 31,
2005, of PHH Home Loans, LLC, by and
between PHH Broker Partner
Corporation and Cendant Real Estate
Services Venture Partner, Inc.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
3.3.1
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and
Restated Limited Liability Company
Operating Agreement of PHH Home
Loans, LLC, dated May 12, 2005, by
and between PHH Broker Partner
Corporation and Cendant Real Estate
Services Venture Partner, Inc.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3.1
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended September 30,
2005 filed on November 14, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
3.3.2
|
|
Amendment No. 2, dated as of March
31, 2006 to the Amended and Restated
Limited Liability Company Operating
Agreement of PHH Home Loans, LLC,
dates as of January 31, 2005, as
amended.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to the Current Report on Form 8-K of
Cendant Corporation filed on April 3, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Specimen common stock certificate.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2004 filed on March 5,
2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.1.2
|
|
See Exhibits 3.1 and 3.2 for
provisions of the Amended and
Restated Articles of Incorporation
and Amended and Restated By-laws of
the registrant defining the rights
of holders of common stock of the
registrant.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibits 3.1
and 3.2, respectively, to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on February 1,
2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Rights Agreement, dated as of
January 28, 2005, by and between PHH
Corporation and the Bank of New
York.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.10
to our Current Report on Form 8-K dated as
of February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Indenture dated November 6, 2000
between PHH Corporation and Bank One
Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to
our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
83
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
4.4
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 1 dated
November 6, 2000 between PHH
Corporation and Bank One Trust
Company, N.A., as Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to
our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 3 dated
as of May 30, 2002 to the Indenture
dated as of November 6, 2000 between
PHH Corporation and Bank One Trust
Company, N.A., as Trustee (pursuant
to which the Internotes, 6.000%
Notes due 2008 and 7.125% Notes due
2013 were issued).
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
June 4, 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation Internotes.
|
|
Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit
4.4 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended
December 31, 2002
filed on March 5,
2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Amendment to the Rights Agreement
dated March 14, 2007 between PHH
Corporation and The Bank of New
York.
|
|
Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit
4.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K
filed on March 15,
2007. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Base Indenture dated as of June 30,
1999 between Greyhound Funding LLC
(now known as Chesapeake Funding
LLC) and The Chase Manhattan Bank,
as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit
10.1 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K
filed on November 22,
2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 1 dated
as of October 28, 1999 between
Greyhound Funding LLC and The Chase
Manhattan Bank to the Base Indenture
dated as of June 30, 1999.
|
|
Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit
10.2 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K
filed on November 22,
2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
Series 1999-3 Indenture Supplement
between Greyhound Funding LLC (now
known as Chesapeake Funding LLC) and
The Chase Manhattan Bank, as
Indenture Trustee, dated as of
October 28, 1999, as amended through
January 20, 2004.
|
|
Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit
10.3 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K
filed on November 22,
2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Second Amended and Restated
Mortgage Loan Purchase and
Servicing Agreement, dated as
of October 31, 2000 among the
Bishops Gate Residential
Mortgage Trust, Cendant
Mortgage Corporation, Cendant
Mortgage Corporation, as
Servicer and PHH Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.13 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2001
filed on March 29, 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
Second Amended and Restated
Mortgage Loan Repurchases and
Servicing Agreement dated as
of December 16, 2002 among
Sheffield Receivables
Corporation, as Purchaser,
Barclays Bank Plc. New York
Branch, as Administrative
Agent, Cendant Mortgage
Corporation, as Seller and
Servicer and PHH Corporation,
as Guarantor.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.16 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2002
filed on March 5, 2003. |
84
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.6
|
|
Series 2002-1 Indenture Supplement,
between Chesapeake Funding LLC, as
Issuer and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as
Indenture Trustee, dated as of June
10, 2002.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17
to Chesapeake Funding LLCs Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2002 filed on March 3, 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 2, dated
as of May 27, 2003, to Base
Indenture, dated as of June 30,
1999, as supplemented by
Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated
as of October 28, 1999, between
Chesapeake Funding LLC and JPMorgan
Chase Bank, as Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to Chesapeake Funding LLCs Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2003 filed on August 7, 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 3, dated
as of June 18, 2003, to Base
Indenture, dated as of June 30,
1999, as supplemented by
Supplemental Indenture No. 1, dated
as of October 28, 1999, and
Supplemental Indenture No. 2, dated
as of May 27, 2003, between
Chesapeake Funding LLC and JPMorgan
Chase Bank, as Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
to Chesapeake Funding LLCs Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2003 filed on August 7, 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Supplement Indenture No. 4, dated as
of July 31, 2003, to the Base
Indenture, dated as of June 30,
1999, between Chesapeake Funding LLC
and JPMorgan Chase Bank (formerly
known as The Chase Manhattan Bank),
as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Amendment
to the Registration Statement on Forms
S-3/A and S-1/A (Nos. 333-103678 and
333-103678-01, respectively) filed on
August 1, 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.10
|
|
Series 2003-1 Indenture Supplement,
dated as of August 14, 2003, to the
Base Indenture, dated as of June 30,
1999, between Chesapeake Funding LLC
and JPMorgan Chase Bank (formerly
known as The Chase Manhattan Bank),
as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Chesapeake
Funding LLCs Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the quarterly period ended September
30, 2003 filed on November 6, 2003. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.11
|
|
Series 2003-2 Indenture Supplement,
dated as of November 19, 2003,
between Chesapeake Funding LLC, as
Issuer and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Cendant
Corporations Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 filed on March 1, 2004. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.12
|
|
Three Year Competitive Advance and
Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as
of June 28, 2004, among PHH
Corporation, the Lenders party
thereto, and JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as Administrative Agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
June 30, 2004. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.13
|
|
Series 2004-1 Indenture Supplement,
dated as of July 29, 2004, to the
Base Indenture, dated as of June 30,
1999, between Chesapeake Funding LLC
and JPMorgan Chase Bank (formerly
known as The Chase Manhattan Bank),
as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended September 30,
2004 filed on November 2, 2004. |
85
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.14
|
|
Amendment, dated as of December 21,
2004, to the Three Year Competitive
Advance and Revolving Credit
Agreement, dated June 28, 2004,
between PHH, the Financial
Institution parties thereto and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
administrative agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.15
|
|
Strategic Relationship Agreement,
dated as of January 31, 2005, by and
among Cendant Real Estate Services
Group, LLC, Cendant Real Estate
Services Venture Partner, Inc., PHH
Corporation, Cendant Mortgage
Corporation, PHH Broker Partner
Corporation and PHH Home Loans, LLC.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.16
|
|
Trademark License Agreement, dated
as of January 31, 2005, by and among
TM Acquisition Corp., Coldwell
Banker Real Estate Corporation, ERA
Franchise Systems, Inc., Century 21
LLC and Cendant Mortgage
Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.17
|
|
Marketing Agreement, dated as of
January 31, 2005, by and between
Coldwell Banker Real Estate
Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate
LLC, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc.,
Sothebys International Affiliates,
Inc. and Cendant Mortgage
Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Separation Agreement, dated as of
January 31, 2005, by and between
Cendant Corporation and PHH
Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5
to our Current Report on Form 8-K dated as
of February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.19
|
|
Tax Sharing Agreement, dated as of
January 1, 2005, by and among
Cendant Corporation, PHH Corporation
and certain affiliates of PHH
Corporation named therein.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.20
|
|
Transition Services Agreement, dated
as of January 31, 2005, by and among
Cendant Corporation, Cendant
Operations, Inc., PHH Corporation,
PHH Vehicle Management Services LLC
(d/b/a PHH Arval) and Cendant
Mortgage Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7
to our Current Report on Form 8-K dated as
of February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.21
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of
January 1, 2005, by and between PHH
Corporation and Terence W. Edwards.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.22
|
|
PHH Corporation Non-Employee
Directors Deferred Compensation
Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
86
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.23
|
|
PHH Corporation Officer Deferred
Compensation Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.24
|
|
PHH Corporation Savings Restoration Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.25
|
|
PHH Corporation 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 1, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.26
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2005
Equity Incentive Plan
Non-Qualified Stock Option
Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.29 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the
year ended December 31, 2004
filed on March 15, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.27
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2005
Equity and Incentive Plan
Non-Qualified Stock Option
Agreement, as amended.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.28 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005
filed on May 16, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.28
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2005
Equity and Incentive Plan
Non-Qualified Stock Option
Conversion Award Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.29 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005
filed on May 16, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.29
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2003
Restricted Stock Unit
Conversion Award Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.30 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005
filed on May 16, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.30
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2004
Restricted Stock Unit
Conversion Award Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.31 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005
filed on May 16, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.31
|
|
Resolution of the PHH
Corporation Board of
Directors dated March 31,
2005, adopting non-employee
director compensation
arrangements.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.32 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2005
filed on May 16, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.32
|
|
Fourth Amended and Restated
Mortgage Loan Repurchase and
Servicing Agreement between
Sheffield Receivables
Corporation, as purchaser,
Barclays Bank PLC, New York
Branch, as Administrative
Agent, PHH Mortgage
Corporation, as Seller and
Servicer, and PHH
Corporation, as Guarantor,
dated as of June 30, 2005.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.33 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended June 30, 2005
filed on August 12, 2005. |
87
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.33
|
|
Series 2005-1 Indenture Supplement
between Chesapeake Funding LLC, as
Issuer, PHH Vehicle Management
Services, LLC, as administrator,
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Administrative Agent, Certain CP
Conduit Purchases, Certain APA
Banks, Certain Funding Agents and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, National
Association, as Indenture Trustee,
dated as of July 15, 2005.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
filed on August 12, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.34
|
|
Amendment Number One to the PHH
Corporation 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
filed on August 12, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.35
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2005 Equity
and Incentive Plan Non-Qualified
Stock Option Award Agreement, as
revised June 28, 2005.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.36
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
filed on August 12, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.36
|
|
Form of PHH Corporation 2005 Equity
and Incentive Plan Restricted Stock
Unit Award Agreement, as revised
June 28, 2005.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended June 30, 2005
filed on August 12, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.37
|
|
Resolution of the PHH Corporation
Compensation Committee dated
November 10, 2005 modifying fiscal
2005 performance targets for equity
awards and cash bonuses under the
2005 Equity and Incentive Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.38
to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended September 30,
2005 filed on November 14, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.38
|
|
Form of Vesting Schedule
Modification for PHH
Corporation 2004 Restricted
Stock Unit Conversion Award
Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.39 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended September 30,
2005 filed on November 14,
2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.39
|
|
Form of Accelerated Vesting
Schedule Modification for
PHH Corporation Restricted
Stock Unit Award Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.40 to our
Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended September 30,
2005 filed on November 14,
2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.40
|
|
Form of Accelerated Vesting
Schedule Modification for
PHH Corporation
Non-Qualified Stock Option
Award Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
our Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarterly
period ended September 30,
2005 filed on November 14,
2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.41
|
|
Extension of Scheduled
Expiry Date, dated as of
December 2, 2005, for Series
1999-3 Indenture Supplement
No. 1, dated as of October
28, 1999, as amended, to the
Base Indenture, dated as of
June 30, 1999.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Amended
Current Report on Form 8-K/A
filed on December 12, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.42
|
|
Amended and Restated Tax
Sharing Agreement dated as
of December 21, 2005 between
PHH Corporation and Cendant
Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 21, 2005. |
88
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.43
|
|
Resolution of the PHH Corporation
Compensation Committee dated
December 21, 2005 modifying fiscal
2006 through 2008 performance
targets for equity awards under the
2005 Equity and Incentive Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 21, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.44
|
|
Form of Vesting Schedule
Modification for PHH Corporation
Restricted Stock Unit Conversion
Award Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 21, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.45
|
|
Form of Accelerated Vesting Schedule
Modification for PHH Corporation
Restricted Stock Unit Award
Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 21, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.46
|
|
Form of Accelerated Vesting Schedule
Modification for PHH Corporation
Non-Qualified Stock Option Award
Agreement.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 21, 2005. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.47
|
|
Amended and Restated
Competitive Advance and
Revolving Credit Agreement,
dated as of January 6, 2006,
by and among PHH Corporation
and PHH Vehicle Management
Services, Inc., as Borrowers,
J.P. Morgan Securities, Inc.
and Citigroup Global Markets,
Inc., as Joint Lead
Arrangers, the Lenders
referred to therein (the
Lenders), and JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A., as a Lender
and Administrative Agent for
the Lenders.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.47 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.48
|
|
Extension Agreement, dated as
of January 13, 2006,
extending the expiration date
for the Fourth Amended and
Restated Mortgage Loan
Repurchase and Servicing
Agreement, dated as of June
30, 2005, among Sheffield
Receivables Corporation, as
Purchaser, Barclays Bank PLC,
as Administrative Agent, PHH
Mortgage Corporation, as
Seller and Servicer, and PHH
Corporation, as Guarantor.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
January 13, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.49
|
|
Base Indenture, dated as of
March 7, 2006, between
Chesapeake Funding LLC (now
known as Chesapeake Finance
Holdings LLC), as Issuer, and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 13, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.50
|
|
Series 2006-1 Indenture
Supplement, dated as of March
7, 2006, among Chesapeake
Funding LLC (now known as
Chesapeake Finance Holdings
LLC), as issuer, PHH Vehicle
Management Services, LLC, as
Administrator, JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A., as Administrative
Agent, Certain CP Conduit
Purchasers, Certain APA
Banks, Certain Funding
Agents, and JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A. as Indenture
Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 13, 2006. |
89
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.51
|
|
Series 2006-2 Indenture Supplement,
dated as of March 7, 2006, among
Chesapeake Funding LLC (now known as
Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC), as
Issuer, PHH Vehicle Management
Services, LLC, as Administrator,
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Administrative Agent, Certain CP
Conduit Purchasers, Certain APA
Banks, Certain Funding Agents, and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 13, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.52
|
|
Master Exchange Agreement, dated as
of March 7, 2006, among PHH Funding,
LLC, Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC
(f/k/a Chesapeake Funding LLC) and
D.L. Peterson Trust.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 13, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.53
|
|
$500 million 364-Day
Revolving Credit Agreement,
dated as of April 6, 2006,
among PHH Corporation, as
Borrower, J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc. and
Citigroup Global Markets
Inc., as Joint Lead
Arrangers and Joint
Bookrunners, the Lenders
referred to therein, and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.,
as a Lender and
Administrative Agent for the
Lenders.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
April 6, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.54
|
|
Management Services
Agreement, dated as of March
31, 2006, between PHH Home
Loans, LLC and PHH Mortgage
Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
April 6, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.55
|
|
Base Indenture, dated as of
December 11, 1998, between
Bishops Gate Residential
Mortgage Trust, as Issuer,
and The Bank of New York, as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 21, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.56
|
|
Series 1999-1 Supplement,
dated as of November 22,
1999, to the Base Indenture,
dated as of December 11,
1998, between Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust,
as Issuer, and The Bank of
New York, as Indenture
Trustee and Series 1999-1
Agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 21, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.57
|
|
Base Indenture Amendment
Agreement, dated as of
October 31, 2000, to the
Base Indenture, dated as of
December 11, 1998, between
Bishops Gate Residential
Mortgage Trust, as Issuer,
and The Bank of New York, as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 21, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.58
|
|
Series 2001-1 Supplement,
dated as of March 30, 2001,
to the Base Indenture, dated
as of December 11, 1998,
between Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust,
as Issuer, and The Bank of
New York, as Indenture
Trustee and Series 2001-1
Agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 21, 2006. |
90
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.59
|
|
Series 2001-2 Supplement, dated as
of November 20, 2001, to the Base
Indenture, dated as of December 11,
1998, between Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust, as
Issuer, and The Bank of New York, as
Indenture Trustee and Series 2001-2
Agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 21, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.60
|
|
Base Indenture Second Amendment
Agreement, dated as of December 28,
2001, to the Base Indenture, dated
as of December 11, 1998, between
Bishops Gate Residential Mortgage
Trust, as Issuer, and The Bank of
New York, as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 21, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.61
|
|
$750 million Credit
Agreement, dated as of July
21, 2006, among PHH
Corporation, as Borrower,
Citicorp North America, Inc.
and Wachovia Bank, National
Association, as Syndication
Agents, J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc. and
Citigroup Global Markets
Inc., as Joint Lead
Arrangers and Joint
Bookrunners, the Lenders
referred to therein, and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.,
as a Lender and
Administrative Agent for the
Lenders.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
July 24, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.62
|
|
Amended and Restated
Liquidity Agreement dated as
of December 11, 1998 (as
Further and Amended and
Restated as of December 2,
2003) among Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust,
Certain Banks Listed Therein
and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as
Agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
August 16, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.63
|
|
Supplemental Indenture,
dated as of August 11, 2006,
between Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust
and the Bank of New York, as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
our Current Report on Form
8-K dated as of August 16,
2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.64
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No.
4, dated as of August 31,
2006, by and between PHH
Corporation and J.P. Morgan
Trust Company, N.A. (as
successor in interest to
Bank One Trust Company,
N.A.), as Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
September 1, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.65
|
|
Release and Restrictive
Covenants Agreement, dated
September 21, 2006, by and
between PHH Corporation and
Neil J. Cashen.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
September 26, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.66
|
|
Trademark License Agreement,
dated as of January 31,
2005, by and between Cendant
Real Estate Services Venture
Partner, Inc., and PHH Home
Loans, LLC.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.66 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
91
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.67
|
|
Origination Assistance Agreement,
dated as of December 15, 2000, as
amended through March 24, 2006, by
and between Merrill Lynch Credit
Corporation and Cendant Mortgage
Corporation (renamed PHH Mortgage
Corporation).
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.67
to our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.68
|
|
Portfolio Servicing Agreement, dated
as of January 28, 2000, as amended
through October 27, 2004, by and
between Merrill Lynch Credit
Corporation and Cendant Mortgage
Corporation (renamed PHH Mortgage
Corporation).
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.68
to our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.69
|
|
Loan Purchase and Sale
Agreement, dated as of
December 15, 2000, as
amended through March 24,
2006, by and between Merrill
Lynch Credit Corporation and
Cendant Mortgage Corporation
(renamed PHH Mortgage
Corporation).
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.69 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.70
|
|
Equity Access® and
OmegaSM Loan
Subservicing Agreement,
dated as of June 6, 2002, as
amended through March 14,
2006 by and between Merrill
Lynch Credit Corporation, as
servicer, and Cendant
Mortgage Corporation
(renamed PHH Mortgage
Corporation), as
subservicer.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.70 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.71
|
|
Servicing Rights Purchase
and Sale Agreement, dated as
of January 28, 2000, as
amended through March 29,
2005, by and between Merrill
Lynch Credit Corporation and
Cendant Mortgage Corporation
(renamed PHH Mortgage
Corporation).
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.71 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.72
|
|
Fifth Amended and Restated
Master Repurchase Agreement,
dated as of October 30,
2006, among Sheffield
Receivables Corporation, as
conduit principal, Barclays
Bank PLC, as administrative
agent, PHH Mortgage
Corporation, as seller, and
PHH Corporation, as
guarantor.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
October 30, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.73
|
|
Servicing Agreement, dated
as of October 30, 2006,
among Barclays Bank PLC, as
administrative agent, PHH
Mortgage Corporation, as
seller, and PHH Corporation,
as guarantor.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
October 30, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.74
|
|
Resolution of the PHH
Corporation Compensation
Committee, dated November
22, 2006, modifying fiscal
2005 performance targets for
equity awards and cash
bonuses as applied to
participants other than the
Named Executive Officers
under the 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.74 to our Annual
Report on Form 10-K filed on
November 22, 2006. |
92
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.75
|
|
Amended and Restated Series 2006-2
Indenture Supplement, dated as of
December 1, 2006, among Chesapeake
Funding LLC, as Issuer, PHH Vehicle
Management Services LLC, as
Administrator, JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as Administrative Agent,
Certain Commercial Paper Conduit
Purchasers, Certain APA Banks,
Certain Funding Agents as set forth
therein, and The Bank of New York as
successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as indenture trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 7, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.76
|
|
Amendment to Liquidity
Agreement, dated as of
December 1, 2006, among
Bishops Gate Residential
Mortgage Trust, Certain Banks
listed therein and JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A., as
Administrative Agent.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
December 7, 2006. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.77
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 2,
dated as of December 21,
2006, between Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust and The Bank of
New York, as Indenture
Trustee. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.78
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of
February 22, 2007, to the
364-Day Revolving Credit
Agreement, dated April 6,
2006, among PHH Corporation,
as Borrower, J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc. and Citigroup
Global Markets Inc., as Joint
Lead Arrangers and Joint
Bookrunners, the Lenders
referred to therein, and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
a Lender and Administrative
Agent for the Lenders.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 28, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.79
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of
February 22, 2007, to the
Credit Agreement, dated as of
July 21, 2006, among PHH
Corporation, as Borrower,
Citicorp North America, Inc.
and Wachovia Bank, National
Association, as Syndication
Agents; J.P. Morgan
Securities Inc. and Citigroup
Global Markets Inc., as Joint
Lead Arrangers and Joint
Bookrunners; the Lenders, and
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
a Lender and as
Administrative Agent for the
Lenders.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
February 28, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.80
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of
March 6, 2007, to the Series
2006-1 Indenture Supplement,
dated as of March 7, 2006,
among Chesapeake Funding LLC,
as Issuer, PHH Vehicle
Management Services, LLC, as
Administrator, JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A., as Administrative
Agent, Certain Commercial
Paper Conduit Purchasers,
Certain Banks, Certain
Funding Agents as set forth
therein, and The Bank of New
York as Successor to JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A., as
Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to our Current
Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 8, 2007. |
93
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
No. |
|
Description |
|
Incorporation by Reference |
10.81
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of March
6, 2007, to the Amended and Restated
Series 2006-2 Indenture Supplement,
dated as of December 1, 2006, among
Chesapeake Funding LLC, as Issuer,
PHH Vehicle Management Services,
LLC, as Administrator, JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative
Agent, Certain Commercial Paper
Conduit Purchasers, Certain Banks,
Certain Funding Agents as set forth
therein, and The Bank of New York as
Successor to JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on
March 8, 2007. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.82
|
|
Consent and
Amendment, dated as of March
14, 2007, among PHH Corporation, PHH
Mortgage Corporation, PHH Broker
Partner Corporation, PHH Home Loans
LLC, Realogy Real Estate Services
Group, LLC (formerly Cendant Real
Estate Services Group, LLC), Realogy
Services Venture Partner Inc.
(formerly known as Cendant Real
Estate Services Venture Partner,
Inc.), Century 21 Real Estate LLC,
Coldwell Banker Real Estate
Corporation, ERA Franchise Systems,
Inc., Sothebys International Realty
Affiliates, Inc., and TM Acquisition
Corp. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.83
|
|
Waiver and Amendment Agreement,
dated as of March 14, 2007, PHH Mortgage
Corporation and Merrill Lynch Credit
Corporation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31(i).1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31(i).2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
* |
Schedules and exhibits of this Exhibit have been omitted pursuant to Item 601(b)(2) of
Regulation S-K which portions will be furnished upon the request of the Commission. |
|
|
Confidential treatment has been requested for certain portions of this Exhibit pursuant to
Rule 24b-2 of the Exchange Act which portions have been omitted and filed separately with the
Commission. |
|
|
Management or compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed pursuant to Item
601(b)(10) of Regulation S-K. |
94