10-K
UNITED
STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 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
|
|
52-0551284
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
|
|
|
3000 LEADENHALL ROAD
|
|
08054
|
MT. LAUREL, NEW
JERSEY
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
(Address of principal executive
offices)
|
|
|
856-917-1744
(Registrants telephone
number, including area code)
SECURITIES
REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:
|
|
|
|
|
NAME OF EACH EXCHANGE
|
TITLE OF EACH CLASS
|
|
ON WHICH REGISTERED
|
|
Common Stock, par value
$0.01 per share
|
|
The New York Stock Exchange
|
Preference Stock Purchase Rights
|
|
The New York Stock Exchange
|
SECURITIES
REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Securities Act.
Yes o No þ
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 if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. 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
The aggregate market value of our Common stock held by
non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2006 was
$1.472 billion.
As of May 15, 2007, there were 53,506,822 shares of
PHH Common stock outstanding.
Documents Incorporated by Reference: None.
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 1,
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies in the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2006
(Form 10-K));
however, within this
Form 10-K,
PHHs former parent company, now known as Avis Budget
Group, Inc. (NYSE: CAR) is referred to as
Cendant.
CAUTIONARY
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
Form 10-K
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-K
include, but are not limited to, the following: (i) the
beliefs regarding the increasing competition in the mortgage
industry, 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 belief that growth in our Fleet
Management Services segment will be negatively impacted during
2007 by delays in the availability of our financial statements
and uncertainties regarding the proposed Merger (as defined in
Item 1. BusinessRecent Developments);
(iv) the belief that we have developed an industry-leading
technology infrastructure; (v) the expectation that any
existing legal claims or proceedings other than the several
purported class actions filed against us as discussed in this
Form 10-K
would not have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial position, results of operations or cash flows and our
intent to respond appropriately in defending against the several
purported class actions filed against us as discussed in this
Form 10-K;
(vi) the beliefs that the restrictions under our loan
agreements will not materially limit our operations or our
ability to make dividend payments on our Common stock;
(vii) the expectation that our agreements and arrangements
with Cendant and Realogy Corporation (Realogy) will
continue to be material to our business; (viii) the
expectation that our sources of liquidity are adequate to fund
operations for the next 12 months; (ix) our
anticipated levels of capital expenditures for 2007;
(x) the expectations regarding the impact of the adoption
of recently issued accounting pronouncements on our financial
statements; (xi) 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;
(xii) the anticipated amounts of amortization expense for
amortizable intangible assets for the next five fiscal years;
(xiii) the expectation that our mortgage loan originations
from our Mortgage Production segment in the year ended
December 31, 2007 will be comprised of a similar portion of
mortgage loan originations arising out of our arrangements with
Realogy as during the year ended December 31, 2006;
(xiv) our intention to deliver our financial statements for
the quarter ended March 31, 2007 on or before June 29,
2007; (xv) our intention to negotiate with our lenders and
trustees under certain of our financing agreements to extend our
waivers if we are unable to deliver our financial statements
within the prescribed deadlines and (xvi) our expectation
that although managements goal is to remediate as many
material weaknesses as feasible in 2007, we will need to
continue our remediation efforts into 2008.
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;
|
2
|
|
|
|
§
|
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 deadlines for the delivery of our
quarterly 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 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 United States
(U.S.) home sales, due to adverse economic changes
or otherwise, on our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing
segments;
|
|
|
§
|
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 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
3
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.
PART I
Recent
Developments
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 entered into an agreement to
sell our mortgage operations 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, we entered into an amendment to the Rights
Agreement, dated as of January 28, 2005, between us and The
Bank of New York (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. The Merger is subject to
approval by our stockholders and 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 (the NYSE). There is no
assurance when or if the Merger Agreement and the Merger will be
approved by our stockholders, and there is no assurance when or
whether the other conditions to the completion of the Merger
will be satisfied.
History
For all periods presented in this
Form 10-K
prior to February 1, 2005, we were a wholly owned
subsidiary of Cendant (renamed Avis Budget Group, Inc.) 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 our spin-off from Cendant
(the Spin-Off). In connection with the Spin-Off, we
entered into several contracts with Cendant and Cendants
real estate services division to provide for the separation of
our business from Cendant and the continuation of certain
business arrangements with Cendants real estate services
division, including a separation agreement, a tax sharing
agreement, a transition services agreement, a strategic
relationship agreement, a marketing agreement, trademark license
agreements and the operating agreement for PHH Home Loans, LLC
(together with its subsidiaries, PHH Home Loans or
the Mortgage Venture) (collectively, the
Spin-Off Agreements). Cendant spun-off its real
estate services division, Realogy, including its relocation
subsidiary, Cartus Corporation (formerly known as Cendant
Mobility Services Corporation) (together with its subsidiaries,
Cartus) into an independent, publicly traded company
(the Realogy Spin-Off) effective July 31, 2006.
On April 10, 2007, Realogy became a wholly owned subsidiary
of Domus Holdings Corp., an affiliate of Apollo Management VI,
L.P., following the completion of a merger and related
transactions. (See Arrangements with Cendant
and Arrangements with Realogy for more
information.)
Prior to the Spin-Off, we underwent an internal reorganization
whereby we distributed our former relocation business, Cartus,
fuel card business, Wright Express LLC (together with its
subsidiaries, Wright Express), and other
subsidiaries that engaged in the relocation and fuel card
businesses to Cendant, and Cendant contributed its former
appraisal business, Speedy Title and Appraisal Review Services
LLC (STARS), to us. Pursuant to Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 141,
Business Combinations
(SFAS No. 141), Cendants
contribution of STARS to PHH 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
4
segregated and reported as discontinued operations for all
periods presented (see Note 24, Discontinued
Operations in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K
for more information).
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. PHH Home Loans is a mortgage venture
that we maintain with Realogy that began operations in October
2005. PHH Mortgage and PHH Home Loans both conduct business
throughout the U.S. Our Mortgage Production segment focuses
on providing private-label mortgage services to financial
institutions and real estate brokers.
Our Mortgage Servicing segment services mortgage loans that
either PHH Mortgage or PHH Home Loans originated. Our Mortgage
Servicing segment also purchases mortgage servicing rights
(MSRs) and acts as a subservicer for certain clients
that own the underlying MSRs. Mortgage loan servicing consists
of collecting loan payments, remitting principal and interest
payments to investors, holding escrow funds for payment of
mortgage-related expenses such as taxes and insurance and
otherwise administering our mortgage loan servicing portfolio.
Our Fleet Management Services segment provides commercial fleet
management services to corporate clients and government agencies
throughout the U.S. and Canada through our wholly owned
subsidiary, PHH Vehicle Management Services Group LLC (PHH
Arval). PHH Arval is a fully integrated provider of fleet
management services with a broad range of product offerings.
These services include management and leasing of vehicles and
other fee-based services for our clients vehicle fleets.
Available
Information
Our principal offices are located at 3000 Leadenhall Road, Mt.
Laurel, NJ 08054. Our telephone number is
(856) 917-1744.
Our corporate website is located at www.phh.com, and our filings
pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), are available
free of charge on our website under the tabs Investor
RelationsSEC Reports as soon as reasonably
practicable after such filings are electronically filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC). Our
Corporate Governance Guidelines, our Code of Business Ethics and
the charters of the committees of our Board of Directors are
also available on our corporate website and printed copies are
available upon request. The information contained on our
corporate website is not part of this
Form 10-K.
Interested readers may also read and copy any materials that we
file at the SECs Public Reference Room at 100 F Street,
N.E., Washington D.C., 20549. Readers may obtain information on
the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
The SEC also maintains an internet site (www.sec.gov) that
contains our reports.
OUR
BUSINESS
Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing Segments
Mortgage
Production Segment
Our Mortgage Production segment focuses on providing mortgage
services, including private-label mortgage services, to
financial institutions and real estate brokers through PHH
Mortgage and PHH Home Loans, which conduct business throughout
the U.S. Our Mortgage Production segment generated 14%, 21%
and 29% of our Net revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The
following table sets forth the Net revenues, segment profit or
loss (as described in Note 23, Segment
Information in the Notes to Consolidated
5
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K)
and Assets for our Mortgage Production segment for each of the
years ended and as of December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended and As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Mortgage Production Net revenues
|
|
$
|
329
|
|
|
$
|
524
|
|
|
$
|
700
|
|
Mortgage Production Segment (loss)
profit
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
109
|
|
Mortgage Production Assets
|
|
|
3,226
|
|
|
|
2,640
|
|
|
|
2,797
|
|
The Mortgage Production segment principally generates revenue
through fee-based mortgage loan origination services and sales
of originated and purchased mortgage loans into the secondary
market. PHH Mortgage generally sells all mortgage loans that it
originates to investors (which include a variety of
institutional investors) within 60 days of origination. For
the year ended December 31, 2006, PHH Mortgage was the
8th largest
retail originator of residential mortgages and the
17th largest
overall residential mortgage originator, according to Inside
Mortgage Finance. We are a leading outsource provider of
mortgage loan origination services to financial institutions and
the only mortgage company authorized to use the Century 21,
Coldwell Banker and ERA brand names in marketing our mortgage
loan products through the Mortgage Venture and other
arrangements that we have with Realogy. See
Arrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture
Between Realogy and PHH and Strategic
Relationship Agreement and Marketing
Agreements. For the year ended December 31, 2006, we
originated mortgage loans for approximately 19% of the
transactions in which real estate brokerages owned by Realogy
represented the home buyer and approximately 4% of the
transactions in which real estate brokerages franchised by
Realogy represented the home buyer.
We originate mortgage loans through three principal business
channels: financial institutions (on a private-label basis),
real estate brokers (including brokers associated with
brokerages owned or franchised by Realogy and Third-Party
Brokers, as defined below) and relocation (mortgage services for
clients of Cartus).
|
|
|
|
§
|
Financial Institutions Channel: We are
a leading provider of private-label mortgage loan
originations for financial institutions and other entities
throughout the U.S. In this channel, we offer a complete
outsourcing solution, from processing applications through
funding for clients that wish to offer mortgage services to
their customers, but are not equipped to handle all aspects of
the process cost-effectively. Representative clients include
Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation (Merrill Lynch), TD
Banknorth, N.A. and Charles Schwab Bank. This channel generated
approximately 49%, 50% and 54% of our mortgage loan originations
for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Approximately 20% of our mortgage loan
originations for the year ended December 31, 2006 were from
a single client, Merrill Lynch. (See
Arrangements with Merrill Lynch for more
information.)
|
|
|
§
|
Real Estate Brokers Channel: We work
with real estate brokers to provide their customers with
mortgage loans. Through our affiliations with real estate
brokers, we have access to home buyers at the time of purchase.
In this channel, we work with brokers associated with NRT
Incorporated, Realogys owned real estate brokerage
business (together with its subsidiaries, NRT),
brokers associated with Realogys franchised brokerages
(Realogy Franchisees) and brokers that are not
affiliated with Realogy (Third-Party Brokers).
Realogy has agreed that the residential and commercial real
estate brokerage business owned and operated by NRT and the
title and settlement services business owned and operated by
Title Resource Group LLC (formerly known as Cendant Settlement
Services Group) (together with its subsidiaries,
TRG) will exclusively recommend the Mortgage Venture
as 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 Services Venture Partner, Inc. (formerly known as
Cendant Real Estate Services Venture Partner, Inc.) (the
Realogy Venture Partner and together with Realogy
Services Group LLC and their respective subsidiaries, the
Realogy Entities), excluding the independent sales
associates of any Realogy Franchisee acting in such capacity,
(ii) all customers of the Realogy Entities (excluding
Realogy Franchisees or any employee or independent sales
associate thereof acting in such capacity) and (iii) all
U.S.-based
employees of Cendant. (See Arrangements with
RealogyStrategic Relationship Agreement for more
information.) In general, our capture rate of
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
mortgages where we are the exclusive recommended provider is
much higher than in other situations. Realogy Franchisees,
including Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, Century 21
Real Estate LLC, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys
International Affiliates, Inc. have agreed to recommend
exclusively PHH Mortgage as provider of mortgage loans to their
respective independent sales associates. (See
Arrangements with RealogyMarketing
Agreements for more information.) Additionally, for
Realogy Franchisees and Third-Party Brokers, we endeavor to
enter into separate marketing service agreements
(MSAs) or other arrangements whereby we are the
exclusive recommended provider of mortgage loans to each
franchise or broker. We have entered into exclusive MSAs with
34% of Realogy Franchisees as of December 31, 2006.
Following the Realogy Spin-Off, Realogy is a leading franchisor
of real estate brokerage services in the U.S. In this
channel, we primarily operate on a private-label basis,
incorporating the brand name associated with the real estate
broker, such as Coldwell Banker Mortgage, Century 21 Mortgage or
ERA Mortgage. This channel generated approximately 46%, 45% and
41% of our mortgage loan originations from our Mortgage
Production segment for the years ended December 31, 2006,
2005 and 2004, respectively, substantially all of which was
originated from Realogy and the Realogy Franchisees in 2006 and
2005. (See Arrangements with Realogy for more
information.)
|
|
|
|
|
§
|
Relocation Channel: In this channel, we
work with Cartus, Realogys relocation business, to provide
mortgage loans to employees of Cartus clients. Cartus is
the industry leader of outsourced corporate relocation services
in the U.S. The relocation channel generated approximately
5% of our mortgage loan originations for each of the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, substantially all of
which were from Cartus. (See Arrangements with
Realogy for more information.)
|
Included in the Real Estate Brokers and Relocation Channels
described above is the Mortgage Venture that we have with
Realogy. The Mortgage Venture commenced operations in October
2005. At that time, we contributed assets and transferred
employees that have historically supported originations from NRT
and Cartus to the Mortgage Venture. The provisions of a
strategic relationship agreement dated as of January 31,
2005, between PHH Mortgage, PHH Home Loans, PHH Broker Partner
Corporation (PHH Broker Partner), Realogy, Realogy
Venture Partner and Cendant (the Strategic Relationship
Agreement) govern the manner in which the Mortgage Venture
is recommended by Realogy. See Arrangements with
RealogyMortgage Venture Between Realogy and PHH and
Strategic Relationship Agreement. The Mortgage
Venture originates and sells mortgage loans primarily sourced
through NRT and Cartus. 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.
We own 50.1% of the Mortgage Venture through our wholly owned
subsidiary, PHH Broker Partner, and Realogy owns the remaining
49.9% through its wholly owned subsidiary, Realogy Venture
Partner. The Mortgage Venture is consolidated within our
financial statements, and Realogys ownership interest is
presented in our 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
under 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) 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. The termination of our Mortgage Venture with
Realogy or of our exclusivity arrangement for the Mortgage
Venture under the Strategic Relationship Agreement could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial position,
results of operations and cash flows. (See
Arrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture
Between Realogy and PHH and Strategic
Relationship Agreement for more information.)
Our mortgage loan origination channels are supported by three
distinct platforms:
|
|
|
|
§
|
Teleservices: We operate a teleservices
operation (also known as our Phone In, Move
In®
program) that provides centralized processing along with
consistent customer service. We utilize Phone In, Move In for
all three origination channels described above. We also maintain
multiple internet sites that provide online mortgage application
capabilities for our customers.
|
7
|
|
|
|
§
|
Field Sales Professionals: Members of
our field sales force are generally located in real estate
brokerage offices or are affiliated with financial institution
clients around the U.S., and are equipped to provide product
information, quote interest rates and help customers prepare
mortgage applications. Through our
MyChoicetm
program, mortgage advisors are assigned a dedicated territory
for marketing efforts and customers are provided with the option
of applying for mortgage loans over the telephone, in person or
online through the internet.
|
|
|
§
|
Closed Mortgage Loan Purchases: We
purchase closed mortgage loans from community banks, credit
unions, mortgage brokers and mortgage bankers. We also acquire
mortgage loans from mortgage brokers that receive applications
from and qualify the borrowers.
|
The following table sets forth the composition of our mortgage
loan originations by channel and platform for each of the years
ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Loans closed to be sold
|
|
$
|
32,390
|
|
|
$
|
36,219
|
|
|
$
|
34,405
|
|
Fee-based closings
|
|
|
8,872
|
|
|
|
11,966
|
|
|
|
18,148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
41,262
|
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
52,553
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans sold
|
|
$
|
31,598
|
|
|
$
|
35,541
|
|
|
$
|
32,465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Originations by
Channel:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial institutions
|
|
|
49%
|
|
|
|
50%
|
|
|
|
54%
|
|
Real estate brokers
|
|
|
46%
|
|
|
|
45%
|
|
|
|
41%
|
|
Relocation
|
|
|
5%
|
|
|
|
5%
|
|
|
|
5%
|
|
Total Mortgage Originations by
Platform:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Teleservices
|
|
|
56%
|
|
|
|
57%
|
|
|
|
60%
|
|
Field sales professionals
|
|
|
23%
|
|
|
|
24%
|
|
|
|
25%
|
|
Closed mortgage loan purchases
|
|
|
21%
|
|
|
|
19%
|
|
|
|
15%
|
|
Fee-based closings are comprised of mortgages originated for
others (including brokered loans and loans originated through
our financial institutions channel). Loans originated by us and
purchased from financial institutions are included in loans
closed to be sold while loans originated by us and retained by
financial institutions are included in fee-based closings.
8
The following table sets forth the composition of our mortgage
loan originations by product type for each of the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Fixed rate
|
|
|
57%
|
|
|
|
47%
|
|
|
|
60%
|
|
Adjustable rate
|
|
|
43%
|
|
|
|
53%
|
|
|
|
40%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conforming(1)
|
|
|
56%
|
|
|
|
49%
|
|
|
|
62%
|
|
Non-conforming
|
|
|
44%
|
|
|
|
51%
|
|
|
|
38%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase closings
|
|
|
69%
|
|
|
|
67%
|
|
|
|
66%
|
|
Refinance closings
|
|
|
31%
|
|
|
|
33%
|
|
|
|
34%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgages
|
|
|
90%
|
|
|
|
89%
|
|
|
|
91%
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
|
11%
|
|
|
|
9%
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents mortgages that conform
to the standards of the Federal National Mortgage Association
(Fannie Mae), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation (Freddie Mac) or the Government National
Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae).
|
Appraisal Services Business
Our Mortgage Production segment includes our appraisal services
business. In January 2005, Cendant contributed STARS, its
appraisal services business, to us. STARS provides appraisal
services utilizing a network of approximately 4,400 third-party
professional licensed appraisers offering local coverage
throughout the U.S. and also provides credit research, flood
certification and tax services. The appraisal services business
is closely linked to the processes by which our mortgage
operations originate mortgage loans and derives substantially
all of its business from our various channels. The results of
operations and financial position of STARS are included in our
Mortgage Production segment for all periods presented.
Mortgage
Servicing Segment
Our Mortgage Servicing segment consists of collecting loan
payments, remitting principal and interest payments to
investors, holding escrow funds for payment of mortgage-related
expenses such as taxes and insurance and otherwise administering
our mortgage loan servicing portfolio. We principally generate
revenue for our Mortgage Servicing segment through fees earned
for servicing mortgage loans held by investors. (See
Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting
PoliciesRevenue RecognitionMortgage Servicing
in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in
this
Form 10-K
for a discussion of our Loan servicing income.) We also generate
revenue from reinsurance activities from our wholly owned
subsidiary, Atrium Insurance Corporation (Atrium).
Our Mortgage Servicing segment generated 6%, 10% and 5% of our
Net revenues for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005
and 2004, respectively. The following table sets forth the Net
revenues, segment profit (as described in Note 23,
Segment Information in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K)
and Assets for our Mortgage Servicing segment for each of the
years ended and as of December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended and As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Mortgage Servicing Net revenues
|
|
$
|
131
|
|
|
$
|
236
|
|
|
$
|
119
|
|
Mortgage Servicing Segment profit
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Mortgage Servicing Assets
|
|
|
2,641
|
|
|
|
2,555
|
|
|
|
2,242
|
|
PHH Mortgage typically retains the MSRs on the mortgage loans
that it sells. MSRs are the rights to receive a portion of the
interest coupon and fees collected from the mortgagors for
performing specified mortgage servicing activities, as described
above.
9
The following table sets forth summary data of our mortgage loan
servicing activities for the years ended and as of
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended and As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except average loan size)
|
|
|
Average loan servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
159,269
|
|
|
$
|
147,304
|
|
|
$
|
143,521
|
|
Ending loan servicing
portfolio(1)
|
|
$
|
160,222
|
|
|
$
|
154,843
|
|
|
$
|
143,056
|
|
Number of loans
serviced(2)
|
|
|
1,079,671
|
|
|
|
1,010,855
|
|
|
|
906,954
|
|
Average loan
size(2)
|
|
$
|
148,399
|
|
|
$
|
153,180
|
|
|
$
|
157,731
|
|
Weighted-average interest
rate(3)
|
|
|
6.1%
|
|
|
|
5.8%
|
|
|
|
5.4%
|
|
Delinquent Mortgage
Loans:(4)(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 days
|
|
|
1.93%
|
|
|
|
1.75%
|
|
|
|
1.72%
|
|
60 days
|
|
|
0.38%
|
|
|
|
0.36%
|
|
|
|
0.32%
|
|
90 days or more
|
|
|
0.29%
|
|
|
|
0.38%
|
|
|
|
0.29%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total delinquencies
|
|
|
2.60%
|
|
|
|
2.49%
|
|
|
|
2.33%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreclosures/real estate
owned/bankruptcies
|
|
|
0.58%
|
|
|
|
0.67%
|
|
|
|
0.59%
|
|
Major Geographical
Concentrations:(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
California
|
|
|
11.4%
|
|
|
|
11.4%
|
|
|
|
11.0%
|
|
New Jersey
|
|
|
8.5%
|
|
|
|
8.8%
|
|
|
|
9.3%
|
|
Florida
|
|
|
7.4%
|
|
|
|
7.4%
|
|
|
|
7.3%
|
|
New York
|
|
|
7.3%
|
|
|
|
7.4%
|
|
|
|
7.9%
|
|
Texas
|
|
|
4.8%
|
|
|
|
5.0%
|
|
|
|
5.4%
|
|
Other
|
|
|
60.6%
|
|
|
|
60.0%
|
|
|
|
59.1%
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Prior to June 30, 2006,
certain home equity loans subserviced for others were excluded
from the disclosed portfolio activity. As a result of a systems
conversion during the second quarter of 2006, these loans
subserviced for others are now includable in the portfolio
balance as of December 31, 2006. The amounts of home equity
loans subserviced for others and excluded from the portfolio
balance as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 were approximately
$2.5 billion and $2.7 billion, respectively.
|
|
(2) |
|
Excludes certain home equity loans
subserviced for others as of December 31, 2005 and 2004.
Had these 39,335 loans been excluded from the number of loans
serviced as of December 31, 2006, the average loan size
would have increased from $148,399 to $152,296.
|
|
(3) |
|
Certain home equity loans
subserviced for others described above were excluded from the
weighted-average interest rate calculation as of
December 31, 2005 and 2004, but are included in the
weighted-average interest rate calculation as of
December 31, 2006. Had these loans been excluded from the
December 31, 2006 weighted-average interest rate
calculation, the weighted-average interest rate would have
remained 6.1%.
|
|
(4) |
|
Represents the loan servicing
portfolio delinquencies as a percentage of the total unpaid
balance of the portfolio.
|
|
(5) |
|
Certain home equity loans
subserviced for others described above were excluded from the
delinquency calculations as of December 31, 2005 and 2004,
but are included in the delinquency calculations as of
December 31, 2006. Had these loans been excluded from the
December 31, 2006 delinquency calculations, the total
delinquency would have remained 2.60%. In addition, the
percentage in foreclosure/real estate owned/bankruptcy would
have remained 0.58%.
|
|
(6) |
|
Certain home equity loans
subserviced for others described above were excluded from the
geographical concentrations calculations as of December 31,
2005 and 2004, but are included in the geographical
concentrations calculations as of December 31, 2006. Had
these loans been excluded from the December 31, 2006
geographical concentrations calculations, the percentage of
loans serviced that are located in California would have
decreased from 11.4% to 11.3%, the percentage of loans serviced
that are located in Texas would have increased from 4.8% to 4.9%
and the percentage of loans serviced that are located in New
Jersey, Florida, New York and other states would have remained
8.5%, 7.4%, 7.3% and 60.6%, respectively.
|
Mortgage Guaranty Reinsurance Business
Our Mortgage Servicing segment also includes our reinsurance
business, which we conduct through Atrium, our wholly owned
subsidiary and a New York domiciled monoline mortgage guaranty
insurance company. Atrium
10
does not write direct insurance policies, but acts as a
reinsurer of a portion of the ultimate net losses on mortgage
insurance policies underwritten by third parties. Atrium
receives premiums from certain third-party insurance companies
and provides reinsurance solely in respect of primary mortgage
insurance issued by those third-party insurance companies on
loans originated through our various loan origination channels.
Competition
The principal factors for competition for our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments are service, quality,
products and price. Competitive conditions also can be impacted
by shifts in consumer preference between variable-rate mortgages
and fixed-rate mortgages, depending on the interest rate
environment. In our Mortgage Production segment, we work with
our clients to develop new and competitive loan products that
address their specific customer needs. In our Mortgage Servicing
segment, we focus on customer service while working to enhance
the efficiency of our servicing platform. Excellent customer
service is also a critical component of our competitive strategy
to win new clients and maintain existing clients. Within every
process in our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing
segments, employees are trained to provide high levels of
customer service. We, along with our clients, consistently track
and monitor customer service levels and look for ways to improve
customer service.
According to Inside Mortgage Finance, PHH Mortgage was
the
8th largest
retail mortgage loan originator in the U.S. with a 3.1%
market share as of December 31, 2006 and the
11th largest
mortgage loan servicer with a 1.6% market share as of
December 31, 2006. Some of our largest competitors include
Countrywide Financial, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Washington
Mutual, Chase Home Finance, CitiMortgage, Bank of America and
GMAC Mortgage Corporation. Many of our competitors are larger
than we are and have access to greater financial resources than
we do, which can place us at a competitive disadvantage.
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,
uncertainties regarding the proposed Merger or otherwise. See
Our BusinessMortgage Production and Mortgage
Servicing SegmentsMortgage Production Segment for
more information.
We are party to the Strategic Relationship Agreement, which,
among other things, restricts us and our affiliates, subject to
limited exceptions, from engaging in certain residential real
estate services, including any business conducted by Realogy
(formerly Cendants real estate services division). The
Strategic Relationship Agreement also provides that we will not
directly or indirectly sell any mortgage loans or mortgage loan
servicing to certain competitors in the residential real estate
brokerage franchise businesses in the U.S. (or any company
affiliated with them). See Arrangements with
RealogyStrategic Relationship Agreement below for
more information.
Seasonality
Our Mortgage Production segment is generally subject to seasonal
trends. These seasonal trends reflect the pattern in the
national housing market. Home sales typically rise during the
spring and summer seasons and decline during the fall and winter
seasons. Seasonality has less of an effect on mortgage
refinancing activity, which is primarily driven by prevailing
mortgage rates. Our Mortgage Servicing segment is generally not
subject to seasonal trends; however, delinquency rates typically
rise temporarily during the winter months, driven by the
mortgagor payment patterns.
Trademarks
and Intellectual Property
The trade names and related logos of our financial institutions
clients are material to our Mortgage Production and Mortgage
Servicing segments. Our financial institution clients license
the use of their names to us in connection with our
private-label business. These trademark licenses generally run
for the duration of our origination services
11
agreements with such financial institution clients and
facilitate the origination services that we provide to them.
Realogys brand names and related items, such as logos and
domain names, of its owned and franchised residential real
estate brokerages are material to our Mortgage Production and
Mortgage Servicing segments. Realogy licenses its real estate
brands and related items, such as logos and domain names, to us
for use in our mortgage loan origination services that we
provide to Realogys owned real estate brokerage,
relocation and settlement services businesses. In connection
with the Spin-Off, TM Acquisition Corp., Coldwell Banker Real
Estate Corporation, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. and PHH Mortgage
entered into a trademark license agreement (the PHH
Mortgage Trademark License Agreement) pursuant to which
PHH Mortgage was granted a license to use certain of
Realogys real estate brand names and related items, such
as domain names, in connection with our mortgage loan
origination services on behalf of Realogys franchised real
estate brokerage business. PHH Mortgage was granted a license to
use brand names and related items, such as domain names, in
connection with Realogys real estate brokerage business
owned and operated by NRT, the relocation business owned and
operated by Cartus and the settlement services business owned
and operated by TRG; however this license terminated upon PHH
Home Loans commencing operations. PHH Home Loans is party to its
own trademark license agreement (the Mortgage Venture
Trademark License Agreement) with TM Acquisition Corp.,
Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation and ERA Franchise
Systems, Inc. pursuant to which PHH Home Loans was granted a
license to use certain of Realogys real estate brand names
and related items, such as domain names, in connection with our
mortgage loan origination services on behalf of Realogys
owned real estate brokerage business owned and operated by NRT,
the relocation business owned and operated by Cartus and the
settlement services business owned and operated by TRG. See
Arrangements with RealogyTrademark License
Agreements for more information about the PHH Mortgage
Trademark License Agreement and the Mortgage Venture Trademark
License Agreement (collectively, the Trademark License
Agreements).
Mortgage
Regulation
Our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments are
subject to numerous federal, state and local laws and
regulations and may be subject to various judicial and
administrative decisions imposing various requirements and
restrictions on our business. These laws, regulations and
judicial and administrative decisions to which our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments are subject include
those pertaining to: real estate settlement procedures; fair
lending; fair credit reporting; truth in lending; compliance
with net worth and financial statement delivery requirements;
compliance with federal and state disclosure requirements; the
establishment of maximum interest rates, finance charges and
other charges; secured transactions; collection, foreclosure,
repossession and claims-handling procedures and other trade
practices and privacy regulations providing for the use and
safeguarding of non-public personal financial information of
borrowers. By agreement with our financial institution clients,
we are required to comply with additional requirements that our
clients may be subject to through their regulators. The Home
Mortgage Disclosure Act requires us to disclose certain
information about the mortgage loans we originate and purchase,
such as the race and gender of our customers, the disposition of
mortgage applications, income levels and interest rate (i.e.
annual percentage rate) information. We believe that publication
of such information may lead to heightened scrutiny of all
mortgage lenders loan pricing and underwriting practices.
The federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act
(RESPA) and state real estate brokerage laws
restrict the payment of fees or other consideration for the
referral of real estate settlement services. The establishment
of PHH Home Loans and the continuing relationships between and
among PHH Home Loans, Realogy and us are subject to the
anti-kickback requirements of RESPA. There can be no assurance
that more restrictive laws, rules and regulations will not be
adopted in the future or that existing laws, rules and
regulations will be applied in a manner that may adversely
impact our business or make regulatory compliance more difficult
or expensive.
Insurance
Regulation
Atrium, our wholly owned insurance subsidiary, is subject to
insurance regulations in the State of New York relating to,
among other things: standards of solvency that must be met and
maintained; the licensing of insurers and their agents; the
nature of and limitations on investments; premium rates;
restrictions on the size of risks that may be insured under a
single policy; reserves and provisions for unearned premiums,
losses and other obligations; deposits of securities for the
benefit of policyholders; approval of policy forms and the
regulation of market conduct,
12
including the use of credit information in underwriting as well
as other underwriting and claims practices. The New York
State Insurance Department also conducts periodic examinations
and requires the filing of annual and other reports relating to
the financial condition of companies and other matters.
As a result of our ownership of Atrium, we are subject to New
Yorks insurance holding company statute, as well as
certain other laws, which, among other things, limit
Atriums ability to declare and pay dividends except from
restricted cash in excess of the aggregate of Atriums
paid-in capital, paid-in surplus and contingency reserve.
Additionally, anyone seeking to acquire, directly or indirectly,
10% or more of Atriums outstanding common stock, or
otherwise proposing to engage in a transaction involving a
change in control of Atrium, will be required to obtain the
prior approval of the New York Superintendent of Insurance.
Fleet
Management Services Segment
We provide fleet management services to corporate clients and
government agencies through PHH Arval throughout the U.S. and
Canada. We are a fully integrated provider of these services
with a broad range of product offerings. We are the second
largest provider of outsourced commercial fleet management
services in the U.S. and Canada, combined, according to the
Automotive Fleet 2006 Fact Book. We focus on clients with
fleets of greater than 500 vehicles (the Large Fleet
Market) and clients with fleets of between 75 and 500
vehicles (the National Fleet Market). Following our
acquisition of First Fleet Corporation (First Fleet)
on February 27, 2004, we enhanced our truck fleet offering
and are increasing our efforts to attract customers in this
market. As of December 31, 2006, we had more than 337,000
vehicles leased, primarily consisting of cars and light trucks
and, to a lesser extent medium and heavy trucks, trailers and
equipment and approximately 303,000 additional vehicles serviced
under fuel cards, maintenance cards, accident management
services arrangements
and/or
similar arrangements. We purchase more than 80,000 vehicles
annually. Our Fleet Management Services segment generated 80%,
69%, and 66% of our Net revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The
following table sets forth the Net revenues, segment profit (as
described in Note 23, Segment Information in
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K)
and Assets for our Fleet Management Services segment for each of
the years ended and as of December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended and As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Fleet Management Services Net
revenues
|
|
$
|
1,830
|
|
|
$
|
1,711
|
|
|
$
|
1,578
|
|
Fleet Management Services Segment
profit
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
Fleet Management Services Assets
|
|
|
4,868
|
|
|
|
4,716
|
|
|
|
4,409
|
|
We offer fully integrated services that provide solutions to
clients subject to their business objectives. We place an
emphasis on customer service and focus on a consultative
approach with our clients. Our employees support each client in
achieving the full benefits of outsourcing fleet management,
including lower costs and better operations. We offer
24-hour
customer service for the end-users of our products and services.
We believe we have developed an industry-leading technology
infrastructure. Our data warehousing, information management and
online systems provide clients access to customized reports to
better monitor and manage their corporate fleets.
We provide corporate clients and government agencies the
following services and products:
|
|
|
|
§
|
Fleet Leasing and Fleet Management
Services. These services include vehicle
leasing, fleet policy analysis and recommendations,
benchmarking, vehicle recommendations, ordering and purchasing
vehicles, arranging for vehicle delivery and administration of
the title and registration process, as well as tax and insurance
requirements, pursuing warranty claims and remarketing used
vehicles. We also offer various leasing plans, financed
primarily through the issuance of variable-rate notes and
borrowings through an asset-backed structure. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, we averaged 334,000 leased vehicles.
Substantially all of the residual risk on the value of the
vehicle at the end of the lease term remains with the lessee for
approximately 95% of the vehicles financed by us in the U.S. and
Canada. These leases typically have a minimum lease term of
12 months and can be continued after that at the
lessees election for successive monthly renewals. At the
appropriate replacement period, we typically sell the vehicle
into the secondary market and the client receives a credit or
pays the difference between the sale proceeds and the
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
book value. For the remaining 5% of the vehicles financed by us,
we retain the residual risk of the value of the vehicle at the
end of the lease term. We maintain rigorous standards with
respect to the creditworthiness of our clients. Net credit
losses as a percentage of the ending balance of Net investment
in fleet leases have not exceeded 0.07% in any of the last three
years. During the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and
2004 our fleet leasing and fleet management servicing generated
approximately 89%, 88% and 89%, respectively, of our Net
revenues for our Fleet Management Services segment.
|
|
|
|
|
§
|
Maintenance Services. We offer clients
vehicle maintenance service cards that are used to facilitate
payment for repairs and maintenance. We maintain an extensive
network of third-party service providers in the U.S. and Canada
to ensure ease of use by the clients drivers. The vehicle
maintenance service cards provide customers with the following
benefits: (i) negotiated discounts off of full retail
prices through our convenient supplier network; (ii) access
to our in-house team of certified maintenance experts that
monitor transactions for policy compliance, reasonability and
cost-effectiveness and (iii) inclusion of vehicle
maintenance transactions in a consolidated information and
billing database, which assists clients with the evaluation of
overall fleet performance and costs. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, we averaged 339,000 maintenance service
cards outstanding in the U.S. and Canada. We receive a fixed
monthly fee for these services from our clients as well as
additional fees from service providers in our third-party
network for individual maintenance services.
|
|
|
§
|
Accident Management Services. We
provide our clients with comprehensive accident management
services such as immediate assistance upon receiving the initial
accident report from the driver (e.g., facilitating emergency
towing services and car rental assistance), an organized vehicle
appraisal and repair process through a network of third-party
preferred repair and body shops and coordination and negotiation
of potential accident claims. Our accident management services
provide our clients with the following benefits:
(i) convenient, coordinated
24-hour
assistance from our call center; (ii) access to our
relationships with the repair and body shops included in our
preferred supplier network, which typically provide clients with
favorable terms and (iii) expertise of our damage
specialists, who ensure that vehicle appraisals and repairs are
appropriate, cost-efficient and in accordance with each
clients specific repair policy. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, we averaged 331,000 vehicles that were
participating in accident management programs with us in the
U.S. and Canada. We receive fees from our clients for these
services as well as additional fees from service providers in
our third-party network for individual incident services.
|
|
|
§
|
Fuel Card Services. We provide our
clients with fuel card programs that facilitate the payment,
monitoring and control of fuel purchases through PHH Arval. Fuel
is typically the single largest fleet-related operating expense.
By using our fuel cards, our clients receive the following
benefits: access to more fuel brands and outlets than other
private-label corporate fuel cards,
point-of-sale
processing technology for fuel card transactions that enhances
clients ability to monitor purchases and consolidated
billing and access to other information on fuel card
transactions, which assists clients with the evaluation of
overall fleet performance and costs. Our fuel card offered
through a relationship with Wright Express in the U.S. and
through a proprietary card in Canada offers expanded fuel
management capabilities on one service card. For the year ended
December 31, 2006, we averaged 325,000 fuel cards
outstanding in the U.S. and Canada. We receive both monthly fees
from our fuel card clients and additional fees from fuel
providers.
|
The following table sets forth the Net revenues attributable to
our domestic and foreign operations for our Fleet Management
Services segment for each of the years ended December 31,
2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
$
|
1,751
|
|
|
$
|
1,654
|
|
|
$
|
1,530
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
14
The following table sets forth our Fleet Management Services
segments Assets located domestically and in foreign
countries as of December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic
|
|
$
|
4,678
|
|
|
$
|
4,529
|
|
|
$
|
4,235
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
174
|
|
Leases
We lease vehicles to our clients under both open-end and
closed-end leases. The majority of our leases are to corporate
clients and are open-end leases, a form of lease in which the
customer bears substantially all of the vehicles residual
value risk.
Our open-end operating lease agreements provide for a minimum
lease term of 12 months. At any time after the end of the
minimum term, the client has the right to terminate the lease
for a particular vehicle. We typically then sell the vehicle
into the secondary market. If the net proceeds from the sale are
greater than the vehicles book value, the client receives
the difference. If the net proceeds from the sale are less than
the vehicles book value, the client pays us substantially
all of the difference. Closed-end leases, on the other hand, are
entered into for a designated term of 24, 36 or
48 months. At the end of the lease, the client returns the
vehicle to us. Except for excess wear and tear or excess
mileage, for which the client is required to reimburse us, we
then bear the risk of loss upon resale.
Open-end leases may be classified as operating leases or direct
financing leases depending upon the nature of the residual
guarantee. For operating leases, lease revenues, which contain a
depreciation component, an interest component and a management
fee component, are recognized over the lease term of the
vehicle, which encompasses the minimum lease term and the
month-to-month
renewals. For direct financing leases, lease revenues contain an
interest component and a management fee component. The interest
component is recognized using the effective interest method over
the lease term of the vehicle, which encompasses the minimum
lease term and the
month-to-month
renewals. Amounts charged to the lessees for interest are
determined in accordance with the pricing supplement to the
respective lease agreement and are generally calculated on a
variable-rate basis that varies
month-to-month
in accordance with changes in the variable-rate index. Amounts
charged to the lessees for interest may also be based on a fixed
rate that would remain constant for the life of the lease.
Amounts charged to the lessees for depreciation are based on the
straight-line depreciation of the vehicle over its expected
lease term. Management fees are recognized on a straight-line
basis over the life of the lease. Revenue for other services is
recognized when such services are provided to the lessee.
We sell certain of our truck and equipment leases to third-party
banks and individual financial institutions. When we sell
operating leases, we sell the underlying assets and assign any
rights to the leases, including future leasing revenues, to the
banks or financial institutions. Upon the transfer of the title
and the assignment of the rights associated with the operating
leases, we record the proceeds from the sale as revenue and
recognize an expense for the undepreciated cost of the asset
sold. Upon the sale or transfer of rights to direct financing
leases, the net gain or loss is recorded. Under certain of these
sales agreements, we retain some residual risk in connection
with the fair value of the asset at lease termination.
Trademarks
and Intellectual Property
The service mark PHH and related trademarks and
logos are material to our Fleet Management Services segment. All
of the material marks used by us are registered (or have
applications pending for registration) with the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office. All of the material marks used by us are
also registered in Canada, and the PHH mark and logo
are registered (or have applications pending) in those major
countries where we have strategic partnerships with local
providers of fleet management services. Except for the
Arval mark, which we license from a third party so
that we can do business as PHH Arval, we own the material marks
used by us in our Fleet Management Services segment.
15
Competition
We differentiate ourselves from our competitors primarily on
three factors: the breadth of our product offering; customer
service and technology. Unlike certain of our competitors that
focus on selected elements of the fleet management process, we
offer fully integrated services. In this manner, we are able to
offer customized solutions to clients regardless of their needs.
We believe we have developed an industry-leading technology
infrastructure. Our data warehousing, information management and
online systems enable clients to download customized reports to
better monitor and manage their corporate fleets. Our
competitors in the U.S. and Canada include GE Commercial Finance
Fleet Services, Wheels Inc., Automotive Resources International,
Lease Plan International and other local and regional
competitors, including numerous competitors who focus on one or
two products. Certain of our competitors are larger than we are
and have access to greater financial resources than we do.
Seasonality
The revenues generated by our Fleet Management Services segment
are generally not seasonal.
Commercial
Fleet Leasing Regulation
We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations
including those relating to taxing and licensing of vehicles and
certain consumer credit and environmental protection. Our Fleet
Management Services segment could be liable for damages in
connection with motor vehicle accidents under the theory of
vicarious liability. Under this theory, companies that lease
motor vehicles may be subject to liability for the tortious acts
of their lessees, even in situations where the leasing company
has not been negligent. Our lease contracts require that each
lessee indemnify us against such liabilities; however, in the
event that a lessee lacks adequate insurance coverage or
financial resources to satisfy these indemnity provisions, we
could be liable for property damage or injuries caused by the
vehicles that we lease. A federal law was enacted in the
U.S. which preempted state vicarious liability laws that
impose unlimited liability on a vehicle lessor. This law,
however, does not preempt existing state laws that impose
limited liability on a vehicle lessor in the event that certain
insurance or financial responsibility requirements for the
leased vehicles are not met. The scope, application and
enforceability of this law have not been tested. (See
Item 1A. Risk FactorsRisks Related to our
BusinessThe businesses in which we engage are complex and
heavily regulated, and changes in the regulatory environment
affecting our businesses could have a material adverse effect on
our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. for more information.)
Employees
As of December 31, 2006, we employed a total of
approximately 6,280 persons, including approximately 4,880
persons in our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing
segments, approximately 1,360 persons in our Fleet Management
Services segment and approximately 40 corporate employees. As of
April 30, 2007, we employed a total of approximately 6,160
persons, including approximately 4,740 persons in our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments, approximately 1,380
persons in our Fleet Management Services segment and
approximately 40 corporate employees. Management considers our
employee relations to be satisfactory. As of April 30,
2007, none of our employees were covered under collective
bargaining agreements.
ARRANGEMENTS
WITH CENDANT
For all periods presented in this
Form 10-K
prior to February 1, 2005, we were a wholly owned
subsidiary of Cendant and 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 the
Spin-Off. We entered into several contracts with Cendant in
connection with the Spin-Off to provide for our separation from
Cendant and the transition of our business as an independent
company, including a separation agreement (the Separation
Agreement), a tax sharing agreement (as amended and
restated, the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement) and a
transition services agreement (the Transition Services
Agreement).
16
Separation
Agreement
In connection with the Spin-Off, we and Cendant entered into the
Separation Agreement that provided for our internal
reorganization whereby we distributed our former relocation and
fuel card businesses to Cendant, and Cendant contributed its
former appraisal business, STARS, to us. The Separation
Agreement also provided for the allocation of the costs of the
Spin-Off, the establishment of our pension, 401(k) and retiree
medical plans, our assumption of certain Cendant stock options
and restricted stock awards (as adjusted and converted into
awards relating to our Common stock), our assumption of certain
pension obligations and certain other provisions customary for
agreements of its type.
Following the Spin-Off, the Separation Agreement requires us to
exchange information with Cendant, resolve disputes in a
particular manner, maintain the confidentiality of certain
information and preserve available legal privileges. The
Separation Agreement also provides for a mutual release of
claims by Cendant and us, indemnification rights between Cendant
and us and the non-solicitation of employees by Cendant and us.
Allocation
of Costs and Expenses Related to the Transaction
Pursuant to the Separation Agreement, all
out-of-pocket
fees and expenses incurred by us or Cendant directly related to
the Spin-Off (other than taxes, which are allocated pursuant to
the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement discussed below) are to be
paid by Cendant; provided, however, Cendant is not obligated to
pay any such expenses incurred by us unless such expenses have
had the prior written approval of an officer of Cendant.
Additionally, we are responsible for our own internal fees,
costs and expenses, such as salaries of personnel, incurred in
connection with the Spin-Off.
Release
of Claims
Under the Separation Agreement, we and Cendant release one
another from all liabilities that occurred, failed to occur or
were alleged to have occurred or failed to occur or any
conditions existing or alleged to have existed on or before the
date of the Spin-Off. The release of claims, however, does not
affect Cendants or our rights or obligations under the
Separation Agreement, the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement or the
Transition Services Agreement.
Indemnification
Pursuant to the Separation Agreement, we agree 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:
|
|
|
|
§
|
any of our liabilities, including, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
(i)
|
all liabilities reflected in our pro forma balance sheet as of
September 30, 2004 or that would be, or should have been,
reflected in such balance sheet,
|
(ii) all liabilities relating to our business whether
before or after the date of the Spin-Off,
|
|
|
|
(iii)
|
all liabilities that relate to, or arise from any performance
guaranty of Avis Group Holdings, Inc. in connection with
indebtedness issued by Chesapeake Funding LLC (which changed its
name to Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC effective March 7,
2006),
|
(iv) any liabilities relating to our or our
affiliates employees and
17
|
|
|
|
(v)
|
all liabilities that are expressly allocated to us or our
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 the Transition Services
Agreement;
|
|
|
|
|
§
|
any breach by us or our affiliates of the Separation Agreement,
the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement or the Transition Services
Agreement and
|
|
|
§
|
any liabilities relating to information in the registration
statement on
Form 8-A
filed with the SEC on January 18, 2005 (the
Form 8-A),
the information statement (the Information
Statement) filed by us as an exhibit to our Current Report
on
Form 8-K
filed on January 19, 2005 (the January 19, 2005
Form 8-K)
or the investor presentation (the Investor
Presentation) filed as an exhibit to the January 19,
2005
Form 8-K,
other than portions thereof provided by Cendant.
|
Cendant is obligated to indemnify us for any losses (other than
losses relating to taxes, indemnification for which is provided
in the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement described below under
Tax Sharing Agreement) that any party seeks to
impose upon us or our affiliates that relate to:
|
|
|
|
§
|
any liabilities other than liabilities we have assumed or any
liabilities relating to the Cendant business;
|
|
|
§
|
any breach by Cendant or its affiliates of the Separation
Agreement, the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement or the Transition
Services Agreement; and
|
|
|
§
|
any liabilities relating to information in the
Form 8-A,
the Information Statement or the Investor Presentation provided
by Cendant.
|
In addition, we and our pension plan have agreed to indemnify
Cendant and its pension plan, and Cendant and its pension plan
have agreed to indemnify us and our pension plan, with respect
to any liabilities involving eligible participants in our and
Cendants pension plans, respectively.
Tax
Sharing Agreement
In connection with the Spin-Off, we and Cendant entered into a
tax sharing agreement that contains provisions governing the
allocation of liabilities for taxes between Cendant and us,
indemnification for certain tax liabilities and responsibility
for preparing and filing tax returns and defending tax contests,
as well as other tax-related matters including the sharing of
tax information and cooperating with the preparation and filing
of tax returns. On December 21, 2005, we and Cendant
entered into the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement which clarifies
that Cendant shall be responsible for tax liabilities and
potential tax benefits for certain tax returns and time periods.
Allocation
of Liability for Taxes
Pursuant to the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement, Cendant is
responsible for all federal, state and local income taxes of or
attributable to any affiliated or similar group filing a
consolidated, combined or unitary income tax return of which any
of Cendant or its affiliates (other than us or our subsidiaries)
is the common parent for any taxable period beginning on or
before January 31, 2005, except, in certain cases, for
taxes resulting from the failure of the Spin-Off or transactions
relating to the internal reorganization to qualify as tax-free
as described more fully below. Cendant is responsible for all
other income taxes and all non-income taxes attributable to
Cendant and its subsidiaries (other than us or our
subsidiaries), and, except for certain separate income taxes
attributable to years prior to 2004 as noted below, which are
Cendants responsibility, we are responsible for all other
income taxes and all non-income taxes attributable to us and our
subsidiaries. As a result of the resolution of any tax
contingencies that relate to audit adjustments due to taxing
authorities review of prior income tax returns and any
effects of current year income tax returns, our tax basis in
certain of our assets may be adjusted in the future. We are
responsible for any corporate-level taxes resulting from the
failure of the Spin-Off or transactions relating to the internal
reorganization to qualify as tax-free, which failure was the
result of our or our subsidiaries actions,
misrepresentations or omissions. We also are responsible for
13.7% of any corporate-level taxes resulting from the failure of
the Spin-Off or transactions relating to the internal
reorganization to qualify as tax-free, which failure is not due
to the actions, misrepresentations or omissions of Cendant or us
or our respective subsidiaries. Such percentage was based on the
relative pro forma net book values of Cendant and us as of
September 30, 2004, without
18
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. We have agreed to
indemnify Cendant and its subsidiaries and Cendant has agreed to
indemnify us and our subsidiaries for any taxes for which the
other is responsible.
The Amended Tax Sharing Agreement, dated as of December 21,
2005, clarifies that Cendant is solely responsible for separate
state taxes on a significant number of our income tax returns
for years 2003 and prior. We will cooperate with Cendant on any
federal and state audits for these years, but Cendant is
contractually obligated to bear the cost of any liabilities that
may result from such audits. 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 Internal Revenue Service (the IRS) audit
for the taxable years 1998 through 2002 that included us.
Preparing
and Filing Tax Returns
Cendant has the right and obligation to prepare and file all tax
returns reporting tax liabilities for the payment of which
Cendant is responsible as described above. We are required to
provide information and to cooperate with Cendant in the
preparation and filing of these tax returns. We have the right
and obligation to prepare and file all other tax returns
relating to us and our subsidiaries.
Tax
Contests
Cendant has the right to control all administrative, regulatory
and judicial proceedings relating to federal, state and local
income tax returns for which it has preparation and filing
responsibility, as described above, and all proceedings relating
to taxes resulting from the failure of the Spin-Off or
transactions relating to the internal reorganization to qualify
as tax-free. We have the right to control all administrative,
regulatory and judicial proceedings relating to other taxes
attributable to us and our subsidiaries.
Transition
Services Agreement
In connection with the Spin-Off, we entered into the Transition
Services Agreement with Cendant and Cendant Operations, Inc.
that governed certain continuing arrangements between us and
Cendant to provide for our orderly transition from a wholly
owned subsidiary to an independent, publicly traded company.
Pursuant to the Transition Services Agreement, Cendant, through
its subsidiary Cendant Operations, Inc., provided us, and we
provided to Cendant, various services including services
relating to human resources and employee benefits, payroll,
financial systems management, treasury and cash management,
accounts payable services, external reporting,
telecommunications services and information technology services.
Prior to the Spin-Off, Cendant provided these and other services
to us and allocated certain corporate costs to us which, in the
aggregate, were approximately $3 million and
$32 million for the years ended December 31, 2005 and
2004, respectively. During 2006 and 2005, we increased our
internal capabilities to reduce our reliance on Cendant for
these services. Additionally, we continued to purchase certain
information technology services through Cendant through
March 31, 2007 under their current contracts on terms
consistent with our historic cost from Cendant. The Transition
Services Agreement also contained agreements relating to
indemnification, access to information and certain other
provisions customary for agreements of this type. We have the
right to receive reasonable information with respect to charges
for transition services provided by Cendant.
The cost of each transition service under the Transition
Services Agreement generally reflected the same payment terms
and was calculated using the same cost-allocation methodologies
for the particular service as those associated with historic
costs for the equivalent services, and at a rate intended to
approximate an arms-length pricing negotiation as if there
were no pre-existing cost-allocation methodology; however, the
agreement was negotiated in the context of a parent-subsidiary
relationship and in the context of the Spin-Off. (See
Item 1A. Risk FactorsRisks Related to the
Spin-OffOur agreements with Cendant and Realogy may not
reflect terms that would have resulted from arms-length
negotiations between unaffiliated parties. for more
information.) The Transition Services Agreement expired
March 31, 2007. With respect to the outsourced information
technology services provided to us under the Transition Services
Agreement, we entered into our own independent relationship with
the existing third-party service provider for these services
effective April 1, 2007.
19
Prior to the Spin-Off, we provided Cendant and certain Cendant
affiliates, subsidiaries and business units with certain
information technology support, equipment and services at or
from our data center and certain PC desktop support for
approximately 100 Cendant personnel, located at our facility in
Sparks, Maryland. During 2005, we provided these services to
Cendant and applicable affiliates, subsidiaries and business
units under the Transition Services Agreement. Cendant
terminated the provision of these services as of January 1,
2006.
ARRANGEMENTS
WITH REALOGY
In connection with the Spin-Off, we entered into several
contracts with Cendants real estate services division to
provide for the continuation of certain business arrangements,
including the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, the
Strategic Relationship Agreement, a marketing agreement (the
Marketing Agreement), and the Trademark License
Agreements. Cendants real estate services division,
Realogy, became an independent, publicly traded company pursuant
to the Realogy Spin-Off effective July 31, 2006. On
April 10, 2007, Realogy became a wholly owned subsidiary of
Domus Holdings Corp., an affiliate of Apollo Management VI,
L.P., following the completion of a merger and related
transactions. Following the Realogy Spin-Off, Realogy is a
leading franchisor of real estate brokerages, the largest owner
and operator of residential real estate brokerages in the U.S.
and the largest U.S. provider of relocation services. As a
result of the Realogy Spin-Off and the proposed Merger, we and
our subsidiaries, PHH Mortgage and PHH Broker Partner entered
into a Consent and Amendment (the Consent), dated
March 14, 2007, with certain subsidiaries of Realogy which
provided for certain amendments to these agreements effective
immediately prior to the closing of the sale of our mortgage
operations to Blackstone immediately following the completion of
the Merger. There can be no assurances that we will be able to
obtain any additional required amendments we believe may be
necessary or appropriate or that if obtained, that these
amendments will be on terms favorable to us. See
Consent and Amendment for additional
information regarding the Consent.
Mortgage
Venture Between Realogy and PHH
Realogy, through its subsidiary Realogy Venture Partner, and we,
through our subsidiary, PHH Broker Partner, are parties to the
Mortgage Venture for the purpose of originating and selling
mortgage loans primarily sourced through Realogys owned
residential real estate brokerage and corporate relocation
businesses, NRT and Cartus, respectively. In connection with the
formation of the Mortgage Venture, we contributed assets and
transferred employees to the Mortgage Venture that have
historically supported originations from NRT and Cartus. The
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement has a
50-year
term, subject to earlier termination as described below under
Termination or non-renewal by PHH Broker
Partner after 25 years subject to delivery of notice
between January 31, 2027 and January 31, 2028. In the
event that PHH Broker Partner does not deliver a non-renewal
notice after the 25th year, the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement will be renewed for an additional
25-year term
subject to earlier termination as described below under
Termination.
The Mortgage Venture commenced operations in October 2005 and is
licensed, where applicable, to conduct loan origination, loan
sales and related operations in those jurisdictions in which it
is doing business. All mortgage loans originated by the Mortgage
Venture are sold to PHH Mortgage or to unaffiliated third-party
investors on arms-length terms. The Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement provides that the members of the Mortgage
Venture intend that at least 15% of the total number of all
mortgage loans originated by the Mortgage Venture be sold to
unaffiliated third-party investors. The Mortgage Venture does
not hold any mortgage loans for investment purposes or retain
MSRs for any loans it originates. As discussed under
Marketing Agreements, PHH Mortgage entered
into interim marketing agreements with NRT and Cartus pursuant
to which Cendant, NRT and Cartus agreed that PHH Mortgage was
the exclusive recommended provider of mortgage products and
services promoted by NRT to its independent contractor sales
associates and by Cartus to its customers and clients. The
interim marketing services agreements terminated following
commencement of the Mortgage Venture. Thereafter, the provisions
of the Strategic Relationship Agreement, as discussed in more
detail below, began to govern the manner in which the Mortgage
Venture is recommended.
20
Ownership
and Distributions
We own 50.1% of the Mortgage Venture through PHH Broker Partner,
and Realogy owns the remaining 49.9% of the Mortgage Venture,
through Realogy Venture Partner. The Mortgage Venture is
consolidated within our financial statements, and Realogys
ownership interest is presented in our 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 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.
Management
We manage the Mortgage Venture through PHH Broker Partner with
the exception of certain specified actions that are subject to
approval by Realogy through the Mortgage Ventures board of
advisors, which consists of representatives of Realogy and PHH.
The Mortgage Ventures board of advisors has no managerial
authority, and its primary purpose is to provide a means for
Realogy to exercise its approval rights over those specified
actions of the Mortgage Venture for which Realogys
approval is required.
Termination
Pursuant to the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, Realogy
Venture Partner has the right to terminate the Mortgage Venture
and the Strategic Relationship Agreement in the event of:
|
|
|
|
§
|
a Regulatory Event (defined below) continuing for six months or
more; provided that PHH Broker Partner may defer termination on
account of a Regulatory Event for up to six additional one-month
periods by paying Realogy Venture Partner a $1 million fee
at the beginning of each such one-month period;
|
|
|
§
|
a change in control of us, PHH Broker Partner or any other
affiliate of ours with a direct or indirect ownership interest
in PHH Home Loans involving certain specified parties (see
Recent Developments and Consent
and Amendment for additional information regarding a
potential change in control);
|
|
|
§
|
a material breach, not cured within the requisite cure period,
by us or our affiliates of the representations, warranties,
covenants or other agreements (discussed below) under any of the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, the Strategic Relationship
Agreement (described below under Strategic
Relationship Agreement), the Marketing Agreement
(described below under Marketing Agreements),
the Trademark License Agreements (described below under
Trademark License Agreements), a management
services agreement (the Management Services
Agreement) (described below under Management
Services Agreement) and certain other agreements entered
into in connection with the Spin-Off;
|
|
|
§
|
the failure by the Mortgage Venture to make scheduled
distributions pursuant to the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement;
|
|
|
§
|
the bankruptcy or insolvency of us or PHH Mortgage, or
|
|
|
§
|
any act or omission by us or our subsidiaries that causes or
would reasonably be expected to cause material harm to the
reputation of Cendant or any of its subsidiaries.
|
As defined in the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, a
Regulatory Event is a situation in which
(i) PHH Mortgage or the Mortgage Venture becomes subject to
any regulatory order, or any governmental entity initiates a
proceeding with respect to PHH Mortgage or the Mortgage Venture,
and (ii) such regulatory order or proceeding prevents or
materially impairs the Mortgage Ventures ability to
originate mortgage loans for any period of time in a manner that
adversely affects the value of one or more quarterly
distributions to be paid by the Mortgage Venture pursuant to the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement; provided, however, that a
Regulatory Event does not include (a) any order, directive
or interpretation or change in law, rule or regulation, in any
such case that is applicable generally to companies engaged in
the mortgage lending business such that PHH Mortgage or such
affiliate or the Mortgage Venture is unable to cure the
resulting circumstances described in (ii) above, or
(b) any regulatory order or proceeding that results solely
from acts or omissions on the part of Cendant or its affiliates.
21
The representations, warranties, covenants and other agreements
in the Strategic Relationship Agreement, the Marketing
Agreement, the Trademark License Agreements and the Management
Services Agreement include, among others: (i) customary
representations and warranties made by us or our affiliated
party to such agreements, (ii) our confidentiality
agreements in the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement and the
Strategic Relationship Agreement with respect to Realogy
information, (iii) our obligations under the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement, (iv) our indemnification
obligations under the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, the
Strategic Relationship Agreement and the Trademark License
Agreements, (v) our non-competition agreements in the
Strategic Relationship Agreement and (vi) our termination
assistance agreements in the Strategic Relationship Agreement in
the event that the Mortgage Venture is terminated.
Upon a termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement
by Realogy Venture Partner, Realogy Venture Partner will have
the right either (i) to require that PHH Mortgage or PHH
Broker Partner purchase all of its interest in the Mortgage
Venture or (ii) to cause PHH Broker Partner to sell its
interest in the Mortgage Venture to an unaffiliated third party
designated by Realogy Venture Partner.
The exercise price at which PHH Mortgage or PHH Broker Partner
would be required to purchase Realogy Venture Partners
interest in the Mortgage Venture would be the sum of the
following: (i) the capital account balance for Realogy
Venture Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture as of
the closing date of the purchase; (ii) the aggregate amount
of all past due quarterly distributions to Realogy Venture
Partner and any unpaid distribution in respect of the most
recently completed fiscal quarter as of the closing date of the
purchase and (iii) any amount equal to 49.9% of the net
income, if any, realized by the Mortgage Venture at any time
after the end of the fiscal quarter most recently completed as
of the closing date of the purchase attributable to mortgage
loans in process at any time prior to the closing date of the
purchase. The exercise price would also include a liquidated
damages payment equal to the sum of (i) two times the
Mortgage Ventures trailing 12 months net income
(except that, in the case of a termination by Realogy Venture
Partner following a change in control of us, PHH Broker Partner
or an affiliate of ours, PHH Broker Partner may be required to
make a cash payment to Realogy Venture Partner in an amount
equal to the Mortgage Ventures trailing 12 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 12 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, the Marketing Agreement and
the Trademark License Agreements.
The sale price at which PHH Broker Partner would be required to
sell its interest in the Mortgage Venture would be the sum of
(i) the fair value of PHH Broker Partners interest as
of the closing date of the sale, (ii) the aggregate amount
of all past due quarterly distributions to PHH Broker Partner
and any unpaid distribution in respect of the most recently
completed fiscal quarter as of the closing date of the sale and
(iii) any amount equal to 50.1% of the net income, if any,
realized by the Mortgage Venture at any time after the end of
the fiscal quarter most recently completed as of the closing
date of the sale attributable to mortgage loans in process at
any time prior to the closing date of the sale. The fair value
of PHH Broker Partners interest would be equal to PHH
Broker Partners proportionate share of the Mortgage
Ventures earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and
amortization (EBITDA) for the 12 months prior
to the closing date of the sale, multiplied by a then-current
average market EBITDA multiple for mortgage banking companies.
Two-Year
Termination
Beginning on February 1, 2015, the tenth anniversary of the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, Realogy Venture Partner
may terminate the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement at any
time by giving two years prior written notice to us (a
Two-Year Termination). Upon a Two-Year Termination
of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement by Realogy Venture
Partner, Realogy Venture Partner will have the option either
(i) to require that PHH Broker Partner purchase all of
Realogy Venture Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture
or (ii) to cause PHH Broker Partner to sell its interest in
the Mortgage Venture to an unaffiliated third party designated
by Realogy Venture Partner.
22
The exercise price at which PHH Broker Partner would be required
to purchase Realogy Venture Partners interest in the
Mortgage Venture would be the sum of the following: (i) the
fair value of Realogy Venture Partners interest in the
Mortgage Venture as of the closing date of the purchase;
(ii) the aggregate amount of all past due quarterly
distributions to Realogy Venture Partner and any unpaid
distribution in respect of the most recently completed fiscal
quarter as of the closing date of the purchase and
(iii) any amount equal to 49.9% of the net income, if any,
realized by the Mortgage Venture at any time after the end of
the fiscal quarter most recently completed as of the closing
date of the purchase attributable to mortgage loans in process
at any time prior to the closing date of the purchase. The fair
value of Realogy Venture Partners interest would be
determined through business valuation experts selected by each
of PHH Broker Partner and Realogy Venture Partner. These
business valuation experts would then prepare two valuations of
the interest in the Mortgage Venture in light of the relevant
facts and circumstances, including the consequences of the
Two-Year Termination and PHH Broker Partners purchase of
Realogy Venture Partners interest. In the event that the
difference between the two valuations is equal to or less than
10%, then the average of the two valuations would be used as the
fair value of Realogy Venture Partners interest in the
Mortgage Venture. In the event that the difference between the
two valuations is greater than 10%, then the two business
valuation experts would select another business valuation expert
to perform a third valuation which would be used as the fair
value of Realogy Venture Partners interest in the Mortgage
Venture.
The sale price at which PHH Broker Partner would be required to
sell its interest in the Mortgage Venture would be the sum of
(i) the fair value of PHH Broker Partners interest as
of the closing date of the sale, (ii) the aggregate amount
of all past due quarterly distributions to PHH Broker Partner
and any unpaid distribution in respect of the most recently
completed fiscal quarter as of the closing date of the sale and
(iii) any amount equal to 50.1% of the net income, if any,
realized by the Mortgage Venture at any time after the end of
the fiscal quarter most recently completed as of the closing
date of the sale attributable to mortgage loans in process at
any time prior to the closing date of the sale. The fair value
of PHH Broker Partners interest would be determined in a
similar manner as the fair value of Realogy Venture
Partners interest is determined above.
Special
Termination
In the event that, as a result of any change in the law,
(i) any provision of the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement or the related agreements (including the Strategic
Relationship Agreement, the Marketing Agreement and the
Trademark License Agreements) is not compliant with applicable
law, or (ii) the financial terms of the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement or any of the related agreements, taken as a
whole, become inconsistent with the then-current market, the
members shall use commercially reasonable efforts to restructure
our business and to amend the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement in a manner that complies with such law and, to the
extent possible, most closely reflects the original intention of
the members as to the economics of their relationship. In the
case of a law that renders the financial terms of the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement to become inconsistent with the
then-current market, Realogy Venture Partner may also request
that PHH Broker Partner and PHH Mortgage enter into good faith
negotiations to renegotiate the terms of the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement within 30 days following the request.
During such
30-day
period, Realogy Venture Partner may solicit proposals from PHH
Broker Partner and other persons for the provision of mortgage
services substantially similar to those provided under the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement and the related agreements.
If Realogy Venture Partner receives a proposal from a third
party that Realogy Venture Partner determines, taken as a whole,
is superior to PHH Broker Partners proposal, then Realogy
Venture Partner may elect to terminate the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement. Upon a termination of the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement by Realogy Venture Partner, PHH Broker
Partner would be required to purchase Realogy Venture
Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture at a price
calculated in the same manner as the price at which Realogy
Venture Partner could cause PHH Broker Partner to purchase its
interest in the Mortgage Venture upon a Two-Year Termination.
The closing of the purchase would be completed within
90 days of the termination of the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement by Realogy Venture Partner.
PHH
Termination
PHH Broker Partner has the right to terminate the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement either upon a material breach, not
cured within the requisite cure period by Realogy Venture
Partner of a material provision of the
23
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement or the related agreements,
including the Strategic Relationship Agreement, the Marketing
Agreement and the Trademark License Agreements, or the
bankruptcy or insolvency of Cendant. Upon a termination of the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement by PHH Broker Partner, PHH
Broker Partner has the right to purchase Realogy Venture
Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture at a price equal
to the sum of the following: (i) the fair value of Realogy
Venture Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture as of
the date PHH Broker Partner exercises its purchase right;
(ii) the aggregate amount of all past due quarterly
distributions to Realogy Venture Partner and any unpaid
distribution in respect of the most recently completed fiscal
quarter as of the date PHH Broker Partner exercises its purchase
right and (iii) any amount equal to 49.9% of the net
income, if any, realized by the Mortgage Venture at any time
after the end of the fiscal quarter most recently completed as
of the date PHH Broker Partner exercises its purchase right
attributable to mortgage loans in process at any time prior to
the date PHH Broker Partner exercises its purchase right. The
fair value of Realogy Venture Partners interest would be
equal to Realogy Venture Partners proportionate share of
the Mortgage Ventures trailing 12 month EBITDA
multiplied by a then-current average EBITDA multiple for
mortgage banking companies. PHH Broker Partners right
would be exercisable for two months following a termination
event by delivering written notice to Cendant. The closing of
the purchase would not be completed prior to the one-year
anniversary of PHH Broker Partners exercise notice to
Realogy Venture Partner.
PHH
Non-Renewal
As discussed above, PHH Broker Partner may elect not to renew
the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement for an additional
25-year term
by delivering a notice to Realogy Venture Partner between
January 31, 2027 and January 31, 2028. Upon a
non-renewal of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement by PHH
Broker Partner, PHH Broker Partner has the right either
(i) to purchase Realogy Venture Partners interest in
the Mortgage Venture at a price calculated in the same manner as
the price at which Realogy Venture Partner could cause PHH
Broker Partner to purchase its interest in the Mortgage Venture
upon a Two-Year Termination or (ii) to sell PHH Broker
Partners interest in the Mortgage Venture to an
unaffiliated third party designated by Realogy Venture Partner
at a price calculated in the same manner as the price at which
Realogy Venture Partner could cause PHH Broker Partner to sell
its interest in the Mortgage Venture upon a Two-Year
Termination. The closing of this transaction would not be
completed prior to January 31, 2030.
Effects
of Termination or Non-Renewal
Upon termination of the Mortgage Venture by Realogy Venture
Partner or PHH Broker Partner as described above, the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement and related agreements will
terminate automatically (excluding certain privacy,
non-competition, venture-related transition provisions and other
general provisions, which shall survive the termination of such
agreements), and Realogy Venture Partner and its affiliates will
be released from any restrictions under the agreements entered
into in connection with the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement
(including the Strategic Relationship Agreement, the Marketing
Agreement, the Trademark License Agreements and the Management
Services Agreement) that may restrict its ability to pursue a
partnership, joint venture or another arrangement with any
third-party mortgage operation.
Management
Services Agreement
PHH Mortgage operates under the Management Services Agreement
with the Mortgage Venture pursuant to which PHH Mortgage
provides certain mortgage origination processing and
administrative services for the Mortgage Venture. The mortgage
origination processing services that PHH Mortgage provides the
Mortgage Venture include seasonal call center staffing beyond
the Mortgage Ventures permanent staff, secondary mortgage
marketing, pricing and, for certain channels, underwriting,
credit scoring and document review. Administrative services that
PHH Mortgage provides the Mortgage Venture include payroll,
financial systems management, treasury, information technology
services, telecommunications services and human resources and
employee benefits services. In exchange for such services, the
Mortgage Venture pays PHH Mortgage a fee per service and a fee
per loan, subject to a minimum amount. The Management Services
Agreement terminates automatically upon the termination of the
Strategic Relationship Agreement.
24
Strategic
Relationship Agreement
We and Realogy are parties to the Strategic Relationship
Agreement. The Strategic Relationship Agreement contains
detailed covenants regarding the relationship of Realogy and us
with respect to the operation of the Mortgage Venture and its
origination channels, which are discussed below:
Exclusive
Recommended Provider of Mortgage Loans
Under the Strategic Relationship Agreement, Realogy agreed that
the residential and commercial real estate brokerage business
owned and operated by NRT, the title and settlement services
business owned and operated by TRG, and the relocation business
owned and operated by Cartus will exclusively recommend the
Mortgage Venture as provider of mortgage loans to (i) the
independent sales associates affiliated with the Realogy
Entities (excluding the independent sales associates of any
Realogy Franchisee acting in such capacity), (ii) all
customers of the Realogy Entities (excluding Realogy Franchisees
or any employee or independent sales associate thereof acting in
such capacity) and (iii) all
U.S.-based
employees of Cendant. Realogy, however, is not required under
the terms of the Strategic Relationship Agreement to condition
doing business with a customer on such customer obtaining a
mortgage loan from the Mortgage Venture or contacting or being
contacted by the Mortgage Venture. Realogy has the right to
terminate the exclusivity arrangement of the Strategic
Relationship Agreement under certain circumstances, including
(i) if we materially breach any representation, warranty,
covenant or other agreement contained in any of the agreements
entered into in connection with the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement (described generally above under Mortgage
Venture Between Realogy and PHHTermination) and such
breach is not cured within the required cure period and
(ii) if a Regulatory Event occurs and is not cured within
the required time period. In addition, if the Mortgage Venture
is prohibited by law, rule, regulation, order or other legal
restriction from performing its mortgage origination function in
any jurisdiction, and such prohibition has not been cured within
the applicable cure period, Realogy has the right to terminate
exclusivity in the affected jurisdiction.
Subsequent
Mortgage Company Acquisitions
If Realogy acquires or enters into an agreement to acquire,
directly or indirectly, a residential real estate brokerage
business that also directly or indirectly owns or conducts a
mortgage loan origination business, then we will work together
with Realogy and the Mortgage Venture to formulate a plan for
the sale of such mortgage loan origination business to the
Mortgage Venture pursuant to pricing perimeters specified in the
Strategic Relationship Agreement. If the parties do not reach an
agreement with respect to the terms of the sale within
30 days after we or the Mortgage Venture receive notice of
the proposed acquisition, Realogy has the option either
(i) to sell the mortgage loan origination business to a
third party (provided that the Mortgage Venture has a right of
first refusal if the purchase price for the proposed sale to the
third party is less than a specified amount with respect to the
purchase price calculated under the formulas specified in the
Strategic Relationship Agreement or, if no formula is
applicable, the price proposed by Realogy) or (ii) to
retain and operate the mortgage loan origination business of
such residential real estate brokerage business, and, in either
case, described under clauses (i) or (ii), at the option of
Realogy, under certain circumstances, the exclusivity provisions
described above will terminate with respect to each county in
which the mortgage loan origination business of such acquired
residential real estate brokerage conducts its operations. If
the parties reach agreement with respect to the terms of the
sale but the Mortgage Venture defaults on its obligation to
complete the sale transaction in a timely manner, the Mortgage
Venture is required to make a damages payment to Realogy within
30 days after the acquisition was scheduled to close. If
the damages payment is not made by such date, at the option of
Realogy, under certain circumstances, the exclusivity provisions
described above will terminate with respect to each county in
which the mortgage loan origination business of the acquired
residential real estate brokerage conducts its operations.
Non-Competition
The Strategic Relationship Agreement provides that, subject to
limited exceptions, we will not engage in (i) the title,
closing, escrow or search-related services for residential real
estate transactions and all other mortgage-related transactions
or provide any services or products which were otherwise offered
or provided by TRG as of January 31, 2005, (ii) the
residential real estate brokerage business, commercial real
estate brokerage business or corporate relocation services
business, or become or operate as a broker, owner or franchisor
in any such business, or
25
otherwise, directly or indirectly, assist or facilitate the
purchase or sale of residential or commercial real estate (other
than through STARS or through the Mortgage Ventures
origination and servicing of mortgage loans) or (iii) any
other business conducted by Realogy as of January 31, 2005.
Our non-competition covenant will survive for up to two years
following termination of the Strategic Relationship Agreement.
To the extent that Realogy expands into new business and, at the
time of such expansion, we are engaged in the same business, we
will not be prohibited from continuing to conduct such business.
The Strategic Relationship Agreement also provides that
(i) neither we nor our subsidiaries will directly or
indirectly sell any mortgage loans or MSRs to any of the 20
largest residential real estate brokerage firms in the
U.S. or any of the 10 largest residential real estate
brokerage franchisors in the U.S. and (ii) neither we nor
our affiliates will knowingly solicit any such competitors for
mortgage loans other than through the Mortgage Venture, as
provided in the Strategic Relationship Agreement and the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement.
Other
Exclusivity Arrangements
The Strategic Relationship Agreement also provides for
additional exclusivity arrangements with PHH, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
§
|
We will use Realogy Services Group LLC on all of our commercial
real estate transactions where a Realogy commercial real estate
agent is available.
|
|
|
§
|
We will recommend TRG as the provider of title, closing, escrow
and search-related services, and
|
|
|
§
|
We will utilize TRG on an exclusive basis whenever we have the
option to choose the title or escrow agent and TRG either
provides such services or receives compensation in connection
with such services in the applicable jurisdiction.
|
Indemnification
Pursuant to the Strategic Relationship Agreement, we have agreed
to indemnify Realogy for all losses arising out of or resulting
from (i) any violation or material breach by us of any
representation, warranty, or covenant in the agreement or
(ii) our negligent or willful misconduct in connection with
the agreement. We have also agreed to indemnify the Mortgage
Venture for all losses incurred or sustained by it (i) for
any damages paid by the Mortgage Venture in connection with an
acquisition of a mortgage loan origination business under the
Strategic Relationship Agreement or (ii) any interest paid
by the Mortgage Venture for any failure to make scheduled
distributions for any fiscal quarter pursuant to the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement. (See Subsequent
Mortgage Company Acquisitions and Mortgage
Venture Between Realogy and PHHTermination above for
more information).
PHH
Guarantee
We guarantee all representations, warranties, covenants,
agreements and other obligations of our subsidiaries and
affiliates (other than the Mortgage Venture) in the full and
timely performance of their respective obligations under the
Strategic Relationship Agreement and the other agreements
entered into in connection with the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement.
Termination
The Strategic Relationship Agreement terminates upon termination
of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement. (See
Mortgage Venture Between Realogy and
PHHTermination and Effects of
Termination or Non-Renewal for more information about
termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement.)
Following termination of the Strategic Relationship Agreement,
we are required to provide certain transition services to
Realogy for up to one year following termination.
Trademark
License Agreements
PHH Mortgage, TM Acquisition Corp., Coldwell Banker Real Estate
Corporation and ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. are parties to the
PHH Mortgage Trademark License Agreement pursuant to which PHH
Mortgage was granted a license to use certain of Realogys
real estate brand names, trademarks and service marks and
related
26
items, such as logos and domain names in its origination of
mortgage loans on behalf of customers of Realogys
franchised real estate brokerage business. PHH Mortgage also was
granted a license to use certain of Realogys real estate
brand names and related items in connection with its mortgage
loan origination services for Realogys real estate
brokerage business owned and operated by NRT, the relocation
business owned and operated by Cartus and the settlement
services business owned and operated by TRG; however, this
license terminated upon PHH Home Loans commencing operations. We
pay a fixed licensing fee to the licensors on a quarterly basis.
PHH Mortgage agreed to indemnify the licensors and their
affiliates for all damages from third-party claims directly or
indirectly arising out of our use of the licensed marks. The PHH
Mortgage Trademark License Agreement terminates upon the
completion of either PHH Broker Partners purchase of
Realogy Venture Partners interest in PHH Home Loans, or
PHH Broker Partners sale of its interest in PHH Home Loans
upon a termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement
or the dissolution of PHH Home Loans. (See Mortgage
Venture Between Realogy and PHHTermination and
Effects of Termination or Non-Renewal for more
information about termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement.) PHH Mortgage or the licensor may also terminate the
PHH Mortgage Trademark License Agreement for the other
partys breach or default of any material obligation under
the PHH Mortgage Trademark License Agreement that is not cured
within 60 days after receipt of written notice of the
breach. Upon termination of the PHH Mortgage Trademark License
Agreement, PHH Mortgage loses all rights to use the licensed
marks and must destroy all materials containing or in any way
using the licensed marks.
PHH Home Loans is party to the Mortgage Venture Trademark
License Agreement with TM Acquisition Corp., Coldwell Banker
Real Estate Corporation and ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. pursuant
to which PHH Home Loans was granted a license to use certain of
Realogys real estate brand names, trademarks and service
marks and related items, such as domain names, in connection
with its mortgage loan origination services for Realogys
real estate brokerage business owned and operated by NRT, the
relocation business owned and operated by Cartus and the
settlement services business owned and operated by TRG. The
license granted to PHH Home Loans is royalty-free,
non-exclusive, non-assignable, non-transferable and
non-sublicensable. PHH Home Loans agrees to indemnify the
licensors and their affiliates for all damages from third-party
claims directly or indirectly arising out of PHH Home
Loans use of the licensed marks. The Mortgage Venture
Trademark License Agreement terminates upon the completion of
either PHH Broker Partners purchase of Realogy Venture
Partners interest in PHH Home Loans, or PHH Broker
Partners sale of its interests in PHH Home Loans upon a
termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement or the
dissolution of PHH Home Loans. (See Mortgage Venture
Between Realogy and PHHTermination and
Effects of Termination or Non-Renewal for more
information about termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement.) PHH Home Loans or the licensors may also terminate
the Mortgage Venture Trademark License Agreement for the other
partys breach or default of any material obligation under
the Mortgage Venture Trademark License Agreement that is not
cured within 60 days after receipt of written notice of the
breach. Upon termination of the Mortgage Venture Trademark
License Agreement, PHH Home Loans loses all rights to use the
licensed marks and must destroy all materials containing or in
any way using the licensed marks.
Marketing
Agreements
Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate
LLC, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc., Sothebys International
Affiliates, Inc. and PHH Mortgage are parties to the Marketing
Agreement. Pursuant to the terms of the Marketing Agreement,
Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate
LLC, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys
International Affiliates, Inc. have each agreed to recommend
exclusively PHH Mortgage as provider of mortgage loans to their
respective independent sales associates. In addition, Coldwell
Banker Real Estate Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate LLC, ERA
Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys International
Affiliates, Inc. agree under the Marketing Agreement to actively
promote our products and services to their franchisees and the
sales agents of their franchisees, which includes, among other
things, promotion of PHH through mail inserts, brochures and
advertisements as well as articles in company newsletters and
permitting PHH Mortgage presentations during sales meetings.
Under the Marketing Agreement, we pay Coldwell Banker Real
Estate Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate LLC, ERA Franchise
Systems, Inc. and Sothebys International Affiliates, Inc.
a marketing fee for conducting such promotions based upon the
fair market value of the services to be provided. The Marketing
Agreement terminates upon termination of the Strategic
Relationship Agreement.
27
Prior to entering into the Marketing Agreement, NRT and Cartus
each entered into separate interim marketing agreements with PHH
Mortgage. Pursuant to the interim marketing agreement between
NRT and PHH Mortgage, NRT agreed to provide access to PHH
Mortgage and to market PHH Mortgages various mortgage
programs and services to NRTs customers and real estate
agents in NRTs company-owned offices. Cartus agreed under
its interim marketing agreement with PHH Mortgage to provide
access to PHH Mortgage and to market PHH Mortgages various
mortgage programs and services to the customers and clients of
Cartus. In addition, NRT and Cartus each agreed under both
interim marketing agreements to provide certain additional
marketing and promotional services for PHH Mortgage. Such
services during 2005 included mail inserts, brochures and
advertisements as well as placement in company newsletters and
permitting PHH Mortgage presentations during sales meetings and,
with respect to NRT, also included the posting of PHH Mortgage
banners and signs throughout NRT offices. Under both interim
marketing agreements, NRT and Cartus each agreed not to enter
into similar arrangements with any other person or entity. PHH
Mortgage paid each of NRT and Cartus monthly marketing fees
under the interim marketing agreements, which were based upon
the fair market value of the services to be provided. The NRT
interim marketing agreement and the Cartus interim marketing
agreement terminated following the commencement of the Mortgage
Venture. The provisions of the Strategic Relationship Agreement
and the Marketing Agreement described above now govern the
manner in which the Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage,
respectively, are recommended.
Consent
and Amendment
On March 14, 2007, we and our subsidiaries, PHH Mortgage
and PHH Broker Partner, entered into the Consent with TM
Acquisition Corp., PHH Home Loans and Realogys
subsidiaries, Realogy Real Estate Services Group, LLC, Realogy
Real Estate Services Venture Partner, Inc., Century 21 Real
Estate Corporation, Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, ERA
Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys International Realty
Affiliates, Inc. which provides for the following:
(i) consents from the parties under the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement, the Strategic Relationship Agreement, the
Management Services Agreement, the Trademark License Agreements
and the Marketing Agreement (collectively, the Realogy
Agreements) to the Merger and the related transactions
contemplated thereby; (ii) certain corrective amendments to
certain provisions of the Realogy Agreements as a result of the
Realogy Spin-Off and certain other amendments to change in
control, non-compete, fee and other provisions in the Realogy
Agreements and (iii) undertakings as to certain other
actions and agreements with respect to the foregoing consents
and amendments. The amendments to the Realogy Agreements
effected pursuant to the Consent will be effective immediately
prior to the closing of the sale of our mortgage operations to
Blackstone immediately following the completion of the Merger.
The provisions of the Consent will terminate and be void in the
event that either the Merger Agreement or the agreement for the
sale of our mortgage operations is terminated. See
Item 1A. Risk FactorsRisks Related to the
Proposed MergerFailure to complete the proposed merger
could negatively affect us. for more information about
risks related to the proposed Merger.
ARRANGEMENTS
WITH MERRILL LYNCH
Approximately 20% of our mortgage loan originations for the year
ended December 31, 2006 were from Merrill Lynch, pursuant
to certain agreements between us and Merrill Lynch as described
in more detail below.
Origination
Assistance Agreement
We are party to an Origination Assistance Agreement, dated as of
December 15, 2000, with Merrill Lynch, as amended (the
OAA). Pursuant to the OAA, we assist Merrill Lynch
in originating certain mortgage loans on a private-label basis.
We also provide certain origination-related services for Merrill
Lynch on a private-label basis in connection with Merrill
Lynchs wholesale loan program for correspondent lenders
and mortgage brokers. The mortgage loan origination services
that we perform for Merrill Lynch include receiving and
processing applications for certain mortgage loan products
offered by Merrill Lynch, preparing documentation for mortgage
loans that meet Merrill Lynchs applicable underwriting
guidelines, closing mortgage loans, maintaining certain files
with respect to mortgage loans and providing daily interest rate
sheets to correspondent lenders and mortgage brokers. We also
assist Merrill Lynch in making bulk purchases of certain
mortgage loan products from correspondent lenders. Under the
terms of the OAA, we are the exclusive provider of mortgage
loans for mortgage loan borrowers (other than
28
borrowers who borrow indirectly through a correspondent lender
or mortgage broker) who either (i) have a relationship
with, or are referred by, a Merrill Lynch Financial Advisor in
the Global Private Client Group or (ii) are clients of the
Merrill Lynch investor services group. We are required to
provide all services under the OAA in accordance with the
service standards specified therein. The OAA obligates us to
make certain liquidated damage payments to Merrill Lynch if we
do not maintain specified levels of customer satisfaction with
respect to the services that we provide on behalf of Merrill
Lynch. In addition, our breach of the service standards in
certain circumstances (a PHH Performance Failure)
may result in termination of the OAA. The initial term of the
OAA expires on December 31, 2010, unless earlier
terminated. Upon expiration of the initial term, the OAA will
automatically renew for a five-year extension term; provided
that, if there shall have been a PHH Performance Failure or
Merrill Lynch shall not have met certain specified obligations
under the OAA prior to December 31, 2010, then the OAA
shall not automatically extend unless the non-breaching party
gives notice to the other party that it is willing to extend the
OAA. We and Merrill Lynch each have the right to terminate the
OAA for the other partys uncured material breach of any
representation, warranty or covenant of the OAA or bankruptcy or
insolvency. In addition, Merrill Lynch may also terminate the
OAA upon notice to us if (i) we lose good standing with the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) or both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac revoke our
good standing for cause and we do not have our good standing
reinstated within 30 days, (ii) we experience a change
of control under certain circumstances or (iii) we breach
the terms of a trademark use agreement with Merrill Lynch
without curing such a breach within the applicable cure period.
During the one-year period following the termination of the OAA,
we are obligated to assist Merrill Lynch in transitioning the
business back to it or a third-party service provider designated
by Merrill Lynch.
Portfolio
Servicing Agreement
We are also party to a Portfolio Servicing Agreement, dated as
of January 28, 2000, with Merrill Lynch, as amended (the
Portfolio Servicing Agreement). Pursuant to the
Portfolio Servicing Agreement, we service certain mortgage loans
originated or otherwise held in a portfolio by Merrill Lynch and
maintain electronic files related to the servicing functions
that we perform. Mortgage loan servicing under the Portfolio
Servicing Agreement includes collecting loan payments from
borrowers, remitting principal and interest payments to the
owner of each mortgage loan and holding escrow funds for payment
of mortgage loan-related expenses, such as property taxes and
homeowners insurance. We also assist Merrill Lynch in
managing funds relating to properties acquired by Merrill Lynch
in foreclosure, which may include the disposition of such
properties. We may not terminate the Portfolio Servicing
Agreement without the consent of Merrill Lynch. Merrill Lynch,
however, may terminate the Portfolio Servicing Agreement at any
time upon notice to us in the event of (i) any uncured
material breach of any representation, warranty or covenant by
us under certain agreements, including the Portfolio Servicing
Agreement, a trademark use agreement with Merrill Lynch, and the
Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement (as defined below),
(ii) our bankruptcy or insolvency, (iii) the loss of
our eligibility to sell or service mortgage loans for Fannie
Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae if we cease to be a HUD-approved
mortgagee, (iv) we experience a change in control under
certain circumstances or (v) our failure to meet certain
service standards specified in the Portfolio Servicing
Agreement, which is not cured within the applicable cure period.
If the Portfolio Servicing Agreement is terminated due to our
failure to meet certain specified service standards, then we and
Merrill Lynch will retain an arbitrator to determine the fair
market value of the MSRs. Upon determination of the fair market
value of such MSRs by the arbitrator, Merrill Lynch may elect to
terminate the Portfolio Servicing Agreement and purchase such
MSRs from us.
Loan
Purchase and Sale Agreement
We are party to a Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated as of
December 15, 2000, with Merrill Lynch, as amended (the
Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement). Pursuant to the
Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement, we are required to purchase
from Merrill Lynch certain mortgage loans that have been
originated under the OAA, including the MSRs with respect to
such loans (other than alternative mortgage loans). We and
Merrill Lynch agree upon mortgage loans constituting alternative
mortgage loans from
time-to-time,
but generally these loans include three- and five-year
adjustable-rate and variable-rate mortgage loans and
construction loans. While not required, we may elect to purchase
alternative mortgage loans from Merrill Lynch, including the
MSRs associated with such loans, upon mutual agreement of
Merrill Lynch. The initial term of the Loan Purchase and Sale
Agreement expires on the earlier of December 31, 2010 or
the date the OAA is terminated. If the OAA is renewed in
accordance with its terms,
29
then the Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement will automatically
renew for a concurrent extension term. Both we and Merrill Lynch
have the right to terminate the Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement
for the other partys uncured material breach of any
representation, warranty or covenant of the Loan Purchase and
Sale Agreement or bankruptcy or insolvency. In addition, Merrill
Lynch may also terminate the Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement
upon notice to us if (i) we lose our good standing with HUD
or both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac revoke our good standing for
cause and we do not have our good standing reinstated within
30 days, (ii) we experience a change of control under
certain circumstances or (iii) we breach the terms of our
trademark use agreement with Merrill Lynch without curing such
breach within the applicable cure period. Following the
termination of the Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement, we are no
longer required to purchase any mortgage loans originated under
the OAA.
Servicing
Rights Purchase and Sale Agreement
We are party to a Servicing Rights Purchase and Sale Agreement,
dated as of January 28, 2000, with Merrill Lynch, as
amended (the SRPSA). Pursuant to the SRPSA, we are
required to purchase from Merrill Lynch the MSRs for certain
mortgage loans that have been originated under the OAA
(alternative mortgage loans). We purchase the MSRs at quarterly
bulk offering sales and on a flow basis. We will not purchase
MSRs for loans that are (i) 60 days or more past due
as of the sale date, (ii) in litigation or (iii) in
bankruptcy. The SRPSA expires upon the earlier of
December 31, 2010 or the date upon which the OAA is
terminated. If the OAA is extended, the SRPSA shall be
automatically extended for the same extension term. Both we and
Merrill Lynch have the right to terminate the SRPSA for the
other partys uncured material breach of any
representation, warranty or covenant of the SRPSA or bankruptcy
or insolvency. In addition, either party may terminate the SRPSA
if the other party loses its good standing with HUD, Fannie Mae,
Freddie Mac, or Ginnie Mae. Following the termination of the
SRPSA, we are no longer required to purchase the MSRs and no
further flow offerings or quarterly bulk offerings shall take
place.
Equity
Access and Omega Loan Subservicing Agreement
We are party to an Equity Access and Omega Loan Subservicing
Agreement, dated as of June 6, 2002, with Merrill Lynch, as
amended (the EA Agreement). Merrill Lynch services
certain revolving line of credit loans secured by marketable
securities, as well as certain securitized and non-securitized
residential first and second lien equity line of credit loans
pursuant to applicable pooling and servicing agreements and
private investor agreements. Pursuant to this agreement, we
agree to subservice such loans for Merrill Lynch. The EA
Agreement expires upon the earlier of June 1, 2009 or the
date upon which the OAA is terminated. With respect to services
to be provided by us pursuant to the EA Agreement, we agree to
indemnify Merrill Lynch for all losses resulting from our
failure to comply with the terms of any private investor
agreement or pooling and servicing agreement. Merrill Lynch may
terminate the EA Agreement at any time upon notice to us in the
event of (i) any uncured material breach of any
representation, warranty or covenant by us including failure to
make pass-through payments, (ii) our bankruptcy or
insolvency, (iii) the loss of our eligibility to sell or
service mortgage loans for Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie
Mae, or if we cease to be a HUD-approved mortgagee or
(iv) if we fail to perform in accordance with the
applicable service standards and do not cure the failure within
90 days.
Waiver
and Amendment Agreement
On March 14, 2007, PHH Mortgage and Merrill Lynch entered
into a Waiver and Amendment Agreement (the Waiver),
which provides for the following: (i) the waiver of Merrill
Lynchs rights in connection with a change in control of us
and PHH Mortgage under the SRPSA, the Portfolio Servicing
Agreement, the OAA, the Loan Purchase and Sale Agreement and the
EA Agreement (collectively, the Merrill Lynch
Agreements) as a result of the Merger and the related
transactions contemplated thereby; (ii) an amendment to the
OAA, which will be effective as of the closing of the sale of
our mortgage operations to Blackstone and
(iii) undertakings as to certain other actions, including
further negotiation of certain amendments to the Merrill Lynch
Agreements and other agreements with respect to the foregoing
amendments. The provisions of the Waiver will terminate and be
void in the event that the Merger Agreement is terminated. See
Item 1A. Risk FactorsRisks Related to the
Proposed MergerFailure to complete the proposed merger
could negatively affect us. for more information about
risks related to the proposed Merger.
30
Risks
Related to the Proposed Merger
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 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 and 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 when or whether 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;
|
|
|
§
|
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 the 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.
|
Pending litigation relating to the Merger and the Merger
Agreement and our potential indemnification obligations and
limitations of our directors and officers liability insurance in
connection with such litigation could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flow.
We, our Directors, and certain other parties are defendants in
two purported class actions pursuant to which the plaintiffs
allege a breach of fiduciary duties by our Board of Directors in
approving the Merger and the Merger Agreement. See
Item 3. Legal Proceedings, for a more detailed
description of these proceedings. We intend to respond
appropriately in defending against the alleged claims in each of
these matters. These actions, however, remain in preliminary
stages, and it is not yet possible to determine their ultimate
outcome at this time. We, therefore, cannot provide assurance
that the legal and other costs associated with the defense of
these actions, the time required to be spent by management and
the Board of Directors on these matters and the ultimate
resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. In addition, we have an obligation to
indemnify and pay expenses in advance for our Directors and
officers to the fullest extent permitted by Maryland law in
relation to these matters under Maryland law, our charter and
our by-
31
laws. Such indemnification may have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows to the extent insurance does not cover our costs. The
insurance carriers that provide our directors and officers
liability policies may seek to rescind or deny coverage with
respect to these matters or we may not have sufficient coverage
under such policies. If the insurance carriers are successful in
rescinding or denying coverage to us
and/or some
of our Directors or officers, or if we do not have sufficient
coverage under our policies, our business, financial position,
results of operations or cash flows may be adversely affected.
Risks
Related to our Internal Control Deficiencies, the Restatement of
our Financial Statements and the Delay in Filing our Periodic
Reports
We have identified material weaknesses in our internal
control over financial reporting.
During the preparation of our financial statements for the year
ended December 31, 2006, 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. The material weaknesses identified for the
year ended December 31, 2006 have not been fully remediated
as of the filing of this
Form 10-K.
In addition, management determined that certain material
weaknesses identified for the year ended December 31, 2005
had not been fully remediated as of December 31, 2006.
Based on the material weaknesses identified, management
concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was
not effective as of December 31, 2006. In addition,
management does not expect that our internal control over
financial reporting will be effective for our quarterly and
annual reporting periods in 2007. See Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures for additional information.
As of the end of the period covered in this
Form 10-K,
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, as well as our
inability to file this
Form 10-K
within the statutory time period, management concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of
December 31, 2006, and management further expects that our
disclosure controls and procedures will not be effective for our
quarterly and annual reporting periods in 2007. 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.
We expect to continue to incur significant expenses
related to our internal control over financial reporting and the
preparation of our financial statements.
During 2006, we devoted substantial internal and external
resources to the completion of our Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 (our 2005
Form 10-K)
and related matters. As a result of these efforts, along with
efforts to complete our assessment of internal control 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. While we do not expect fees and expenses
relating to the preparation of our financial results for future
periods to remain at this level, in 2007, we expect them to
remain significantly higher than historical fees and expenses.
These expenses, as well as the substantial time devoted by our
management towards addressing the material weaknesses
identified, could have a material and adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
We have delayed the filing of our Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. As a result, we do
not have current financial information available and are not
able to register our securities for offer and sale until we are
deemed a current filer with the SEC.
We have delayed the filing of our Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2007. Investors must
evaluate whether to purchase or sell our securities in light of
the lack of current financial information
32
concerning us. Accordingly, any investment in our securities
involves a high degree of risk. In addition, until current
periodic reports and financial statements are available for us,
we will be precluded from registering our securities with the
SEC for offer and sale. This precludes us from raising debt or
equity financing in the public markets and restrains our ability
to use stock options and other equity-based awards to attract,
retain and provide incentives to our employees. Finally,
Blackstone may be unable to raise the financing needed to
complete the Mortgage Sale (which is a condition to closing the
Merger) until our current financial information is available.
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 2007 quarterly
financial statements. Failure to deliver these financial
statements within the 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 certain of our
financing, servicing, hedging and related agreements and
instruments (collectively, our Financing
Agreements). 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. Due to the delays in completing our financial
statements for 2005 and 2006, we have not yet filed our
financial statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2007.
We obtained waivers for certain of our Financing Agreements
extending the deadline for the delivery of our financial
statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 until
June 29, 2007. We intend to deliver our financial
statements for the quarter ended March 31, 2007 on or
before June 29, 2007. We may require additional waivers in
the future if we are unable to meet this deadline for the
delivery of our financial statements.
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 with respect to the delivery of our financial
statements, 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 March 31, 2007
to the MTN Indenture Trustee, which are required to be delivered
no later than May 25, 2007 under the MTN Indenture. As a
result of our failure to deliver these financial statements, the
MTN Indenture Trustee could provide us with a notice of default.
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.
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
be obtained on reasonable terms or 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.
33
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 with the
SEC, we are in breach of the continued listing requirements of
the NYSE. 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.
|
Pending securities litigation and potential
indemnification obligations and limitations of our directors and
officers liability insurance in connection with such securities
litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
We, our Directors, Chief Executive Officer and former Chief
Financial Officer are defendants in several securities lawsuits.
See Item 3. Legal Proceedings, for a more
detailed description of these proceedings. We intend to respond
appropriately in defending against the alleged claims in each of
these matters. These actions, however, remain in preliminary
stages, and it is not yet possible to determine their ultimate
outcome at this time. We, therefore, cannot provide assurance
that the legal and other costs associated with the defense of
these actions, the time required to be spent by management and
the Board of Directors on these matters and the ultimate
resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. In addition, we have an obligation to
indemnify and pay expenses in advance for our Directors and
officers to the fullest extent permitted by Maryland law in
relation to these matters under Maryland law, our charter and
our by-laws. Such indemnification may have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows to the extent insurance does not cover
our costs. The insurance carriers that provide our directors and
officers liability policies may seek to rescind or deny coverage
with respect to these matters or we may not have sufficient
coverage under such policies. If the insurance carriers are
successful in rescinding or denying coverage to us
and/or some
of our Directors or officers, or if we do not have sufficient
coverage under our policies, our business, financial position,
results of operations or cash flows may be adversely affected.
Continuing negative publicity may adversely affect our
business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
As a result of the delay in the filing of our financial
statements, our internal control deficiencies and the
restatement of our financial statements for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003 in the 2005
Form 10-K,
we have been the subject of continuing negative publicity. This
negative publicity may inhibit our ability to attract new
clients and business partners and have an effect on the terms
under which some clients are willing to continue to do business
with us. Continuing negative publicity could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
34
Risks
Related to our Business
The termination of our status as the exclusive recommended
provider of mortgage products and services promoted by the
residential and commercial real estate brokerage business owned
and operated by Realogys affiliate, NRT, the title and
settlement services business owned and operated by
Realogys affiliate, TRG and the relocation business owned
and operated by Realogys affiliate, Cartus, could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial position,
results of operations and cash flows.
Under the terms of the Strategic Relationship Agreement, we are
the exclusive recommended provider of mortgage loans to the
independent sales associates affiliated with the residential and
commercial real estate brokerage business owned and operated by
Realogys affiliate, NRT, certain customers of Realogy and
all
U.S.-based
employees of Cendant. The Marketing Agreement similarly provides
that we are the exclusive recommended provider of mortgage loans
and related products to the independent sales associates of
Realogys real estate brokerage franchisees, which include
Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate
LLC, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys
International Affiliates, Inc. See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture
Between Realogy and PHH, Strategic
Relationship Agreement and Marketing
Agreements in this
Form 10-K
for more information. For the year ended December 31, 2006,
approximately 50% of loans originated by our Mortgage Production
segment were derived from NRT and Cartus. We anticipate that a
similar portion of mortgage loan originations from our Mortgage
Production segment during 2007 will be comprised of business
arising out of our arrangements with Realogy. In 2006, Cendant
spun-off its real estate services division, Realogy, into an
independent, publicly traded company. On April 10, 2007,
Realogy became a wholly owned subsidiary of Domus Holdings
Corp., an affiliate of Apollo Management VI, L.P., following the
completion of a merger and related transactions. As a result of
the Realogy Spin-Off and the proposed Merger, on March 14,
2007, we, along with certain of our affiliates entered into the
Consent which, among other things, provided for Realogys
consent under the Realogy Agreements to the Merger, the Mortgage
Sale and transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement and
the Mortgage Sale Agreement. Pursuant to the Consent, we
obtained certain corrective amendments to certain provisions of
the Realogy Agreements, but these amendments will not be
effective unless and until the Mortgage Sale is completed
immediately following the Merger. The provisions of the Consent
will terminate and be void in the event that either the Merger
Agreement or the Mortgage Sale Agreement is terminated. There
can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain any
additional required amendments we believe may be necessary or
appropriate or that if obtained, that these amendments will be
on terms favorable to us.
Pursuant to the terms of the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement, beginning on February 1, 2015, Realogy will have
the right at any time upon two years notice to us to
terminate its interest in the Mortgage Venture. A termination of
the Mortgage Venture could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial position, results of operations and cash
flows. In addition, the Strategic Relationship Agreement
provides that Realogy has the right to terminate the covenant
requiring it to exclusively recommend us as the provider of
mortgage loans to the independent sales associates affiliated
with the residential and commercial real estate brokerage
business owned and operated by Realogys affiliate, NRT,
certain customers of Realogy, and all
U.S.-based
employees of Cendant, following notice and a cure period, if:
|
|
|
|
§
|
we materially breach any representation, warranty, covenant or
other agreement contained in the Strategic Relationship
Agreement, the Marketing Agreement, the Trademark License
Agreements or certain other related agreements;
|
|
|
§
|
we or the Mortgage Venture become subject to any regulatory
order or governmental proceeding and such order or proceeding
prevents or materially impairs the Mortgage Ventures
ability to originate mortgage loans for any period of time
(which order or proceeding is not generally applicable to
companies in the mortgage lending business) in a manner that
adversely affects the value of one or more of the quarterly
distributions to be paid by the Mortgage Venture pursuant to the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement;
|
|
|
§
|
the Mortgage Venture otherwise is not permitted by law,
regulation, rule, order or other legal restriction to perform
its origination function in any jurisdiction, but in such case
exclusivity may be terminated only with respect to such
jurisdiction or
|
35
|
|
|
|
§
|
the Mortgage Venture does not comply with its obligations to
complete an acquisition of a mortgage loan origination company
under the terms of the Strategic Relationship Agreement.
|
If Realogy were to terminate its exclusivity obligations with
respect to the Mortgage Venture, it would adversely affect our
business, financial position, results of operations and cash
flows.
Adverse developments in general business, economic,
environmental and political conditions could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
Our businesses and operations are sensitive to general business
and economic conditions in the U.S. These conditions
include short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation,
fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, including the
secondary market for mortgage loans, and the general condition
of the U.S. economy and housing market, both nationally and
in the regions in which we conduct our businesses. A significant
portion of our mortgage loan originations are made in a small
number of geographical areas which include: California, New
Jersey, Florida, New York and Texas.
A host of factors beyond our control could cause fluctuations in
these conditions, including political events, such as civil
unrest, war or acts or threats of war or terrorism and
environmental events, such as hurricanes, earthquakes and other
natural disasters. Adverse developments in these conditions and
resulting general business and economic conditions, including
through recession, downturn or otherwise, either in the economy
generally or in those regions in which a large portion of our
business is conducted, could have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Our business is significantly affected by monetary and related
policies of the federal government, its agencies and
government-sponsored entities. We are particularly affected by
the policies of the Federal Reserve Board, which regulates the
supply of money and credit in the U.S. The Federal Reserve
Boards policies affect the size of the mortgage
origination market, the pricing of our interest-earning assets
and the cost of our interest-bearing liabilities. Changes in any
of these policies are beyond our control, difficult to predict
and could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Recent developments in the subprime mortgage market may
negatively affect the mortgage loan origination volumes and
profitability of mortgage loan products that we offer in our
Mortgage Production segment.
Rising default rates by subprime borrowers have caused investors
in subprime mortgage loans in the secondary market to demand
better terms. A number of mortgage loan originators have
consequently revised their underwriting guidelines for subprime
mortgage loans, which have made subprime mortgage loans either
more costly for potential subprime borrowers to obtain or
resulted in certain potential subprime borrowers no longer
qualifying for mortgage loans at all. As a result of these
changes in the subprime secondary mortgage market, mortgage loan
originators, including clients in our financial institutions
channel, could revise their underwriting guidelines for mortgage
loan products that we offer, in anticipation of or in response
to further demands for improved mortgage loan terms by investors
in the secondary mortgage market. As a result, the cost of
mortgage loans for potential borrowers may increase
significantly, certain mortgage loan products may no longer be
available or certain potential borrowers may no longer qualify
for mortgage loans at all. Although subprime products are a de
minimis component of our business, such changes in the mortgage
loan market could cause our origination volumes for mortgage
loan products to decline materially, which could also cause our
profit margins to decline due to increased competition among
mortgage loan originators and higher unit costs, thus reducing
revenues from our Mortgage Production segment.
Downward trends in the real estate market could adversely
impact our business, profitability or results of
operations.
A decline in the real estate market, which may be accompanied by
relatively higher interest rates, would mean less opportunity
for purchase mortgage loan originations. As a result of these
downward trends, revenues in our Mortgage Production segment
could materially decline. Moreover, these trends could cause our
origination volumes for mortgage loan products to decline
materially, which could also cause our profit margins to decline
due to increased competition among mortgage loan originators and
higher unit costs, thus reducing revenues in our Mortgage
Production segment. These conditions also increase the risk that
borrowers, particularly borrowers who
36
have adjustable-rate mortgage loans, will not be able to repay
those loans and increase the risk that the value of the
properties securing those mortgage loans will be insufficient to
satisfy the amounts owed to us or our clients in the event a
borrower defaults on a mortgage loan. These downward trends in
the real estate market could impact demand for mortgage loans by
investors in the secondary mortgage market, increase the demand
for or cost of credit enhancements that we might be required to
give such investors in connection with sales of mortgage loans
or alter the risks associated with some or all of the mortgage
loans that we sell into the secondary mortgage market. As a
result, our access to the secondary mortgage market may be
reduced, restricted or less profitable in the current industry
environment.
Our business is affected by fluctuations in interest
rates, and if we fail to manage our exposure to changes in
interest rates effectively, our business, financial position,
results of operations or cash flows could be adversely
affected.
Our 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. We also have 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 level and volatility of interest rates significantly affect
the mortgage lending industry. A decline in mortgage interest
rates generally increases the demand for home loans as more
potential homeowners seek mortgage loans and more borrowers seek
to refinance existing loans, but also generally leads to
accelerated payoffs in our mortgage servicing portfolio, which
negatively impacts the value of our MSRs. Historically, as
interest rates increase, mortgage loan production decreases,
particularly production from loan refinancing. An environment of
gradual interest rate increases may, however, signify an
improving economy or increasing real estate values, which in
turn may stimulate increased home buying activity. Generally, in
periods of reduced mortgage loan production, the associated
profit margins also decline due to increased competition among
mortgage loan originators and higher unit costs, thus further
reducing our mortgage production revenues. Conversely, in a
rising interest rate environment, mortgage loan servicing
revenues generally increase because mortgage prepayment rates
tend to decrease, extending the average life of our servicing
portfolio and increasing the value of our MSRs. We attempt to
manage our interest rate risk, in part, through the use of
derivatives, including swap contracts, forward delivery
commitments, futures and options contracts to manage and reduce
this risk. Our main objective in managing interest rate risk is
to moderate the impact of changes in interest rates on our
earnings over time. Our interest rate risk management strategies
may result in significant earnings volatility in the short term.
The success of our interest rate risk management strategy is
largely dependent on our ability to predict the earnings
sensitivity of our loan servicing and loan production activities
in various interest rate environments, which is inherently
uncertain. Significant changes in current market conditions
and/or the
assumptions used (including the relationship of the change in
the value of the MSRs to the change in the value of derivatives)
in developing our estimates of borrower behavior and future
interest rates could result in a material adverse effect on our
business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Certain hedging strategies that we use to manage interest
rate risk associated with our MSRs and other mortgage-related
assets and commitments may not be effective in mitigating those
risks.
We employ various economic hedging strategies to attempt to
mitigate the interest rate and prepayment risk inherent in many
of our assets, including our mortgage loans held for sale
(MLHS), interest rate lock commitments
(IRLCs) and our MSRs. We use various derivative and
other financial instruments to provide a level of protection
against interest rate risks, but no hedging strategy can protect
us completely. Our hedging activities may include entering into
interest rate swaps, caps and floors, options to purchase these
items, futures and forward contracts
and/or
purchasing or selling Treasury securities. Our hedging decisions
in the future will be determined in light of the facts and
circumstances existing at the time and may differ from our
current hedging strategy. We also seek to manage interest rate
risk in our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments
partially by monitoring and seeking to maintain an appropriate
balance between our loan production volume and the size of our
mortgage servicing portfolio, as the value of MSRs and the
income they provide tend to be counter-cyclical to the changes
in production volumes and gain on sale of loans that result from
changes in interest rates.
Our hedging strategies may not be effective in mitigating the
risks related to changes in interest rates. Poorly designed
strategies or improperly executed transactions could actually
increase our risk and losses. There have been
37
periods, and it is likely that there will be periods in the
future, during which we incur losses after accounting for our
hedging strategies. As stated earlier, the success of our
interest rate risk management strategy is largely dependent on
our ability to predict the earnings sensitivity of our loan
servicing and loan production activities in various interest
rate environments. Our hedging strategies also rely on
assumptions and projections regarding our assets and general
market factors. If these assumptions and projections prove to be
incorrect or our hedges do not adequately mitigate the impact of
changes in interest rates or prepayment speeds, we may incur
losses that could adversely affect our business, financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
Our business relies, in part, on warehouse, repurchase and
other credit facilities to fund mortgage loans and vehicle
purchases. If any of our warehouse, repurchase and other credit
facilities are terminated as a result of our breach of the
agreement or are not renewed, we may be unable to find
replacement financing on commercially favorable terms, if at
all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Our business relies, in part, on warehouse, repurchase and other
credit facilities to fund mortgage loans and vehicle purchases,
a significant portion of which is short-term. If any of our
warehouse, repurchase or other credit facilities are terminated
as a result of our breach of the agreement or are not renewed,
we may be unable to find replacement financing on commercially
favorable terms, if at all, which could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
The industries in which we operate are highly competitive
and, if we fail to meet the competitive challenges in our
industries, it could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
We operate in highly competitive industries that could become
even more competitive as a result of economic, legislative,
regulatory and technological changes. Certain of our competitors
are larger than we are and have access to greater financial
resources than we do. Competition for mortgage loans comes
primarily from large commercial banks and savings institutions,
which typically have lower funding costs and are less reliant
than we are on the sale of mortgages into the secondary markets
to maintain their liquidity. In addition, technological advances
and heightened
e-commerce
activity have generally increased consumers access to
products and services. This has intensified competition among
banking, as well as non-banking companies, in offering financial
products and services, with or without the need for a physical
presence. If competition in the mortgage services industry
continues to increase, it could have a material adverse effect
on our business, financial position, results of operations or
cash flows. 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, uncertainties regarding the proposed Merger or
otherwise.
The fleet management industry in which we operate is highly
competitive. We compete against large national competitors, such
as GE Commercial Finance Fleet Services, Wheels, Inc.,
Automotive Resources International, Lease Plan International and
other local and regional competitors, including numerous
competitors who focus on one or two products. Competitive
pressures could adversely affect our revenues and operating
results by decreasing our market share or depressing the prices
that we can charge.
Changes in existing U.S. government-sponsored
mortgage programs, or disruptions in the secondary markets for
mortgage loans could adversely affect our business, financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
Our ability to generate revenues through mortgage loan sales to
institutional investors depends to a significant degree on
programs administered by government-sponsored enterprises such
as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae and others that
facilitate the issuance of mortgage-backed securities in the
secondary market. These government-sponsored enterprises play a
powerful role in the residential mortgage industry, and we have
significant business relationships with them. Proposals are
being considered in Congress and by various regulatory
authorities
38
that would affect the manner in which these government-sponsored
enterprises conduct their business, including proposals to
establish a new independent agency to regulate the
government-sponsored enterprises, to require them to register
their stock with the SEC, to reduce or limit certain business
benefits that they receive from the U.S. government and to
limit the size of the mortgage loan portfolios that they may
hold. Any discontinuation of, or significant reduction in, the
operation of these government-sponsored enterprises could
adversely affect our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. Also, any significant adverse change
in the level of activity in the secondary market or the
underwriting criteria of these government-sponsored enterprises
could adversely affect our business, financial position, results
of operations or cash flows.
The businesses in which we engage are complex and heavily
regulated, and changes in the regulatory environment affecting
our businesses could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
We are subject to numerous federal, state and local laws, rules
and regulations that affect our business, including mortgage-
and real estate-related regulations such as RESPA, which
restricts the payment of fees or other consideration for the
referral of real estate settlement services, including mortgage
loans, as well as rules and regulations related to taxation,
vicarious liability, insurance and accounting. Our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments, in general, are
heavily regulated by mortgage lending laws at the federal, state
and local levels, and proposals for further regulation of the
financial services industry, including recently proposed and
enacted regulations addressing borrowers with blemished credit
and non-traditional mortgage products, are continually being
introduced. The establishment of the Mortgage Venture and the
continuing relationships between and among the Mortgage Venture,
Realogy and us are subject to the anti-kickback requirements of
RESPA.
The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires us to disclose certain
information about the mortgage loans we originate and purchase,
such as the race and gender of our customers, the disposition of
mortgage applications, income levels and interest rate (i.e.
annual percentage rate) information. We believe that publication
of such information may lead to heightened scrutiny of all
mortgage lenders loan pricing and underwriting practices.
We are also subject to privacy regulations. We manage highly
sensitive non-public personal information in all of our
operating segments, which is regulated by law. Problems with the
safeguarding and proper use of this information could result in
regulatory actions and negative publicity, which could adversely
affect our reputation, financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
With respect to our Fleet Management Services segment, we could
be subject to unlimited liability as the owner of leased
vehicles in two major provinces in Canada and are subject to
limited liability in the Province of Ontario and as many as
fifteen jurisdictions in the U.S. under the legal theory of
vicarious liability.
Congress, state legislatures, federal and state regulatory
agencies and other professional and regulatory entities review
existing laws, rules, regulations and policies and periodically
propose changes that could significantly affect or restrict the
manner in which we conduct our business. It is possible that one
or more legislative proposals may be adopted or one or more
regulatory changes, changes in interpretations of laws and
regulations, judicial decisions or governmental enforcement
actions may be implemented that would have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. For example, certain trends in the regulatory environment
could result in increased pressure from our clients for us to
assume more residual risk on the value of the vehicles at the
end of the lease term. If this were to occur, it could have a
material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Our failure to comply with such laws, rules or regulations,
whether actual or alleged, could expose us to fines, penalties
or potential litigation liabilities, including costs,
settlements and judgments, any of which could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
Our Fleet Management Services business contracts with
various government agencies, which may be subject to audit and
potential reduction of costs and fees.
Contracts with federal, state and local government agencies may
be subject to audits, which could result in the disallowance of
certain fees and costs. These audits may be conducted by
government agencies and can result in the disallowance of
significant costs and expenses if the auditing agency
determines, in its discretion, that certain costs
39
and expenses were not warranted or were excessive. Disallowance
of costs and expenses, if pervasive or significant, could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
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, 2006, approximately 49% 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, 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 an 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, if we are unable to obtain consents
to or waivers of certain rights of certain of our clients in
connection with the Merger and the transactions contemplated
thereby, it could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. We have entered into the Waiver with Merrill Lynch which
provides for a waiver of its rights in connection with a change
in control from the Merger, Mortgage Sale and transactions
contemplated by the Merger Agreement and the Mortgage Sale
Agreement. There can be no assurance that we will be able to
obtain similar waivers and amendments from our other financial
institution clients.
Unanticipated liabilities of our Fleet Management Services
segment as a result of damages in connection with motor vehicle
accidents under the theory of vicarious liability could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial position,
results of operations or cash flows.
Our Fleet Management Services segment could be liable for
damages in connection with motor vehicle accidents under the
theory of vicarious liability in certain jurisdictions in which
we do business. Under this theory, companies that lease motor
vehicles may be subject to liability for the tortious acts of
their lessees, even in situations where the leasing company has
not been negligent. Our Fleet Management Services segment is
subject to unlimited liability as the owner of leased vehicles
in two major provinces in Canada and is subject to limited
liability (e.g., in the event of a lessees failure to meet
certain insurance or financial responsibility requirements) in
the Province of Ontario and as many as fifteen jurisdictions in
the U.S. Although our lease contracts require that each
lessee indemnifies us against such liabilities, in the event
that a lessee lacks adequate insurance coverage or financial
resources to satisfy these indemnity provisions, we could be
liable for property damage or injuries caused by the vehicles
that we lease.
On August 10, 2005, a federal law was enacted in the
U.S. which preempted state vicarious liability laws that
imposed unlimited liability on a vehicle lessor. This law,
however, does not preempt existing state laws that impose
limited liability on a vehicle lessor in the event that certain
insurance or financial responsibility requirements for the
leased vehicles are not met. Prior to the enactment of this law,
our Fleet Management Services segment was subject to unlimited
liability in the District of Columbia, Maine and New York. It is
unclear at this time whether any of these three jurisdictions
will enact legislation imposing limited or an alternative form
of liability on vehicle lessors. In addition, the scope,
application and enforceability of this federal law have not been
fully tested. For example, a state trial court in New York has
ruled that the law is unconstitutional. The ultimate disposition
of this New York case and its impact on the federal law are
uncertain at this time.
Additionally, a law was enacted in the Province of Ontario
setting a cap of $1 million on a lessors liability
for personal injuries for accidents occurring on or after
March 1, 2006. The scope, application and enforceability of
this provincial law also have not been fully tested.
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 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
40
lines and private debt placements (secured and unsecured).
Declines in our credit ratings would 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 bank stand-by lines of credit, as well
as a capital structure and leverage appropriate for companies in
our industry.
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 (as defined in
Item 7. Managements Discussion and
AnalysisLiquidity and Capital
ResourcesIndebtednessUnsecured DebtCredit
Facilities) increased pursuant to the terms of each
agreement. As of May 22, 2007, our senior unsecured
long-term debt credit ratings from Moodys Investors
Service, Standard & Poors and Fitch Ratings were
Baa3, BBB− and BBB+, respectively, and our short-term debt
credit ratings were
P-3,
A-3 and F-2,
respectively.
Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how
we record and report our financial position and results of
operations, and they may require management to make assumptions
and estimates about matters that are inherently
uncertain.
Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we
record and report our financial position and results of
operations. We have identified several accounting policies as
being critical to the presentation of our financial position and
results of operations because they require management to make
particularly subjective or complex judgments about matters that
are inherently uncertain and because of the likelihood that
materially different amounts would be recorded under different
conditions or using different assumptions. Because of the
inherent uncertainty of the estimates and assumptions associated
with these critical accounting policies, we cannot provide any
assurance that we will not make subsequent significant
adjustments to the related amounts recorded in this
Form 10-K.
See Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of OperationsCritical
Accounting Policies for more information on our critical
accounting policies.
Changes in accounting standards issued by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board (the FASB) or other
standard-setting bodies may adversely affect our reported
revenues, profitability or financial position.
Our financial statements are subject to the application of
accounting principles generally accepted in the
U.S. (GAAP), which are periodically revised
and/or
expanded. The application of accounting principles is also
subject to varying interpretations over time. Accordingly, we
are required to adopt new or revised accounting standards or
comply with revised interpretations that are issued from
time-to-time
by recognized authoritative bodies, including the FASB and the
SEC. Those changes could adversely affect our reported revenues,
profitability or financial position. In addition, new or revised
accounting standards may impact certain of our leasing or
lending products, which could adversely affect our profitability.
We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information
provided by or on behalf of our customers and
counterparties.
In deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other
transactions with customers and counterparties, we may rely on
information furnished to us by or on behalf of customers and
counterparties, including financial statements and other
financial information. We also may rely on representations of
customers and counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness
of that information and, with respect to financial statements,
on reports of independent auditors. Our financial position and
results of operations could be negatively impacted to the extent
we rely on financial statements that do not comply with GAAP or
are materially misleading.
41
An interruption in or breach of our information systems
may result in lost business, regulatory actions or litigation or
may otherwise have an adverse effect on our reputation,
revenues, profitability and business prospects.
We rely heavily upon communications and information systems to
conduct our business. Any failure or interruption of our
information systems or the third-party information systems on
which we rely could cause underwriting or other delays and could
result in fewer loan applications being received, slower
processing of applications and reduced efficiency in loan
servicing in our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing
segments, as well as business interruptions in our Fleet
Management Services segment. We are required to comply with
significant federal, state and foreign laws and regulations in
various jurisdictions in which we operate, with respect to the
handling of consumer information, and a breach in the security
of our information systems could result in regulatory actions
and litigation against us. If a failure, interruption or breach
occurs, it may not be adequately addressed by us or the third
parties on which we rely. Such a failure, interruption or breach
could have an adverse effect on our reputation, revenues,
profitability and business prospects.
The success and growth of our business may be adversely
affected if we do not adapt to and implement technological
changes.
Our business is dependent upon technological advancement, such
as the ability to process loan applications over the internet,
accept electronic payments and provide immediate status updates
to our clients and customers. To the extent that we become
reliant on any particular technology or technological solution,
we may be harmed if the technology or technological solution:
|
|
|
|
§
|
becomes non-compliant with existing industry standards or is no
longer supported by vendors;
|
|
|
§
|
fails to meet or exceed the capabilities of our
competitors corresponding technologies or technological
solutions;
|
|
|
§
|
becomes increasingly expensive to service, retain and
update; or
|
|
|
§
|
becomes subject to third-party claims of copyright or patent
infringement.
|
Our failure to acquire necessary technologies or technological
solutions could limit our ability to remain competitive and
could also limit our ability to increase our cost efficiencies,
which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
Risks
Related to the Spin-Off
Our agreements with Cendant and Realogy may not reflect
terms that would have resulted from arms-length
negotiations between unaffiliated parties.
The agreements related to our separation from Cendant and the
continuation of certain business arrangements with Cendant and
Realogy, including the Separation Agreement, the Transition
Services Agreement, the Strategic Relationship Agreement, the
Marketing Agreement and other agreements, were not the result of
arms-length negotiations and thus may not reflect terms
that would have resulted from arms-length negotiations
between two unaffiliated parties. This could include, among
other things, the allocation of assets, liabilities, rights,
indemnities and other obligations between Cendant, Realogy and
us. See Item 1. BusinessArrangements with
Cendant and Arrangements with Realogy
for more information.
We may be required to satisfy certain indemnification
obligations to Cendant or Realogy, or we may not be able to
collect on indemnification rights from Cendant or
Realogy.
In connection with the Spin-Off, we and Cendant and our
respective affiliates have agreed to indemnify each other for
certain liabilities and obligations. Our indemnification
obligations could be significant. We are required to indemnify
Cendant for any taxes incurred by it and its affiliates as a
result of any action, misrepresentation or omission by us or one
of our subsidiaries that causes the distribution of our Common
stock by Cendant or transactions relating to the internal
reorganization to fail to qualify as tax-free. We are also
responsible for 13.7% of any taxes resulting from the failure of
the Spin-Off or transactions relating to the internal
reorganization to qualify as tax-free, which failure is not due
to the actions, misrepresentations or omissions of Cendant or us
or our
42
respective subsidiaries. Such percentage was based on the
relative pro forma net book values of Cendant and us 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. We cannot determine whether we will have to
indemnify Cendant or its current or former affiliates for any
substantial obligations in the future. There also can be no
assurance that if Cendant or Realogy is required to indemnify us
for any substantial obligations, they will be able to satisfy
those obligations.
Certain arrangements and agreements that we have entered
into with Cendant in connection with the Spin-Off could impact
our tax and other assets and liabilities in the future, and our
financial statements are subject to future adjustments as a
result of our obligations under those arrangements and
agreements.
In connection with the Spin-Off, we entered into certain
arrangements and agreements with Cendant that could impact our
tax and other assets and liabilities in the future. See
Item 1. BusinessArrangements with Cendant
for more information. For example, we are party to the Amended
Tax Sharing Agreement with Cendant that contains provisions
governing the allocation of liabilities for taxes between
Cendant and us, indemnification for certain tax liabilities and
responsibility for preparing and filing tax returns and
defending contested tax positions, as well as other tax-related
matters including the sharing of tax information and cooperating
with the preparation and filing of tax returns. Pursuant to the
Amended Tax Sharing Agreement, our tax assets and liabilities
may be affected by Cendants future tax returns and may
also be impacted by the results of audits of Cendants
prior tax years, including the settlement of any such audits.
See Note 17, Commitments and Contingencies in
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
Consequently, our financial statements are subject to future
adjustments which may not be fully resolved until the audits of
Cendants prior years returns are completed.
Our historical financial information may not be
representative of results we would have achieved as an
independent company or will achieve in the future.
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. For this reason, as
well as the inherent uncertainties of our business, 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. See Note 24,
Discontinued Operations in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
Risks
Related to our Common Stock
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 NYSE under the symbol PHH. From
February 1, 2005 through May 15, 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 when or whether the other conditions to the
completion of the Merger will be satisfied.
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
43
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 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, 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
Ventures trailing 12 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 the Mortgage Ventures
trailing 12 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
12 years of the term of the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement, or (b) if the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement is terminated on or after its tenth anniversary, two
years), and (ii) all costs reasonably incurred by
44
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, the Marketing Agreement and the 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 the Consent which, among other things,
provided for Realogys consent under the Realogy Agreements
to the Merger, the 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 for
more information.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
Our principal offices are located at 3000 Leadenhall Road, Mt.
Laurel, New Jersey 08054.
Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing Segments
Our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments have
centralized operations in approximately 800,000 square feet
of shared leased office space in the Mt. Laurel, New Jersey
area. We have a second area of centralized offices that are
shared by our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing
segments in Jacksonville, Florida, where approximately
235,000 square feet is occupied. In addition, our Mortgage
Production segment leases 30 smaller offices located throughout
the U.S. and our Mortgage Servicing segment leases one
additional office located in the state of New York.
Fleet
Management Services Segment
Our Fleet Management Services segment maintains a headquarters
office in a 210,000 square-foot office building in Sparks,
Maryland. Our Fleet Management Services segment also leases
office space and marketing centers in five locations in Canada
and has five smaller regional locations throughout the U.S.
|
|
Item 3.
|
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 purported class actions were
filed against us, our Chief Executive Officer and our former
Chief Financial Officer in the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs seek to represent an
alleged 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 U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
against us, our former Chief Financial Officer and each member
of our Board of Directors. Both of these derivative actions have
since been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs.
Following the announcement of the Merger in March 2007, two
purported 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 seek to represent an alleged 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
45
duties by failing to maximize stockholder value in approving the
Merger Agreement. On April 5, 2007, the defendants moved to
dismiss the plaintiffs claims.
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 respond appropriately in defending against the alleged
claims in each of these matters. The ultimate resolution of
these matters could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
None.
46
PART II
Item 5. Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market
Price of Common Stock
Shares of our Common stock are listed on the NYSE under the
symbol PHH and began trading on that exchange
immediately after the Spin-Off from Cendant on February 1,
2005. The following table sets forth the high and low sales
prices for our Common stock as reported by the NYSE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Price
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
February 1, 2005 to
March 31, 2005
|
|
$
|
22.65
|
|
|
$
|
20.04
|
|
April 1, 2005 to
June 30, 2005
|
|
|
25.96
|
|
|
|
21.21
|
|
July 1, 2005 to
September 30, 2005
|
|
|
31.13
|
|
|
|
25.60
|
|
October 1, 2005 to
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
30.44
|
|
|
|
25.45
|
|
January 1, 2006 to
March 31, 2006
|
|
|
29.29
|
|
|
|
23.70
|
|
April 1, 2006 to
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
27.99
|
|
|
|
25.03
|
|
July 1, 2006 to
September 30, 2006
|
|
|
27.99
|
|
|
|
23.99
|
|
October 1, 2006 to
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
29.35
|
|
|
|
26.67
|
|
As of April 30, 2007, there were approximately 7,400
holders of record of our Common stock. As of that date, there
were approximately 67,000 total holders of our Common stock
including beneficial holders whose securities are held in the
name of a registered clearing agency or its nominee.
Dividend
Policy
No dividends were declared during the years ended
December 31, 2006 or 2005.
The declaration and payment of future dividends by us will be
subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and will
depend upon many factors, including our financial condition,
earnings, capital requirements of our operating subsidiaries,
legal requirements, regulatory constraints and other factors
deemed relevant by our Board of Directors. Many of our
subsidiaries (including certain consolidated partnerships,
trusts and other non-corporate entities) are subject to
restrictions on their ability to pay dividends or otherwise
transfer funds to other consolidated subsidiaries and,
ultimately, to PHH Corporation (the parent company). These
restrictions relate to loan agreements applicable to certain of
our asset-backed debt arrangements and to regulatory
restrictions applicable to the equity of our insurance
subsidiary, Atrium. The aggregate restricted net assets of these
subsidiaries totaled $1.0 billion as of December 31,
2006. These restrictions on net assets of certain subsidiaries,
however, do not directly limit our ability to pay dividends from
consolidated Retained earnings. Pursuant to the MTN Indenture
(as defined in Item 7. Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsLiquidity and Capital
ResourcesIndebtednessUnsecured DebtTerm
Notes), we may not pay dividends on our Common stock in
the event that our ratio of debt to equity exceeds 6.5:1, after
giving effect to the dividend payment. The MTN Indenture also
requires that we maintain a debt to tangible equity ratio of not
more than 10:1. In addition, the Amended Credit Facility, the
Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender Support Facility
(each as defined in Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsLiquidity and Capital
ResourcesIndebtednessUnsecured DebtCredit
Facilities) each include various covenants that may
restrict our ability to pay dividends on our Common stock,
including covenants which 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. Based on our assessment of these
requirements as of December 31, 2006, we do not believe
that these restrictions will materially limit dividend payments
on our Common stock in the foreseeable future. However, we do
not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our Common stock in
the foreseeable future.
47
In addition, the Merger Agreement contains certain restrictions
on our ability to pay dividends on our Common stock as well as
on the payment of intercompany dividends by certain of our
subsidiaries without the prior written consent of GE.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
There were no share repurchases during the quarter ended
December 31, 2006.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
As discussed under Item 1. Business, on
February 1, 2005, we began operating as an independent,
publicly traded company pursuant to the Spin-Off from Cendant.
During 2005, prior to the Spin-Off, we underwent an internal
reorganization whereby we distributed our former relocation and
fuel card businesses to Cendant, and Cendant contributed its
former appraisal business, 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 from December 31, 2002 until it contributed STARS
to us as part of the internal reorganization discussed above.
Pursuant to SFAS No. 141, 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, 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 24, Discontinued
Operations in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K
for more information).
In connection with and in order to consummate the Spin-Off, on
January 27, 2005, our Board of Directors authorized and
approved a 52,684-for-one Common stock split, to be effected by
a stock dividend at such ratio. The record date with regard to
such stock split was January 28, 2005. The cash dividends
declared per share and earnings per share amounts presented
below reflect this stock split.
48
The selected consolidated financial data set forth below is
derived from our audited Consolidated Financial Statements for
the periods indicated. 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. For this reason, as well as the inherent
uncertainties of our business, 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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended and As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005(1)
|
|
|
2004(2)
|
|
|
2003(3)
|
|
|
2002(4)
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of
Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
2,288
|
|
|
$
|
2,471
|
|
|
$
|
2,397
|
|
|
$
|
2,636
|
|
|
$
|
1,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
157
|
|
|
$
|
(55
|
)
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations, net of income
taxes(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting
change, net of income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
212
|
|
|
$
|
220
|
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.38
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
2.97
|
|
|
$
|
(1.06
|
)
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
2.24
|
|
|
|
1.87
|
|
|
|
1.68
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting
change, net of income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.67
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.36
|
|
|
$
|
4.03
|
|
|
$
|
4.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.36
|
|
|
$
|
1.77
|
|
|
$
|
2.95
|
|
|
$
|
(1.06
|
)
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
2.22
|
|
|
|
1.85
|
|
|
|
1.68
|
|
Cumulative effect of accounting
change, net of income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.67
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.34
|
|
|
$
|
3.99
|
|
|
$
|
4.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared per
share(6)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.66
|
|
|
$
|
2.66
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets
Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
10,760
|
|
|
$
|
9,965
|
|
|
$
|
11,399
|
|
|
$
|
11,641
|
|
|
$
|
10,242
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
6,744
|
|
|
|
6,504
|
|
|
|
6,829
|
|
|
|
6,237
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,515
|
|
|
|
1,521
|
|
|
|
1,921
|
|
|
|
1,855
|
|
|
|
1,769
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Income from continuing operations
and Net income for the year ended December 31, 2005
included pre-tax Spin-Off related expenses of $41 million.
See Note 2, Spin-Off from Cendant in the Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
|
(2) |
|
During 2004, we acquired First
Fleet, a national provider of fleet management services to
companies that maintain private truck fleets. See Note 3,
Acquisitions in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
|
(3) |
|
Income from continuing operations
and Net income for the year ended December 31, 2003
included a pre-tax goodwill impairment charge of
$102 million ($96 million net of income taxes). Also
during 2003, we consolidated Bishops Gate Residential
Mortgage Trust (Bishops Gate) pursuant to FASB
Interpretation No. 46, Consolidation of Variable
Interest Entities (FIN 46) and recognized
the related cumulative effect of accounting change.
|
|
(4) |
|
Loss from continuing operations and
Net income for the year ended December 31, 2002 included a
goodwill impairment charge of $100 million.
|
|
(5) |
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations, net of income taxes includes the after-tax results
of discontinued operations.
|
|
(6) |
|
Dividends declared during the years
ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 were paid to our former
parent, Cendant.
|
49
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with
Item 1. Business and our Consolidated Financial
Statements and the notes thereto included in this
Form 10-K.
The following discussion should also be read in conjunction with
the Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements and the risks and uncertainties described in
Item 1A. Risk Factors set forth above. 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 December 31, 2006.
For additional information regarding material weaknesses, see
Item 9A. 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 which includes PHH Home
Loans. PHH Home Loans is a mortgage venture that we maintain
with Realogy that began operations in October 2005. Our Mortgage
Production segment generated 14%, 21% and 29% of our Net
revenues for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and
2004, respectively. Our Mortgage Servicing segment services
mortgage loans that either PHH Mortgage or PHH Home Loans
originated. Our Mortgage Servicing segment also purchases MSRs
and acts as a subservicer for certain clients that own the
underlying MSRs. Our Mortgage Servicing segment generated 6%,
10% and 5% of our Net revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Our Fleet
Management Services segment provides commercial fleet management
services to corporate clients and government agencies throughout
the U.S. and Canada through PHH Arval. Our Fleet Management
Services segment generated 80%, 69%, and 66% of our Net revenues
for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively.
For all periods presented in this
Form 10-K
prior to February 1, 2005, 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. During 2006, Cendant changed its name to
Avis Budget Group, Inc.; however, within this
Form 10-K,
our former parent company, now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc.
(NYSE: CAR) is referred to as Cendant. On
February 1, 2005, we began operating as an independent,
publicly traded company pursuant to the Spin-Off from Cendant.
See Item 1. Business for a discussion of the
Spin-Off.
During 2005, prior to the Spin-Off, we underwent an internal
reorganization whereby we distributed our former relocation and
fuel card businesses to Cendant, and Cendant contributed its
former appraisal business, 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.
Pursuant to SFAS No. 141, 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, 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 24, Discontinued
Operations in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K
for more information).
In connection with the Spin-Off, we entered into several
agreements and arrangements with Cendant and its real estate
services division, Realogy, that we expect to continue to be
material to our business going forward. Cendant completed the
Realogy Spin-Off effective July 31, 2006. On April 10,
2007, Realogy became a wholly owned subsidiary of Domus Holdings
Corp., an affiliate of Apollo Management VI, L.P., following the
completion of a merger and related transactions. For a
discussion of these agreements and arrangements, see
Item 1. BusinessArrangements with Cendant
and Arrangements with Realogy.
50
We, through our subsidiary, PHH Broker Partner, and Realogy,
through its subsidiary, Realogy Venture Partner, formed the
Mortgage Venture. 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 originates and
sells mortgage loans primarily sourced through Realogys
owned real estate brokerage business, NRT and its owned
relocation business, Cartus. 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 commenced operations, and 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 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, following a
two-year notice, or non-renewal by us after 25 years
subject to delivery of notice between January 31, 2027 and
January 31, 2028. 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 the Realogy Entities (excluding the independent
sales associates of any Realogy Franchisee acting in such
capacity), (ii) all customers of the Realogy Entities
(excluding Realogy Franchisees or any employee or independent
sales associate thereof acting in such capacity) and
(iii) all
U.S.-based
employees of Cendant. See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture
Between Realogy and PHH and Strategic
Relationship Agreement for a description of the terms of
the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement and the Strategic
Relationship Agreement.
The Mortgage Venture is consolidated within our financial
statements, and Realogys ownership interest is presented
in our financial statements as a minority interest. (See
Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting
PoliciesBasis of Presentation and Note 2,
Spin-Off from Cendant in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.)
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
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.
Prior to the Spin-Off and in the ordinary course of business, we
were allocated certain expenses from Cendant for corporate
functions including executive management, accounting, tax,
finance, human resources, information technology, legal and
facility-related expenses. Cendant allocated these corporate
expenses to subsidiaries conducting ongoing operations based on
a percentage of the subsidiaries forecasted revenues. Such
expenses amounted to $3 million and $32 million during
the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Although we had the ability to access the public debt market or
available credit facilities for required funding, prior to the
Spin-Off, Cendant provided intercompany funding to us in order
to lower the total cost of funding for the consolidated entity
through the use of its available cash. During the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004, interest expense related to
such intercompany funding was not significant. These
intercompany funding arrangements with Cendant terminated at the
time of the Spin-Off.
In addition, during 2005, prior to and as part of the Spin-Off,
Cendant made a cash contribution to us of $100 million and
we distributed assets net of liabilities of $593 million to
Cendant. Such amount included the historical cost of the net
assets of our former relocation and fuel card businesses,
certain other assets and liabilities per the Spin-Off Agreements
and the net amount of forgiveness of certain payables and
receivables, including income taxes, between us, our former
relocation and fuel card businesses and Cendant.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, we paid Cendant
$140 million (or $2.66 per share after giving effect
to the 52,684-for-one stock split effective January 28,
2005) of cash dividends. We did not pay cash dividends to
Cendant during the year ended December 31, 2005.
51
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. For this reason, as
well as the inherent uncertainties of our business, 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 control 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. Of this $44 million, we recorded
$32 million and $12 million in Other operating
expenses in the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. While
we do not expect fees and expenses relating to the preparation
of our financial results for future periods to remain at this
level, in 2007, we expect them to remain significantly higher
than historical fees and expenses.
On March 15, 2007, we entered into the Merger Agreement
with GE and its wholly owned subsidiary, Jade Merger Sub, Inc.
to be acquired (as previously defined, the Merger).
In conjunction with the Merger, GE entered into an agreement to
sell our mortgage operations to Blackstone. The Merger is
subject to approval by our stockholders and 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 NYSE.
Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing Segments
Mortgage
Production Segment
Our Mortgage Production segment principally provides fee-based
mortgage loan origination services for others (including
brokered mortgage loans) and sells originated mortgage loans
into the secondary market. PHH Mortgage generally sells all
mortgage loans that it originates to investors (which include a
variety of institutional investors) within 60 days of
origination. We originate mortgage loans through three principal
business channels: financial institutions (on a private-label
basis), real estate brokers (including brokers associated with
brokerages owned or franchised by Realogy and independent
brokers) and relocation (mortgage services for clients of
Cartus). We also purchase mortgage loans originated by third
parties. Fee income consists primarily of fees collected on
loans originated for others (including brokered loans) and is
recorded as revenue when we have completed our obligations
related to the underlying loan transaction. Loan origination
fees, commitment fees paid in connection with the sale of loans
and certain direct loan origination costs associated with loans
are deferred until such loans are sold. MLHS are recorded on our
balance sheet at the lower of cost or market value, which is
computed by the aggregate method, net of deferred loan
origination fees and costs. Sales of mortgage loans are recorded
on the date that ownership is transferred. Gains or losses on
sales of mortgage loans are recognized based upon the difference
between the selling price and the carrying value of the related
mortgage loans sold.
Upon the closing of a residential mortgage loan originated or
purchased by us, the mortgage loan is typically warehoused for a
period of up to 60 days and then sold into the secondary
market. MLHS represent mortgage loans originated or purchased by
us and held until sold to investors. We principally sell our
mortgage loans directly to government-sponsored entities, such
as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae. Upon the sale, we
generally retain the MSRs and servicing obligations of the
underlying mortgage loans.
Our Mortgage Production segment also includes STARS, our
appraisal services business. The appraisal services business is
closely linked to the processes by which our Mortgage Production
segment originates mortgage loans. STARS derives substantially
all of its business from our three principal business channels
described above.
52
Mortgage
Servicing Segment
Our Mortgage Servicing segment services residential mortgage
loans. Upon the sale of the loans originated in or purchased by
the Mortgage Production segment, we generally retain the MSRs
and servicing obligations of those underlying loans. An MSR is
the right to receive a portion of the interest coupon and fees
collected from the mortgagor for performing specified mortgage
servicing activities, which consist of collecting loan payments,
remitting principal and interest payments to investors, holding
escrow funds for payment of mortgage-related expenses such as
taxes and insurance and otherwise administering our mortgage
loan servicing portfolio.
The capitalization of MSRs occurs upon the sale of the
underlying mortgage loans into the secondary market. We adopted
SFAS No. 156, Accounting for Servicing of
Financial Assets (SFAS No. 156) on
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. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 156,
servicing rights were amortized in proportion to estimated net
servicing income and such amortization is recorded in
Amortization and recovery of (provision for) impairment of
mortgage servicing rights in our Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.
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 Consolidated
Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31,
2006. Loan servicing income is comprised of several components,
including recurring servicing and other ancillary fees and net
reinsurance income from our wholly owned reinsurance company,
Atrium. Recurring servicing fees are recognized upon receipt of
the coupon payment from the borrower and recorded net of agency
guaranty fees. Loan servicing income is receivable only out of
interest collected from mortgagors, and is recorded as income
when collected. Late charges and other miscellaneous fees
collected from mortgagors are also recorded as income when
collected. Costs associated with loan servicing are charged to
expense as incurred.
The fair value of the MSRs is estimated based upon projections
of expected future cash flows considering prepayment estimates
(developed using a model described below), our historical
prepayment rates, portfolio characteristics, interest rates
based on interest rate yield curves, implied volatility and
other economic factors. The model to forecast prepayment rates
used in the development of expected future cash flows is based
on historical observations of prepayment behavior in similar
periods, comparing current mortgage interest rates to the
mortgage interest rates in our servicing portfolio, and
incorporates loan characteristics (e.g., loan type and note
rate) and factors such as recent prepayment experience, previous
refinance opportunities and estimated levels of home equity.
Prior to January 1, 2006, MSRs were routinely evaluated for
impairment, at least on a quarterly basis. Fair value was
estimated using the method described above. In addition, the
loans underlying the MSRs were stratified into note rate pools
based on certain risk characteristics including product type and
rate. We measured impairment for each stratum by comparing its
estimated fair value to the carrying amount. Temporary
impairment was recorded through a valuation allowance in the
period of occurrence. We periodically evaluated our MSRs to
determine if the carrying value before the application of the
valuation allowance was recoverable. When we determined that a
portion of the asset was not recoverable, the asset and the
previously designated valuation were reduced to reflect the
write-down.
Our Mortgage Servicing segment also includes our reinsurance
business, which we conduct through Atrium, our wholly owned
subsidiary and a New York domiciled monoline mortgage guaranty
insurance corporation. Atrium receives premiums from certain
third-party insurance companies and provides reinsurance solely
in respect of primary mortgage insurance issued by those
third-party insurance companies on loans originated through our
various loan origination channels.
Arrangements
with Cendant and Realogy
Prior to the Spin-Off, we entered into various agreements with
Cendant in connection with the Spin-Off to provide for our
separation from Cendant and the transition of our business as an
independent company, including: (i) the Separation
Agreement, (ii) the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement and
(iii) the Transition Services Agreement. (See
Item 1. BusinessArrangements with Cendant
for more information about these agreements and
Item 1A. Risk FactorsRisks
Related to the Spin-OffCertain arrangements and agreements
that we have entered into with Cendant in connection with the
Spin-Off could impact our tax and other assets and liabilities
in the
53
future, and our financial statements are subject to future
adjustments as a result of our obligations under those
arrangements and agreements. for a
discussion of some of the risks associated with these
agreements.)
The Amended Tax Sharing Agreement contains provisions governing
the allocation of liabilities for taxes between Cendant and us,
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. Our tax basis in certain assets
may be adjusted in the future, and we may be required to remit
tax benefits ultimately realized by us to Cendant in certain
circumstances. Certain of the effects of future adjustments
relating to years we were 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.
We also entered into several agreements with Cendants real
estate services division prior to the Spin-Off to provide for
the continuation of certain business arrangements, including
(i) the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, (ii) the
Strategic Relationship Agreement, (iii) the Marketing
Agreement and (iv) the Trademark License Agreements. (See
Item 1. BusinessArrangements with Realogy
for a description of these agreements.) In connection with the
Spin-Off, we, through PHH Broker Partner, and Cendants
real estate services division, through Realogy Venture Partner,
formed the Mortgage Venture. (See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with RealogyMortgage Venture
Between Realogy and PHH for a discussion of the Mortgage
Venture.) The termination of our rights under our agreements
with Realogy, including the termination of the Mortgage Venture
or of our exclusivity rights under the Strategic Relationship
Agreement or the Marketing Agreement, could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations and cash flows. See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with Realogy and
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Regulatory
Trends
The regulatory environments in which we operate have an impact
on the activities in which we may engage, how the activities may
be carried out and the profitability of those activities. (See
Item 1A. Risk FactorsRisks Related to our
BusinessThe businesses in which we engage are complex and
heavily regulated, and changes in the regulatory environment
affecting our businesses could have a material adverse effect on
our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.) Our Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing
segments are subject to numerous federal, state and local laws
and regulations, including those relating to real estate
settlement procedures, fair lending, fair credit reporting,
truth in lending, federal and state disclosure and licensing.
Changes to laws, regulations or regulatory policies can affect
our operations. As discussed in Item 1.
BusinessOur BusinessMortgage Production and Mortgage
Servicing SegmentsMortgage Regulation, RESPA and
state real estate brokerage laws restrict the payment of fees or
other consideration for the referral of real estate settlement
services. The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires us to
disclose certain information about the mortgage loans we
originate and purchase, such as race and gender of our
customers, the disposition of mortgage applications, income
levels and interest rate (i.e. annual percentage rate)
information. We believe that publication of such information may
lead to heightened scrutiny of all mortgage lenders loan
pricing and underwriting practices. The establishment of the
Mortgage Venture and the continuing relationships between and
among the Mortgage Venture, Realogy and us are subject to the
anti-kickback requirements of RESPA. There can be no assurance
that more restrictive laws, rules and regulations will not be
adopted in the future or that existing laws, rules and
regulations will be applied in a manner that may adversely
impact our business or make regulatory compliance more difficult
or expensive.
Atrium, our wholly owned insurance subsidiary, is subject to
insurance regulations in the State of New York relating to,
among other things: standards of solvency that must be met and
maintained; the licensing of insurers and their agents; the
nature of and limitations on investments; premium rates;
restrictions on the size of risks that may be insured under a
single policy; reserves and provisions for unearned premiums,
losses and other obligations; deposits of securities for the
benefit of policyholders; approval of policy forms and the
regulation of market conduct, including the use of credit
information in underwriting as well as other underwriting and
claims practices. The New York State Insurance Department also
conducts periodic examinations and requires the filing of annual
and other reports relating to the financial condition of
companies and other matters.
54
As a result of our ownership of Atrium, we are subject to New
Yorks insurance holding company statute, as well as
certain other laws, which, among other things, limit
Atriums ability to declare and pay dividends except from
restricted cash in excess of the aggregate of Atriums
paid-in capital, paid-in surplus and contingency reserve.
Additionally, anyone seeking to acquire, directly or indirectly,
10% or more of Atriums outstanding common stock, or
otherwise proposing to engage in a transaction involving a
change in control of Atrium, will be required to obtain the
prior approval of the New York Superintendent of Insurance.
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. 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 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, uncertainties
regarding the proposed 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 pre-tax results by
approximately $40 million. (See Item 1A. Risk
FactorsRisks Related to our BusinessDownward trends
in the real estate market could adversely impact our business,
profitability or results of operations. for more
information.)
Seasonality
Our Mortgage Production segment is generally subject to seasonal
trends. These seasonal trends reflect the pattern in the
national housing market. Home sales typically rise during the
spring and summer seasons and decline during the fall and winter
seasons. Seasonality has less of an effect on mortgage
refinancing activity, which is primarily driven by prevailing
mortgage rates. Our Mortgage Servicing segment is generally not
subject to seasonal trends; however, delinquency rates typically
rise temporarily during the winter months, driven by mortgagor
payment patterns.
Inflation
An increase in inflation could have a significant impact on our
Mortgage Production and Mortgage Servicing segments. Interest
rates normally increase during periods of rising inflation.
Historically, as interest rates increase, mortgage loan
production decreases, particularly production from loan
refinancing. An environment of gradual interest rate increases
may, however, signify an improving economy or increasing real
estate values, which in turn may stimulate increased home buying
activity. Generally, in periods of reduced mortgage loan
production, the associated profit margins also decline due to
increased competition among mortgage loan originators and higher
unit costs, thus further reducing our mortgage production
revenues. Conversely, in a rising interest rate
55
environment, our mortgage loan servicing revenues generally
increase because mortgage prepayment rates tend to decrease,
extending the average life of our servicing portfolio and
increasing the value of our MSRs. See discussion below under
Market and Credit Risk, Item 1A.
Risk FactorsRisks Related to our BusinessOur
business is affected by fluctuations in interest rates, and if
we fail to manage our exposure to changes in interest rates
effectively, our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows could be adversely affected. and
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures
About Market Risk.
Fleet
Management Services Segment
We provide fleet management services to corporate clients and
government agencies. These services include management and
leasing of vehicles and other fee-based services for
clients vehicle fleets. We lease vehicles primarily to
corporate fleet users under open-end operating and direct
financing lease arrangements where the client bears
substantially all of the vehicles residual value risk. The
lease term under the open-end lease agreements provide for a
minimum lease term of 12 months and after the minimum term,
the leases may be continued at the lessees election for
successive monthly renewals. In limited circumstances, we lease
vehicles under closed-end leases where we bear all of the
vehicles residual value risk. For operating leases, lease
revenues, which contain a depreciation component, an interest
component and a management fee component, are recognized over
the lease term of the vehicle, which encompasses the minimum
lease term and the
month-to-month
renewals. For direct financing leases, lease revenues contain an
interest component and a management fee component. The interest
component is recognized using the effective interest method over
the lease term of the vehicle, which encompasses the minimum
lease term and the
month-to-month
renewals. Amounts charged to the lessees for interest are
determined in accordance with the pricing supplement to the
respective lease agreement and are generally calculated on a
variable-rate basis that varies
month-to-month
in accordance with changes in the variable-rate index. Amounts
charged to lessees for interest may also be based on a fixed
rate that would remain constant for the life of the lease.
Amounts charged to the lessees for depreciation are based on the
straight-line depreciation of the vehicle over its expected
lease term. Management fees are recognized on a straight-line
basis over the life of the lease. Revenue for other services is
recognized when such services are provided to the lessee.
We sell certain of our truck and equipment leases to third-party
banks and individual financial institutions. When we sell
operating leases, we sell the underlying assets and assign any
rights to the leases, including future leasing revenues, to the
banks or financial institutions. Upon the transfer of the title
and the assignment of the rights associated with the operating
leases, we record the proceeds from the sale as revenue and
recognize an expense for the undepreciated cost of the asset
sold. Upon the sale or transfer of rights to direct financing
leases, the net gain or loss is recorded. Under certain of these
sales agreements, we retain some residual risk in connection
with the fair value of the asset at lease termination.
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 2006, 2005
and 2004 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 uncertainties
regarding the proposed Merger.
Vicarious
Liability
Our Fleet Management Services segment could be liable for
damages in connection with motor vehicle accidents under the
theory of vicarious liability in certain jurisdictions in which
we do business. Under this theory, companies that lease motor
vehicles may be subject to liability for the tortious acts of
their lessees, even in situations where the leasing company has
not been negligent. Our Fleet Management Services segment is
subject to unlimited liability as the owner of leased vehicles
in two major provinces in Canada and is subject to limited
liability (e.g., in the event of a lessees failure to meet
certain insurance or financial responsibility requirements) in
the Province of Ontario and as many as fifteen jurisdictions in
the U.S. Although our lease contracts require that each
lessee indemnifies us against such liabilities, in the event
that a lessee lacks adequate insurance coverage or financial
56
resources to satisfy these indemnity provisions we could be
liable for property damage or injuries caused by the vehicles
that we lease.
On August 10, 2005, a federal law was enacted in the
U.S. which preempted state vicarious liability laws that
imposed unlimited liability on a vehicle lessor. This law,
however, does not preempt existing state laws that impose
limited liability on a vehicle lessor in the event that certain
insurance or financial responsibility requirements for the
leased vehicles are not met. Prior to the enactment of this law,
our Fleet Management Services segment was subject to unlimited
liability in the District of Columbia, Maine and New York. It is
unclear at this time whether any of these three jurisdictions
will enact legislation imposing limited or an alternative form
of liability on vehicle lessors. In addition, the scope,
application and enforceability of this federal law have not been
fully tested. For example, a state trial court in New York has
ruled that the law is unconstitutional. The ultimate disposition
of this New York case and its impact on the federal law are
uncertain at this time.
Additionally, a law was enacted in the Province of Ontario
setting a cap of $1 million on a lessors liability
for personal injuries for accidents occurring on or after
March 1, 2006. The scope, application and enforceability of
this provincial law also have not been fully tested.
Seasonality
The results of operations of our Fleet Management Services
segment are generally not seasonal.
Inflation
Inflation does not have a significant impact on our Fleet
Management Services segment.
Market
and Credit Risk
We are exposed to market and credit risks. See
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures
About Market Risk and Item 1A. Risk
FactorsRisks
Related to our
BusinessOur
business is affected by fluctuations in interest rates, and if
we fail to manage our exposure to changes in interest rates
effectively, our business, financial position, results of
operations or cash flows could be adversely affected. and
Certain hedging strategies that we use to manage
interest rate risk associated with our MSRs and other
mortgage-related assets may not be successful in mitigating
those risks.
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 manage and reduce our interest rate risk
through various economic hedging strategies and financial
instruments, including swap contracts, forward delivery
commitments, futures and options contracts.
Credit
Risk
While the majority of the mortgage loans serviced by us were
sold without recourse, we are exposed to consumer credit risk
related to loans sold with recourse. The majority of the loans
sold with recourse represent sales under a program where we
retain the credit risk for a limited period of time and only for
a specific default event. The retained credit risk represents
the unpaid principal balance of mortgage loans. For these loans,
we record a recourse liability, which is determined based upon
our history of actual loss experience under the program. This
liability and the related activity are not significant to our
results of operations or financial position. We are also exposed
to credit risk for our clients under the lease and service
agreements for PHH Arval.
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
57
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.
Results
of Operations 2006 vs. 2005
Consolidated
Results
Our consolidated results of continuing operations for 2006 and
2005 were comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
2,288
|
|
|
$
|
2,471
|
|
|
$
|
(183
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spin-Off related expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Other expenses
|
|
|
2,292
|
|
|
|
2,271
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
2,292
|
|
|
|
2,312
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before income taxes and minority interest
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before minority interest
|
|
$
|
(14
|
)
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2006, our Net revenues decreased by $183 million
(7%) compared to 2005, primarily due to decreases of
$195 million and $105 million in our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments, respectively, that
were partially offset by a $119 million increase in our
Fleet Management Services segment. In addition, Net revenues
during 2006 included the elimination of $2 million in
intersegment revenues recorded by the Mortgage Servicing
segment. Our Income from continuing operations before income
taxes and minority interest during 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 $163 million
during 2006 compared to 2005 due to unfavorable changes of
$132 million and $96 million in our Mortgage
Production and Mortgage Servicing segments, respectively, that
were partially offset by the Spin-Off related expenses recorded
in 2005, a favorable change of $22 million in our Fleet
Management Services segment, and a $2 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
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended
December 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. We evaluated the impact of the
adjustments and determined that they are not material,
individually or in the aggregate to any of the years affected,
specifically the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, 2003
or 2002.
Our effective income tax rates were 249.1% and 54.7% for 2006
and 2005, respectively. The Provision for income taxes decreased
$77 million to $10 million in 2006 from
$87 million in 2005 primarily due to the following:
(i) a decrease of $64 million due to the unfavorable
change in (Loss) income from continuing operations before income
taxes and minority interest from 2005 to 2006; (ii) a
$5 million decrease due to our mix of income and loss from
our operations by entity and state income tax jurisdiction in
2006, which created a significant change in the 2006 state
income tax effective rate (losses in jurisdictions with higher
income tax rates, income in jurisdictions with lower income tax
rates and near breakeven pre-tax results on a consolidated
basis) in comparison to 2005; (iii) a decrease of
$6 million related to net deferred income tax charges
representing the change in estimated deferred state
58
income taxes for state apportionment factors in 2006 as compared
to 2005 and (iv) a $3 million decrease in income tax
contingency reserves expensed in 2006 as compared to 2005.
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 and intersegment eliminations 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 income (loss) of consolidated
entities, net of income taxes. The Mortgage Production segment
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
interim marketing agreements with NRT and Cartus, wherein PHH
Mortgage paid fees for services provided. These interim
marketing agreements terminated when the Mortgage Venture
commenced operations. The provisions of the Strategic
Relationship Agreement and the Marketing Agreement thereafter
govern the manner in which the Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage
are recommended by Realogy. (See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements with RealogyStrategic
Relationship Agreement and Marketing
Agreements for a discussion of the terms on which the
Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage are recommended by Realogy.)
Our segment results were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment (Loss)
Profit(1)
|
|
|
|
Net Revenues
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Mortgage Production segment
|
|
$
|
329
|
|
|
$
|
524
|
|
|
$
|
(195
|
)
|
|
$
|
(152
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(135
|
)
|
Mortgage Servicing segment
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
(96
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Services
|
|
|
460
|
|
|
|
760
|
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
(231
|
)
|
Fleet Management Services segment
|
|
|
1,830
|
|
|
|
1,711
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments
|
|
|
2,290
|
|
|
|
2,471
|
|
|
|
(181
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
(209
|
)
|
Other(2)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43
|
)
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
$
|
2,288
|
|
|
$
|
2,471
|
|
|
$
|
(183
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
(166
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The following is a reconciliation
of (Loss) income from continuing operations before income taxes
and minority interest to segment (loss) profit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
(Loss)
income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
Minority
interest in income (loss) of consolidated entities, net of
income taxes
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
(loss) profit
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Net revenues reported under the
heading Other for 2006 represent the elimination of
$2 million of intersegment revenues recorded by the
Mortgage Servicing segment, which are offset in segment loss by
the elimination of $2 million of intersegment expense
recorded by the Fleet Management Services segment. Segment loss
reported under the heading Other for 2005 was primarily
$41 million of Spin-Off related expenses.
|
59
Mortgage
Production Segment
Net revenues decreased by $195 million (37%) in 2006
compared to 2005. As discussed in greater detail below, Net
revenues were impacted by decreases of $102 million in Gain
on sale of mortgage loans, net, $56 million in Mortgage
fees, $36 million in Mortgage net finance income and
$1 million in Other income.
Segment loss increased by $135 million (794%) in 2006
compared to 2005 driven by the $195 million decrease in Net
revenues and a $3 million unfavorable change in Minority
interest in income (loss) of consolidated entities, net of
income taxes, which were partially offset by a $63 million
(12%) decrease in Total expenses. The $63 million decrease
in Total expenses was primarily due to decreases of
$56 million and $10 million in Salaries and related
expenses and Other operating expenses, respectively, that were
partially offset by a $4 million increase in Other
depreciation and amortization.
60
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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
average loan amount)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans closed to be sold
|
|
$
|
32,390
|
|
|
$
|
36,219
|
|
|
$
|
(3,829
|
)
|
|
|
(11)%
|
|
Fee-based closings
|
|
|
8,872
|
|
|
|
11,966
|
|
|
|
(3,094
|
)
|
|
|
(26)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
41,262
|
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
(6,923
|
)
|
|
|
(14)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase closings
|
|
$
|
28,509
|
|
|
$
|
32,098
|
|
|
$
|
(3,589
|
)
|
|
|
(11)%
|
|
Refinance closings
|
|
|
12,753
|
|
|
|
16,087
|
|
|
|
(3,334
|
)
|
|
|
(21)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
41,262
|
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
(6,923
|
)
|
|
|
(14)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate
|
|
$
|
23,336
|
|
|
$
|
22,681
|
|
|
$
|
655
|
|
|
|
3 %
|
|
Adjustable rate
|
|
|
17,926
|
|
|
|
25,504
|
|
|
|
(7,578
|
)
|
|
|
(30)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
41,262
|
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
(6,923
|
)
|
|
|
(14)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of loans closed (units)
|
|
|
206,063
|
|
|
|
233,810
|
|
|
|
(27,747
|
)
|
|
|
(12)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average loan amount
|
|
$
|
200,238
|
|
|
$
|
206,086
|
|
|
$
|
(5,848
|
)
|
|
|
(3)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans sold
|
|
$
|
31,598
|
|
|
$
|
35,541
|
|
|
$
|
(3,943
|
)
|
|
|
(11)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage fees
|
|
$
|
129
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
(30)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net
|
|
|
198
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
(34)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1%
|
|
Mortgage interest expense
|
|
|
(184
|
)
|
|
|
(146
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
(26)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
|
(100)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(33)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
329
|
|
|
|
524
|
|
|
|
(195
|
)
|
|
|
(37)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
207
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
(21)%
|
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(2)%
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
24%
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
|
211
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
(5)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
542
|
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(12)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
|
|
(733)%
|
|
Minority interest in income (loss)
of consolidated entities, net of income taxes
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
300%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment loss
|
|
$
|
(152
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17
|
)
|
|
$
|
(135
|
)
|
|
|
(794)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 income
61
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 originated by us and 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 $56 million (30%) from 2005 to
2006. This decrease was primarily attributable to the decline in
loans closed to be sold of $3.8 billion (11%), coupled with
a $3.1 billion (26%) decrease in fee-based closings. The
decline in total closings was primarily attributable to the
impact of lower industry origination volumes due to the impact
of the slowing housing market as well as higher interest rates
which caused a decline in refinancing activity. The change in
mix between fee-based closings and loans closed to be sold was
primarily due to a decrease in fee-based closings from our
financial institutions clients during 2006 compared to 2005. The
$6.9 billion (14%) decline in total closings from 2005 to
2006 was attributable to a $3.6 billion (11%) decrease in
purchase closings and a $3.3 billion (21%) decrease in
refinance closings. The decline in purchase closings was due to
the decline in overall housing purchases in 2006 compared to
2005. 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 IRLCs, freestanding
loan-related derivatives and loan derivatives designated in a
hedge relationship. See Note 10, Derivatives and Risk
Management Activities in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on loans sold
|
|
$
|
157
|
|
|
$
|
209
|
|
|
$
|
(52
|
)
|
|
|
(25)%
|
|
Initial value of capitalized
servicing
|
|
|
410
|
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(4)%
|
|
Recognition of deferred fees and
costs, net
|
|
|
(369
|
)
|
|
|
(334
|
)
|
|
|
(35
|
)
|
|
|
(10)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net
|
|
$
|
198
|
|
|
$
|
300
|
|
|
$
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
(34)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net decreased by
$102 million (34%) in 2006 compared to 2005. Gain on loans
sold net of the recognition of deferred fees and costs (the
effects of SFAS No. 91) declined by
$87 million from 2005 to 2006 driven by a $116 million
decline due to lower margins on loans sold that was partially
offset by a $29 million favorable variance from economic
hedge ineffectiveness resulting from our risk management
activities related to
62
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 $29 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 $35 million in 2005 to
$6 million in 2006. A $15 million decrease in the
initial value of capitalized servicing was caused by a decrease
in the volume of loans sold, partially offset by an increase of
10 basis points (bps) in the initial
capitalized servicing rate in 2006 compared to 2005. The
increase in the initial capitalized servicing rate during 2006
is primarily related to the increase in interest rates in 2006
as compared to 2005.
Mortgage
Net Finance Income
Mortgage net finance income allocable to the Mortgage Production
segment consists of interest income on 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 $36 million (100%) in 2006 compared to 2005,
due to a $38 million (26%) increase in Mortgage interest
expense that was partially offset by a $2 million (1%)
increase in Mortgage interest income. The $38 million
increase in Mortgage interest expense was attributable to
increases of $30 million due to a higher cost of funds from
our outstanding borrowings and $8 million due to higher
average borrowings. A significant portion of our loan
originations are funded with variable-rate short-term debt. At
December 31, 2006 and 2005, one-month LIBOR, which is used
as a benchmark for short-term rates, was 5.46% and 4.48%,
respectively, an increase of 98 bps. The $2 million
increase in Mortgage interest income was primarily due to higher
note rates associated with loans held for sale partially offset
by lower 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
$56 million (21%) in 2006 compared to 2005 primarily due to
a decrease in average staffing levels due to employee attrition
and lower origination volumes.
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-related
direct expenses, appraisal expense and allocations for overhead.
Other operating expenses decreased by $10 million (5%)
during 2006 compared to 2005, primarily attributable to a 14%
decrease in total closings during 2006 compared to 2005. This
decrease was partially offset by $14 million in allocated
costs primarily resulting from incremental fees and expenses for
additional auditor services, financial and other consulting
services, legal services and liquidity waivers, including a
$6 million loss on extinguishment of debt, as well as a
decrease in deferred expense under SFAS No. 91
primarily associated with a lower volume of loans closed to be
sold during 2006 compared to 2005.
Mortgage
Servicing Segment
Net revenues decreased by $105 million (44%) in 2006
compared to 2005. As discussed in greater detail below, a
$180 million unfavorable change in Amortization and
valuation adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net
was partially offset by increases of $38 million,
$36 million and $1 million in Mortgage net finance
income, Loan servicing income and Other income, respectively.
Segment profit decreased by $96 million (69%) in 2006
compared to 2005 due to the $105 million decrease in Net
revenues that was partially offset by a $9 million (9%)
decrease in Total expenses. The $9 million reduction in
Total expenses was primarily due to a $7 million decrease
in Other depreciation and amortization and a $2 million
decrease in Other operating expenses.
63
The following tables present a summary of our financial results
and a key related driver for the Mortgage Servicing segment, and
are followed by a discussion of each of the key components of
Net revenues and Total expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average loan servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
159,269
|
|
|
$
|
147,304
|
|
|
$
|
11,965
|
|
|
|
8%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income
|
|
$
|
181
|
|
|
$
|
120
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
51%
|
|
Mortgage interest expense
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
(37)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
67%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income
|
|
|
515
|
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
8%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and recovery of
impairment of mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(217
|
)
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
Change in fair value of mortgage
servicing rights
|
|
|
(334
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(334
|
)
|
|
|
n/m(1)
|
|
Net derivative loss related to
mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(77)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation
adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
(479
|
)
|
|
|
(299
|
)
|
|
|
(180
|
)
|
|
|
(60)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan servicing income
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
(144
|
)
|
|
|
(80)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(44)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(3)%
|
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
11%
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(78)%
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(4)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(9)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit
|
|
$
|
44
|
|
|
$
|
140
|
|
|
$
|
(96
|
)
|
|
|
(69)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 $38 million (67%) in 2006 compared to
2005, primarily due to higher interest 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 2006 compared to 2005
since the escrow balances earn income based upon one-month LIBOR.
Loan
Servicing Income
Loan servicing income includes recurring servicing fees, other
ancillary fees and net reinsurance income from our wholly owned
reinsurance subsidiary, 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.
64
The components of Loan servicing income were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Net service fee revenue
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
467
|
|
|
$
|
18
|
|
|
|
4%
|
Late fees and other ancillary
servicing revenue
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
50%
|
Curtailment interest paid to
investors
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
12%
|
Net reinsurance income
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(9)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income
|
|
$
|
515
|
|
|
$
|
479
|
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
|
|
8%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income increased by $36 million (8%) from
2005 to 2006. 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. Additionally, a decrease in curtailment
interest paid to investors due to a decrease in loan payoffs
during 2006 in comparison to 2005 contributed to this increase.
These increases were partially offset by a $3 million
decrease in net reinsurance income during 2006 compared to 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 $180 million (60%) from 2005 to 2006
was attributable to a $334 million decrease in the fair
value of mortgage servicing rights recorded during 2006 and a
$63 million increase in net derivative losses during 2006
in comparison to 2005, that were partially offset by
$217 million of Amortization and recovery of impairment of
mortgage servicing rights recorded during 2005. 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 2005, we recorded $433 million
of amortization of MSRs and a $216 million recovery of
impairment of MSRs.
Change in Fair Value of Mortgage Servicing
Rights: The fair value of our MSRs is estimated
based upon projections 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.
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 2006, the fair value of our MSRs
was reduced by $373 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 $39 million. This favorable change was
primarily due to the increase in mortgage interest rates during
2006 leading to lower expected prepayments. The
10-year
Treasury rate, which is widely regarded as a benchmark for
mortgage rates, increased by 32 bps during 2006. During
2005, the
10-year
Treasury rate increased by 18 bps.
65
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 10, Derivatives and Risk Management
Activities in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
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 mortgage
loans and lower their interest rates. (See Item 1A.
Risk FactorsRisks Related to our BusinessCertain
hedging strategies that we use to manage interest rate risk
associated with our MSRs and other mortgage-related assets and
commitments may not be effective in mitigating those
risks. for more information.)
During 2006, the value of derivatives related to our MSRs
decreased by $145 million. During 2005, the value of
derivatives related to our MSRs decreased by $82 million.
As described below, our net results from MSRs risk management
activities were a loss of $106 million and a gain of
$40 million during 2006 and 2005, respectively. Refer to
Item 7A. 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
December 31, 2006.
The following table outlines Net (loss) gain on MSRs risk
management activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net derivative loss related to
mortgage servicing rights
|
|
$
|
(145
|
)
|
|
$
|
(82
|
)
|
Change in fair value of mortgage
servicing rights due to changes in market inputs or assumptions
used in the valuation model
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery of impairment of mortgage
servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
Application of amortization rate
to the valuation allowance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) gain on MSRs risk
management activities
|
|
$
|
(106
|
)
|
|
$
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Income
Other income allocable to the Mortgage Servicing segment
consists primarily of net gains or losses on investment
securities.
Fleet
Management Services Segment
Net revenues increased by $119 million (7%) in 2006
compared to 2005. As discussed in greater detail below, the
increase in Net revenues was due to increases of
$119 million and $8 million in Fleet lease income and
Fleet management fees, respectively, that were partially offset
by an $8 million decrease in Other income.
Segment profit increased by $22 million (28%) in 2006
compared to 2005 due to the $119 million increase in Net
revenues, partially offset by a $97 million (6%) increase
in Total expenses. The $97 million increase in Total
expenses was primarily due to increases of $58 million and
$48 million in Fleet interest expense and Depreciation on
operating leases, respectively, that were partially offset by an
$7 million decrease in Other operating expenses.
66
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In thousands of units)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased vehicles
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
Maintenance service cards
|
|
|
339
|
|
|
|
338
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fuel cards
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
Accident management vehicles
|
|
|
331
|
|
|
|
332
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet management fees
|
|
$
|
158
|
|
|
$
|
150
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
%
|
Fleet lease income
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
%
|
Other income
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
1,830
|
|
|
|
1,711
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
%
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
%
|
Fleet interest expense
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
%
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
%
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
187
|
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
1,728
|
|
|
|
1,631
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit
|
|
$
|
102
|
|
|
$
|
80
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
$8 million (5%) in 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to
increases in revenue from our principal fee-based products,
which accounted for approximately $5 million of this
increase. Additionally, Fleet management fees were enhanced by
incremental revenue of $3 million from other fee-based
products.
Fleet
Lease Income
Fleet lease income increased by $119 million (8%) during
2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to higher total lease
billings resulting from the 3% increase in leased vehicles.
Additionally, Fleet lease income increased due to higher
interest rates on variable-interest rate leases and new leases.
Other
Income
Other income consists principally of the revenue generated by
our dealerships and other miscellaneous revenues. Other income
decreased by $8 million (9%) during 2006 compared to 2005,
primarily due to a 14% decline in new and used vehicle sales at
our dealerships.
67
Salaries
and Related Expenses
Salaries and related expenses decreased by $1 million (1%)
during 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to a decrease in
variable compensation expense that was partially offset by
increases in base compensation and 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 2006 increased by $48 million (4%)
compared to 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 2006, which are accounted
for as adjustments to the basis of the leased units.
Fleet
Interest Expense
Fleet interest expense increased by $58 million (42%)
during 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to higher short-term
interest rates and increased borrowings associated with the 3%
increase in leased vehicles.
Other
Operating Expenses
Other operating expenses decreased by $7 million (4%)
during 2006 compared to 2005, primarily due to a decrease in
cost of goods sold associated with the 14% decrease in new and
used vehicle sales at our dealerships.
Results
of Operations2005 vs. 2004
Consolidated
Results
Our consolidated results of continuing operations for 2005 and
2004 were comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
2,471
|
|
|
$
|
2,397
|
|
|
$
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spin-Off related expenses
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Other expenses
|
|
|
2,271
|
|
|
|
2,225
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
2,312
|
|
|
|
2,225
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes and minority interest
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations
before minority interest
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
(22
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2005, our Net revenues increased by $74 million (3%)
compared to 2004, due to $133 million and $117 million
increases in Net revenues for our Fleet Management Services and
Mortgage Servicing segments, respectively, partially offset by a
$176 million decrease in Net revenues for our Mortgage
Production segment. Our Income from continuing operations before
income taxes and minority interest during 2005 included
$41 million of Spin-Off related expenses, which were
excluded from the results of our reportable segments. These
Spin-Off related expenses, a $127 million decrease in
Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest for the Mortgage Production segment and a
$5 million increase in other expenses not allocated to our
reportable segments were partially offset by increases of
$128 million and $32 million of Income from continuing
operations before income taxes and minority interest for the
Mortgage Servicing and Fleet Management Services segments,
respectively.
Our effective income tax rates were 54.7% and 45.3% during 2005
and 2004, respectively. The Provision for income taxes increased
$9 million to $87 million in 2005 from
$78 million in 2004 primarily due to a charge for
68
income tax contingency reserves of $15 million in 2005 and
an unfavorable change in deferred income tax charges of
$15 million due to changes in estimated deferred state
income taxes for state apportionment factors in 2005 as compared
to 2004. These increases were partially offset by a decrease of
$17 million in charges related to valuation allowances
(primarily associated with state net operating loss
carryforwards) and a decrease of $1 million due to the
income tax impact of unfavorable changes in Income from
continuing operations before income taxes and minority interest
in 2005 compared to 2004. The increase in weighted-average state
income tax apportionment factors was due in part to PHH
Mortgages change in classification for state income tax
purposes to a financial institution in certain states in 2005.
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 interim marketing agreements with NRT and Cartus,
wherein PHH Mortgage paid fees for services provided. These
interim marketing agreements terminated when the Mortgage
Venture commenced operations. The provisions of the Strategic
Relationship Agreement and the Marketing Agreement thereafter
govern the manner in which the Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage
are recommended by Realogy. (See Item 1.
BusinessArrangements
with
RealogyStrategic
Relationship Agreement and Marketing
Agreements for a discussion of the terms on which the
Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage are recommended by Realogy.)
Our segment results were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Revenues
|
|
|
Segment (Loss)
Profit(1)
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Mortgage Production segment
|
|
$
|
524
|
|
|
$
|
700
|
|
|
$
|
(176
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17
|
)
|
|
$
|
109
|
|
|
$
|
(126
|
)
|
Mortgage Servicing segment
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Services
|
|
|
760
|
|
|
|
819
|
|
|
|
(59
|
)
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Fleet Management Services segment
|
|
|
1,711
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reportable segments
|
|
|
2,471
|
|
|
|
2,397
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Other(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43
|
)
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
(46
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Company
|
|
$
|
2,471
|
|
|
$
|
2,397
|
|
|
$
|
74
|
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
|
$
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The following is a reconciliation
of Income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest to segment profit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Income
from continuing operations before income taxes and minority
interest
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
Minority
interest in loss of consolidated entities
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
profit
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Segment loss reported under the
heading Other for 2005 was primarily $41 million of
Spin-Off related expenses.
|
69
Mortgage
Production Segment
Net revenues decreased by $176 million (25%) in 2005
compared to 2004. As discussed in greater detail below, Net
revenues were impacted by decreases of $105 million in Gain
on sale of mortgage loans, net, $41 million in Mortgage
fees, $23 million in Mortgage net finance income and
$7 million in Other income.
Segment profit decreased by $126 million in 2005 compared
to 2004 driven by the $176 million decrease in Net
revenues, which was partially offset by a $49 million
decrease in Total expenses. The $49 million reduction in
Total expenses was primarily due to decreases in Other operating
expenses of $25 million and Salaries and related expenses
of $16 million.
70
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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions, except
|
|
|
|
|
|
average loan amount)
|
|
|
|
|
Loans closed to be sold
|
|
$
|
36,219
|
|
|
$
|
34,405
|
|
|
$
|
1,814
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
%
|
Fee-based closings
|
|
|
11,966
|
|
|
|
18,148
|
|
|
|
(6,182
|
)
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
52,553
|
|
|
$
|
(4,368
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase closings
|
|
$
|
32,098
|
|
|
$
|
34,680
|
|
|
$
|
(2,582
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
%
|
Refinance closings
|
|
|
16,087
|
|
|
|
17,873
|
|
|
|
(1,786
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
52,553
|
|
|
$
|
(4,368
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate
|
|
$
|
22,681
|
|
|
$
|
31,370
|
|
|
$
|
(8,689
|
)
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
%
|
Adjustable rate
|
|
|
25,504
|
|
|
|
21,183
|
|
|
|
4,321
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total closings
|
|
$
|
48,185
|
|
|
$
|
52,553
|
|
|
$
|
(4,368
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of loans closed (units)
|
|
|
233,810
|
|
|
|
277,902
|
|
|
|
(44,092
|
)
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average loan amount
|
|
$
|
206,086
|
|
|
$
|
189,106
|
|
|
$
|
16,980
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans sold
|
|
$
|
35,541
|
|
|
$
|
32,465
|
|
|
$
|
3,076
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage fees
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
226
|
|
|
$
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
405
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
%
|
Mortgage interest expense
|
|
|
(146
|
)
|
|
|
(99
|
)
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
524
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
(176
|
)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
279
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
%
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
%
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
%
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
211
|
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
542
|
|
|
|
591
|
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
(127
|
)
|
|
|
n/m(1
|
)
|
|
Minority interest in loss of
consolidated entities, net of income taxes
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
n/m(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment (loss) profit
|
|
$
|
(17
|
)
|
|
$
|
109
|
|
|
$
|
(126
|
)
|
|
|
n/m(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 income
71
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 originated by us and 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. 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 $41 million (18%) from 2004 to
2005. This decrease was primarily attributable to the decline in
fee-based closings of 34%, partially offset by a 5% 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 the
flat yield curve, which caused our financial institution clients
to retain fewer loans in their portfolio in 2005 compared to
2004. Of the $4.4 billion decline in total closings,
$1.8 billion was attributable to a decline in refinancing
activity from 2004 to 2005. 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. Purchase closings
decreased by $2.6 billion over the same period. Total
originations in 2005 compared to 2004 were adversely affected by
the loss of the Fleet Bank relationship resulting from Bank of
Americas acquisition of Fleet Bank and a decline in volume
from USAA, which insourced its mortgage originations during 2004.
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 IRLCs, freestanding
loan-related derivatives and loan derivatives designated in a
hedge relationship. See Note 10, Derivatives and Risk
Management Activities in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
To the extent the derivatives are considered effective hedges
under 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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on loans sold
|
|
$
|
209
|
|
|
$
|
234
|
|
|
$
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
%
|
Initial value of capitalized
servicing
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
|
448
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
%
|
Recognition of deferred fees and
costs, net
|
|
|
(334
|
)
|
|
|
(277
|
)
|
|
|
(57
|
)
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net
|
|
$
|
300
|
|
|
$
|
405
|
|
|
$
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net decreased by
$105 million (26%) in 2005 compared to 2004. Lower initial
capitalization rates of our MSRs caused $59 million of this
decline, as our initial capitalization rate related to mortgage
loans sold declined by approximately 18 bps in 2005
compared to 2004. This decrease in the initial capitalization
rate was partially offset by a $3.1 billion increase in
loans sold, which increased the initial value of capitalized
servicing by $36 million. Gain on loans sold net of the
recognition of deferred fees and costs (the effects of
SFAS No. 91) declined by $82 million in 2005
compared to 2004. Of this $82 million decline, $76 million
is due
72
to a decline in margins on loans sold during 2005. 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 remaining $6 million of the
decline was the result of economic hedge ineffectiveness
resulting from our risk management activities related to IRLCs
and mortgage loans, which yielded losses of approximately
$29 million in 2004 and losses of approximately
$35 million in 2005.
Mortgage
Net Finance Income
Mortgage net finance income allocable to the Mortgage Production
segment consists of interest income on 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 $23 million (39%) in 2005 compared to 2004,
largely because of the flattening of the yield curve in 2005
compared to 2004. Of this decline, approximately
$47 million related to increased Mortgage interest expense,
$59 million of which was attributable to a higher cost of
funds from our outstanding borrowings, partially offset by a
$12 million decrease in Mortgage interest expense due to
lower average borrowings. A significant portion of our loan
originations are funded with variable-rate short-term debt. At
December 31, 2005 and 2004, one-month LIBOR, which is used
as a benchmark for short-term rates, was 4.48% and 2.40%,
respectively, which was an increase of 208 bps. The
increase in Mortgage interest expense was partially offset by a
$24 million increase in Mortgage interest income primarily
due to higher note rates associated with loans held for sale.
These increases were partially offset by lower average loans
held for sale.
Other
Income
Other income allocable to the Mortgage Production segment
decreased by $7 million (70%) in 2005 compared to 2004.
This decrease was primarily attributable to the receipt of a
one-time payment during 2004 associated with the termination of
the Fleet Bank relationship resulting from Bank of
Americas acquisition of Fleet Bank.
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
$16 million (6%) in 2005 compared to 2004 primarily due to
a decrease in average staffing levels due to lower origination
volumes that was partially offset by higher average salaries and
a $9 million increase in incentive bonus expense recorded
during 2005 that was not incurred in 2004.
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-related
direct expenses, appraisal expense and allocations for overhead.
Other operating expenses decreased by $25 million (11%)
during 2005 compared to 2004. This decrease was primarily
attributable to an 8% decrease in loans closed during 2005
compared to those closed during 2004.
Mortgage
Servicing Segment
Net revenues increased by $117 million (98%) in 2005
compared to 2004. As discussed in greater detail below, a
favorable change in Amortization and valuation adjustments
related to mortgage servicing rights, net of $83 million
and an increase in Mortgage net finance income of
$46 million were partially offset by decreases in Other
income of $6 million and Loan servicing income of
$6 million.
Segment profit increased by $128 million in 2005 compared
to 2004 driven by the $117 million increase in Net revenues
and an $11 million (10%) decrease in Total expenses. The
$11 million reduction in Total expenses was primarily due
to a $6 million decrease in Other operating expenses and a
decrease in Salaries and related expenses of $2 million.
73
The following tables present a summary of our financial results
and a key related driver for the Mortgage Servicing segment, and
are followed by a discussion of each of the key components of
Net revenues and Total expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Average loan servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
147,304
|
|
|
$
|
143,521
|
|
|
$
|
3,783
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
%
|
Mortgage interest expense
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(46
|
)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
418
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and recovery of
(provision for) impairment of mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
(217
|
)
|
|
|
(499
|
)
|
|
|
282
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
%
|
Net derivative (loss) gain related
to mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
(199
|
)
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation
adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
(299
|
)
|
|
|
(382
|
)
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan servicing income
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
n/m(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
236
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
%
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
%
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
%
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
96
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit
|
|
$
|
140
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
128
|
|
|
|
n/m(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 $46 million (418%) in 2005 compared to
2004, primarily due to higher interest 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 2005 compared to 2004
since the escrow balances earn income based upon one-month LIBOR.
Loan
Servicing Income
Loan servicing income includes recurring servicing fees, other
ancillary fees and net reinsurance income from our wholly owned
reinsurance subsidiary, 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.
74
The components of Loan servicing income were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net service fee revenue
|
|
$
|
467
|
|
|
$
|
465
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Late fees and other ancillary
servicing revenue
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Curtailment interest paid to
investors
|
|
|
(51
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(13)%
|
|
Net reinsurance income
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(6)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income
|
|
$
|
479
|
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(1)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income decreased by $6 million (1%) from
2004 to 2005. This decrease primarily related to higher
curtailment interest paid to investors during 2005 due to an
increase in loan payoffs during 2005, as well as a decrease in
net reinsurance income during 2005 compared to 2004. These
decreases were partially offset by higher servicing fees due to
the higher average servicing portfolio during 2005.
Amortization and Valuation Adjustments Related to Mortgage
Servicing Rights, Net
Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage
servicing rights, net during 2005 and 2004 includes Amortization
and recovery of (provision for) impairment of mortgage servicing
rights, and Net derivative (loss) gain related to mortgage
servicing rights. The favorable change of $83 million (22%)
from 2004 to 2005 was attributable to a $430 million
favorable change in the valuation of our MSRs, partially offset
by a $199 million unfavorable change in net derivative
gains and losses and $148 million of higher MSRs
amortization. The components of Amortization and valuation
adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net are
discussed separately below.
Amortization and Recovery of (Provision for) 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.
Amortization of our MSRs increased by $148 million (52%)
during 2005 compared to 2004. The increase in amortization
expense was primarily attributable to a higher amortization rate
due to a decline in the beginning weighted-average life of the
portfolio resulting from a flattening of the yield curve in 2005
compared to 2004.
During 2005, the recovery of impairment of MSRs valuation was
$216 million, a favorable change of $430 million
(201%) from 2004. This favorable change was primarily due to the
increase in mortgage interest rates during 2005 leading to lower
expected prepayments. The
10-year
Treasury rate, which is widely regarded as a benchmark for
mortgage rates, increased by 18 bps during 2005.
Conversely, the
10-year
Treasury rate decreased by 4 bps in 2004. Additionally, the
spread between mortgage coupon rates and the underlying
risk-free interest rate increased during 2005. The increase in
mortgage spreads also had a favorable impact on the recovery of
impairment of MSRs.
Net Derivative (Loss) Gain 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 10, Derivatives and Risk Management
Activities in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
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 mortgage
loans and lower their interest rates. (See Item 1A.
Risk FactorsRisks Related to our
75
BusinessCertain hedging strategies that we use to manage
interest rate risk associated with our MSRs and other
mortgage-related assets and commitments may not be effective in
mitigating those risks. for more information.)
During 2005, the value of derivatives related to our MSRs
decreased by $82 million. During 2004, the value of
derivatives related to our MSRs increased by $117 million.
As described below, our net results from MSRs risk management
activities were a gain of $40 million and a loss of
$158 million during 2005 and 2004, respectively.
The following table outlines Net gain (loss) on MSRs risk
management activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net derivative (loss) gain related
to mortgage servicing rights
|
|
$
|
(82
|
)
|
|
$
|
117
|
|
Recovery of (provision for)
impairment of mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
Application of amortization rate
to the valuation allowance
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain (loss) on MSRs risk
management activities
|
|
$
|
40
|
|
|
$
|
(158
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
Income
Other income allocable to the Mortgage Servicing segment
consists primarily of net gains or losses on investment
securities and decreased by $6 million in 2005 compared to
2004. This decrease was primarily attributable to gains on the
sale of investment securities that occurred in 2004, whereas no
marketable securities were sold in 2005.
Salaries
and Related Expenses
Salaries and related expenses allocable to the Mortgage
Servicing segment consist of compensation, payroll taxes and
benefits paid to employees in our mortgage loan servicing
operations and allocations for overhead. Salaries and related
expenses decreased by $2 million (6%) in 2005 compared to
2004. This decrease was primarily due to a decrease in average
staffing levels despite the 3% increase in the average loan
servicing portfolio. This decrease was partially offset by a
$2 million increase in incentive bonus expense recorded
during 2005 that was not incurred in 2004, as well as higher
average salaries.
Other
Operating Expenses
Other operating expenses allocable to the Mortgage Servicing
segment include servicing-related direct expenses, costs
associated with foreclosure and real estate owned
(REO) and allocations for overhead. Other operating
expenses decreased by $6 million (12%) during 2005 compared
to 2004. This decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease
in foreclosure costs primarily related to improvements in the
performance of our loans sold with recourse.
Fleet
Management Services Segment
On February 27, 2004, we acquired First Fleet. Accordingly,
our results for 2005 included a full year of First Fleet
activity compared to ten months of activity included in 2004.
The impact of the additional two months of First Fleet profit in
2005 was not material to the results of operations for our Fleet
Management Services segment.
Net revenues increased by $133 million (8%) in 2005
compared to 2004. As discussed in greater detail below, the
increase in Net revenues was primarily due to increases of
$111 million in Fleet lease income and $15 million in
Fleet management fees.
Segment profit increased by $32 million (67%) in 2005
compared to 2004 due to the $133 million increase in Net
revenues, partially offset by a $101 million (7%) increase
in Total expenses. The $101 million increase in Total
expenses was primarily due to increases of $56 million and
$34 million in Depreciation on operating leases and Fleet
interest expense, respectively.
76
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(In thousands of units)
|
|
|
|
|
Leased vehicles
|
|
|
325
|
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
Maintenance service cards
|
|
|
338
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
Fuel cards
|
|
|
321
|
|
|
|
305
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
Accident management vehicles
|
|
|
332
|
|
|
|
314
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet management fees
|
|
$
|
150
|
|
|
$
|
135
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
%
|
Fleet lease income
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
1,357
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
%
|
Other income
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
1,711
|
|
|
|
1,578
|
|
|
|
133
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
%
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
%
|
Fleet interest expense
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
%
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
%
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
1,631
|
|
|
|
1,530
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment profit
|
|
$
|
80
|
|
|
$
|
48
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
$15 million (11%) in 2005 compared to 2004, due to
increases in all four major revenue drivers, which accounted for
$12 million of the increase. Individual fees increased in
line with our unit count growth. Total growth was enhanced as
the result of higher revenues due to higher average transactions
for both maintenance service cards and fuel cards and higher
subrogation recovery for our clients.
Fleet
Lease Income
Fleet lease income increased by $111 million (8%) during
2005 compared to 2004 due to higher total lease billings
resulting from the 3% increase in leased vehicles. Increased
depreciation billed as a result of increased leased unit counts
and increased Fleet interest expense on our variable-interest
rate funded leases added to Fleet lease income.
Other
Income
Other income consists principally of the revenue generated by
our dealerships and other miscellaneous revenues. Other income
increased by $7 million (8%) during 2005 compared to 2004,
primarily due to a $5 million increase in interest income
and a $2 million increase in net truck remarketing revenue.
77
Salaries
and Related Expenses
Salaries and related expenses increased by $10 million
(13%) during 2005 compared to 2004, primarily due to increased
wages 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 2005 increased by $56 million (5%)
compared to 2004, 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 2005, 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 $34 million (32%)
during 2005 compared to 2004. The increase in Fleet interest
expense was primarily due to rising short-term interest rates.
Debt is utilized to fund the domestic fleet leases, of which
approximately 77% are variable-rate leases, whereby the interest
component of the lease billing changes with the movement of
certain variable-rate indices. The increase in Fleet interest
expense resulting from the higher interest rates was partially
offset by a $28 million decrease due to lower debt levels
resulting from certain capital structure adjustments made in
connection with the Spin-Off.
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 unsecured contractually committed 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 12 months. We expect aggregate capital expenditures
for 2007 to be between $23 million and $31 million.
78
Cash
Flows
At December 31, 2006, we had $123 million of Total
Cash and cash equivalents, an increase of $16 million from
$107 million at December 31, 2005. The following table
summarizes the changes in Total Cash and cash equivalents during
the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in)
continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
748
|
|
|
$
|
731
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(1,574
|
)
|
|
|
(1,246
|
)
|
|
|
(328
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
841
|
|
|
|
365
|
|
|
|
476
|
|
Effects of changes in exchange
rates on Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
continuing operations
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(150
|
)
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
(238
|
)
|
|
$
|
254
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
Operations
Operating
Activities
During 2006, we generated $17 million more cash from
operating activities than during 2005. The net cash outflows
related to the origination and sale of mortgage loans during
2006 were $149 million greater than the net cash outflows
that occurred during 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 2006, we used $328 million more cash in investing
activities than during 2005. During 2005, we redeemed
$400 million of senior notes issued under our 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
$151 million in net settlement proceeds for derivatives
related to MSRs that was partially offset by a $116 million
decrease in cash paid on derivatives related to MSRs.
Financing
Activities
During 2006, we generated $476 million more cash from
financing activities than during 2005, primarily due to
$14.0 billion of higher proceeds from borrowings that were
partially offset by $13.2 billion more principal payments
on borrowings, a $149 million lower net increase in
short-term borrowings during 2006 compared to 2005 and a
$100 million cash contribution from Cendant related to the
Spin-Off recorded during 2005. The increases in both proceeds
from borrowings and principal payments on borrowings were
primarily related to borrowings and repayments related to the
Mortgage Venture, Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC
(Chesapeake Finance) and Terrapin Funding LLC
(Terrapin), a change in mix between commercial paper
and other asset-backed debt and the activity related to a tender
offer and consent solicitation (each further described below).
The increases in principal payments on borrowings were partially
offset by the repayment of $443 million aggregate principal
amount of our privately placed senior term notes in 2005.
79
Because the Mortgage Venture commenced operations in October
2005, there was a full year of borrowing and repayment activity
in 2006 compared to three months of activity in 2005. The
additional nine months of activity in 2006 resulted in
incremental proceeds from borrowings of $5.8 billion and
principal payments on borrowings of $5.6 billion.
Additionally, during the fourth quarter of 2006, we recorded a
$2.3 billion increase in proceeds from borrowings and a
$2.5 billion increase in principal payments on borrowings
due to an increase in loan originations by the Mortgage Venture
as compared to the fourth quarter of 2005.
In 2006, both proceeds from borrowings and principal payments on
borrowings increased by $3.2 billion from 2005 as we
incurred debt to redeem the outstanding term notes, variable
funding notes and subordinated notes issued by Chesapeake
Finance and Terrapin.
During 2006, we decreased our utilization of asset-backed
commercial paper financing arrangements that are reported in Net
increase (decrease) in short-term borrowings in the accompanying
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows and increased our
utilization of other asset-backed debt arrangements that are
reported on a gross basis within proceeds from borrowings and
principal payments on borrowings in the accompanying
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. This change in the mix of
funding arrangements increased both proceeds from borrowing and
principal payments on borrowings by $2.4 billion in 2006
compared to 2005.
During 2006, we concluded a tender offer and consent
solicitation, which resulted in additional borrowings of
$415 million and principal payments on borrowings of
$416 million. See IndebtednessUnsecured
DebtTerm Notes for more information regarding the
tender offer and consent solicitation.
Discontinued
Operations
During 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, Freddie Mac or 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 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 operations. We focus our business
process on consistently producing quality mortgages that meet
investor requirements to continue to be able to access these
markets.
80
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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
$
|
559
|
|
|
$
|
497
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net
|
|
|
2,936
|
|
|
|
2,395
|
|
Net investment in fleet leases
|
|
|
4,147
|
|
|
|
3,966
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
1,971
|
|
|
|
1,909
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets under management programs
|
|
$
|
9,648
|
|
|
$
|
8,808
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables summarize the components of our
indebtedness as of December 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Vehicle
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
Warehouse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed
|
|
|
Asset-Backed
|
|
|
Unsecured
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Term notes
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
646
|
|
|
$
|
1,046
|
|
Variable funding notes
|
|
|
3,532
|
|
|
|
774
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,306
|
|
Subordinated debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
Commercial paper
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
688
|
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
1,099
|
|
Borrowings under credit facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
1,019
|
|
|
|
1,085
|
|
Other
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,541
|
|
|
$
|
2,004
|
|
|
$
|
2,102
|
|
|
$
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
81
$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 Consolidated Statement of Operations for the
year ended December 31, 2006.
As of December 31, 2006, variable funding notes outstanding
under this arrangement aggregated $3.5 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 December 31, 2006 was collateralized by approximately
$4.1 billion of leased vehicles and related assets,
primarily included in Net investment in fleet leases in the
accompanying 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 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
December 31, 2006, the agreements governing the
Series 2006-1
and
Series 2006-2
notes were scheduled to expire on March 6, 2007 and
November 30, 2007, 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 5.7% and 4.8% as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
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 December 31, 2006, the total capacity under vehicle
management asset-backed debt arrangements was approximately
$3.7 billion, and we had $168 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 December 31, 2006
and 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
$400 million and $800 million, respectively. On
September 20, 2006, Bishops Gate retired
$400 million of the Bishops Gate Notes and
$51 million of the Bishops Gate subordinated
certificates (the Bishops Gate Certificates)
in accordance with their scheduled maturity dates. Funds for the
retirement of this debt were provided by a combination of the
sale of mortgage loans and the issuance of commercial paper
issued by Bishops Gate. The Bishops Gate Notes are
82
variable-rate instruments and, as of December 31, 2006,
were scheduled to mature in November 2008. The weighted-average
interest rate on the Bishops Gate Notes as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.7% and 4.7%, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Bishops Gate
Certificates aggregated $50 million and $101 million,
respectively. As of December 31, 2006, the Bishops
Gate Certificates were primarily fixed-rate instruments and were
scheduled to mature in May 2008. The weighted-average interest
rate on the Bishops Gate Certificates as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.6% and 5.8%, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006 and 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 $688 million and
$84 million, respectively. During 2006, the maximum
committed borrowings allowed under the Bishops Gate
Liquidity Agreement was reduced from $1.5 billion to
$1.0 billion and the expiration date was extended to
November 30, 2007. The Bishops Gate commercial paper
are fixed-rate instruments. The weighted-average interest rate
on the Bishops Gate commercial paper as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.4% and 4.3%, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006, the debt issued by Bishops
Gate was collateralized by approximately $1.2 billion of
underlying mortgage loans and related assets, primarily recorded
in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the accompanying
Consolidated Balance Sheet.
As of May 22, 2007, the Bishops Gate Notes were rated
AAA/Aaa/AAA, the Bishops Gate Certificates were rated
BBB/Baa2/BBB and Bishops Gates commercial paper was
rated A1/P1/F1 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 committed mortgage repurchase facility that
is used to finance mortgage loans originated by PHH Mortgage, a
wholly owned subsidiary. This facility is funded by a
multi-seller conduit, and we generally use this facility to
supplement the capacity of Bishops Gate and unsecured
borrowings used to fund our mortgage warehouse needs. On
October 30, 2006, we amended this 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 this facility
(as amended by the Amended Repurchase Agreements, 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. As of December 31, 2006, borrowings under the
Mortgage Repurchase Facility were $505 million and were
collateralized by underlying mortgage loans and related assets
of $551 million, primarily included in Mortgage loans held
for sale, net in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. As
of December 31, 2005, borrowings under this facility were
$247 million. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
borrowings under this variable-rate facility bore interest at
5.4% and 4.3%, respectively. The Mortgage Repurchase Facility
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.
During 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. As of December 31, 2006, borrowings outstanding
under the Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility were
$269 million and were collateralized by underlying mortgage
loans and related assets of $331 million, primarily
included in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the
accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. Borrowings under this
variable-rate facility bore interest at 5.4% as of
December 31, 2006. The Mortgage Venture also pays an annual
liquidity fee of 20 bps on 102% of the
83
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. During 2006, the capacity of
this line of credit was reduced from $350 million to
$200 million following the execution of the Mortgage
Venture Repurchase Facility. Borrowings outstanding under this
secured line of credit were $58 million and
$177 million as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, and, as of December 31, 2006, were
collateralized by underlying mortgage loans and related assets
of $67 million, primarily included in Mortgage loans held
for sale, net in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet.
During 2006, the expiration date of this agreement was extended
to October 5, 2007. This variable-rate credit agreement
bore interest at 6.2% and 5.2% on December 31, 2006 and
2005, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006, the total capacity under mortgage
warehouse asset-backed debt arrangements was approximately
$2.8 billion, and we had approximately $787 million 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
December 31, 2006, we had a total of approximately
$1.1 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 May 22, 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. 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 Investors Service, 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). Declines in our credit
ratings would 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
December 31, 2006 and 2005 consisted of $646 million
and $1.1 billion, respectively, of medium-term notes (the
MTNs) publicly issued under the Indenture, dated as
of
84
November 6, 2000 (as amended and supplemented, the
MTN Indenture) by and between PHH and The Bank of
New York, as successor trustee for Bank One Trust Company, N.A.
(the MTN Indenture Trustee). During 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. As of December 31, 2006, the
outstanding MTNs were scheduled to mature between January 2007
and April 2018. The effective rate of interest for the MTNs
outstanding as of both December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 6.8%.
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 $411 million and
$747 million as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. This commercial paper is fixed-rate and matures
within 270 days of issuance. The weighted-average interest
rate on outstanding unsecured commercial paper as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.7% 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 Canadian
sub-facility,
which is available to our Fleet Management Services operations
in Canada. Borrowings under the Amended Credit Facility were
$404 million as of December 31, 2006. There were no
borrowings under the Credit Facility as of December 31,
2005.
Pricing under the Credit Facility was based upon our senior
unsecured long-term debt credit ratings and, as of
December 31, 2005, bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of
60 bps. The Credit Facility also required us to pay a per
annum facility fee of 15 bps and a per annum utilization
fee of 12.5 bps if our usage exceeded 33% of the aggregate
commitments under the Credit Facility. Pricing under the Amended
Credit Facility is also 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
December 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 December 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 and the facility fee would become 70 bps and
17.5 bps, respectively, while the utilization fee would
remain 12.5 bps.
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 was scheduled to
expire on April 5, 2007. Borrowings under the Supplemental
Credit Facility were $200 million as of December 31,
2006. Pricing under the Supplemental 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
Supplemental Credit Facility. Borrowings under the Supplemental
Credit Facility bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of
38 bps as of December 31, 2006. The Supplemental
Credit Facility also requires us to pay per annum utilization
fees if our usage exceeds 50% of the aggregate commitments under
the
85
Supplemental Credit Facility and per annum facility fees. As of
December 31, 2006, the per annum utilization and facility
fees were 10 bps and 12 bps, respectively. We were
also required to pay an additional facility fee of 10 bps
against the outstanding commitments under the facility as of
October 6, 2006. 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 Supplemental Credit Facility after the
downgrade bore 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.
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 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 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. 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 and the per annum facility fee would become
127.5 bps and 22.5 bps, respectively.
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 was scheduled to expire 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.
Borrowings under the Tender Support Facility were
$415 million as of December 31, 2006. 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 long-term 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.
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.
The Merger Agreement contains certain restrictions on our
ability to incur new indebtedness without the prior written
consent of GE.
86
Debt Maturities
The following table provides the contractual maturities of our
indebtedness at December 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
|
|
$
|
2,181
|
|
|
$
|
1,084
|
|
|
$
|
3,265
|
|
Between one and two years
|
|
|
1,544
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
1,739
|
|
Between two and three years
|
|
|
816
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
816
|
|
Between three and four years
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
Between four and five years
|
|
|
332
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
736
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
528
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,545
|
|
|
$
|
2,102
|
|
|
$
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 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
|
|
$
|
3,709
|
|
|
$
|
3,541
|
|
|
$
|
168
|
|
Mortgage warehouse
|
|
|
2,791
|
|
|
|
2,004
|
|
|
|
787
|
|
Unsecured Committed Credit
Facilities(2)
|
|
|
2,551
|
|
|
|
1,432
|
|
|
|
1,119
|
|
|
|
|
(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 $411 million which fully supports the
outstanding unsecured commercial paper issued by us as of
December 31, 2006. Under our policy, all of the outstanding
unsecured commercial paper is supported by available capacity
under our unsecured committed credit facilities with the
exception of the Tender Support Facility. The sole purpose of
the Tender Support Facility is the funding of the retirement of
MTNs. In addition, utilized capacity reflects $2 million of
letters of credit issued under the Amended Credit Facility. See
Asset-Backed DebtVehicle Management
Asset-Backed Debt and Unsecured
DebtCredit Facilities for information regarding
changes in our capacity under asset-backed debt arrangements and
unsecured committed credit facilities after December 31,
2006.
|
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
payment, the debt to equity ratio exceeds 6.5:1. At
December 31, 2006, we were in compliance with all of our
financial covenants related to our debt arrangements, except
that we did
87
not deliver our financial statements for the quarters ended
March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and September 30,
2006 to the MTN Indenture Trustee by December 31, 2006
pursuant to the terms of Supplemental Indenture No. 4
(defined and described below). We did not receive a notice of
default and subsequently delivered these financial statements on
or before April 11, 2007.
Under many of our financing, servicing, hedging and related
agreements and instruments (collectively, the 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 delays in
completing the unaudited quarterly financial statements for
2006, the 2006 audited annual financial statements and the
unaudited quarterly financial statements for the quarter ended
March 31, 2007 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. 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 Bishops Gate Notes as well as the
lenders under the Bishops 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 (the Bishops Gate
Supplemental 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.
The Bishops Gate 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.
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 the
Amended Credit Facility, the Supplemental Credit Facility, the
Tender Support Facility and the 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
88
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 Mortgage
Repurchase Facility, the financing agreements for Chesapeake and
Bishops Gate and other agreements which waived certain
potential breaches of covenants under those instruments and
extended 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 was March 30, 2007. Our financial
statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and
June 30, 2006 were filed with the SEC on March 30,
2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of our quarterly
financial statements for the quarter ended September 30,
2006 was April 30, 2007. Our financial statements for the
quarter ended September 30, 2006 were filed with the SEC on
April 11, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of
our financial statements for the year ended December 31,
2006 and the quarter ended March 31, 2007 is June 29,
2007.
We intend to deliver our financial statements for the quarter
ended March 31, 2007 on or before 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. 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
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.
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 with respect to the delivery of our financial
statements, 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 March 31, 2007
to the MTN Indenture Trustee, which are required to be delivered
no later than May 25, 2007 under the MTN Indenture. As a
result of our failure to deliver these financial statements, the
MTN Indenture Trustee could provide us with a notice of default.
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.
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
be obtained on reasonable terms or 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.
Restrictions
on Paying Dividends
Many of our subsidiaries (including certain consolidated
partnerships, trusts and other non-corporate entities) are
subject to restrictions on their ability to pay dividends or
otherwise transfer funds to other consolidated
89
subsidiaries and, ultimately, to PHH Corporation (the parent
company). These restrictions relate to loan agreements
applicable to certain of our asset-backed debt arrangements and
to regulatory restrictions applicable to the equity of our
insurance subsidiary, Atrium. The aggregate restricted net
assets of these subsidiaries totaled $1.0 billion as of
December 31, 2006. These restrictions on net assets of
certain subsidiaries, however, do not directly limit our ability
to pay dividends from consolidated Retained earnings. Pursuant
to the MTN Indenture, we may not pay dividends on our Common
stock in the event that our ratio of debt to equity exceeds
6.5:1, after giving effect to the dividend payment. The MTN
Indenture also requires that we maintain a debt to tangible
equity ratio of not more than 10:1. In addition, the Amended
Credit Facility, the Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender
Support Facility each include various covenants that may
restrict our ability to pay dividends on our Common stock,
including covenants which 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. Based on our assessment of these
requirements as of December 31, 2006, we do not believe
that these restrictions will materially limit dividend payments
on our Common stock in the foreseeable future. However, we do
not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our Common stock in
the foreseeable future.
In addition, the Merger Agreement contains certain restrictions
on our ability to pay dividends on our Common stock as well as
on the payment of intercompany dividends by certain of our
subsidiaries without the prior written consent of GE.
Contractual
Obligations
The following table summarizes our future contractual
obligations as of December 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-backed
debt(1)(2)
|
|
$
|
2,181
|
|
|
$
|
1,544
|
|
|
$
|
816
|
|
|
$
|
558
|
|
|
$
|
332
|
|
|
$
|
114
|
|
|
$
|
5,545
|
|
Unsecured
debt(1)(3)
|
|
|
1,084
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
2,102
|
|
Operating
leases(4)
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
211
|
|
Capital
leases(1)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Other purchase
commitments(5)
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,312
|
|
|
$
|
1,766
|
|
|
$
|
835
|
|
|
$
|
581
|
|
|
$
|
753
|
|
|
$
|
641
|
|
|
$
|
7,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The table above excludes future
cash payments related to interest expense. Interest payments
during the year ended December 31, 2006 totaled
$463 million. Interest is calculated on most of our debt
obligations based on variable rates referenced to LIBOR or other
short-term interest rate indexes. A substantial portion of our
interest cost related to vehicle management asset-backed debt is
charged to lessees pursuant to lease agreements.
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents the contractual
maturities for asset-backed debt arrangements as of
December 31, 2006, except for our vehicle management
asset-backed notes, where estimated payments have been used
assuming the underlying agreements were not renewed. See
Liquidity and Capital
ResourcesIndebtedness and Note 14, Debt
and Borrowing Arrangements in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
|
(3) |
|
Represents the contractual
maturities for unsecured debt arrangements as of
December 31, 2006. See Liquidity and Capital
ResourcesIndebtedness and Note 14, Debt
and Borrowing Arrangements in the Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Includes operating leases for our
Mortgage Production and Servicing segments in Mt. Laurel, New
Jersey; Jacksonville, Florida and other smaller regional
locations throughout the U.S. Also includes leases for our
Fleet Management Services segment for its headquarters office in
Sparks, Maryland, office space and marketing centers in five
locations in Canada and five smaller regional locations
throughout the U.S. See Note 17, Commitments and
Contingencies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
|
(5) |
|
Includes various commitments to
purchase goods or services from specific suppliers made by us in
the ordinary course of our business, including those related to
capital expenditures. See Note 17, Commitments and
Contingencies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
90
In the normal course of business, we enter into commitments to
either originate or purchase mortgage loans at specified rates.
As of December 31, 2006, we had commitments to fund
mortgage loans with
agreed-upon
rates or rate protection amounting to $3.9 billion.
Additionally, as of December 31, 2006, we had commitments
to fund open home equity lines of credit of $3.0 billion
and construction loans of $58 million.
Commitments to sell loans generally have fixed expiration dates
or other termination clauses and may require the payment of a
fee. We may settle the forward delivery commitments on a net
basis; therefore, the commitments outstanding do not necessarily
represent future cash obligations. Our $4.0 billion of
forward delivery commitments as of December 31, 2006
generally will be settled within 90 days of the individual
commitment date.
See Note 17, Commitments and Contingencies in
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
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, 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.
Critical
Accounting Policies
In presenting our financial statements in conformity with GAAP,
we are required to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the amounts reported therein. Several of the estimates and
assumptions we are required to make relate to matters that are
inherently uncertain as they pertain to future events. However,
events that are outside of our control cannot be predicted and,
as such, they cannot be contemplated in evaluating such
estimates and assumptions. If there is a significant unfavorable
change to current conditions, it could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position, results of
operations and cash flows. We believe that the estimates and
assumptions we used when preparing our financial statements were
the most appropriate at that time. Presented below are those
accounting policies that we believe require subjective and
complex judgments that could potentially affect reported results.
Mortgage
Servicing Rights
An MSR is the right to receive a portion of the interest coupon
and fees collected from the mortgagor for performing specified
mortgage servicing activities, which consist of collecting loan
payments, remitting principal and interest payments to
investors, holding escrow funds for payment of mortgage-related
expenses such as taxes and insurance and otherwise administering
our mortgage loan servicing portfolio. The fair value of the
MSRs is estimated based upon projections of expected future cash
flows considering prepayment estimates (developed using a model
described below), our historical prepayment rates, portfolio
characteristics, interest rates based on interest rate yield
curves, implied volatility and other economic factors. We
incorporate a probability weighted option adjusted spread
(OAS) model to generate and discount cash flows for
the MSR valuation. The OAS model generates numerous interest
rate paths, then calculates the MSR cash flow at each monthly
point for each interest rate path and discounts those cash flows
back to the current period. The MSR value is determined by
averaging the discounted cash flows from each of the interest
rate paths. The interest rate paths are generated with a random
91
distribution centered around implied forward interest rates,
which are determined from the interest rate yield curve at any
given point of time. As of December 31, 2006, the implied
forward interest rates project a decrease of approximately
3 basis points in the yield of the
10-year
Treasury over the next 12 months. Changes in the yield
curve will result in changes to the forward rates implied from
that yield curve.
A key assumption in our estimate of the fair value of the MSRs
is forecasted prepayments. We use a third-party model to
forecast prepayment rates at each monthly point for each
interest rate path in the OAS model. The model to forecast
prepayment rates used in the development of expected future cash
flows is based on historical observations of prepayment behavior
in similar periods, comparing current mortgage interest rates to
the mortgage interest rates in our servicing portfolio, and
incorporates loan characteristics (e.g., loan type and note
rate) and factors such as recent prepayment experience, previous
refinance opportunities and estimated levels of home equity.
After the adoption of SFAS No. 156, MSRs are recorded
at fair value. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 156,
to the extent that fair value was less than carrying value at
the individual strata level (which was based upon product type
and interest rates of the underlying mortgage loans), we would
consider the portfolio to have been impaired and recorded a
related charge. Reductions in interest rates different than
those used in our models could have caused us to use different
assumptions in the MSR valuation, which could result in a
decrease in the estimated fair value of our MSRs. To mitigate
this risk, we use derivatives that generally increase in value
as interest rates decline and decrease in value as interest
rates rise. Additionally, as interest rates decrease, we have
historically experienced increased production revenue resulting
from a higher level of refinancing activity, which over time has
historically mitigated the impact on earnings of the decline in
our MSRs (the natural business hedge).
Changes in the estimated fair value of the MSRs based upon
variations in the assumptions (e.g., future interest rate
levels, implied volatility, prepayment speeds) cannot be
extrapolated because the relationship of the change in
assumptions to the change in fair value may not be linear.
Changes in one assumption may result in changes to another,
which may magnify or counteract the fair value sensitivity
analysis and would make such an analysis not meaningful.
Additionally, further declines in interest rates due to a
weakening economy and geopolitical risks, which result in an
increase in refinancing activity or changes in assumptions,
could adversely impact the valuation. The fair value of our MSRs
was approximately $2.0 billion as of December 31, 2006
and the total portfolio associated with our capitalized MSRs
approximated $146.8 billion as of December 31, 2006
(see Note 7, Mortgage Servicing Rights in the
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K
for a detailed discussion of the effect of any changes to the
value of this asset during 2006, 2005 and 2004). The effects of
certain adverse potential changes in the estimated fair value of
our MSRs are detailed in Note 9, Mortgage Loan
Securitizations in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
Financial
Instruments
We estimate fair values for each of our financial instruments,
including derivative instruments. Most of these financial
instruments are not publicly traded on an organized exchange. In
the absence of quoted market prices, we must develop an estimate
of fair value using dealer quotes, present value cash flow
models, option-pricing models or other conventional valuation
methods, as appropriate. The use of these fair value techniques
involves significant judgments and assumptions, including
estimates of future interest rate levels based on interest rate
yield curves, prepayment and volatility factors and an
estimation of the timing of future cash flows. The use of
different assumptions may have a material effect on the
estimated fair value amounts recorded in our financial
statements. See Note 21, Fair Value of Financial
Instruments in the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
In addition, hedge accounting requires that, at the beginning of
each hedge period, we justify an expectation that the
relationship between the changes in the fair value of
derivatives designated as hedges compared to the changes in the
fair value of the underlying hedged items will be highly
effective. This effectiveness assessment involves an estimation
of changes in the fair value resulting from changes in interest
rates and corresponding changes in prepayment levels, as well as
the probability of the occurrence of transactions for cash flow
hedges. The use of different assumptions and changing market
conditions may impact the results of the effectiveness
assessment and ultimately the timing of when changes in
derivative fair values and the underlying hedged items are
recorded in earnings. See Item 7A. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk for a
sensitivity analysis based on hypothetical changes in interest
rates.
92
Goodwill
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets
(SFAS No. 142), we assess the carrying
value of our goodwill for impairment annually, or more
frequently if circumstances indicate impairment may have
occurred. We assess goodwill for such impairment by comparing
the carrying value of our reporting units to their fair value.
Due to the integration and reorganization of the operations of
First Fleet into our other fleet management services operations
during the third quarter of 2006, we changed our reporting unit
structure to aggregate all fleet management services operations
into one reporting unit. Prior to this change, our reporting
units were First Fleet, the Fleet Management Services segment
excluding First Fleet, PHH Home Loans, the Mortgage Production
segment excluding PHH Home Loans and the Mortgage Servicing
segment. When determining the fair value of our reporting units,
we utilize discounted cash flows and incorporate assumptions
that we believe marketplace participants would utilize. When
available and as appropriate, we use comparative market
multiples and other factors to corroborate the discounted cash
flow results. The aggregate carrying value of our Goodwill was
$86 million at December 31, 2006. See Note 5,
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets in the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
Income
Taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes
(SFAS No. 109), which requires that
deferred tax assets and liabilities be recognized using enacted
tax rates for the effect of the temporary differences between
the book and tax basis of recorded assets and liabilities. We
make estimates and judgments with regard to the calculation of
certain tax assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 109 also
requires that deferred tax assets be reduced by valuation
allowances if it is more likely than not that some portion of
the deferred tax asset will not be realized. We assess the
likelihood that the benefits of a deferred tax asset will be
realized by considering historical and projected taxable income
and income tax planning strategies. Should a change in
circumstances lead to a change in our judgments about the
realization of deferred tax assets in future years, we adjust
the valuation allowances in the period that the change in
circumstances occurs, along with a charge or credit to current
tax expense. Significant changes to our estimates and
assumptions may result in an increase or decrease to our tax
expense in a subsequent period. As of December 31, 2006 and
2005, we had valuation allowances of $63 million and
$62 million, respectively, which primarily represent state
net operating loss carryforwards that we believe will more
likely than not go unutilized.
We record liabilities for income tax contingencies when it is
probable that a liability to a taxing authority has been
incurred and the amount of the contingency can be reasonably
estimated. These income tax contingency reserves are reviewed
periodically and are adjusted as events occur that affect our
estimates, such as the availability of new information, the
lapsing of applicable statutes of limitations, the conclusion of
tax audits, the measurement of additional estimated liabilities
based on current calculations (including interest
and/or
penalties), the identification of new income tax contingencies,
the release of administrative tax guidance affecting its
estimates of tax liabilities or the rendering of relevant court
decisions.
To the extent we prevail in matters for which reserves have been
established or are required to pay amounts in excess of our
reserves, our effective income tax rate in a given financial
statement period could be materially affected. An unfavorable
tax settlement would require the use of our cash and may result
in an increase in our effective income tax rate in the period of
resolution if the settlement is in excess of our reserves. A tax
settlement for an amount lower than our reserves would be
recognized as a reduction in our income tax expense in the
period of resolution and would result in a decrease in our
effective tax rate. Income tax contingency reserves, including
accrued interest, were $27 million and $15 million as
of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and are
reflected in Other liabilities in the accompanying Consolidated
Balance Sheets.
See Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
included in this
Form 10-K
for discussion regarding the issuance of FASB Interpretation
No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes.
93
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
For detailed information regarding recently issued accounting
pronouncements and the expected impact on our business, see
Note 1, Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
included in this
Form 10-K.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
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.
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 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 purchased 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 were
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 $3.4 billion as
of December 31, 2006. In addition, the outstanding balance
of loans sold with recourse by us was $584 million as of
December 31, 2006.
94
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 December 31, 2006, we had a liability of
$29 million, recorded in Other liabilities in the
accompanying 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 December 31, 2006, we provided
such mortgage reinsurance for approximately $18.2 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
$702 million as of December 31, 2006. We are required
to hold securities in trust related to this potential
obligation, which were included in Restricted Cash in the
accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31,
2006. As of December 31, 2006, a liability of
$17 million was recorded in Other liabilities in the
accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet for estimated losses
associated with our mortgage reinsurance activities.
See Note 17, Commitments and Contingencies in
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
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 represented more than 5% of the Net revenues of the
business during the year ended December 31, 2006. PHH
Arvals historical net credit losses as a percentage of the
ending balance of Net investment in fleet leases have not
exceeded 0.07% in any of the last three 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 December 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.
95
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 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 December 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.
The following table summarizes the estimated change in the fair
value of our assets and liabilities sensitive to interest rates
as of December 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
|
|
$
|
47
|
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
(18
|
)
|
|
$
|
(38
|
)
|
|
$
|
(85
|
)
|
Interest rate lock commitments
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
Forward loan sale commitments
|
|
|
(76
|
)
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
147
|
|
Options
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage loans held for
sale, net, interest rate lock commitments and related derivatives
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
(578
|
)
|
|
|
(287
|
)
|
|
|
(140
|
)
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights
derivatives
|
|
|
374
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
(93
|
)
|
|
|
(184
|
)
|
|
|
(357
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage servicing rights,
net and related derivatives
|
|
|
(204
|
)
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Mortgage Assets
|
|
|
(211
|
)
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
Total Vehicle Assets
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
Total Liabilities
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total, net
|
|
$
|
(196
|
)
|
|
$
|
(101
|
)
|
|
$
|
(46
|
)
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
$
|
38
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
Index to
the Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
Schedules:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
97
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of PHH
Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
PHH Corporation and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity, and cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2006. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of PHH
Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and
2005, and the results of their operations and their cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2006, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
As discussed in Note 26 to the consolidated financial
statements, on March 15, 2007, the Company entered into a
Merger Agreement.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006 based on the
criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission and our report dated May 24, 2007
expressed an unqualified opinion on managements assessment
of the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting and an adverse opinion on the effectiveness
of the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
May 24, 2007
98
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of PHH
Corporation:
We have audited managements assessment, included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting, that PHH Corporation and subsidiaries (the
Company) did not maintain effective internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, because
of the effect of the material weaknesses identified in
managements assessment based on criteria established in
Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. The Companys management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on managements assessment and an opinion on the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed by, or under the supervision of, the
companys principal executive and principal financial
officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected
by the companys board of directors, management, and other
personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over
financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or
improper management override of controls, material misstatements
due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. Also, projections of any evaluation of the
effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting
to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may
become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the
degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may
deteriorate.
A material weakness is a significant deficiency, or combination
of significant deficiencies, that results in more than a remote
likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim
financial statements will not be prevented or detected. The
following material weaknesses have been identified and included
in managements assessment:
|
|
I. |
The Company did not have adequate controls in place to establish
and maintain an effective control environment. Specifically, the
following deficiencies in the control environment in the
aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company 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 U.S. (GAAP) and in
internal control over financial reporting commensurate with its
financial reporting obligations.
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain sufficient, formalized and
consistent finance and accounting policies nor did the Company
maintain adequate controls with respect to the review,
supervision and monitoring of its accounting operations.
|
99
|
|
|
|
|
The Company did not establish and maintain adequate segregation
of duties, assignments and delegation of authority with clear
lines of communication and system access controls to provide
reasonable assurance that it was in compliance with existing
policies and procedures.
|
|
|
|
The Company did not establish an adequate enterprise-wide risk
assessment process, including an assessment of risk related to
fraud.
|
The material weakness in the Companys control environment
increases the likelihood of material misstatements of the
Companys 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. |
The Company did not maintain effective controls, including
monitoring, to provide reasonable assurance that the
Companys financial closing and reporting process was
timely and accurate. Specifically, the following deficiencies in
the aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain sufficient, formalized written
policies and procedures governing the financial closing and
reporting process.
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain effective controls to provide
reasonable assurance that management oversight and review
procedures were properly performed over the accounts and
disclosures in its consolidated financial statements. In
addition, the Company did not maintain effective controls over
the reporting of information to management to provide reasonable
assurance that the preparation of its consolidated financial
statements and disclosures were complete and accurate.
|
|
|
|
The Company 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.
|
|
|
|
The Company 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. |
The Company did not maintain effective controls, including
policies and procedures, over accounting for contracts.
Specifically, the Company 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.
|
|
|
IV. |
The Company did not design and maintain effective controls over
accounting for income taxes. Specifically, the following
deficiencies in the process of accounting for income taxes in
the aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company 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 the consolidated financial
statements.
|
|
|
|
The Company 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 the consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
V. |
The Company did not design and maintain effective controls over
accounting for human resources and payroll processes (HR
Processes). Specifically, the following deficiencies in
the process of accounting for HR Processes in the aggregate
constituted a material weakness:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain effective controls over HR
Processes, including reconciliation, monitoring and reporting
processes performed by the Company and third-party service
providers.
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain effective controls over funding
authorization for payroll processes.
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain formal, written policies and
procedures governing the HR Processes.
|
100
|
|
VI. |
The Company did not design and maintain effective controls over
accounting for expenditures. Specifically, the following
deficiencies in the process of accounting for expenditures in
the aggregate constituted a material weakness:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain effective controls to provide
reasonable assurance that vendor accounts were properly
established, updated and authorized and that vendor invoices
were properly approved.
|
|
|
|
The Company did not maintain sufficient evidence of the regular
performance of account reconciliations and management
expenditure reviews.
|
These material weaknesses were considered in determining the
nature, timing, and extent of audit tests applied in our audit
of the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedules as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006,
of the Company and this report does not affect our report on
such consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedules.
In our opinion, managements assessment that the Company
did not maintain effective internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2006, is fairly stated, in all
material respects, based on the criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Also in our
opinion, because of the effect of the material weaknesses
described above on the achievement of the objectives of the
control criteria, the Company has not maintained effective
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006, based on the criteria established in
Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedules as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006,
of the Company, and our reports dated May 24, 2007
expressed an unqualified opinion on those financial statements
and financial statement schedules and included explanatory
paragraphs concerning the Merger Agreement entered into on
March 15, 2007.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
May 24, 2007
101
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage fees
|
|
$
|
129
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
226
|
|
Fleet management fees
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net fee income
|
|
|
287
|
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
361
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet lease income
|
|
|
1,587
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
1,357
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net
|
|
|
198
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
405
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage interest income
|
|
|
363
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
Mortgage interest expense
|
|
|
(270
|
)
|
|
|
(209
|
)
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage net finance income
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan servicing income
|
|
|
515
|
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and recovery of
(provision for) impairment of mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(217
|
)
|
|
|
(499
|
)
|
Change in fair value of mortgage
servicing rights
|
|
|
(334
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net derivative (loss) gain related
to mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation
adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
(479
|
)
|
|
|
(299
|
)
|
|
|
(382
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loan servicing income
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
|
2,288
|
|
|
|
2,471
|
|
|
|
2,397
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
389
|
|
|
|
395
|
|
Occupancy and other office expenses
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
Fleet interest expense
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
105
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
419
|
|
|
|
445
|
|
|
|
474
|
|
Spin-Off related expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
2,292
|
|
|
|
2,312
|
|
|
|
2,225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before income taxes and minority interest
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
|
172
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before minority interest
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
Minority interest in income (loss)
of consolidated entities, net of income taxes of $(1) and $1
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations, net of income taxes of $0 and $76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per
share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.38
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
2.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.36
|
|
|
$
|
4.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per
share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.36
|
|
|
$
|
1.77
|
|
(Loss) income from discontinued
operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.02
|
)
|
|
|
2.22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.34
|
|
|
$
|
3.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
102
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
(In millions, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
123
|
|
|
$
|
107
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
559
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net
|
|
|
2,936
|
|
|
|
2,395
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of
allowance for doubtful accounts of $3 and $6
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
471
|
|
Net investment in fleet leases
|
|
|
4,147
|
|
|
|
3,966
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
1,971
|
|
|
|
1,909
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
64
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
377
|
|
|
|
419
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
10,760
|
|
|
$
|
9,965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued
expenses
|
|
$
|
494
|
|
|
$
|
565
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
6,744
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
766
|
|
|
|
790
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
307
|
|
|
|
314
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
9,214
|
|
|
|
8,413
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (See
Note 17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par
value; 10,000,000 shares authorized; none issued or
outstanding at December 31, 2006 and 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par
value; 100,000,000 shares authorized;
53,506,822 shares issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2006; 53,408,728 shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
961
|
|
|
|
983
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
556
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
income
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Deferred compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders
equity
|
|
|
1,515
|
|
|
|
1,521
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
10,760
|
|
|
$
|
9,965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
103
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
(In millions, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2003
|
|
|
1,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
830
|
|
|
$
|
1,046
|
|
|
$
|
(21
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,855
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains on
available-for-sale
securities, net of income taxes of $4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of realized
holding gains on
available-for-sale
securities, net of income taxes of $(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum pension liability
adjustment, net of income taxes of $(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222
|
|
Cash dividend to Cendant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(140
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(140
|
)
|
Transfer of subsidiary to Cendant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2004
|
|
|
1,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
830
|
|
|
|
1,102
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,921
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains on
available-for-sale
securities, net of income taxes of $1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum pension liability
adjustment, net of income taxes of $(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
Stock split,
52,684-for-1,
effected January 28, 2005 related to the
Spin-Off
|
|
|
52,683,398
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions of assets and
liabilities to Cendant related to the Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(617
|
)
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(593
|
)
|
Cash contribution from Cendant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
Stock option expense related to
Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Deferred compensation from Cendant
in connection with the Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Stock options exercised, net of
income taxes of $(2)
|
|
|
797,964
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Restricted stock award vesting, net
of income taxes of $(1)
|
|
|
182,565
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
Restricted stock award grants, net
of forfeitures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of Common stock
|
|
|
(256,199
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2005
|
|
|
53,408,728
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
983
|
|
|
$
|
556
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
(31
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,521
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
104
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY (Continued)
(In millions, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(continued from previous
page)
|
|
|
53,408,728
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
983
|
|
|
$
|
556
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
(31
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,521
|
|
Effect of adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum pension liability
adjustment, net of income taxes of $1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive
loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Stock options exercised, net of
income taxes of $0
|
|
|
65,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Restricted stock award vesting, net
of income taxes of $0
|
|
|
32,574
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
53,506,822
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
961
|
|
|
$
|
540
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,515
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
105
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
212
|
|
Adjustment for discontinued
operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(118
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
94
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile (Loss)
income from continuing operations to net cash provided by
operating activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option expense related to
the Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalization of originated
mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
(411
|
)
|
|
|
(425
|
)
|
|
|
(448
|
)
|
Amortization and (recovery of)
provision for impairment of mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
499
|
|
Net unrealized loss (gain) on
mortgage servicing rights and related derivatives
|
|
|
479
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
(117
|
)
|
Vehicle depreciation
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
Origination of mortgage loans held
for sale
|
|
|
(33,388
|
)
|
|
|
(37,737
|
)
|
|
|
(36,518
|
)
|
Proceeds on sale of and payments
from mortgage loans held for sale
|
|
|
32,843
|
|
|
|
37,341
|
|
|
|
37,046
|
|
Other adjustments and changes in
other assets and liabilities, net
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
(44
|
)
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating
activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
748
|
|
|
|
731
|
|
|
|
1,937
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in vehicles
|
|
|
(2,539
|
)
|
|
|
(2,518
|
)
|
|
|
(2,155
|
)
|
Proceeds on sale of investment
vehicles
|
|
|
1,135
|
|
|
|
1,095
|
|
|
|
937
|
|
Purchase of mortgage servicing
rights
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
Cash paid on derivatives related
to mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
(178
|
)
|
|
|
(294
|
)
|
|
|
(560
|
)
|
Net settlement proceeds for
derivatives related to mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
228
|
|
|
|
702
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and
equipment
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
Net assets acquired, net of cash
acquired of $0, $0 and $10, and acquisition-related payments
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
(Increase) decrease in Restricted
cash
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
(199
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
(1,574
|
)
|
|
|
(1,246
|
)
|
|
|
(1,282
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in
short-term borrowings
|
|
|
384
|
|
|
|
533
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
Proceeds from borrowings
|
|
|
23,184
|
|
|
|
9,207
|
|
|
|
2,712
|
|
Principal payments on borrowings
|
|
|
(22,707
|
)
|
|
|
(9,516
|
)
|
|
|
(3,057
|
)
|
Issuances of Company Common stock
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of Company Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of dividends to Cendant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(140
|
)
|
Capital contribution from Cendant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net intercompany funding from
Cendant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
financing activities of continuing operations
|
|
$
|
841
|
|
|
$
|
365
|
|
|
$
|
(527
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
106
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Continued)
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Effect of changes in exchange
rates on Cash and cash equivalents of continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in)
discontinued operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(242
|
)
|
|
|
103
|
|
Effect of changes in exchange
rates on Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by
discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(88
|
)
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(238
|
)
|
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at
beginning of period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
257
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash and cash equivalents at
beginning of period
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
345
|
|
|
|
174
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end
of period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
257
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cash and cash equivalents
at end of period
|
|
$
|
123
|
|
|
$
|
107
|
|
|
$
|
345
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash
Flows Information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
payments(1)
|
|
$
|
463
|
|
|
$
|
344
|
|
|
$
|
256
|
|
Income tax payments, net
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes a $44 million
make-whole payment made during the year ended December 31,
2005 that is discussed further in Note 2, Spin-Off
from Cendant.
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
107
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
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 Productionprovides mortgage loan
origination services and sells mortgage loans.
|
|
|
§
|
Mortgage Servicingprovides servicing activities for
originated and purchased loans.
|
|
|
§
|
Fleet Management Servicesprovides commercial fleet
management services.
|
For all periods presented in these Consolidated Financial
Statements prior to February 1, 2005, 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.; however, within
these Notes to 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 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 and variable interest entities of which the Company is
the primary beneficiary. The Mortgage Venture (as defined and
discussed further in Note 2, Spin-Off from
Cendant) is consolidated within PHHs Consolidated
Financial Statements, and Realogy Corporations ownership
interest is presented as Minority interest in the Consolidated
Balance Sheets and Minority interest in income (loss) of
consolidated entities, net of income taxes in the Consolidated
Statements 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 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
(SFAS No. 144), 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 24, Discontinued Operations for more
information).
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
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended
December 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 any of the years affected,
specifically the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005, 2003
or 2002.
108
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
(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. These
estimates and assumptions include, but are not limited to, those
related to the valuation of mortgage servicing rights
(MSRs), financial instruments and Goodwill and the
determination of certain income tax assets and liabilities and
associated valuation allowances. Actual results could differ
from those estimates.
Changes
In Accounting Policies
Loan Commitments. On March 9,
2004, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
SEC) issued Staff Accounting Bulletin
(SAB) No. 105, Application of Accounting
Principles to Loan Commitments
(SAB 105). SAB 105 summarized the views of
the SEC staff regarding the application of GAAP to loan
commitments accounted for as derivative instruments. The SEC
staff believes that in recognizing
a loan
commitment, entities should not consider expected future cash
flows related to the associated servicing of the loan until the
servicing asset has been contractually separated from the
underlying loan by sale or securitization of the loan with the
servicing retained. The provisions of SAB 105 are
applicable to all loan commitments accounted for as derivatives
and entered into subsequent to March 31, 2004. The adoption
of SAB 105 did not have a material impact on the
Companys consolidated statement of operations, financial
position or cash flows, as the Companys pre-existing
accounting treatment for such loan commitments was consistent
with the provisions of SAB 105.
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 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
109
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
presented tax benefits in excess of the value recognized for
financial reporting purposes related to equity instruments
issued under stock-based payment arrangements as cash flows from
operating activities in the 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
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended
December 31, 2006. Additionally, the adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R) did not have a significant effect on
the Companys Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the
year ended December 31, 2006. In accordance with the
transition provisions of SFAS No. 123(R)s
modified prospective application method of adoption, the
Companys 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 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 Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year
ended December 31, 2006. The effects of carrying servicing
rights at the lower of cost or fair value prior to the adoption
of SFAS No. 156
110
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
are recorded in Amortization and recovery of (provision for)
impairment of mortgage servicing rights in the Companys
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004.
The adoption of SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006
did not have a material impact on the Companys
Consolidated Financial Statements as all of the servicing asset
strata were impaired (and therefore reported at fair value) as
of December 31, 2005.
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
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 were 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 adoption of SFAS No. 158
did not have a significant impact on the Companys
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
adoption of SAB 108 did not impact the Companys
Consolidated Financial Statements.
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 does not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 155
to have a significant impact 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
111
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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.
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.
Revenue
Recognition
Mortgage Production. Mortgage
production includes the origination (funding either a purchase
or refinancing) and sale of residential mortgage loans. Mortgage
loans are originated through a variety of marketing channels,
including relationships with corporations, financial
institutions and real estate brokerage firms. The Company also
purchases mortgage loans originated by third parties. Fee income
consists primarily of fees collected on loans originated for
others (including brokered loans) and is recorded as revenue
when the Company has completed its obligations related to the
underlying loan transaction. Loan origination fees, commitment
fees paid in connection with the sale of loans and certain
direct loan origination costs associated with loans are deferred
until such loans are sold. Such fees are recorded as an
adjustment to the cost-basis of the loan and are included in
Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net when the loan is sold. Sales
of mortgage loans are recorded on the date that ownership is
transferred. Gains or losses on sales of mortgage loans are
recognized based upon the difference between the selling price
and the carrying value of the related mortgage loans sold.
The Company principally sells its originated mortgage loans
directly to government-sponsored entities and other investors;
however, in limited circumstances, the Company sells loans
through a wholly owned subsidiarys public registration
statement. In accordance with SFAS No. 140,
Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets
and Extinguishments of Liabilities, the Company evaluates
each type of sale or securitization for sales treatment. This
review includes both an accounting and a legal analysis to
determine whether or not the transferred assets have been
isolated from the transferor. To the extent the transfer of
assets qualifies as a sale, the Company derecognizes the asset
and records the gain or loss on the sale date. In the event the
Company determines that the transfer of assets does not qualify
as a sale, the transfer would be treated as a secured borrowing.
112
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Interest income is accrued as earned. Loans are placed on
non-accrual status when any portion of the principal or interest
is ninety days past due or earlier when concern exists as to the
ultimate collectibility of principal or interest. Interest
received from loans on non-accrual status is recorded as income
when collected. Loans return to accrual status when principal
and interest become current and are anticipated to be fully
collectible.
Mortgage Servicing. Mortgage servicing
is the servicing of residential mortgage loans. Loan servicing
income represents recurring servicing and other ancillary fees
earned for servicing mortgage loans owned by investors as well
as net reinsurance income from the Companys wholly owned
reinsurance subsidiary, Atrium Insurance Corporation
(Atrium). Servicing fees received for servicing
mortgage loans owned by investors are based on a stipulated
percentage of the outstanding monthly principal balance on such
loans, or the difference between the weighted-average yield
received on the mortgages and the amount paid to the investor,
less guaranty fees, expenses associated with business
relationships and interest on curtailments. Loan servicing
income is receivable only out of interest collected from
mortgagors, and is recorded as income when collected. Late
charges and other miscellaneous fees collected from mortgagors
are also recorded as income when collected. Costs associated
with loan servicing are charged to expense as incurred.
Fleet Leasing Services. The Company
provides fleet management services to corporate clients and
government agencies. These services include management and
leasing of vehicles and other fee-based services for
clients vehicle fleets. The Company leases vehicles
primarily to corporate fleet users under open-end operating and
direct financing lease arrangements where the client bears
substantially all of the vehicles residual value risk. The
lease term under the open-end lease agreements provides for a
minimum lease term of 12 months and after the minimum term,
the leases may be continued at the lessees election for
successive monthly renewals. In limited circumstances, the
Company leases vehicles under closed-end leases where the
Company bears all of the vehicles residual value risk.
Gains or losses on the sales of vehicles under closed-end leases
are recorded in Other income. For operating leases, lease
revenues, which contain a depreciation component, an interest
component and a management fee component, are recognized over
the lease term of the vehicle, which encompasses the minimum
lease term and the
month-to-month
renewals. For direct financing leases, lease revenues contain an
interest component and a management fee component. The interest
component is recognized using the effective interest method over
the lease term of the vehicle, which encompasses the minimum
lease term and the
month-to-month
renewals. Amounts charged to the lessees for interest are
determined in accordance with the pricing supplement to the
respective lease agreement and are generally calculated on a
variable-rate basis that varies
month-to-month
in accordance with changes in the variable-rate index. Amounts
charged to lessees for interest may also be based on a fixed
rate that would remain constant for the life of the lease.
Amounts charged to the lessees for depreciation are based on the
straight-line depreciation of the vehicle over its expected
lease term. Management fees are recognized on a straight-line
basis over the life of the lease. Revenue for other services is
recognized when such services are provided to the lessee.
Revenue for certain services, including fuel card, accident
management services and maintenance services, is based on a
negotiated percentage of the purchase price for the underlying
products or services provided by third-party suppliers and is
recognized when the service is provided by the supplier. Revenue
for other services, including management fees for leased
vehicles, is recognized when such services are provided to the
lessee.
The Company sells certain of its truck and equipment leases to
third-party banks and individual financial institutions. When
the Company sells operating leases, it sells the underlying
assets and assigns any rights to the leases, including future
leasing revenues, to the banks or financial institutions. Upon
the transfer of the title and the assignment of the rights
associated with the operating leases, the Company records the
proceeds from the sale as revenue and recognizes an expense for
the undepreciated cost of the asset sold. Upon the sale or
transfer of rights to direct financing leases, the net gain or
loss is recorded in Other income. Under certain of these sales
agreements, the Company retains some residual risk in connection
with the fair value of the asset at lease termination.
113
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Depreciation
on Operating Leases and Net Investment in Fleet Leases
Vehicles are stated at cost, net of accumulated depreciation.
The initial cost of the vehicles is recorded net of incentives
and allowances from vehicle manufacturers. Leased vehicles are
depreciated on a straight-line basis over a term that generally
ranges from 3 to 6 years.
Advertising
Expenses
Advertising costs are expensed in the period incurred.
Advertising expenses, recorded within Other operating expenses
in the Consolidated Statements of Operations, were
$10 million, $10 million and $11 million in 2006,
2005 and 2004, respectively.
Income
Taxes
The Company filed its income tax returns for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2004 and for the short period ended on
the effective date of the Spin-Off as part of the Cendant
consolidated federal return and certain Cendant consolidated
state returns. Income tax expense for periods prior to the
Spin-Off is computed as if the Company filed its federal and
state income tax returns on a stand-alone basis. The Company
filed a consolidated federal return and state returns, as
required, for the period from February 1, 2005 through
December 31, 2005 which reported only its taxable income
and the taxable income of those corporations which were its
subsidiaries subsequent to the Spin-Off. The Company recognizes
deferred tax assets and liabilities pursuant to
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes
(SFAS No. 109). The Company regularly
reviews the deferred tax assets to assess their potential
realization and establishes a valuation allowance for such
assets when the Company believes it is more likely than not that
some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized.
Generally, any change in the valuation allowance is recorded in
current tax expense; however, if the valuation allowance is
adjusted in connection with an acquisition, such adjustment is
recorded concurrently through Goodwill rather than the Provision
for income taxes. Income tax expense includes (i) deferred
tax expense, which represents the net change in the deferred tax
asset or liability balance during the year plus any change in
the valuation allowance and (ii) current tax expense, which
represents the amount of taxes currently payable to or
receivable from a taxing authority plus amounts accrued for tax
contingencies (including both tax and interest) in accordance
with SFAS No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies (SFAS No. 5). The
Company records income tax contingency reserves through charges
to current income tax expense and includes the associated
liability in Other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance
Sheets. Income tax expense excludes the tax effects related to
adjustments recorded to Accumulated other comprehensive income
as well as the tax effects of cumulative effects of changes in
accounting principles.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Marketable securities with original maturities of three months
or less are included in Cash and cash equivalents.
Restricted
Cash
Restricted cash primarily relates to (i) amounts
specifically designated to purchase assets, to repay debt
and/or to
provide over-collateralization within the Companys
asset-backed debt arrangements, (ii) funds collected and
held for pending mortgage closings and (iii) accounts held
for the capital fund requirements of and potential claims
related to the Companys mortgage reinsurance subsidiary.
Mortgage
Loans Held for Sale
Mortgage loans held for sale (MLHS) represent
mortgage loans originated or purchased by the Company and held
until sold to investors. Upon the closing of a residential
mortgage loan originated or purchased by the Company, the
mortgage loan is typically warehoused for a period of up to
60 days and then sold into the secondary market. MLHS are
recorded in the Consolidated Balance Sheets at the lower of cost
or market value, which is
114
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
computed by the aggregate method, net of deferred loan
origination fees and costs. The cost-basis of MLHS is adjusted
to reflect changes in the fair value of the loans as applicable
through fair value hedge accounting. The fair value is estimated
using quoted market prices for securities backed by similar
types of loans and current dealer commitments to purchase loans.
Upon the sale of the underlying mortgage loans, the MSRs and
servicing obligations of those loans are generally retained by
the Company.
Mortgage
Servicing Rights
An MSR is the right to receive a portion of the interest coupon
and fees collected from the mortgagor for performing specified
mortgage servicing activities, which consist of collecting loan
payments, remitting principal and interest payments to
investors, holding escrow funds for payment of mortgage-related
expenses such as taxes and insurance and otherwise administering
the Companys mortgage loan servicing portfolio.
MSRs are created through either the direct purchase of servicing
from a third party or through the sale of an originated loan.
The Company adopted the fair value measurement method of
SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006. In accordance
with SFAS No. 156, servicing is initially recorded at
fair value. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 156,
purchased servicing was recorded at the lower of the purchase
price or fair value and servicing created through the sale of an
originated loan was determined by an allocation of the cost of
the mortgage loan between the loan sold and the retained
servicing, based on their relative fair values. Both prior to
and subsequent to the adoption of SFAS No. 156, the
initial capitalization of the servicing is recorded as an
addition to Mortgage servicing rights, net in the Consolidated
Balance Sheets and has a direct impact on Gain on sale of
mortgage loans, net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Company services residential mortgage loans, which represent
its single class of servicing rights. Beginning on
January 1, 2006, all MSRs are recorded at fair value, as
the Company elected the fair value measurement method for
subsequently measuring these servicing rights. Valuation changes
in the MSRs are recognized in Change in fair value of mortgage
servicing rights in the Consolidated Statement of Operations for
the year ended December 31, 2006, and the carrying value of
the MSRs is adjusted in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of
December 31, 2006. The fair value of the MSRs is estimated
based upon projections of expected future cash flows considering
prepayment estimates (developed using a model described below),
the Companys historical prepayment rates, portfolio
characteristics, interest rates based on interest rate yield
curves, implied volatility and other economic factors. The
Company incorporates a probability weighted option adjusted
spread (OAS) model to generate and discount cash
flows for the MSR valuation. The OAS model generates numerous
interest rate paths, then calculates the MSR cash flow at each
monthly point for each interest rate path and discounts those
cash flows back to the current period. The MSR value is
determined by averaging the discounted cash flows from each of
the interest rate paths. The interest rate paths are generated
with a random distribution centered around implied forward
interest rates, which are determined from the interest rate
yield curve at any given point of time.
A key assumption in the Companys estimate of the fair
value of the MSRs is forecasted prepayments. The Company uses a
third-party model to forecast prepayment rates at each monthly
point for each interest rate path in the OAS model. The model to
forecast prepayment rates used in the development of expected
future cash flows is based on historical observations of
prepayment behavior in similar periods, comparing current
mortgage interest rates to the mortgage interest rates in the
Companys servicing portfolio, and incorporates loan
characteristics (e.g., loan type and note rate) and factors such
as recent prepayment experience, previous refinance
opportunities and estimated levels of home equity. On a
quarterly basis, the Company validates the assumptions used in
estimating the fair value of the MSRs against a number of
third-party sources, including peer surveys, MSR broker surveys
and other market-based sources. The Company also obtains
third-party valuations of its MSRs and considers these
independent valuations in its evaluation of the fair value of
its MSRs.
Prior to January 1, 2006, MSRs were routinely evaluated for
impairment, at least on a quarterly basis. Valuation changes in
the MSRs were recognized in Amortization and recovery of
(provision for) impairment of mortgage servicing rights in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and
115
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
2004, and the carrying value of the MSRs was adjusted through a
valuation allowance in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of
December 31, 2005. Fair value was estimated using the
method described above. In addition, the loans underlying the
MSRs were stratified into note rate pools based on certain risk
characteristics including product type and rate. Fixed-rate
loans were stratified into interest rate bands of less than 6%,
6-6.5% and greater than 6.5%. Variable-rate loans were
stratified into adjustable-rate mortgage, hybrid adjustable-rate
mortgage and home equity line of credit products. The Company
also obtained quarterly estimates of the value of each stratum
of MSRs from an independent third party and considered these
independent valuations in its evaluation of potential impairment
of MSRs. Management periodically reviewed the various strata to
determine whether the value of the impaired MSRs in a given
stratum was likely to recover. If the value was not expected to
recover with a 200 basis point increase in rates, the
impairment was deemed to be
other-than-temporary.
If
other-than-temporary
impairment was indicated, MSRs were written off directly with a
corresponding decrease to the valuation allowance and could not
be subsequently recovered. Recovery of the valuation allowance
resulting from a temporary impairment was recorded if the fair
value of the stratum increased, but was limited to the
cost-basis of a given stratum. The Company amortized MSRs 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. The
amortization rate was applied to the gross book value of the
MSRs to determine the amortization expense.
Investment
Securities
The Companys Investment securities totaled
$35 million and $41 million as of December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively, and consisted of its retained
interests in securitizations. Management determines the
appropriate classification of its investments at the time
acquired. The retained interests from the Companys
securitizations of residential mortgage loans, with the
exception of MSRs (the accounting for which is described above
under Mortgage Servicing Rights), are classified as
available-for-sale
or trading securities, and, after the adoption of
SFAS No. 156 on January 1, 2006, are recorded at
fair value. Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 156,
gains or losses relating to the assets securitized were
allocated between such assets and the retained interests based
on their relative fair values on the date of sale. The Company
evaluates its investment securities for
other-than-temporary
impairment on a quarterly basis.
Other-than-temporary
impairment is recorded within Other income in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations. The Company estimates the fair value
of retained interests based upon the present value of expected
future cash flows, which is subject to prepayment risks,
expected credit losses and interest rate risks of the sold
financial assets. See Note 9, Mortgage Loan
Securitizations for more information regarding these
retained interests.
Available-for-sale
securities are carried at fair value with unrealized gains and
losses reported net of income taxes as a separate component of
Stockholders equity. Trading securities are recorded at
fair value with unrealized gains and losses reported in Other
income in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. All
realized gains and losses are determined on a specific
identification basis and are recorded within Other income in the
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Property,
Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment (including leasehold improvements)
are recorded at cost, net of accumulated depreciation and
amortization. Depreciation, recorded as a component of Other
depreciation and amortization in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations, is computed utilizing the straight-line method over
the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Amortization
of leasehold improvements, also recorded as a component of Other
depreciation and amortization, is computed utilizing the
straight-line method over the estimated benefit period of the
related assets or the lease term, if shorter. Estimated useful
lives are 30 years for the Companys building,
3 years for capitalized software, and range from 2 to
20 years for leasehold improvements and 3 to 7 years
for furniture, fixtures and equipment.
The Company capitalizes internal software development costs
during the application development stage. The costs capitalized
by the Company relate to external direct costs of materials and
services and employee costs related
116
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
to the time spent on the project during the capitalization
period. Capitalized software costs are evaluated for impairment
annually or when changing circumstances indicate that amounts
capitalized may be impaired. Impaired items are written down to
their estimated fair values at the date of evaluation.
Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets
(SFAS No. 142), the Company assesses the
carrying value of its goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible
assets for impairment annually, or more frequently if
circumstances indicate impairment may have occurred. The Company
assesses goodwill for such impairment by comparing the carrying
value of its reporting units to their fair value. Due to the
integration and reorganization of the operations of First Fleet
Corporation (First Fleet) into the Companys
other fleet management services operations during the third
quarter of 2006, the Company changed its reporting unit
structure to aggregate all fleet management services operations
into one reporting unit. Prior to this change, the
Companys reporting units were First Fleet, the Fleet
Management Services segment excluding First Fleet, PHH Home
Loans, LLC (as defined in Note 2, Spin-Off from
Cendant), the Mortgage Production segment excluding PHH
Home Loans, LLC and the Mortgage Servicing segment. When
determining the fair value of its reporting units, the Company
utilizes discounted cash flows and incorporates assumptions that
it believes marketplace participants would utilize. When
available and as appropriate, the Company uses comparative
market multiples and other factors to corroborate the discounted
cash flow results. Indefinite-lived intangible assets are tested
for impairment and written down to fair value, as required by
SFAS No. 142.
Customer lists are generally amortized over a
20-year
period.
Derivative
Instruments
The Company uses derivative instruments as part of its overall
strategy to manage its exposure to market risks primarily
associated with fluctuations in interest rates. As a matter of
policy, the Company does not use derivatives for speculative
purposes.
All derivatives are recorded at fair value and included in Other
assets or Other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Changes in the fair value of derivatives not designated as
hedging instruments and derivatives designated as fair value
hedging instruments are recognized in earnings. Changes in the
fair value of the hedged item in a fair value hedge are recorded
as adjustments to the carrying amount of the hedged item and
recognized in earnings in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations. The changes in the fair values of hedged items and
related derivatives are included in the following line items in
the Consolidated Statements of Operations:
|
|
|
|
§
|
Loan-related derivatives and changes in the fair value of MLHS
are included in Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net;
|
|
|
§
|
Debt-related derivatives and changes in the fair value of the
debt are included in Mortgage interest expense or Fleet interest
expense.
|
The effective portion of changes in the fair value of
derivatives designated as cash flow hedging instruments is
recorded as a component of Accumulated other comprehensive
income. The ineffective portion is reported in earnings as a
component of Mortgage interest expense or Fleet interest
expense. Amounts included in Accumulated other comprehensive
income are reclassified into earnings in the same period during
which the hedged item affects earnings.
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. As of and for the years
ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, the derivatives
associated with the MSRs were freestanding derivatives and were
not designated in a hedge relationship pursuant to
SFAS No. 133. Changes in the fair value of MSR-related
derivatives and changes in the fair value of MSRs are included
in Amortization and valuation adjustments related to mortgage
servicing rights, net.
117
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets
As required by SFAS No. 144, if circumstances indicate
an impairment may have occurred, the Company evaluates the
recoverability of its long-lived assets including amortizing
intangible assets, by comparing the respective carrying values
of the assets to the current and expected future cash flows, on
an undiscounted basis, to be generated from such assets.
Custodial
Accounts
The Company has fiduciary responsibility for servicing accounts
related to customer escrow funds and custodial funds due to
investors aggregating approximately $2.6 billion and
$3.1 billion as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. These funds are maintained in segregated bank
accounts, which are not included in the assets and liabilities
of the Company. The Company receives certain benefits from these
deposits, as allowable under federal and state laws and
regulations. Income earned on these escrow accounts is recorded
in Mortgage interest income in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
On January 31, 2005, each holder of Cendant common stock
received one share of PHH Common stock for every twenty shares
of Cendant common stock held on January 19, 2005, the
record date for the distribution. The Spin-Off was effective on
February 1, 2005.
In connection with the Spin-Off, PHH and Cendants real
estate services division became parties to a mortgage venture,
PHH Home Loans, LLC (the Mortgage Venture).
Effective July 31, 2006, Cendant completed the spin-off of
its real estate services division (the Realogy
Spin-Off) into an independent publicly traded company,
Realogy Corporation (NYSE: H) (Realogy). The
structure and operation of the Mortgage Venture was not impacted
by the Realogy Spin-Off. The Mortgage Venture originates and
sells mortgage loans primarily sourced through Realogys
owned real estate brokerage business, NRT Incorporated
(NRT) and its owned relocation business, Cartus
Corporation (formerly known as Cendant Mobility Services
Corporation) (Cartus). The Mortgage Venture
commenced operations in October 2005. The Company contributed
assets and transferred employees that have historically
supported originations from NRT and Cartus to the Mortgage
Venture in October 2005. PHH Broker Partner Corporation
(PHH Broker Partner), a wholly owned subsidiary of
PHH, owns 50.1% of the Mortgage Venture, and Realogy Real Estate
Services Venture Partner, Inc. (Realogy Venture
Partner), a wholly owned subsidiary of Realogy, owns the
remaining 49.9%. 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 the
Company have agreed on non-competition, indemnification and
exclusivity arrangements (the Strategic Relationship
Agreement). Under the Strategic Relationship Agreement,
Realogy agreed that the residential commercial real estate
brokerage business owned and operated by NRT, the title and
settlement services business owned and operated by
Title Resource Group LLC (formerly known as Cendant
Settlement Services Group) (together with its subsidiaries,
TRG) and the relocation business owned and operated
by Cartus will exclusively recommend the Mortgage Venture as
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 Services Venture Partner, Inc. (formerly known as
Cendant Real Estate Services Venture Partner, Inc.) (the
Realogy Venture Partner and together with Realogy
Services Group LLC and their respective 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 the Realogy
Entities (excluding Realogy Franchisees or any employee or
independent sales associate thereof acting in such capacity) and
(iii) all
U.S.-based
employees of Cendant. See Note 22, Related Party
Transactions for more information regarding the Mortgage
Venture.
118
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Also in connection with the Spin-Off, PHH entered into a tax
sharing agreement with Cendant, which is more fully described in
Note 17, Commitments and Contingencies, a
transition services agreement (the Transition Services
Agreement) and certain other agreements which are more
fully described in Note 22, Related Party
Transactions.
During 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 20, 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 year
ended December 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.
Assets acquired and liabilities assumed in business combinations
were recorded in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of their
respective acquisition dates based upon their estimated fair
values at such dates. The results of operations of businesses
acquired by the Company have been included in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations since their respective dates of
acquisition. The excess of the purchase price over the estimated
fair values of the underlying assets acquired and liabilities
assumed was allocated to Goodwill.
First Fleet. During 2004, the Company
acquired First Fleet, a national provider of fleet management
services to companies that maintain private truck fleets, for
approximately $26 million, net of cash acquired of
$10 million and including $4 million of contingent
consideration that was paid in the first quarter of 2005. As of
December 31, 2004, the Company recorded Goodwill of
$24 million related to this acquisition, none of which is
deductible for income tax purposes. This Goodwill was assigned
to the Fleet Management Services segment. In the fourth quarter
of 2005, the Company recorded $2 million of Goodwill
related to this acquisition due to a contingent payment of
$2 million paid in the first quarter of 2006.
Other. The Company participates in
acquisitions made by NRT by acquiring the mortgage operations of
the real estate brokerage firms acquired by NRT. During 2005,
the Company completed an acquisition for $3 million in
cash, which resulted in $3 million of Goodwill (based on
the preliminary allocation of the purchase price), all of which
was assigned to the Mortgage Production segment. During 2004,
the Company completed two acquisitions for $5 million in
cash, which resulted in $5 million of Goodwill, all of
which was assigned to the Mortgage Production segment.
|
|
4.
|
(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 number of
weighted-average shares outstanding for each of the three years
ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 reflects a
52,684-for-one stock split effected January 28, 2005, in
connection with and in order to consummate the Spin-Off (see
Note 18, Stock-Related Matters). The effect of
potentially dilutive common shares related to Cendants
stock options and restricted stock units that were exchanged for
the Companys stock options and restricted stock units at
the time of the Spin-Off were included in the computation of
diluted earnings per share for all periods prior to the
Spin-Off. The weighted-average computations of the dilutive
119
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
effect of potentially issuable shares of Common stock under the
treasury stock method for the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2004 exclude approximately 3.8 million and
0.4 million outstanding stock-based awards, respectively,
as their inclusion would be anti-dilutive.
The following table summarizes the basic and diluted (loss)
earnings per share calculations for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares
outstandingbasic
|
|
|
53,647,666
|
|
|
|
53,018,376
|
|
|
|
52,684,398
|
|
Effect of potentially dilutive
securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
505,313
|
|
|
|
254,112
|
|
RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
240,927
|
|
|
|
274,209
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares
outstandingdiluted
|
|
|
53,647,666
|
|
|
|
53,764,616
|
|
|
|
53,212,719
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share
from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.38
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share
from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(0.29
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.36
|
|
|
$
|
1.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.
|
Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets
|
In connection with the Spin-Off, there was a change to
Cendants reporting unit structure, which included the
Companys Mortgage Services business that resulted in the
reallocation of goodwill from the Company to other Cendant
entities.
Intangible assets consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Amortized Intangible
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer lists
|
|
$
|
40
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
40
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
Other
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
57
|
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
57
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unamortized Intangible
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
$
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trademarks
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table summarizes the activity associated with
goodwill, by segment, during the years ended December 31,
2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Production
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Goodwill at January 1, 2005
|
|
$
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
88
|
|
Reallocation due to the Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill at the Spin-Off date
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
Goodwill acquired during 2005
|
|
|
2
|
(1)
|
|
|
3
|
(2)
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill at December 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
$
|
61
|
|
|
$
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Relates to the acquisition of First
Fleet. See Note 3, Acquisitions.
|
|
(2) |
|
Relates to the acquisitions of the
mortgage operations of real estate brokerage firms by NRT. See
Note 3, Acquisitions.
|
Amortization expense included within Other depreciation and
amortization relating to all intangible assets excluding MSRs
(see Note 7, Mortgage Servicing Rights) was as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Customer lists
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Other
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the Companys amortizable intangible assets as of
December 31, 2006, the Company expects the related
amortization expense for each of the next five fiscal years to
approximate $4 million, $2 million, $2 million,
$2 million and $2 million, respectively.
121
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
6.
|
Mortgage
Loans Held for Sale
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale
|
|
$
|
2,676
|
|
|
$
|
2,091
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
156
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
Net deferred loan origination fees
and expenses
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net
|
|
$
|
2,936
|
|
|
$
|
2,395
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006, the Company pledged $2.1 billion
of Mortgage loans held for sale, net as collateral in
asset-backed debt arrangements.
|
|
7.
|
Mortgage
Servicing Rights
|
The activity in the Companys loan servicing portfolio
associated with its capitalized MSRs consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
145,827
|
|
|
$
|
138,494
|
|
|
$
|
126,219
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
31,212
|
|
|
|
43,157
|
|
|
|
42,609
|
|
Payoffs, sales and
curtailments(1)
|
|
|
(30,203
|
)
|
|
|
(35,824
|
)
|
|
|
(30,334
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
$
|
146,836
|
|
|
$
|
145,827
|
|
|
$
|
138,494
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes $1.9 billion of the
unpaid principal balance of the underlying mortgage loans for
which the associated MSRs were sold during the year ended
December 31, 2006. There were no sales of MSRs during the
years ended December 31, 2005 or 2004.
|
122
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The activity in the Companys capitalized MSRs consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006(1)
|
|
|
2005(2)
|
|
|
2004(2)
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Mortgage Servicing
Rights:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
2,152
|
|
|
$
|
2,173
|
|
|
$
|
1,976
|
|
Effect of adoption of
SFAS No. 156
|
|
|
(243
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
427
|
|
|
|
522
|
|
|
|
498
|
|
Changes in fair value due to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realization of expected cash flows
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in market inputs or
assumptions used in the valuation model
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and deletions
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(433
|
)
|
|
|
(285
|
)
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
|
1,971
|
|
|
|
2,152
|
|
|
|
2,173
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation Allowance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of period
|
|
|
(243
|
)
|
|
|
(567
|
)
|
|
|
(365
|
)
|
Effect of adoption of
SFAS No. 156
|
|
|
243
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recovery of (provision for)
impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
Reductions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(243
|
)
|
|
|
(567
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
$
|
1,971
|
|
|
$
|
1,909
|
|
|
$
|
1,606
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(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 December 31, 2006 and 2005 were as follows (in
annual rates):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Prepayment speed
|
|
|
19%
|
|
|
|
18%
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
|
10%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
13%
|
|
|
|
16%
|
|
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
123
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
servicing revenue. The Company recorded contractually specified
servicing fees, late fees and other ancillary servicing revenue
within Loan servicing income in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net service fee revenue
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
467
|
|
|
$
|
465
|
|
Late fees
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Other ancillary servicing revenue
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
As of December 31, 2006, the Companys MSRs had a
weighted-average life of approximately 4.7 years.
Approximately 68% of the MSRs associated with the loan servicing
portfolio as of December 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:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Initial capitalization rate of
additions to MSRs
|
|
|
1.37%
|
|
|
|
1.21%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Capitalized servicing rate (based
on fair value)
|
|
|
1.34%
|
|
|
|
1.31%
|
|
Capitalized servicing multiple
(based on fair value)
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Weighted-average servicing fee (in
basis points)
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
The net impact to the Consolidated Statements of Operations
resulting from changes in the fair value of the Companys
MSRs, amortization and related derivatives was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Amortization of mortgage servicing
rights
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(433
|
)
|
|
$
|
(285
|
)
|
Recovery of (provision for)
impairment of mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
(214
|
)
|
Changes in fair value of mortgage
servicing rights due to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realization of expected cash flows
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in market inputs or
assumptions used in the valuation model
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net derivative (loss) gain related
to mortgage servicing rights (See Note 10)
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and valuation
adjustments related to mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
$
|
(479
|
)
|
|
$
|
(299
|
)
|
|
$
|
(382
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
124
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
8.
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of
period(1)
|
|
$
|
154,843
|
|
|
$
|
143,056
|
|
|
$
|
136,427
|
|
Additions(2)
|
|
|
35,804
|
|
|
|
48,155
|
|
|
|
38,829
|
|
Payoffs and
curtailments(2)
|
|
|
(32,555
|
)
|
|
|
(36,368
|
)
|
|
|
(32,200
|
)
|
Addition of certain subserviced
home equity loans as of June 30,
2006(1)
|
|
|
2,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of
period(1)
|
|
$
|
160,222
|
|
|
$
|
154,843
|
|
|
$
|
143,056
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portfolio
Composition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Owned servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
150,533
|
|
|
$
|
149,405
|
|
Subserviced portfolio
|
|
|
9,689
|
|
|
|
7,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
160,222
|
|
|
$
|
157,302
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate
|
|
$
|
100,960
|
|
|
$
|
95,579
|
|
Adjustable rate
|
|
|
59,262
|
|
|
|
61,723
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
160,222
|
|
|
$
|
157,302
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conventional loans
|
|
$
|
148,760
|
|
|
$
|
146,236
|
|
Government loans
|
|
|
7,423
|
|
|
|
6,851
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
4,039
|
|
|
|
4,215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total servicing portfolio
|
|
$
|
160,222
|
|
|
$
|
157,302
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average interest
rate(3)
|
|
|
6.1%
|
|
|
|
5.8%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Portfolio
Delinquency(4)
(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Unpaid
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Unpaid
|
|
|
|
of Loans
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
of Loans
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
30 days
|
|
|
2.19
|
%
|
|
|
1.93
|
%
|
|
|
2.12
|
%
|
|
|
1.75
|
%
|
60 days
|
|
|
0.46
|
%
|
|
|
0.38
|
%
|
|
|
0.48
|
%
|
|
|
0.36
|
%
|
90 or more days
|
|
|
0.36
|
%
|
|
|
0.29
|
%
|
|
|
0.54
|
%
|
|
|
0.38
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total delinquency
|
|
|
3.01
|
%
|
|
|
2.60
|
%
|
|
|
3.14
|
%
|
|
|
2.49
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreclosure/real estate
owned/bankruptcies
|
|
|
0.80
|
%
|
|
|
0.58
|
%
|
|
|
1.05
|
%
|
|
|
0.67
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Prior to June 30, 2006,
certain home equity loans subserviced for others were excluded
from the disclosed portfolio activity. As a result of a systems
conversion during the second quarter of 2006, these loans
subserviced for others are now includable in the portfolio
balance as of December 31, 2006. The amounts of home equity
loans subserviced for others and excluded from the portfolio
balance as of January 1, 2006, 2005 and 2004 were
approximately $2.5 billion, $2.7 billion and
$2.2 billion, respectively.
|
|
(2) |
|
Excludes activity related to
certain home equity loans subserviced for others described above
in the six months ended June 30, 2006 and the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004.
|
|
(3) |
|
Certain home equity loans
subserviced for others described above were excluded from the
weighted-average interest rate calculation as of
December 31, 2005 and 2004, but are included in the
weighted-average interest rate calculation as of
December 31, 2006. Had these loans been excluded from the
December 31, 2006 weighted-average interest rate
calculation, the weighted-average interest rate would have
remained 6.1%.
|
|
(4) |
|
Represents the loan servicing
portfolio delinquencies as a percentage of the total number of
loans and the total unpaid balance of the portfolio.
|
|
(5) |
|
Certain home equity loans
subserviced for others described above were excluded from the
delinquency calculations as of December 31, 2005 and 2004,
but are included in the delinquency calculations as of
December 31, 2006. Had these loans been excluded from the
December 31, 2006 delinquency calculations, the total
delinquency based on the number of loans would increase from
3.01% to 3.09% and the total delinquency based on the unpaid
balance would have remained 2.60%. In addition, the percentage
of the total number of loans in foreclosure/real estate
owned/bankruptcy would increase from 0.80% to 0.83% and the
percentage of the unpaid balance that relates to those loans
would have remained 0.58%.
|
During the fourth quarter of 2005, the Company purchased the
loan servicing portfolio of CUNA Mutual Mortgage Corporation
(CUNA) and assumed its servicing and subservicing
contracts. The aggregate loan servicing portfolio purchased from
CUNA was $9.7 billion, including a $2.9 billion
subserviced portfolio. This purchase is included within
additions in the Portfolio Activity table presented above.
|
|
9.
|
Mortgage
Loan Securitizations
|
The Company sells residential mortgage loans in securitization
transactions typically retaining one or more of the following:
servicing rights, interest-only strips, principal-only strips
and/or
subordinated interests. The Company did not retain any interests
from securitizations in 2006 or 2005, other than MSRs. Key
economic
126
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
assumptions used during 2006, 2005 and 2004 to measure the fair
value of the Companys retained interests in mortgage loans
at the time of the securitization were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Backed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MSRs
|
|
|
MSRs
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
MSRs
|
|
|
Prepayment speed
|
|
|
8-51%
|
|
|
|
6-45%
|
|
|
|
10-24%
|
|
|
|
13-36%
|
|
Weighted-average life (in years)
|
|
|
1.5-6.6
|
|
|
|
1.7-8.0
|
|
|
|
4.2-9.7
|
|
|
|
2.2-7.0
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
|
10-12%
|
|
|
|
7%
|
|
|
|
9-10%
|
|
Volatility
|
|
|
13-16%
|
|
|
|
16-19%
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
12-20%
|
|
Key economic assumptions used in subsequently measuring the fair
value of the Companys retained interests in securitized
mortgage loans at December 31, 2006 and the effect on the
fair value of those interests from adverse changes in those
assumptions were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Backed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
MSRs
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
|
Fair value of retained interests
|
|
$
|
35
|
|
|
$
|
1,971
|
|
Weighted-average life (in years)
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Annual servicing fee
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
%
|
Prepayment speed (annual rate)
|
|
|
2-27
|
%
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
Impact on fair value of 10%
adverse change
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(106
|
)
|
Impact on fair value of 20%
adverse change
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(202
|
)
|
Discount rate (annual rate)
|
|
|
2-15
|
%
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
Impact on fair value of 10%
adverse change
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(57
|
)
|
Impact on fair value of 20%
adverse change
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
Volatility (annual rate)
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
13
|
%
|
Impact on fair value of 10%
adverse change
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
(22
|
)
|
Impact on fair value of 20%
adverse change
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
These sensitivities are hypothetical and presented for
illustrative purposes only. Changes in fair value based on a 10%
variation in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated
because the relationship of the change in assumption to the
change in fair value may not be linear. Also, the effect of a
variation in a particular assumption is calculated without
changing any other assumption; in reality, changes in one
assumption may result in changes in another, which may magnify
or counteract the sensitivities. Further, this analysis does not
assume any impact resulting from managements intervention
to mitigate these variations.
127
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table presents information about delinquencies and
components of securitized residential mortgage loans for which
the Company has retained interests (except for MSRs) as of and
for the year ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Amount 60
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Days or More
|
|
Net Credit
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Past
Due(1)
|
|
Losses
|
|
Balance
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage
loans(2)
|
|
$
|
103
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts are based on total
securitized assets at December 31, 2006.
|
|
(2) |
|
Excludes securitized mortgage loans
that the Company continues to service but to which it has no
other continuing involvement.
|
The following table sets forth information regarding cash flows
relating to the Companys loan sales in which it has
continuing involvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Proceeds from new securitizations
|
|
$
|
28,238
|
|
|
$
|
31,803
|
|
|
$
|
32,699
|
|
Servicing fees
received(1)
|
|
|
485
|
|
|
|
467
|
|
|
|
465
|
|
Other cash flows received on
retained
interests(2)
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Purchases of delinquent or
foreclosed loans
|
|
|
(164
|
)
|
|
|
(141
|
)
|
|
|
(262
|
)
|
Servicing advances
|
|
|
(299
|
)
|
|
|
(300
|
)
|
|
|
(575
|
)
|
Repayment of servicing advances
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
316
|
|
|
|
615
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes late fees and other
ancillary servicing revenue.
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents cash flows received on
retained interests other than servicing fees.
|
During 2006, 2005 and 2004, the Company recognized pre-tax gains
of $198 million, $300 million and $405 million,
respectively, related to the securitization of residential
mortgage loans which are recorded as Gain on sale of mortgage
loans, net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Company has made representations and warranties customary
for securitization transactions, including eligibility
characteristics of the mortgage loans and servicing
responsibilities, in connection with the securitization of these
assets. See Note 17, Commitments and
Contingencies.
|
|
10.
|
Derivatives
and Risk Management Activities
|
Market
Risk
The Companys principal market exposure is to interest rate
risk, specifically long-term United States (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
128
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(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. 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. 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
Consolidated Balance Sheets with changes in their fair values
recorded as a component of Gain on sale of mortgage loans, net
in the 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 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
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 the following instruments in its risk
management activities related to its IRLCs and MLHS:
|
|
|
|
§
|
Forward loan sales commitments: represent
obligations to sell mortgage-backed securities at specified
prices in the future. The value of these instruments increase as
mortgage rates rise.
|
|
|
§
|
Treasury futures: represent obligations to
purchase or deliver Treasury securities at specified prices in
the future. Treasury futures increase in value as the interest
rate on the underlying Treasury declines.
|
|
|
§
|
Options on Treasury Securities: represent rights to
buy or sell Treasuries at specified prices in the future.
|
129
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table provides a summary of the changes in the
fair values of IRLCs, MLHS and the related derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Change in value of IRLCs
|
|
$
|
(18
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30
|
)
|
|
$
|
29
|
|
Change in value of MLHS
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total change in value of IRLCs and
MLHS
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark-to-market
of derivatives designated as hedges of MLHS
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Mark-to-market
of freestanding
derivatives(1)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain (loss) on derivatives
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
(59
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss on hedging
activities(2)
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(30
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amount of ineffectiveness
recognized on hedges of MLHS was insignificant during the year
ended December 31, 2006, due to the application of
SFAS No. 133. Amount includes $11 million and
$8 million of ineffectiveness recognized on hedges of MLHS
during the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004,
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 years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, the Company recognized
$(7) million, $(19) million and $(14) 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 Consolidated Balance Sheets with changes in their fair
values recorded in Net derivative (loss) gain related to
mortgage servicing rights in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
The Company uses the following instruments in its risk
management activities related to its MSRs:
|
|
|
|
§
|
Interest rate swap contracts: represent agreements to
exchange interest rate payments on underlying notional amounts.
In the hedge of the Companys MSRs, the Company generally
receives the fixed rate and pays the variable rate. Such
contracts increase in value as interest rates decline.
|
|
|
§
|
Interest rate futures contracts: represent obligations to
purchase or deliver financial instruments at a future date based
upon underlying debt securities (such as Treasuries or
Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie
Mae) mortgage-backed securities). Interest rate futures
contracts increase in value as the interest rate on the
underlying instrument declines.
|
|
|
§
|
Interest rate forward contracts: represent obligations to
purchase or deliver financial instruments to specific
counterparties at future dates based upon underlying debt
securities. Interest rate forward contracts increase in value as
the interest rate on the underlying instrument declines.
|
130
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
§
|
Mortgage forward contracts: represent obligations to buy
mortgage-backed securities at a specified price in the future.
Sometimes referred to as to be announced securities
(TBAs). Mortgage forward contracts increase in value
as interest rates decline.
|
|
|
§
|
Options on forward contracts: represent rights to buy or
sell the underlying financial instruments such as
mortgage-backed securities.
|
|
|
§
|
Options on futures contracts: represent rights to buy or
sell the underlying financial instruments such as
mortgage-backed securities, generally through an exchange.
|
|
|
§
|
Options on swap contracts: represent rights to enter into
predetermined interest rate swaps at a future date (sometimes
referred to as swaptions). In a receiver swaption,
the fixed rate is received and the variable rate is paid upon
exercise of the option. Receiver swaptions generally increase in
value as rates fall. Conversely, in a payor swaption, the fixed
rate is paid and the variable rate is received upon the exercise
of the option. Payor swaptions generally increase in value as
rates rise.
|
|
|
§
|
Principal-only swaps: represent agreements to exchange
the principal amount of underlying securities and are
economically similar to purchasing principal-only securities.
Principal-only swaps increase in value as interest rates decline.
|
The net activity in the Companys derivatives related to
MSRs consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net balance, beginning of period
|
|
$
|
44(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
60(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
85(3
|
)
|
Additions
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
560
|
|
Changes in fair value
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
117
|
|
Net settlement proceeds
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
|
|
(228
|
)
|
|
|
(702
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance, end of period
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
44(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
60(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The net balance represents the
gross asset of $73 million (recorded within Other assets in
the Consolidated Balance Sheet) net of the gross liability of
$29 million (recorded within Other liabilities in the
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 $316 million (recorded within Other assets)
net of the gross liability of $231 million (recorded within
Other liabilities).
|
|
(4) |
|
The net balance represents the
gross asset of $56 million (recorded within Other assets in
the Consolidated Balance Sheet) net of the gross liability of
$56 million (recorded within Other liabilities in the
Consolidated Balance Sheet).
|
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 years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, except to
create the accrual of interest expense at variable rates. Gains
recognized during the year ended December 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 Consolidated Statement of Operations. The Company recognized
131
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
losses of $4 million and $5 million related to
instruments which do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment
pursuant to SFAS No. 133 for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, which were
included in Mortgage interest expense in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations. On February 9, 2005, the Company
prepaid $443 million aggregate principal amount of its
outstanding senior notes (see Note 2, Spin-Off from
Cendant). As a result, the unamortized balance of this
deferred swap gain was recognized as a reduction to the
prepayment charge incurred in connection with the debt
prepayment, which was included in Spin-Off related expenses in
the Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended
December 31, 2005. Amortization of this deferred swap gain
recorded during the year ended December 31, 2005 prior to
the prepayment was not significant. During the year ended
December 31, 2004, the Company recorded $5 million of
amortization related to this deferred swap gain.
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. The amount of
gains or losses excluded from Accumulated other comprehensive
income and recorded directly to earnings resulting from
ineffectiveness or from excluding a component of the
derivatives gain or loss from the effectiveness
calculation for cash flow hedges during the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 was not significant. Net
gains recognized during the year ended December 31, 2006
related to instruments that were not designated as cash flow
hedges were not significant and were recorded as a component of
Fleet interest expense in the Consolidated Statement of
Operations. The Company recognized a net loss of $2 million
and a net gain of $1 million related to instruments that
were not designated as cash flow hedges for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, as a component of
Fleet interest expense in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations.
Credit
Risk and Exposure
The Company originates loans in all 50 states and the
District of Columbia. Concentrations of credit risk are
considered to exist when there are amounts loaned to multiple
borrowers with similar characteristics, which could cause their
ability to meet contractual obligations to be similarly impacted
by economic or other conditions. California was the only state
that represented more than 10% of the unpaid principal balance
in the Companys loan servicing portfolio, accounting for
approximately 11% of the balance as of December 31, 2006.
For the year ended December 31, 2006, approximately 50% of
loans originated by the Company were derived from Realogys
owned real estate brokerage business, NRT, and relocation
business, Cartus or its franchisees. In addition, approximately
20% of the Companys loan originations were derived from
one private-label partner during the year ended
December 31, 2006.
The Company is exposed to commercial credit risk for its clients
under the lease and service agreements for PHH Vehicle
Management Services Group LLC (PHH Arval) (the
Companys Fleet Management Services business). The Company
manages 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 represented more than 5% of the Net
revenues of the business during the year ended December 31,
2006. PHH Arvals historical net credit losses as a
percentage of the ending balance of Net investment in fleet
leases have not exceeded 0.07% in any of the last three years.
The Company is exposed to counterparty credit risk in the event
of non-performance by counterparties to various agreements and
sales transactions. The Company manages 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. The Company mitigates counterparty credit
risk associated with its derivative contracts by monitoring the
amount for which it is 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.
132
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of December 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 the
Companys diverse customer base. With the exception of the
financing provided to customers of its mortgage business, the
Company does not normally require collateral or other security
to support credit sales.
|
|
11.
|
Vehicle
Leasing Activities
|
The components of Net investment in fleet leases were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Operating Leases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicles under open-end operating
leases
|
|
$
|
6,958
|
|
|
$
|
6,588
|
|
Vehicles under closed-end
operating leases
|
|
|
273
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicles under operating leases
|
|
|
7,231
|
|
|
|
6,809
|
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(3,541
|
)
|
|
|
(3,273
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in operating leases
|
|
|
3,690
|
|
|
|
3,536
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct Financing
Leases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease payments receivable
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
Less: Unearned income
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in direct financing
leases
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Lease Vehicles:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vehicles not yet subject to a lease
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
|
306
|
|
Vehicles held for sale
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in off-lease
vehicles
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment in fleet leases
|
|
$
|
4,147
|
|
|
$
|
3,966
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
133
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
At December 31, 2006, future minimum lease payments to be
received on the Companys operating and direct financing
leases were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Minimum
|
|
|
|
Lease
Payments(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct
|
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
|
Financing
|
|
|
|
Leases
|
|
|
Leases
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
1,258
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
2008
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
2009
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
2010
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
2011
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,341
|
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts included for the interest
component of the future minimum lease payments are based on the
interest rate in effect at the inception of each lease.
Contingent rentals from operating leases were $10 million,
$16 million and $7 million for the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Contingent
rentals from direct financing leases were not significant for
the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
|
The future minimum lease payments disclosed above include the
monthly payments for the unexpired portion of the minimum lease
term, which is 12 months under the Companys open-end
lease agreements, and the residual values guaranteed by the
lessees during the minimum lease term. These leases may be
continued after the minimum lease term at the lessees
election.
|
|
12.
|
Property,
Plant and Equipment, net
|
Property, plant and equipment, net consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Furniture, fixtures and equipment
|
|
$
|
79
|
|
|
$
|
140
|
|
Capitalized software
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
130
|
|
Building and leasehold improvements
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
285
|
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation and
amortization
|
|
|
(100
|
)
|
|
|
(212
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company wrote
off certain fully depreciated assets, which reduced the cost
basis and related accumulated depreciation and amortization of
the assets presented above.
134
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
13.
|
Accounts
Payable and Accrued Expenses
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
288
|
|
|
$
|
358
|
|
Accrued payroll and benefits
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Accrued interest
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Other
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
494
|
|
|
$
|
565
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.
|
Debt and
Borrowing Arrangements
|
The following tables summarize the components of the
Companys indebtedness as of December 31, 2006 and
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
Vehicle
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
Warehouse
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset-Backed
|
|
|
Asset-Backed
|
|
|
Unsecured
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Term notes
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
400
|
|
|
$
|
646
|
|
|
$
|
1,046
|
|
Variable funding notes
|
|
|
3,532
|
|
|
|
774
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,306
|
|
Subordinated debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
Commercial paper
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
688
|
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
1,099
|
|
Borrowings under credit facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
1,019
|
|
|
|
1,085
|
|
Other
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,541
|
|
|
$
|
2,004
|
|
|
$
|
2,102
|
|
|
$
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 Consolidated Statement of Operations for the
year ended December 31, 2006.
As of December 31, 2006, variable funding notes outstanding
under this arrangement aggregated $3.5 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 December 31, 2006 was collateralized by approximately
$4.1 billion of leased vehicles and related assets,
primarily included in Net investment in fleet leases in the
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 December 31, 2006, the agreements
governing the
Series 2006-1
and
Series 2006-2
notes were scheduled to expire on March 6, 2007 and
November 30, 2007, 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 5.7% and 4.8% as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006, the total capacity under vehicle
management asset-backed debt arrangements was approximately
$3.7 billion, and the Company had $168 million of
unused capacity available. See Note 26, Subsequent
Events for a discussion of modifications made to vehicle
management asset-backed debt arrangements after
December 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 December 31, 2006
and 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
136
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Bishops Gate Trustee) and Bishops Gate
aggregated $400 million and $800 million,
respectively. On September 20, 2006, Bishops Gate
retired $400 million of the Bishops Gate Notes and
$51 million of the Bishops Gate subordinated
certificates (the Bishops Gate Certificates)
in accordance with their scheduled maturity dates. Funds for the
retirement of this debt were provided by a combination of the
sale of mortgage loans and the issuance of commercial paper
issued by Bishops Gate. The Bishops Gate Notes are
variable-rate instruments and, as of December 31, 2006,
were scheduled to mature in November 2008. The weighted-average
interest rate on the Bishops Gate Notes as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.7% and 4.7%, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Bishops Gate
Certificates aggregated $50 million and $101 million,
respectively. As of December 31, 2006, the Bishops
Gate Certificates were primarily fixed-rate instruments and were
scheduled to mature in May 2008. The weighted-average interest
rate on the Bishops Gate Certificates as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.6% and 5.8%, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006 and 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 $688 million and
$84 million, respectively. During 2006, the maximum
committed borrowings allowed under the Bishops Gate
Liquidity Agreement was reduced from $1.5 billion to
$1.0 billion and the expiration date was extended to
November 30, 2007. The Bishops Gate commercial paper
are fixed-rate instruments. The weighted-average interest rate
on the Bishops Gate commercial paper as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.4% and 4.3%, respectively.
As of December 31, 2006, the debt issued by Bishops
Gate was collateralized by approximately $1.2 billion of
underlying mortgage loans and related assets, primarily recorded
in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the Consolidated Balance
Sheet.
The Company also maintains a committed mortgage repurchase
facility that is used to finance mortgage loans originated by
PHH Mortgage Corporation (PHH Mortgage), the
Companys wholly owned subsidiary. This facility is funded
by a multi-seller conduit, and the Company generally uses this
facility to supplement the capacity of Bishops Gate and
unsecured borrowings used to fund the Companys mortgage
warehouse needs. On October 30, 2006, the Company amended
this 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 this facility (as amended by the Amended
Repurchase Agreements, 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. As of
December 31, 2006, borrowings under the Mortgage Repurchase
Facility were $505 million and were collateralized by
underlying mortgage loans and related assets of
$551 million, primarily included in Mortgage loans held for
sale, net in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. As of
December 31, 2005, borrowings under this facility were
$247 million. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
borrowings under this variable-rate facility bore interest at
5.4% and 4.3%, respectively. The Mortgage Repurchase Facility
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.
During 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. As of December 31, 2006, borrowings outstanding
under the Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility were
$269 million and were collateralized by underlying mortgage
loans and related assets of $331 million, primarily
included in Mortgage loans held for sale, net in the
Consolidated Balance Sheet. Borrowings under this variable-rate
facility bore interest at 5.4% as of December 31, 2006. The
Mortgage Venture also 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
137
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Venture. During 2006, the capacity of this line of credit was
reduced from $350 million to $200 million following
the execution of the Mortgage Venture Repurchase Facility.
Borrowings outstanding under this secured line of credit were
$58 million and $177 million as of December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively, and, as of December 31, 2006,
were collateralized by underlying mortgage loans and related
assets of $67 million, primarily included in Mortgage loans
held for sale, net in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. During
2006, the expiration date of this agreement was extended to
October 5, 2007. This variable-rate credit agreement bore
interest at 6.2% and 5.2% on December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
As of December 31, 2006, the total capacity under mortgage
warehouse asset-backed debt arrangements was approximately
$2.8 billion, and the Company had approximately
$787 million of unused capacity available.
Unsecured
Debt
Term
Notes
The outstanding carrying value of term notes at
December 31, 2006 and 2005 consisted of $646 million
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 The Bank of
New York, as successor trustee for Bank One Trust Company, N.A.
(the MTN Indenture Trustee). During 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 (defined and described
below) to fund the bulk of the tendered MTNs. As of
December 31, 2006, the outstanding MTNs were scheduled to
mature between January 2007 and April 2018. The effective rate
of interest for the MTNs outstanding as of both
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 6.8%.
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 $411 million
and $747 million as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. This commercial paper is fixed-rate and matures
within 270 days of issuance. The weighted-average interest
rate on outstanding unsecured commercial paper as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.7% and 4.7%, respectively.
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 Canadian
sub-facility,
which is available to the Companys Fleet Management
Services operations in Canada. Borrowings under the Amended
Credit Facility were $404 million as of December 31,
2006. There were no borrowings under the Credit Facility as of
December 31, 2005.
Pricing under the Credit Facility was based upon the
Companys senior unsecured long-term debt credit ratings
and, as of December 31, 2005, bore interest at LIBOR plus a
margin of 60 basis points (bps). The Credit
Facility also required the Company to pay a per annum facility
fee of 15 bps and a per annum utilization fee of
12.5 bps if its usage exceeded 33% of the aggregate
commitments under the Credit Facility. Pricing under the Amended
Credit Facility is also based upon the Companys senior
unsecured long-term debt ratings. If the ratings on the
Companys
138
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 December 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
December 31, 2006, the per annum utilization and facility
fees were 10 bps and 12 bps, respectively.
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 was scheduled to expire on April 5, 2007. Borrowings
under the Supplemental Credit Facility were $200 million as
of December 31, 2006. Pricing under the Supplemental 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
Supplemental Credit Facility. Borrowings under the Supplemental
Credit Facility bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of
38 bps as of December 31, 2006. The Supplemental
Credit Facility also requires the Company to pay per annum
utilization fees if its usage exceeds 50% of the aggregate
commitments under the Supplemental Credit Facility and per annum
facility fees. As of December 31, 2006, the per annum
utilization and facility fees were 10 bps and 12 bps,
respectively. The Company was also required to pay an additional
facility fee of 10 bps against the outstanding commitments
under the facility as of October 6, 2006.
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 was scheduled to
expire 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.
Borrowings under the Tender Support Facility were
$415 million as of December 31, 2006. 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 long-term debt on
January 22, 2007. 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 Company maintains other unsecured credit facilities in the
ordinary course of business as set forth in Debt
Maturities below. See Note 26, Subsequent
Events for a discussion of modifications made to the
Companys unsecured credit facilities and the effects of
changes in the Companys senior unsecured long-term debt
ratings after December 31, 2006.
139
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Debt
Maturities
The following table provides the contractual maturities of the
Companys indebtedness at December 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
|
|
$
|
2,181
|
|
|
$
|
1,084
|
|
|
$
|
3,265
|
|
Between one and two years
|
|
|
1,544
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
|
|
1,739
|
|
Between two and three years
|
|
|
816
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
816
|
|
Between three and four years
|
|
|
558
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
563
|
|
Between four and five years
|
|
|
332
|
|
|
|
404
|
|
|
|
736
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
528
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,545
|
|
|
$
|
2,102
|
|
|
$
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 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
|
|
$
|
3,709
|
|
|
$
|
3,541
|
|
|
$
|
168
|
|
Mortgage warehouse
|
|
|
2,791
|
|
|
|
2,004
|
|
|
|
787
|
|
Unsecured Committed Credit
Facilities(2)
|
|
|
2,551
|
|
|
|
1,432
|
|
|
|
1,119
|
|
|
|
|
(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 $411 million which fully supports the
outstanding unsecured commercial paper issued by the Company as
of December 31, 2006. Under the Companys policy, all
of the outstanding unsecured commercial paper is supported by
available capacity under its unsecured committed credit
facilities with the exception of the Tender Support Facility.
The sole purpose of the Tender Support Facility is the funding
of the retirement of MTNs. In addition, utilized capacity
reflects $2 million of letters of credit issued under the
Amended Credit Facility. See Note 26, Subsequent
Events for information regarding changes in the
Companys capacity under asset-backed debt arrangements and
unsecured committed credit facilities after December 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, the Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender
Support Facility require 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
140
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the Company from paying dividends if, after giving effect to the
dividend payment, the debt to equity ratio exceeds 6.5:1. At
December 31, 2006, the Company was in compliance with all
of its financial covenants related to its debt arrangements,
except that it did not deliver its financial statements for the
quarters ended March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and
September 30, 2006 to the MTN Indenture Trustee by
December 31, 2006 pursuant to the terms of Supplemental
Indenture No. 4 (defined and described below). The Company
did not receive a notice of default and subsequently delivered
these financial statements on or before April 11, 2007.
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 delays in
completing the unaudited quarterly financial statements for
2006, the 2006 audited annual financial statements and the
unaudited quarterly financial statements for the quarter ended
March 31, 2007 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.
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.
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
Bishops Gate Notes as well as the lenders under the
Bishops Gate Liquidity Agreement.
As of August 15, 2006, the Company received all of the
required approvals and executed a Supplemental Indenture to the
Bishops Gate Indenture (the Bishops Gate
Supplemental Indenture) waiving any event of default
arising as a result of the failure to provide 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. The Bishops Gate
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.
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,
141
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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
the Amended Credit Facility, the 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.
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
Mortgage Repurchase Facility, the financing agreements for
Chesapeake and Bishops Gate and other agreements which
waived certain potential breaches of covenants under those
instruments and extended 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 was March 30, 2007. The Companys financial
statements for the quarters ended March 31, 2006 and
June 30, 2006 were filed with the SEC on March 30,
2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of the
Companys quarterly financial statements for the quarter
ended September 30, 2006 was April 30, 2007. The
Companys financial statements for the quarter ended
September 30, 2006 were filed with the SEC on
April 11, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the delivery of
the Companys financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2006 and the quarter ended March 31, 2007
is June 29, 2007.
The Company intends to deliver its financial statements for the
quarter ended March 31, 2007 on or before June 29,
2007. The Company may require additional waivers in the future
if it is unable to meet the deadlines for the delivery of its
financial statements. 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. 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.
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 with respect to the delivery of the
Companys financial statements, 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
March 31, 2007 to the MTN Indenture Trustee, which are
required to be delivered no later than May 25, 2007 under
the MTN Indenture. As a result of the Companys failure to
deliver these financial statements, the MTN Indenture Trustee
could provide it with a notice of default. 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.
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
142
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 be obtained on reasonable terms or 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.
|
|
15.
|
Pension
and Other Post Employment Benefits
|
Defined
Contribution Savings Plans
The Company and the Mortgage Venture sponsor separate defined
contribution savings plans that provide certain eligible
employees of the Company and the Mortgage Venture an opportunity
to accumulate funds for retirement. Prior to the Spin-Off and
the creation of the Mortgage Venture, Cendant sponsored a
similar defined contribution savings plan for the Companys
employees. The Company and the Mortgage Venture match the
contributions of participating employees on the basis specified
by these plans. The Companys cost for contributions to
these plans for continuing operations was $16 million
during each of the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and
2004.
Defined
Benefit Pension Plan and Other Employee Benefit
Plan
Prior to the Spin-Off, Cendant sponsored a domestic
non-contributory defined benefit pension plan, which covered
certain eligible employees. Benefits were based on an
employees years of credited service and a percentage of
final average compensation, or as otherwise described by the
plan. In addition, Cendant maintained an other post employment
benefits (OPEB) plan for retiree health and welfare
for certain eligible employees.
In conjunction with the Spin-Off, the Company is responsible
only for the obligations related to its active employees under
both of these plans, which were transferred to Company-sponsored
plans. Cendant retained responsibility for the current and
future obligations of the Companys retirees as of
January 31, 2005. Both the defined benefit pension plan and
the OPEB plan are frozen plans, wherein the plans only accrue
additional benefits for a very limited number of the
Companys employees. The amounts presented below for the
defined benefit pension plan and the OPEB plan represent those
of the entire Company.
The measurement date for all of the Companys benefit
obligations and plan assets is December 31; however, due to
the Spin-Off, these obligations and assets were also measured at
January 31, 2005. The weighted-average discount rate and
rate of compensation increase used to measure the defined
benefit pension and OPEB plans benefit obligations at
January 31, 2005 were 5.50% and 4.50%, respectively.
143
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table provides a reconciliation of benefit
obligations, plan assets and the funded status of the
Companys defined benefit pension and OPEB plans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Post
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employment
|
|
|
|
Pension Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Change in benefit
obligation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligationJanuary 1
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
154
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
Change due to the Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actuarial gains
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit
obligationDecember 31
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in plan
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan
assetsJanuary 1
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change due to the Spin-Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual return on plan assets
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company contributions
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan
assetsDecember 31
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Unfunded pension liability
recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transition obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized net actuarial loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net amount
recognizedDecember 31
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average assumptions as
of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
5.75%
|
|
|
|
5.50%
|
|
|
|
5.75%
|
|
|
|
5.50%
|
|
Rate of compensation increase
|
|
|
4.50%
|
|
|
|
4.50%
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
Additional
information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated benefit
obligationDecember 31
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
(Decrease) increase in minimum
liability included in other comprehensive income
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
The allocation, by asset category, of the fair value of plan
assets of the defined benefit pension plan at December 31,
2006 and 2005 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
67%
|
|
|
|
66%
|
|
Fixed income securities
|
|
|
33%
|
|
|
|
34%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
At December 31, 2006, the Companys targeted
allocation, by asset category, of the fair value of plan assets
of the defined benefit pension plan is 45% to 77% equity
securities, 30% to 52% fixed income securities and 0% to 6% real
estate. To the extent that the actual allocation of plan assets
differs from the targeted allocation, the Company will consider
rebalancing the assets. The Companys goal is to manage
pension investments over the long term to achieve optimal
returns with an acceptable level of risk and volatility.
The net periodic benefit cost related to the defined benefit
pension plan included the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
Amortization of the actuarial loss
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average assumptions used to determine net periodic
benefit cost were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-
|
|
|
Rate of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Compen-
|
|
|
|
Discount
|
|
|
Return on
|
|
|
sation
|
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Increase
|
|
|
For the year ended
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
|
8.00
|
%
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
For the eleven months ended
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
5.50
|
%
|
|
|
8.25
|
%
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
For the month ended
January 31, 2005
|
|
|
5.75
|
%
|
|
|
8.25
|
%
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
For the year ended
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
6.00
|
%
|
|
|
8.50
|
%
|
|
|
4.50
|
%
|
The expense recorded for the OPEB plan during the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 was insignificant. The
health care cost trend rate used to determine the postretirement
benefit obligation as of December 31, 2006 was 9.0%. This
rate decreases gradually to an ultimate rate of 5.0% as of
December 31, 2011 and remains at that level thereafter. The
trend rate is a significant factor in determining the amounts
reported. A 1% increase or decrease in assumed health care cost
trend rates in each year would not have a material effect on the
accumulated postretirement benefit obligation as of
December 31, 2006 or the aggregate service and interest
components of the net periodic postretirement benefit cost for
the year then ended.
The assumed discount rate at December 31, 2006 is based on
Moodys Investors Services Aa rating for a bond
portfolio with a duration similar to the duration of the
liabilities in the defined benefit pension and OPEB plans at
December 31, 2006.
The Company establishes its expected long-term return on assets
considering various factors, which include targeted asset
allocation percentages, historic returns and expected future
returns. These factors are considered in the fourth quarter of
the year preceding the year in which those assumptions are
applied.
145
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of December 31, 2006, future expected benefit payments,
which reflect expected future service, as appropriate, were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Post
|
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Employment
|
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012 through 2016
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
The Companys policy is to contribute amounts sufficient to
meet minimum funding requirements as set forth in employee
benefit and tax laws and additional amounts at the discretion of
the Company. The Company made contributions of $3 million
and $6 million to the defined benefit pension plans during
the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The Company does not expect to make any contributions to its
defined benefit plan during 2007.
The income tax provision consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
33
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
214
|
|
State
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(167
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
(185
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
87
|
|
|
$
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Domestic operations
|
|
$
|
(22
|
)
|
|
$
|
147
|
|
|
$
|
162
|
|
Foreign operations
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before income taxes and
minority interest
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
146
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Deferred income taxes were comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Deferred income tax
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued liabilities, provisions
for losses and deferred income
|
|
$
|
123
|
|
|
$
|
76
|
|
Federal net operating loss
carryforwards and credits
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
State net operating loss
carryforwards and credits
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
Purchased mortgage servicing rights
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
Alternative minimum tax credit
carryforward
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax assets
|
|
|
296
|
|
|
|
220
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax assets, net of
valuation allowance
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unamortized mortgage servicing
rights
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
535
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
395
|
|
|
|
379
|
|
Other
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax liabilities
|
|
|
999
|
|
|
|
948
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred income tax liability
|
|
$
|
766
|
|
|
$
|
790
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The deferred income tax assets valuation allowances of
$63 million and $62 million at December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively, primarily relate to state net operating
loss carryforwards. The valuation allowance will be reduced when
and if the Company determines that it is more likely than not
that all or a portion of the deferred income tax assets will be
realized. The federal and state net operating loss carryforwards
expire from 2022 to 2026 and from 2007 to 2026, respectively.
The Company has an alternative minimum tax credit of
$46 million that is not subject to limitations. The credits
existing at the time of the Spin-Off of $23 million were
evaluated, and the appropriate actions were taken by Cendant and
the Company to make the credits available to the Company after
the Spin-Off. The Company has determined at this time that it
can utilize all alternative minimum tax carryforwards in future
years; therefore, no reserve or valuation allowance has been
recorded.
No provision has been made for federal deferred income taxes on
approximately $44 million of accumulated and undistributed
earnings of the Companys foreign subsidiaries at
December 31, 2006 since it is the present intention of
management to reinvest the undistributed earnings indefinitely
in those foreign operations. The determination of the amount of
unrecognized federal deferred income tax liability for
unremitted earnings is not practicable.
147
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Companys total income taxes differ from the amount
that would be computed by applying the U.S. federal
statutory rate as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except for percentages)
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before income taxes and minority interest
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
Statutory federal income tax rate
|
|
|
(35
|
)%
|
|
|
35%
|
|
|
|
35%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes computed at statutory
federal rate
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
56
|
|
|
$
|
60
|
|
State and local income taxes, net
of federal tax benefits
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Contingency reserves
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in state apportionment
factors
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
Changes in valuation allowance
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
87
|
|
|
$
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calculated effective tax rate
|
|
|
249.1%
|
|
|
|
54.7%
|
|
|
|
45.3%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the year ended December 31, 2006, the Company
recorded income tax contingency reserves of $12 million and
a net deferred income tax charge of $3 million representing
the change in estimated deferred state income taxes for state
apportionment factors, both of which significantly impacted its
effective tax rate for that year. In addition, the Company
recorded a state income tax benefit of $5 million. Due to
the Companys 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 (losses in jurisdictions with higher income tax rates,
income in jurisdictions with lower income tax rates and near
breakeven pre-tax results on a consolidated basis) in comparison
to 2005.
During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company
recorded income tax contingency reserves of $15 million and
a net deferred income tax charge related to the Spin-Off of
$9 million representing the change in estimated deferred
state income taxes for state apportionment factors, both of
which significantly impacted its effective tax rate for that
year.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company
recorded an $18 million increase in valuation allowances
and a $6 million reduction of estimated deferred state
income taxes for state apportionment factors, both of which
significantly impacted its effective tax rate for that year.
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), more fully described in Note 17,
Commitments and Contingencies.
|
|
17.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Tax
Contingencies
In connection with the Spin-Off, the Company and Cendant entered
into 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
148
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 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 disclosed in its Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Cendant
2006
Form 10-K)
(filed on March 1, 2007 under Avis Budget Group, Inc.) that
it 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 also
disclosed in the Cendant 2006
Form 10-K
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.
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 and in Note 26,
Subsequent Events, 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 purported class actions were
filed against the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and its
former Chief Financial Officer in the U.S. District Court
for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs seek to represent
an alleged 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
149
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
thereunder. Additionally, two derivative actions were filed in
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
against the Company, its former Chief Financial Officer and each
member of its Board of Directors. Both of these derivative
actions have since been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs.
See Note 26, Subsequent Events for additional
discussion of legal contingencies.
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 respond appropriately in defending
against the alleged claims in each of these matters. The
ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material
adverse effect on the Companys business, 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 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 $3.4 billion as
of December 31, 2006. In addition, the outstanding balance
of loans sold with recourse by the Company was $584 million
as of December 31, 2006.
As of December 31, 2006, the Company had a liability of
$29 million, recorded in Other liabilities in the
Consolidated Balance Sheet, for probable losses related to the
Companys loan servicing portfolio.
Mortgage
Reinsurance
Through the Companys wholly owned mortgage reinsurance
subsidiary, Atrium, 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 the 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 December 31, 2006, the Company
provided such mortgage reinsurance for approximately
$18.2 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 $702 million as of
December 31, 2006. The Company is required to hold
securities in trust related to this potential obligation, which
were included in Restricted Cash in the Consolidated Balance
Sheet as of December 31, 2006. As of December 31,
2006, a liability of
150
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
$17 million was recorded in Other liabilities in the
Consolidated Balance Sheet for estimated losses associated with
the Companys mortgage reinsurance activities.
Loan Funding
Commitments
As of December 31, 2006, the Company had commitments to
fund mortgage loans with
agreed-upon
rates or rate protection amounting to $3.9 billion.
Additionally, as of December 31, 2006, the Company had
commitments to fund open home equity lines of credit of
$3.0 billion and construction loans of $58 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 may settle the forward delivery commitments on
a net basis; therefore, the commitments outstanding do not
necessarily represent future cash obligations. The
Companys $4.0 billion of forward delivery commitments
as of December 31, 2006 generally will be settled within
90 days of the individual commitment date.
Lease
Commitments
The Company is committed to making rental payments under
noncancelable operating leases covering various facilities and
equipment. Future minimum lease payments required under
noncancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2006 were
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future
|
|
|
Minimum
|
|
|
Lease
|
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
23
|
2008
|
|
|
21
|
2009
|
|
|
19
|
2010
|
|
|
18
|
2011
|
|
|
17
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
211
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments under capital leases as of December 31, 2006
and 2005 were not significant. The Company incurred rental
expense of $35 million during each of the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
151
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Purchase
Commitments
In the normal course of business, the Company makes various
commitments to purchase goods or services from specific
suppliers, including those related to capital expenditures.
Aggregate purchase commitments made by the Company as of
December 31, 2006 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase
|
|
|
Commitments
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
22
|
2008
|
|
|
5
|
2009
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
Of this aggregate amount, $9 million represented a contract
for software services to be provided to the Company over the
next two fiscal years. An additional $9 million included in
the aggregate amount was associated with an outsource contract
to provide payroll, benefits and human resources administration
to the Company.
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 Funding LLC
(which changed its name to Chesapeake Finance Holdings LLC
effective March 7, 2006), (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 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, 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
152
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 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.
|
|
18.
|
Stock-Related
Matters
|
Stock
Split
In connection with and in order to consummate the Spin-Off, on
January 27, 2005, the Companys Board of Directors
authorized and approved a 52,684-for-one Common stock split, to
be effected by a stock dividend at such ratio. The record date
with regard to such stock split was January 28, 2005. The
effect of this stock split is detailed in the Consolidated
Statement of Changes in Stockholders Equity for the year
ended December 31, 2005. All references to the number of
shares of Common stock and earnings per share amounts in the
Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of
Operations and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
reflect this stock split.
Rights
Agreement
The Company entered into the Rights Agreement, dated as of
January 28, 2005, between the Company and The Bank of New
York (the Rights Agreement) which entitles the
Companys stockholders to acquire shares of its 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 the Companys outstanding
Common stock or commences a tender offer for at least 15% of the
Companys Common stock, in each case, in a transaction that
the Companys Board of Directors does not approve. Under
these limited circumstances, all of the Companys
stockholders, other than the person or group that caused the
rights to become exercisable, would become entitled to effect
discounted purchases of the Companys Common stock which
would significantly increase the cost of acquiring control of
the Company without the support of the Companys Board of
Directors. See Note 26, Subsequent Events for a
discussion of modifications made to the Rights Agreement.
Common
Stock Repurchases
In connection with the Spin-Off, the Company entered into a
letter agreement dated January 31, 2005 with Cendant
requiring the Company to purchase shares of the Companys
Common stock held by Cendant following the Spin-Off. Pursuant to
the agreement, the Company purchased a total of
117,294 shares from Cendant during the year ended
December 31, 2005, for an aggregate purchase price of
$3 million, or an average of $21.73 per share. The
Companys obligations related to this agreement were
satisfied as of February 15, 2005.
On September 9, 2005, the Company announced an odd lot buy
back program (the Program) pursuant to which
stockholders owning fewer than 100 shares of the
Companys Common stock could sell all their shares or
purchase enough additional shares to increase their holdings to
100 shares. From September 9, 2005 to
November 16, 2005, the Company was authorized to purchase
up to 175,000 shares under the Program. The net number of
shares repurchased under the Program was 138,905 for an
aggregate purchase price of $4 million, or an average of
$27.22 per share. The Program expired on November 16,
2005.
All repurchased shares have been returned to the status of
authorized and unissued shares of the Company.
Restrictions
on Paying Dividends
Many of the Companys subsidiaries (including certain
consolidated partnerships, trusts and other non-corporate
entities) are subject to restrictions on their ability to pay
dividends or otherwise transfer funds to other consolidated
subsidiaries and, ultimately, to PHH Corporation (the parent
company). These restrictions relate to
153
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
loan agreements applicable to certain of the Companys
asset-backed debt arrangements and to regulatory restrictions
applicable to the equity of the Companys insurance
subsidiary, Atrium. The aggregate restricted net assets of these
subsidiaries totaled $1.0 billion as of December 31,
2006. These restrictions on net assets of certain subsidiaries,
however, do not directly limit the Companys ability to pay
dividends from consolidated Retained earnings. As discussed in
Note 14, Debt and Borrowing Arrangements,
certain of the Companys debt arrangements require
maintenance of ratios and contain restrictive covenants
applicable to consolidated financial statement elements that
potentially could limit its ability to pay dividends. See
Note 26, Subsequent Events for additional
information regarding other potential restrictions on paying
dividends.
New
York Stock Exchange
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. See Note 26,
Subsequent Events for a discussion of an additional
notice received from the NYSE.
|
|
19.
|
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income
|
The after-tax components of Accumulated other comprehensive
(loss) income were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Losses) Gains
|
|
|
Minimum
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
on Available-
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
Translation
|
|
|
for-Sale
|
|
|
Liability
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
(Loss) Income
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(32
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21
|
)
|
Change during 2004
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
Distributions of assets and
liabilities to Cendant during 2005
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Change during 2005
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
12
|
|
Change during 2006
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All components of Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) 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.
|
|
20.
|
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 year ended
December 31, 2005, which was included in Spin-Off related
expenses in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. The fair
value of the stock options was estimated using the
154
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 26,
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.
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 Company executed a Separation and Release Agreement (the
Separation and Release Agreement) with its former
Chief Financial Officer in September 2006. Under the terms of
the Separation and Release Agreement, the former Chief Financial
Officer retained the rights to his previously issued stock-based
awards under their original terms through October 2009. This
represented a modification of the awards and resulted in
incremental compensation cost of approximately $1 million,
which was recognized in Salaries and related expenses in the
Consolidated Statement of Operations during the year ended
December 31, 2006.
155
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following tables summarize stock option activity as follows:
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
|
|
|
73,643
|
|
|
|
21.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired
|
|
|
(9,205
|
)
|
|
|
21.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
64,438
|
|
|
$
|
21.16
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
9,204
|
|
|
$
|
21.16
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options vested and expected
to
vest(1)
|
|
|
9,204
|
|
|
$
|
21.16
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted due to
modification(2)
|
|
|
142,030
|
|
|
|
18.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(65,520
|
)
|
|
|
19.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired
|
|
|
(50,016
|
)
|
|
|
20.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired due to
modification(2)
|
|
|
(142,030
|
)
|
|
|
18.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
3,352,200
|
|
|
$
|
19.35
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
2,531,506
|
|
|
$
|
18.84
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options vested and expected
to
vest(1)
|
|
|
3,230,815
|
|
|
$
|
19.27
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted due to
modification(2)
|
|
|
142,030
|
|
|
|
18.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(65,520
|
)
|
|
|
19.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired
|
|
|
(59,221
|
)
|
|
|
20.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited or expired due to
modification(2)
|
|
|
(142,030
|
)
|
|
|
18.72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
3,416,638
|
|
|
$
|
19.38
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
2,540,710
|
|
|
$
|
18.85
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
$
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options vested and expected
to
vest(1)
|
|
|
3,240,019
|
|
|
$
|
19.28
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All outstanding and unvested stock
options vest immediately upon a change in control. See
Note 26, Subsequent Events for additional
information regarding a potential change in control.
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents the modification of
stock options in conjunction with the Separation and Release
Agreement.
|
156
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
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 year 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 is the closing
share price for the Companys Common stock on the date of
grant.
The weighted-average grant-date fair value per stock option for
awards granted during the years ended December 31, 2006 and
2005 was $11.81 and $7.84, respectively. The weighted-average
grant-date fair value of stock options was estimated using the
Black-Scholes option valuation model with the following
assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006(1)
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Expected life (in years)
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
4.75%
|
|
|
|
4.04%
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
30.0%
|
|
|
|
30.0%
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For the stock options modified in
conjunction with the Separation and Release Agreement, the fair
value at the modification date was used to calculate the
weighted-average grant-date fair value.
|
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 and
$6 million during the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively.
The tables below summarize RSU activity as follows:
Performance-Based
RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant-
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Date Fair
|
|
|
|
of RSUs
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2006
|
|
|
964,296
|
|
|
$
|
21.55
|
|
Granted due to
modification(1)
|
|
|
21,504
|
|
|
|
27.51
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(52,196
|
)
|
|
|
21.55
|
|
Forfeited or cancelled due to
modification(1)
|
|
|
(21,504
|
)
|
|
|
21.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
912,100
|
|
|
$
|
21.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs expected to be converted into
shares of Common
stock(2)
|
|
|
140,408
|
|
|
$
|
21.68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
157
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Service-Based
RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant-
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Date Fair
|
|
|
|
of RSUs
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2006
|
|
|
752,691
|
|
|
$
|
24.14
|
|
Granted(3)
|
|
|
16,008
|
|
|
|
27.60
|
|
Granted due to
modification(1)
|
|
|
15,031
|
|
|
|
27.51
|
|
Converted
|
|
|
(52,788
|
)
|
|
|
21.55
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(31,788
|
)
|
|
|
24.65
|
|
Forfeited or cancelled due to
modification(1)
|
|
|
(15,031
|
)
|
|
|
23.26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
684,123
|
|
|
$
|
24.49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs expected to be converted into
shares of Common
stock(2)
|
|
|
608,994
|
|
|
$
|
24.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant-
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Date Fair
|
|
|
|
of RSUs
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2006
|
|
|
1,716,987
|
|
|
$
|
22.69
|
|
Granted(3)
|
|
|
16,008
|
|
|
|
27.60
|
|
Granted due to
modification(1)
|
|
|
36,535
|
|
|
|
27.51
|
|
Converted
|
|
|
(52,788
|
)
|
|
|
21.55
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(83,984
|
)
|
|
|
22.74
|
|
Forfeited or cancelled due to
modification(1)
|
|
|
(36,535
|
)
|
|
|
22.25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2006
|
|
|
1,596,223
|
|
|
$
|
22.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs expected to be converted into
Common
stock(2)
|
|
|
749,402
|
|
|
$
|
23.91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the modification of RSUs
in conjunction with the Separation and Release Agreement.
|
|
(2) |
|
All outstanding and unvested RSUs
vest immediately upon a change in control. See Note 26,
Subsequent Events for additional information
regarding a potential change in control.
|
|
(3) |
|
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 per RSU for awards
granted during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005
was $27.54 and $25.53, respectively. The total fair value of
RSUs converted into shares of Common stock during the years
ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was $1 million and
$6 million, respectively.
158
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The table below summarizes expense recognized related to
stock-based compensation arrangements during the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
12
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
Income tax benefit related to
stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense,
net of income taxes
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2006, there was $26 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 26, Subsequent
Events for additional information regarding a potential
change in control. As of December 31, 2006, there was
$8 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 3.5 years.
|
|
21.
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
|
The fair value of financial instruments is based on estimates
using present value or other valuation techniques, as
appropriate, when market values resulting from trading on a
national securities exchange or in an over-the-counter market
are not available. The carrying amounts of Cash and cash
equivalents, Restricted cash, Accounts receivable, net and
Accounts payable and accrued expenses approximate fair value due
to the short-term maturities of these assets and liabilities.
159
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The carrying amounts and estimated fair values of all financial
instruments were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
123
|
|
|
$
|
123
|
|
|
$
|
107
|
|
|
$
|
107
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
559
|
|
|
|
559
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
|
|
497
|
|
Mortgage loans held for sale, net
|
|
|
2,936
|
|
|
|
2,943
|
|
|
|
2,395
|
|
|
|
2,399
|
|
Mortgage servicing rights, net
|
|
|
1,971
|
|
|
|
1,971
|
|
|
|
1,909
|
|
|
|
1,909
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
Derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives related to mortgage
servicing rights
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
Commitments to fund mortgages
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
Interest rate and other swaps
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
Forward delivery commitments
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Option contracts
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
7,647
|
|
|
|
7,689
|
|
|
|
6,744
|
|
|
|
6,828
|
|
Derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives related to mortgage
servicing rights
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
Commitments to fund mortgages
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Interest rate and other swaps
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
50
|
|
Forward delivery commitments
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
Option contracts
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
22.
|
Related
Party Transactions
|
Spin-Off
from Cendant
Prior to the Spin-Off, the Company entered into various
agreements with Cendant and Cendants real estate services
division in connection with the Spin-Off (collectively, the
Spin-Off Agreements), including: (i) the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, the related trademark
license agreements with PHH Mortgage (the
PHH Mortgage Trademark License Agreement) and
the Mortgage Venture (the Mortgage Venture Trademark
License Agreement) (collectively, the Trademark
License Agreements), the management services agreement
between the Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage (the
Management Services Agreement), the marketing
agreement between PHH Mortgage and Coldwell Banker Real Estate
Corporation, Century 21 Real Estate LLC, ERA Franchise Systems,
Inc. and Sothebys International Affiliates, Inc. (the
Marketing Agreement) and other agreements for the
purpose of originating and selling mortgage loans primarily
sourced through NRT and Cartus; (ii) the Strategic
Relationship Agreement; (iii) the Separation Agreement that
requires the exchange of information with Cendant and other
provisions regarding the Companys separation from Cendant;
(iv) the Amended Tax Sharing Agreement governing the
allocation of liability for taxes between Cendant and the
Company, indemnification for liability for taxes and
responsibility for preparing and filing tax returns and
defending tax contests, as well as other tax-related matters and
(v) the Transition Services Agreement governing certain
continuing arrangements between the Company and Cendant to
provide for the transition of the Company from a wholly owned
subsidiary of Cendant to an independent, publicly traded company.
160
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
During 2005, prior to and as part of the Spin-Off, Cendant made
a cash contribution to the Company of $100 million and the
Company distributed assets net of liabilities of
$593 million to Cendant. Such amount included the
historical cost of the net assets of the Companys former
relocation and fuel card businesses, certain other assets and
liabilities per the Spin-Off Agreements and the net amount of
forgiveness of certain payables and receivables, including
income taxes, between the Company, its former relocation and
fuel card businesses and Cendant.
Pursuant to the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, Realogy
Venture Partner has the right to terminate the Strategic
Relationship Agreement and terminate the Mortgage Venture in the
event of:
|
|
|
|
§
|
a Regulatory Event (defined below) continuing for six months or
more; provided that PHH Broker Partner may defer termination on
account of a Regulatory Event for up to six additional one-month
periods by paying Realogy Venture Partner a $1 million fee
at the beginning of each such one-month period;
|
|
|
§
|
a change in control of PHH, PHH Broker Partner or any other
affiliate of PHH with a direct or indirect ownership interest in
the Mortgage Venture involving certain specified parties (see
Note 26, Subsequent Events for additional
information regarding a potential change in control);
|
|
|
§
|
a material breach, not cured within the requisite cure period,
by the Company or its affiliates of the representations,
warranties, covenants or other agreements under any of the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, the Strategic Relationship
Agreement, the Marketing Agreement, the Trademark License
Agreements, the Management Services Agreement and certain other
agreements entered into in connection with the Spin-Off;
|
|
|
§
|
the failure by the Mortgage Venture to make scheduled
distributions pursuant to the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement;
|
|
|
§
|
the bankruptcy or insolvency of PHH or PHH Mortgage or
|
|
|
§
|
any act or omission by PHH that causes or would reasonably be
expected to cause material harm to the reputation of Cendant or
any of its subsidiaries.
|
As defined in the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement, a
Regulatory Event is a situation in which
(i) PHH Mortgage or the Mortgage Venture becomes subject to
any regulatory order, or any governmental entity initiates a
proceeding with respect to PHH Mortgage or the Mortgage Venture,
and (ii) such regulatory order or proceeding prevents or
materially impairs the Mortgage Ventures ability to
originate mortgage loans for any period of time in a manner that
adversely affects the value of one or more quarterly
distributions to be paid by the Mortgage Venture pursuant to the
Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement; provided, however, that a
Regulatory Event does not include (a) any order, directive
or interpretation or change in law, rule or regulation, in any
such case that is applicable generally to companies engaged in
the mortgage lending business such that PHH Mortgage or such
affiliate of the Mortgage Venture is unable to cure the
resulting circumstances described in (ii) above, or
(b) any regulatory order or proceeding that results solely
from acts or omissions on the part of Cendant or its affiliates.
In addition, beginning on February 1, 2015, Realogy Venture
Partner may terminate the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement
at any time by giving two years notice to the Company.
Upon termination of the Mortgage Venture Operating Agreement by
Realogy Venture Partner, Realogy will have the option either to
require that PHH purchase Realogys interest in the
Mortgage Venture at fair value, plus, in certain cases,
liquidated damages, or to cause the Company to sell its interest
in the Mortgage Venture to a third party designated by Realogy
at fair value plus, in certain cases, liquidated damages. In the
case of a termination by Realogy following a change in control
of PHH, the Company may be required to make a cash payment to
Realogy in an amount equal to the Mortgage Ventures
trailing 12 months net income multiplied by the greater of
(i) the number of years remaining in the first
12 years of the term of the Mortgage Venture Operating
Agreement or (ii) two years. See Note 26,
Subsequent Events for additional information
regarding a potential change in control.
The Company has the right to terminate the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement upon, among other things, a material breach
by Realogy of a material provision of the Mortgage Venture
Operating Agreement, in
161
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
which case the Company has the right to purchase Realogys
interest in the Mortgage Venture at a price derived from an
agreed-upon
formula based upon fair market value (which is determined with
reference to that trailing 12 months earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization
(EBITDA)) for the Mortgage Venture and the average
market EBITDA multiple for mortgage banking companies.
Upon termination of the Mortgage Venture, all of the Mortgage
Venture agreements will terminate automatically (excluding
certain privacy, non-competition, venture-related transition
provisions and other general provisions), and Realogy will be
released from any restrictions under the Mortgage Venture
agreements that may restrict its ability to pursue a
partnership, joint venture or another arrangement with any
third-party mortgage operation.
Corporate
Expenses and Dividends
Prior to the Spin-Off and in the ordinary course of business,
the Company was allocated certain expenses from Cendant for
corporate functions including executive management, accounting,
tax, finance, human resources, information technology, legal and
facility-related expenses. Cendant allocated these corporate
expenses to subsidiaries conducting ongoing operations based on
a percentage of the subsidiaries forecasted revenues. Such
expenses amounted to $3 million and $32 million during
the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
As described above, in connection with the Spin-Off, certain
payables and receivables between Cendant and the Company were
forgiven.
During the year ended December 31, 2004, the Company paid
Cendant $140 million (or $2.66 per share after giving
effect to the 52,684-for-one stock split effected
January 28, 2005) of cash dividends. The Company did
not pay cash dividends to Cendant during the year ended
December 31, 2005. During the year ended December 31,
2004, the Company transferred a subsidiary owned by STARS to a
wholly owned subsidiary of Cendant not within the Companys
ownership structure. The net assets of the subsidiary
transferred were $16 million.
Certain
Business Relationships
James W. Brinkley, one of the Companys Directors, became
Vice Chairman of Smith Barneys Global Private Client Group
following Citigroup Inc.s acquisition of Legg Mason Wood
Walker, Incorporated in December 2005. The Company has certain
relationships with the Corporate and Investment Banking segment
of Citigroup Inc. (Citigroup), including financial
services, commercial banking and other transactions. The fees
paid to Citigroup, including interest expense, were
approximately $37 million and $3 million during the
years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Citigroup is a lender, along with various other lenders, in
several of the Companys credit facilities. The
Companys indebtedness to Citigroup was $843 million
and $100 million as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, and was made in the ordinary course of business
upon terms, including interest rates and collateral,
substantially the same as those prevailing at the time for
comparable loans. In addition, the Company executed derivative
transactions through Citigroup during the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005 with total notional amounts of
$5.2 billion and $5.4 billion, respectively. These
derivative transactions were entered into in the ordinary course
of business through a competitive bid process.
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 and intersegment eliminations
are reported under the heading Other.
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 income (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
162
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Venture. Prior to the commencement of the Mortgage Venture
operations, PHH Mortgage was party to interim marketing
agreements with NRT and Cartus, wherein PHH Mortgage paid fees
for services provided. These interim marketing agreements
terminated when the Mortgage Venture commenced operations. The
provisions of the Strategic Relationship Agreement and the
Marketing Agreement thereafter govern the manner in which the
Mortgage Venture and PHH Mortgage are recommended by Realogy.
The Companys segment results were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
|
|
|
Servicing
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Other(1)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
329
|
|
|
$
|
131
|
|
|
$
|
460
|
|
|
$
|
1,830
|
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,288
|
|
Segment (loss)
profit(2)
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
(108
|
)
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
181
|
|
|
|
365
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
380
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
184
|
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
270
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
465
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
Assets of continuing operations
|
|
|
3,226
|
|
|
|
2,641
|
|
|
|
5,867
|
|
|
|
4,868
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
10,760
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
|
|
|
Servicing
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Other(3)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
524
|
|
|
$
|
236
|
|
|
$
|
760
|
|
|
$
|
1,711
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,471
|
|
Segment (loss)
profit(2)
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
123
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
(43
|
)
|
|
|
160
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
302
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
313
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
146
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
209
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
348
|
|
Amortization of MSRs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
433
|
|
|
|
433
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
433
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,180
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
Assets of continuing operations
|
|
|
2,640
|
|
|
|
2,555
|
|
|
|
5,195
|
|
|
|
4,716
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
9,965
|
|
163
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fleet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Management
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Production
|
|
|
Servicing
|
|
|
Mortgage
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Segment
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
700
|
|
|
$
|
119
|
|
|
$
|
819
|
|
|
$
|
1,578
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,397
|
|
Segment
profit(2)
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
172
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
158
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250
|
|
Amortization of MSRs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
285
|
|
|
|
285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
285
|
|
Depreciation on operating leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
Other depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
Assets of continuing operations
|
|
|
2,797
|
|
|
|
2,242
|
|
|
|
5,039
|
|
|
|
4,409
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
9,618
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Net revenues reported under the
heading Other for the year ended December 31, 2006
represent the elimination of $2 million of intersegment
revenues recorded by the Mortgage Servicing segment, which are
offset in segment (loss) profit by the elimination of
$2 million of intersegment expense recorded by the Fleet
Management Services segment.
|
|
(2) |
|
The following is a reconciliation
of (Loss) income from continuing operations before income taxes
and minority interest to segment (loss) profit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2004
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
(Loss)
income from continuing operations before income taxes and
minority interest
|
|
$
|
(4
|
)
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
Minority
interest in income (loss) of consolidated entities, net of
income taxes
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment
(loss) profit
|
|
$
|
(6
|
)
|
|
$
|
160
|
|
|
$
|
172
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Segment loss reported under the
heading Other for the year ended December 31, 2005 was
primarily Spin-Off related expenses.
|
The Companys operations are substantially located in the
U.S.
164
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
24.
|
Discontinued
Operations
|
As described in Note 1, Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies, prior to and in connection with the
Spin-Off and subsequent to December 31, 2004, 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
Consolidated Financial Statements as discontinued operations.
Summarized statement of operations data for the discontinued
operations follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 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
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
Fuel Card
|
|
|
Relocation
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
|
$
|
457
|
|
|
$
|
645
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
$
|
83
|
|
|
$
|
111
|
|
|
$
|
194
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued
operations, net of income taxes
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
$
|
67
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of January 31, 2005, all of the assets and liabilities
of the Companys discontinued operations were distributed
to Cendant in conjunction with the Spin-Off (see Note 1,
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies).
165
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
25.
|
Selected
Quarterly Financial Data(unaudited)
|
Provided below is selected unaudited quarterly financial data
for 2006 and 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
549
|
|
|
$
|
589
|
|
|
$
|
535
|
|
|
$
|
615
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations before income taxes and minority interest
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations before minority interest
|
|
|
(12
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
1
|
|
Basic (loss) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
$
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.03
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
Diluted (loss) earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
$
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.03
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
(0.13
|
)
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
617
|
|
|
$
|
584
|
|
|
$
|
650
|
|
|
$
|
620
|
|
Income from continuing operations
before income taxes and minority interest
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations before minority interest
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.91
|
|
|
$
|
(0.12
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
0.22
|
|
|
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
0.91
|
|
|
|
(0.12
|
)
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.90
|
|
|
$
|
(0.12
|
)
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
0.22
|
|
|
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
0.90
|
|
|
|
(0.12
|
)
|
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.
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 Companys second highest and lowest credit ratings are
downgraded in the future, the
166
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
margin over LIBOR and the facility fee under the Companys
Amended Credit Facility would become 70 bps and
17.5 bps, respectively, while the utilization fee would
remain 12.5 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 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 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
and state licensing 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. The Merger Agreement contains certain restrictions on the
Companys ability to incur new indebtedness and to pay
dividends on its Common stock as well as on the payment of
intercompany dividends by certain of its subsidiaries without
the prior written consent of GE.
In connection with the Merger, on March 14, 2007, the
Company and its subsidiaries, PHH Mortgage and PHH Broker
Partner, entered into a Consent and Amendment (the
Consent) with TM Acquisition Corp., PHH Home Loans
and Realogys subsidiaries, Realogy Real Estate Services
Group, LLC, Realogy Real Estate Services Venture Partner, Inc.,
Century 21 Real Estate Corporation, Coldwell Banker Real Estate
Corporation, ERA Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys
International Realty Affiliates, Inc. which provides for the
following: (i) consents from the parties under the Mortgage
Venture Operating Agreement, the Strategic Relationship
Agreement, the Management Services Agreement, the Trademark
License Agreements and the Marketing Agreement (collectively,
the Realogy Agreements) to the Merger and the
related transactions contemplated thereby; (ii) certain
corrective amendments to certain provisions of the Realogy
Agreements as a result of the Realogy Spin-Off and certain other
amendments to change in control, non-compete, fee and other
provisions in the Realogy Agreements and (iii) undertakings
as to certain other actions and agreements with respect to the
foregoing consents and amendments. The amendments to the Realogy
Agreements effected pursuant to the Consent will be effective
immediately prior to the closing of the sale of the
Companys mortgage operations to Blackstone immediately
following the completion of the Merger. The provisions of the
Consent will terminate and be void in
167
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the event that either the Merger Agreement or the agreement for
the sale of the Companys mortgage operations is terminated.
Following the announcement of the Merger in March 2007, two
purported 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 seek to represent an alleged
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 April 5, 2007, the defendants moved to
dismiss the plaintiffs claims.
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
Investors Service, 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 Companys senior unsecured
long-term debt and other debt will not change in the future.
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.
In addition, the Company concluded that it did not satisfy the
requirements of Section 203.01 of the NYSE Listed Company
Manual as a result of the delay in filing its 2006
Form 10-K.
On April 10, 2007, Realogy became a wholly owned subsidiary
of Domus Holdings Corp., an affiliate of Apollo Management VI,
L.P., following the completion of a merger and related
transactions.
168
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of PHH
Corporation:
We have audited the consolidated financial statements of PHH
Corporation and subsidiaries (the Company) as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, and for each of the three years
in the period ended December 31, 2006, and have issued our
report thereon dated May 24, 2007 (which report expresses
an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph
concerning the Merger Agreement entered into on March 15,
2007); such consolidated financial statements and report are
included elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on the
criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission and our report dated May 24, 2007
expressed an unqualified opinion on managements assessment
of the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting and an adverse opinion on the effectiveness
of the Companys internal control over financial reporting;
such report is included elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
Our audits also included the financial statement schedules of
the Company listed in Items 8 and 15. These financial
statement schedules are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on
our audits. In our opinion, such financial statement schedules,
when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole, present fairly, in all material
respects, the information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 3 of Schedule ICondensed
Financial Information of Registrant, on March 15, 2007, the
Company entered into a Merger Agreement.
/s/ Deloitte &
Touche LLP
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
May 24, 2007
169
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
PHH
CORPORATION
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Net revenues from consolidated
subsidiaries
|
|
$
|
126
|
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salaries and related expenses
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
147
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Spin-Off related expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
before income taxes and equity in earnings of
subsidiaries
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
(91
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
Benefit from income taxes
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
before equity in earnings of subsidiaries
|
|
|
(40
|
)
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
128
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(16
|
)
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to
Condensed Financial Statements.
170
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
Due from consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
1,209
|
|
|
|
1,095
|
|
Investment in consolidated
subsidiaries
|
|
|
2,589
|
|
|
|
2,560
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
216
|
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
4,025
|
|
|
$
|
3,863
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
$
|
2,072
|
|
|
$
|
1,883
|
|
Due to consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
351
|
|
|
|
366
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,510
|
|
|
|
2,342
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
961
|
|
|
|
983
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
556
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
income
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Deferred compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders
equity
|
|
|
1,515
|
|
|
|
1,521
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
4,025
|
|
|
$
|
3,863
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to
Condensed Financial Statements.
171
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by
operating activities of continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(62
|
)
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in consolidated
subsidiaries
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends from consolidated
subsidiaries
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
investing activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities of continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by
consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
(137
|
)
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
307
|
|
Contribution from (dividend to)
parent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
(140
|
)
|
Net (decrease) increase in
short-term borrowings
|
|
|
(220
|
)
|
|
|
449
|
|
|
|
(37
|
)
|
Proceeds from borrowings
|
|
|
1,645
|
|
|
|
890
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments on borrowings
|
|
|
(1,275
|
)
|
|
|
(1,421
|
)
|
|
|
(72
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
financing activities of continuing operations
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(98
|
)
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
from continuing operations
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
(163
|
)
|
|
|
71
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at
beginning of period
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
170
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end
of period
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
7
|
|
|
$
|
170
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to
Condensed Financial Statements.
172
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
|
|
1.
|
Debt and
Borrowing Arrangements
|
The following table summarizes the components of PHH
Corporations unsecured indebtedness:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Term notes
|
|
$
|
646
|
|
|
$
|
1,136
|
|
Commercial paper
|
|
|
411
|
|
|
|
747
|
|
Borrowings under credit facilities
|
|
|
1,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,072
|
|
|
$
|
1,883
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured
Debt
Term
Notes
The outstanding carrying value of term notes at
December 31, 2006 and 2005 consisted of $646 million
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 The Bank of
New York, as successor trustee for Bank One Trust Company, N.A.
(the MTN Indenture Trustee). During 2006, PHH
Corporation concluded a tender offer and consent solicitation
(the Offer) for MTNs issued under the
MTN Indenture. PHH Corporation 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 PHH Corporations Tender
Support Facility (defined and described below) to fund the bulk
of the tendered MTNs. As of December 31, 2006, the
outstanding MTNs were scheduled to mature between January 2007
and April 2018. The effective rate of interest for the MTNs
outstanding as of both December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 6.8%.
Commercial
Paper
PHH Corporations policy is to maintain available capacity
under its committed credit facilities (described below) to fully
support its outstanding unsecured commercial paper. PHH
Corporation had unsecured commercial paper obligations of
$411 million and $747 million as of December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively. This commercial paper is fixed-rate
and matures within 270 days of issuance. The
weighted-average interest rate on outstanding unsecured
commercial paper as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 was 5.7%
and 4.7%, respectively.
Credit
Facilities
As of December 31, 2005, PHH Corporation 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,
PHH Corporation 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 Canadian
sub-facility,
which is available to PHH Corporations Fleet Management
Services operations in Canada. Borrowings under the Amended
Credit Facility were $400 million as of December 31,
2006. There were no borrowings under the Credit Facility as of
December 31, 2005.
173
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
Pricing under the Credit Facility was based on PHH
Corporations senior unsecured long-term debt credit
ratings and, as of December 31, 2005, bore interest at the
London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus a margin
of 60 basis points (bps). The Credit Facility also
required PHH Corporation to pay a per annum facility fee of
15 bps and a per annum utilization fee of 12.5 bps if
its usage exceeded 33% of the aggregate commitments under the
Credit Facility. Pricing under the Amended Credit Facility is
also based upon PHH Corporations senior unsecured
long-term debt ratings. If the ratings on PHH Corporations
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 December 31, 2006. The Amended Credit Facility also
requires PHH Corporation 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
December 31, 2006, the per annum utilization and facility
fees were 10 bps and 12 bps, respectively.
On April 6, 2006, PHH Corporation 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 was scheduled to expire on April 5, 2007. Borrowings
under the Supplemental Credit Facility were $200 million as
of December 31, 2006. Pricing under the Supplemental Credit
Facility is based upon PHH Corporations senior unsecured
long-term debt ratings. If the ratings on PHH Corporations
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
Supplemental Credit Facility. Borrowings under the Supplemental
Credit Facility bore interest at LIBOR plus a margin of
38 bps as of December 31, 2006. The Supplemental
Credit Facility also requires PHH Corporation to pay per annum
utilization fees if its usage exceeds 50% of the aggregate
commitments under the Supplemental Credit Facility and per annum
facility fees. As of December 31, 2006, the per annum
utilization and facility fees were 10 bps and 12 bps,
respectively. PHH Corporation was also required to pay an
additional facility fee of 10 bps against the outstanding
commitments under the facility as of October 6, 2006.
On July 21, 2006, PHH Corporation 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 was scheduled to
expire 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.
Borrowings under the Tender Support Facility were
$415 million as of December 31, 2006. Pricing under
the Tender Support Facility is based upon
PHH Corporations 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 PHH
Corporations senior unsecured long-term debt on
January 22, 2007. The Tender Support Facility also required
PHH Corporation 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, PHH Corporation paid a one-time
fee of 15 bps against borrowings of $415 million drawn
under the Tender Support Facility.
See Note 3, Subsequent Events for a discussion
of modifications made to PHH Corporations unsecured credit
facilities and the effects of changes in PHH Corporations
senior unsecured long-term debt ratings after December 31,
2006.
174
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
Debt
Maturities
The following table provides the contractual maturities of PHH
Corporations indebtedness at December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured
|
|
|
|
Debt
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Within one year
|
|
$
|
1,058
|
|
Between one and two years
|
|
|
195
|
|
Between two and three years
|
|
|
|
|
Between three and four years
|
|
|
5
|
|
Between four and five years
|
|
|
400
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,072
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2006, available funding under PHH
Corporations unsecured committed credit facility consisted
of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilized
|
|
Available
|
|
|
Capacity(1)
|
|
Capacity
|
|
Capacity
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Unsecured committed credit
facilities(2)
|
|
$
|
2,478
|
|
|
$
|
1,428
|
|
|
$
|
1,050
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Capacity is dependent upon
maintaining compliance with, or obtaining waivers of, the terms,
conditions and covenants of the respective agreements.
|
|
(2) |
|
Available capacity reflects a
reduction in availability due to an allocation against the
facilities of $411 million which fully supports the
outstanding unsecured commercial paper issued by PHH Corporation
as of December 31, 2006. Under PHH Corporations
policy, all of the outstanding unsecured commercial paper is
supported by available capacity under its unsecured committed
credit facilities with the exception of the Tender Support
Facility. The sole purpose of the Tender Support Facility is the
funding of the retirement of MTNs. In addition, utilized
capacity reflects $2 million of letters of credit issued
under the Amended Credit Facility. See Note 3,
Subsequent Events for information regarding changes
in PHH Corporations capacity under unsecured committed
credit facilities after December 31, 2006.
|
Beginning on March 16, 2006, access to PHH
Corporations shelf registration statement for public debt
issuances was no longer available due to its non-current filing
status with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC).
Debt
Covenants
Certain of PHH Corporations 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 PHH Corporation 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
PHH Corporation maintain a debt to tangible equity ratio of not
more than 10:1. The MTN Indenture also restricts PHH Corporation
from paying dividends if, after giving effect to the dividend
payment, the debt to equity ratio exceeds 6.5:1. At
December 31, 2006, PHH Corporation was in compliance with
all of its financial covenants related to its debt arrangements,
except that it did not deliver its financial statements for the
quarters ended March 31, 2006, June 30, 2006 and
September 30, 2006 to the MTN Indenture Trustee by
175
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
December 31, 2006 pursuant to the terms of Supplemental
Indenture No. 4 (defined and described below).
PHH Corporation did not receive a notice of default and
subsequently delivered these financial statements on or before
April 11, 2007.
Under many of PHH Corporations financing, servicing,
hedging and related agreements and instruments (collectively,
the Financing Agreements), PHH Corporation 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 delays in
completing the unaudited quarterly financial statements for
2006, the 2006 audited annual financial statements and the
unaudited quarterly financial statements for the quarter ended
March 31, 2007 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, PHH Corporation obtained a waiver under
its Amended Credit Facility 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.
On May 26, 2006, PHH Corporation 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.
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 PHH
Corporation and the MTN Indenture Trustee became effective.
Supplemental Indenture No. 4 extended the deadline for the
delivery of PHH Corporations 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 PHH Corporations financial statements and
other delivery requirements.
On September 19, 2006, PHH Corporation obtained waivers
under the Amended Credit Facility, the Supplemental Credit
Facility and the Tender Support Facility 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.
During the fourth quarter of 2006, PHH Corporation obtained
additional waivers under the Amended Credit Facility, the
Supplemental Credit Facility and the Tender Support Facility
which waived certain potential breaches of covenants under those
instruments and extended 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 PHH
Corporations quarterly financial statements for the
quarters ended March 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006, the
Extended Deadline was March 30, 2007. PHH
Corporations financial statements for the quarters ended
March 31, 2006 and June 30, 2006 were filed with the
SEC on March 30, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the
delivery of PHH Corporations quarterly financial
statements for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 was
April 30, 2007. PHH Corporations financial statements
for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 were filed with
the SEC on April 11, 2007. The Extended Deadline for the
delivery of PHH Corporations financial statements for the
year ended December 31, 2006 and the quarter ended
March 31, 2007 is June 29, 2007.
176
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
PHH Corporation intends to deliver its financial statements for
the quarter ended March 31, 2007 on or before June 29,
2007. PHH Corporation may require additional waivers in the
future if it is unable to meet the deadlines for the delivery of
its financial statements. If PHH Corporation 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. If PHH Corporation 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.
Under certain of the Financing Agreements, the lenders or
trustees have the right to notify PHH Corporation 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 with respect to the delivery of PHH
Corporations financial statements, PHH Corporation
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 PHH Corporations
Financing Agreements would trigger cross-default provisions
under certain of its other Financing Agreements. PHH Corporation
has not yet delivered its financial statements for the quarter
ended March 31, 2007 to the MTN Indenture Trustee, which
are required to be delivered no later than May 25, 2007
under the MTN Indenture. As a result of PHH Corporations
failure to deliver these financial statements, the MTN Indenture
Trustee could provide it with a notice of default. In the event
that PHH Corporation 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.
PHH Corporation 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. PHH Corporation 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 PHH Corporation has already
obtained, will be obtained on reasonable terms or 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 PHH Corporations business,
liquidity and financial condition.
|
|
2.
|
Guarantees
and Indemnifications
|
PHH Corporation provides guarantees to third parties on behalf
of its consolidated subsidiaries. These include guarantees of
payments under derivative contracts that are used to manage
interest rate risk, rent payments to landlords under operating
lease agreements, payments of principal under certain borrowing
arrangements and guarantees of performance under certain service
arrangements.
On January 22, 2007, Standard & Poors
removed PHH Corporations debt ratings from CreditWatch
Negative and downgraded its rating on PHH Corporations
senior unsecured long-term debt to BBB-. As a result, the fees
and interest rates on borrowings under PHH Corporations
Amended Credit Facility, Supplemental Credit Facility and Tender
Support Facility increased pursuant to the terms of each
agreement. After the downgrade, borrowings under
177
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
PHH Corporations 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. 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 PHH Corporations second highest
and lowest credit ratings are downgraded in the future, the
margin over LIBOR and the facility fee under PHH
Corporations Amended Credit Facility would become
70 bps and 17.5 bps, respectively, while the
utilization fee would remain 12.5 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 PHH
Corporations 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 15, 2007, PHH Corporation 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
entered into an agreement to sell the mortgage operations of PHH
Corporation 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, PHH Corporation entered into an amendment
to the Rights Agreement, dated as of January 28, 2005,
between PHH Corporation and The Bank of New York (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. The Merger is subject to approval by PHH
Corporations stockholders and state licensing and other
regulatory approvals, as well as various other closing
conditions. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, at closing,
PHH Corporations stockholders will receive $31.50 per
share in cash and shares of PHH Corporations Common stock
will no longer be listed on the New York Stock Exchange (the
NYSE). The Merger Agreement contains certain
restrictions on PHH Corporations ability to incur new
indebtedness and to pay dividends on its Common stock as well as
on the payment of intercompany dividends by certain of its
subsidiaries without the prior written consent of GE.
In connection with the Merger, on March 14, 2007, PHH
Corporation and its subsidiaries, PHH Mortgage Corporation
(PHH Mortgage) and PHH Broker Partner Corporation
(PHH Broker Partner), entered into a Consent and
Amendment (the Consent) with TM Acquisition Corp.,
PHH Home Loans, LLC (PHH Home Loans) and Realogy
Corporations subsidiaries, Realogy Real Estate Services
Group, LLC, Realogy Real Estate Services Venture Partner, Inc.
(Realogy Venture Partner), Century 21 Real Estate
Corporation, Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, ERA
Franchise Systems, Inc. and Sothebys International Realty
Affiliates, Inc. which provides for the following:
(i) consents from the parties under (a) the operating
agreement of PHH Home Loans between PHH Broker Partner and
Realogy Venture Partner, (b) the strategic relationship
agreement between PHH Mortgage, PHH Home Loans, PHH Broker
Partner, Realogy Corporation (Realogy) and Cendant
Corporation (Cendant), (c) the management
services agreement between PHH Home Loans and PHH Mortgage,
(d) the
178
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
SCHEDULE I CONDENSED FINANCIAL INFORMATION
OF REGISTRANT
PHH
CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Continued)
trademark license agreement between certain Realogy subsidiaries
and PHH Mortgage, (e) the trademark license agreement
between certain Realogy subsidiaries and PHH Home Loans and
(f) the marketing agreement between PHH Mortgage and
certain Realogy subsidiaries (collectively, the Realogy
Agreements) to the Merger and the related transactions
contemplated thereby; (ii) certain corrective amendments to
certain provisions of the Realogy Agreements as a result of the
Realogy Spin-Off and certain other amendments to change in
control, non-compete, fee and other provisions in the Realogy
Agreements and (iii) undertakings as to certain other
actions and agreements with respect to the foregoing consents
and amendments. The amendments to the Realogy Agreements
effected pursuant to the Consent will be effective immediately
prior to the closing of the sale of PHH Corporations
mortgage operations to Blackstone immediately following the
completion of the Merger. The provisions of the Consent will
terminate and be void in the event that either the Merger
Agreement or the agreement for the sale of PHH
Corporations mortgage operations is terminated.
Following the announcement of the Merger in March 2007, two
purported class actions were filed against PHH Corporation 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 seek to represent an alleged
class consisting of all persons (other than PHH
Corporations officers and Directors and their affiliates)
holding PHH Corporations 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 April 5, 2007, the
defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiffs claims.
On March 15, 2007, following the announcement of the
Merger, PHH Corporations senior unsecured long-term debt
ratings were placed under review for upgrade by Moodys
Investors Service, 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 PHH Corporations senior unsecured
long-term debt and other debt will not change in the future.
On March 19, 2007, PHH Corporation 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 PHH
Corporation and the filing status of its 2006
Form 10-K.
In addition, PHH Corporation concluded that it did not satisfy
the requirements of Section 203.01 of the NYSE Listed
Company Manual as a result of the delay in filing its 2006
Form 10-K.
179
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
SUPPLEMENTARY FINANCIAL DATA
PHH
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
Charged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
|
Costs and
|
|
|
to Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of
|
|
Description
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Accounts
|
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset valuation
allowance
|
|
$
|
62
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
63
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset valuation
allowance
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)(1)
|
|
|
62
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset valuation
allowance
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)(2)
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Restructuring associated with the
spin-off from Cendant Corporation during the year ended
December 31, 2005 resulted in reductions of state net
operating loss carryforwards with corresponding reductions in
valuation allowances.
|
|
(2) |
|
Expired state net operating loss
carryforwards and changes in the state tax apportionment factor
resulted in corresponding reductions in valuation allowances
during the year ended December 31, 2004.
|
PHH
CORPORATION
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
Charged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
|
Costs and
|
|
|
to Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of
|
|
Description
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Accounts
|
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset valuation
allowance
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset valuation
allowance
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
(3)
|
|
|
(8
|
)(1)
|
|
|
6
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax asset valuation
allowance
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)(2)
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Restructuring associated with the
spin-off from Cendant Corporation during the year ended
December 31, 2005 resulted in reductions of state net
operating loss carryforwards with corresponding reductions in
valuation allowances.
|
|
(2) |
|
Expired state net operating loss
carryforwards and changes in the state tax apportionment factor
resulted in corresponding reductions in valuation allowances
during the year ended December 31, 2004.
|
|
(3) |
|
Intercompany transfer resulting
from corporate restructuring in connection with the spin-off
from Cendant Corporation during the year ended December 31,
2005.
|
180
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Disclosure
Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, 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 Securities
and Exchange Commissions 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. Based on the evaluation and the identification of
the material weaknesses in internal control over financial
reporting described below, as well as our inability to file this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the
Form 10-K)
within the statutory time period, management concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of
December 31, 2006, and management further expects that our
disclosure controls and procedures will not be effective for our
quarterly and annual reporting periods in 2007.
Because of the material weaknesses identified in our evaluation
of internal control over financial reporting, we performed
additional procedures, where necessary, so that our consolidated
financial statements for all accounting periods beginning with
the year ended December 31, 2002 and through the year ended
December 31, 2006, including quarterly periods, and the
Selected Financial Data for all accounting periods, are
presented in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States (GAAP). These
procedures included, among other things, validating data to
independent source documentation; reviewing our existing
contracts to determine proper financial reporting and performing
additional closing procedures, including detailed reviews of
journal entries, re-performance of account reconciliations and
analyses of balance sheet accounts.
Managements
Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined
in
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f) of
the Exchange Act. Internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements in accordance with GAAP. The effectiveness
of any system of internal control over financial reporting is
subject to inherent limitations, including the exercise of
judgment in designing, implementing, operating and evaluating
the controls and procedures. Because of these inherent
limitations, internal control over financial reporting cannot
provide absolute assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
in accordance with GAAP and may not prevent or detect
misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of
effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
internal controls may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies
or procedures may deteriorate. We intend to continue to monitor
and upgrade our internal controls as necessary and appropriate
for our business, but cannot provide assurance that such
improvements will be sufficient to provide us with effective
internal control over financial reporting.
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, 2006 as required under Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX). Managements
assessment of internal control over financial reporting was
conducted using the criteria in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO). Management utilized substantial internal
resources and engaged outside consultants to assist in various
aspects of its assessment and compliance efforts. Based on the
material weaknesses identified below, management concluded that
our internal control over financial reporting was not effective
as of December 31, 2006. A material weakness is
defined as a significant deficiency, or combination of
significant deficiencies, that results in more than a remote
likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or
181
interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected.
A significant deficiency is defined as a control
deficiency, or combination of control deficiencies, that
adversely affects a companys ability to initiate,
authorize, record, process or report external financial data
reliably in accordance with GAAP such that there is more than a
remote likelihood that a misstatement of a companys annual
or interim financial statements that is more than
inconsequential will not be prevented or detected.
In connection with managements assessment of our internal
control over financial reporting, we identified six material
weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2006:
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:
|
|
|
|
§
|
We did not maintain a sufficient complement of personnel with
the appropriate level of knowledge, experience and training in
the application of 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 and system access controls to provide
reasonable assurance that we were in compliance with existing
policies and procedures.
|
|
|
§
|
We did not establish an adequate enterprise-wide risk assessment
process, including an assessment of risk related to fraud.
|
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.
|
|
|
§
|
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 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.
182
IV. 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.
|
V. We did not design and maintain effective controls over
accounting for human resources and payroll processes (HR
Processes). Specifically, we 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, monitoring and reporting processes
performed by us and 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.
|
VI. We did not design and maintain effective controls over
accounting for expenditures. Specifically, we identified the
following deficiencies in the process of accounting for
expenditures that in the aggregate constituted a material
weakness:
|
|
|
|
§
|
We did not maintain effective controls to provide reasonable
assurance that our vendor accounts were properly established,
updated and authorized and that our vendor invoices were
properly approved.
|
|
|
§
|
We did not maintain sufficient evidence of the regular
performance of account reconciliations and management
expenditure reviews.
|
Because of the material weaknesses identified above, management
has concluded that we did not maintain effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006,
based on the Internal ControlIntegrated Framework
issued by COSO. Deloitte & Touche LLP, our
independent registered public accounting firm has issued an
attestation report on our assessment of internal control over
financial reporting and expressed an adverse opinion on the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
included in Item 8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data in this
Form 10-K.
Remediation
of Material Weaknesses 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. It is managements goal
to remediate as many material weaknesses as feasible in 2007,
but we expect that we will need to continue our remediation
efforts into 2008. Items I through IV above, which
were previously identified by management as material weaknesses
in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the 2005
Form 10-K),
remained material weaknesses as of December 31, 2006 due,
in part, to the significant amount of time required to complete
and file our 2005
Form 10-K.
Items V and VI were identified as material weaknesses by
management as of December 31, 2006. The following
paragraphs describe changes in our internal control over
financial reporting as a result of our remediation efforts as of
December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
§
|
In our 2005
Form 10-K,
we identified a material weakness related to derivatives. As
part of managements assessment as of December 31,
2005, we determined that we did not maintain effective controls,
including policies and procedures, over accounting for certain
derivative financial instruments in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities. In order to remediate this material weakness,
we implemented and updated our policies and procedures relating
to the monitoring of derivative transactions, the review and
determination of the proper accounting treatment for derivative
financial instruments as well as properly documenting
|
183
|
|
|
|
|
compliance with such policies and procedures. These remediation
measures were tested and determined to be effective through
managements assessment of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
§
|
We are working to remediate the six material weaknesses
identified above and have undertaken the following actions to
remediate the material weakness in our control environment as
described below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2005, management identified certain
deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting
related to our internal audit function. During 2006, we replaced
the head of our internal audit department and retained a big
four accounting firm to serve as our internal audit co-source
provider for 2006.
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2005, management identified certain
deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting
related to senior management maintaining the proper tone as to
internal control over financial reporting. During 2006, we
formed a SOX steering committee to implement and oversee the
2006 SOX assessment process, retained one big four accounting
firm to serve as our internal audit co-source provider and
another to serve as our SOX advisor, initiated periodic
communications from senior management regarding the importance
of adherence to internal controls and company policies, expanded
our Disclosure Committee and developed a management confirmation
process regarding the results of the SOX assessment.
|
Unless otherwise noted, the remediation efforts identified above
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. We do not expect
that our internal control over financial reporting will be
effective for our quarterly and annual reporting periods in 2007.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
During the quarter ended December 31, 2006, we hired
additional professionals in our finance and accounting
departments in order to address the delay in the preparation of
our financial statements. There have been no other changes in
our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter
ended December 31, 2006 that have materially affected, or
are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
On May 22, 2007, the Compensation Committee of our Board of
Directors, with the consent of Mr. Clair M. Raubenstine,
our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer,
determined to satisfy a prior arrangement with
Mr. Raubenstine for the award of shares of our Common stock
in the amount of $250,000 when we become a current filer with
the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC)
through a cash payment of the same amount following the filing
of this
Form 10-K.
See Item 11. Executive Compensation
Compensation Discussion and Analysis Executive
Compensation Decisions in 2006 and 2007 for more
information.
184
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
Executive
Officers
Our executive officers are set forth in the table below. All
executive officers are appointed by and serve at the pleasure of
the Board of Directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position(s)
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer
President and Chief Executive Officer PHH
Mortgage Corporation (PHH Mortgage)
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer PHH Vehicle Management Services Group
LLC (PHH Arval)
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer PHH Mortgage
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, General
Counsel and Corporate Secretary
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary PHH Mortgage
|
Mark E. Johnson
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Vice President and Treasurer
|
Michael D. Orner
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
Vice President and Controller
|
Terence W. Edwards serves as our President and
Chief Executive Officer, a position he has held since February
2005 and President and Chief Executive Officer of PHH Mortgage,
a position he has held since August 2005. Prior to our spin-off
from Cendant in the first quarter of 2005 (the
Spin-Off), Mr. Edwards served as President and
Chief Executive Officer of Cendant Mortgage Corporation
(Cendant Mortgage, now known as PHH Mortgage) since
February 1996, and as such, was responsible for overseeing its
entire mortgage banking operations. From 1995 to 1996,
Mr. Edwards served as Vice President of Investor Relations
and Treasurer and was responsible for investor, banking and
rating agency relations, financing resources, cash management,
pension investment management and internal financial structure.
Mr. Edwards joined us in 1980 as a treasury operations
analyst and has held positions of increasing responsibility,
including Director, Mortgage Finance and Senior Vice President,
Secondary Marketing.
Clair M. Raubenstine serves as our Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer, a position he has held
since February 2006. From October 1998 through June 2002,
Mr. Raubenstine served as a national independence
consulting partner with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
(PricewaterhouseCoopers). He also previously served
as an Accounting, Auditing and SEC consulting partner and as an
assurance and business advisory services partner to various
public and private companies. Mr. Raubenstines career
at PricewaterhouseCoopers spanned 39 years until his
retirement in June 2002. From July 2002 through February 2006,
Mr. Raubenstine provided accounting and financial advisory
services to various charitable and educational organizations.
George J. Kilroy serves as President and Chief
Executive Officer of PHH Arval, a position he has held since
March 2001. Mr. Kilroy is responsible for the management of
PHH Arval. From May 1997 to March 2001, Mr. Kilroy served
as Senior Vice President, Business Development and was
responsible for new client sales, client relations and
marketing for PHH Arvals United States (U.S.)
operations. Mr. Kilroy joined PHH Arval in 1976 as an
Account Executive in the Truck and Equipment Division and
has held positions of increasing responsibility, including head
of Diversified Services and Financial Services.
Mark R. Danahy serves as Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of PHH Mortgage, a position he has held
since April 2001. Mr. Danahy is responsible for directing
the mortgage accounting and financial planning teams, which
include financial reporting, asset valuation and capital markets
accounting, planning and forecasting. Mr. Danahy joined
Cendant Mortgage in December 2000 as Controller. From 1999 to
2000, Mr. Danahy served as Senior Vice President, Capital
Market Operations for GE Capital Market Services, Inc.
William F. Brown serves as our Senior Vice
President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, a position
he has held since February 2005 and Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary of PHH Mortgage. Mr. Brown
has served as Senior Vice President and General Counsel of
Cendant Mortgage since June 1999 and
185
oversees its legal, contract, licensing and regulatory
compliance functions. From June 1997 to June 1999,
Mr. Brown served as Vice President and General Counsel of
Cendant Mortgage. From January 1995 to June 1997, Mr. Brown
served as Counsel in the PHH Corporate Legal Department.
Mark E. Johnson serves as our Vice President and
Treasurer, a position he has held since February 2005. Prior to
the Spin-Off, Mr. Johnson served as Vice President,
Secondary Marketing of Cendant Mortgage since May 2003 and was
responsible for various funding initiatives and financial
management of certain subsidiary operations. From May 1997 to
May 2003, Mr. Johnson served as Assistant Treasurer of
Cendant Corporation (our former parent company, now known as
Avis Budget Group, Inc., but referred to in this 2006
Form 10-K
as Cendant), where he had a range of
responsibilities, including banking and rating agency relations
and management of unsecured funding and securitization.
Michael D. Orner serves as our Vice President and
Controller, a position he has held since March 2005. Prior to
joining us, Mr. Orner was employed by Millennium Chemicals,
Inc. as Corporate Controller from January 2003 through March
2005 and Director of Accounting and Financial Reporting from
December 1999 through December 2002. Prior to joining Millennium
Chemicals, Inc., Mr. Orner served as a Senior Manager,
Audit and Business Advisory Services for PricewaterhouseCoopers,
where he was employed from September 1989 through November 1999.
Board
of Directors
Our Board of Directors currently consists of seven members. Our
charter divides our Board of Directors into three classes of
Directors having staggered terms, with one class being elected
each year for a new three-year term and until their successors
are elected and qualified. The term for Class I Directors
expires at the annual meeting of our stockholders for 2009, the
term for Class II Directors expires at the annual meeting
of our stockholders for 2007 and the term for Class III
Directors expires at the annual meeting of our stockholders for
2008. The following table sets forth certain information with
respect to the members of our Board of Directors:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term Expires
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at Annual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Meeting Held
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
|
Position(s)
|
|
for the Year
|
|
|
A.B. Krongard
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
Non-Executive Chairman of the
Board of Directors
|
|
|
2009
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Director; President and Chief
Executive Officer; President
and Chief Executive Officer PHH Mortgage
|
|
|
2009
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Director; President and Chief
Executive Officer PHH Arval
|
|
|
2007
|
|
James W. Brinkley
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Ann D. Logan
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Jonathan D. Mariner
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Francis J. Van Kirk
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
2009
|
|
A.B. Krongard was elected Non-Executive Chairman
of the Board of Directors effective upon the Spin-Off. Since
December 2004, Mr. Krongard has been pursuing personal
interests. From March 2001 until December 2004,
Mr. Krongard served as Executive Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency. From February 1998 until March 2001,
Mr. Krongard served as Counselor to the Director of Central
Intelligence. Mr. Krongard previously worked in various
capacities at Alex. Brown, Incorporated (Alex.
Brown). In 1991, Mr. Krongard was elected as Chief
Executive Officer of Alex. Brown and assumed the additional
duties of Chairman of the Board of Alex. Brown in 1994. Upon the
merger of Alex. Brown with Bankers Trust Corporation
(Bankers Trust) in September 1997, Mr. Krongard
became Chairman of the Board of Bankers Trust and served in such
capacity until joining the Central Intelligence Agency. Since
July 2005, Mr. Krongard has served as a member of the Board
of Directors of Under Armour, Inc. and is the Chairman of its
Audit Committee. Under Armour, Inc. files reports pursuant to
the Exchange Act.
James W. Brinkley was elected as a Director
effective upon the Spin-Off. In December 2005, Mr. Brinkley
became Vice Chairman of Smith Barneys Global Private
Client Group following Citigroup Inc.s acquisition of Legg
Mason Wood Walker, Incorporated (LMWW).
Mr. Brinkley served as a Director of Legg Mason, Inc., a
186
holding company that, through its subsidiaries, provides
financial services to individuals, institutions, corporations,
governments and government agencies since its formation in 1981.
Mr. Brinkley has served as a Senior Executive Vice
President of Legg Mason, Inc. since December 1983.
Mr. Brinkley became Chairman of LMWW, Legg Mason
Inc.s principal brokerage subsidiary, in February 2004.
Mr. Brinkley previously served as LMWWs Vice Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer from July 2003 through February
2004, as its President from 1985 until July 2003 and as its
Chief Operating Officer from February 1998 until July 2003.
Ann D. Logan was elected as a Director effective
upon the Spin-Off. Since July 2000, Ms. Logan has worked
with various non-profit organizations and is currently Chair of
the Annual Fund at Bryn Mawr College and a member of that
colleges campaign steering committee. Ms. Logan was
an Executive Vice President at the Federal National Mortgage
Association (Fannie Mae) from January 1993 to July
2000. Ms. Logan ran the single-family mortgage business at
Fannie Mae from 1998 to 2000 and was the Chief Credit Officer
from 1993 to 1998. From 1989 to 1993, Ms. Logan was a
Senior Vice President in charge of Fannie Maes Northeast
Regional Office in Philadelphia. Prior to joining Fannie Mae,
Ms. Logan was Assistant Vice President at
Standard & Poors Corporation in New York.
From 1976 to 1980, Ms. Logan worked for the
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee and served as the Committee
Staff Director in 1980.
Jonathan D. Mariner was elected as a Director
effective upon the Spin-Off. Mr. Mariner has been the
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Major
League Baseball since January 2004. From March 2002 to January
2004, Mr. Mariner served as the Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of Major League Baseball. From December
2000 to March 2002, Mr. Mariner served as the Chief
Operating Officer of Charter Schools U.S.A., a charter school
development and management company. Mr. Mariner was the
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the
Florida Marlins Baseball Club from February 1992 to December
2000. Mr. Mariner served on the Boards of Directors of
BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. (BankAtlantic) through
May 2006 and Steiner Leisure, Limited through June 2006, both of
which file reports pursuant to the Exchange Act.
Francis J. Van Kirk was elected as a Director
effective July 1, 2005. Since November 2005, Mr. Van
Kirk has been a partner with Heidrick & Struggles, an
international executive search and leadership consulting
services company. Prior to joining Heidrick &
Struggles, Mr. Van Kirk served as the Managing Partner of
PricewaterhouseCoopers Philadelphia office from 1996
through June 2005. In this role, Mr. Van Kirk oversaw the
integration and coordination of PricewaterhouseCoopers
lines of service and industry groups to ensure seamless service
to its clients. Mr. Van Kirk began his career with
PricewaterhouseCoopers in 1971 as a Staff Auditor and was
employed in positions of increasing responsibility during his
35-year
career with that firm.
Independence
of the Board of Directors
Under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange (the
NYSE), our Board of Directors is required to
affirmatively determine which Directors are independent and to
disclose such determination in this
Form 10-K
and in the proxy statement for each annual meeting of
stockholders going forward. On April 24, 2007, our Board of
Directors reviewed each Directors relationships with us in
conjunction with our previously adopted Independence Standards
for Directors (the Independence Standards) and
Section 303A of the NYSEs Listed Company Manual (the
NYSE Listing Standards). A copy of our Independence
Standards is attached to this
Form 10-K
as Exhibit 99.1 and is available on our corporate website
at www.phh.com under the heading Investor
RelationsCorporate Governance. A copy of our
Independence Standards is also available to stockholders upon
request, addressed to the Corporate Secretary at 3000 Leadenhall
Road, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054 (telephone number:
1-866-PHH-INFO or 1-856-917-1PHH). At the meeting, the Board
affirmatively determined that all non-employee
DirectorsMessrs. Brinkley, Krongard, Mariner and Van
Kirk and Ms. Loganmeet the categorical standards
under the Independence Standards and are independent Directors
under the NYSE Listing Standards.
In the course of its determination of the independence of each
non-management Director, the Board considered the following
transactions, relationships and arrangements as required by our
Independence Standards:
|
|
|
|
§
|
Mr. Brinkley became Vice Chairman of Smith Barneys
Global Private Client Group following Citigroup Inc.s
acquisition of LMWW in December 2005. We have certain
relationships with the Corporate and Investment Banking segment
of Citigroup Inc. (Citigroup), including financial
services, commercial banking and other transactions. The Board
specifically evaluated our transactions with Citigroup, the fees
|
187
|
|
|
|
|
paid to Citigroup and the amount of indebtedness to Citigroup
during 2006 and determined that the fees paid to Citigroup were
less than 0.1% of its annual revenues and the amount of
indebtedness was less than 0.1% of its total consolidated
assets. Based on this evaluation and the nature of
Mr. Brinkleys position, our Board determined that
this was not a material relationship for the purposes of
determining his independence. In addition,
Mr. Brinkleys son is a principal at Colliers Pinkard,
a member firm of Colliers International (Colliers),
which provides certain lease management services to us. The
Board evaluated the relationship between Colliers and us,
including the fees paid to Colliers, which were less than 0.1%
of its annual revenues. The Board determined that this was not a
material relationship for the purpose of determining his
independence.
|
|
|
|
|
§
|
Mr. Krongard is an outside director of the global Board of
Directors for DLA Piper, our principal outside law firm. The
Board reviewed the fees paid by us to DLA Piper and determined
that such fees represented less than 0.4% of DLA Pipers
annual revenues for 2006. Based on the nature of his position,
our Board considered Mr. Krongards relationship with
DLA Piper and determined that it was not a material relationship
for the purpose of determining his independence.
|
|
|
§
|
Ms. Logan has a mortgage loan with us, which was originated
prior to her appointment to our Board of Directors. The Board
considered the terms of the mortgage loan, including the
interest rate and collateral requirements, which were
substantially the same as those prevailing at the time for
comparable transactions, and determined that this was not a
material relationship for the purpose of determining her
independence.
|
|
|
§
|
Mr. Mariner served as director of BankAtlantic until May
2006. PHH Mortgage has certain mortgage banking relationships
with BankAtlantic, the fees for which did not exceed 0.2% of
BankAtlantics annual revenues. Based on this evaluation,
the Board determined that this was not a material relationship
for the purpose of determining his independence.
|
See Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions, and Director Independence for more
information. Our Board also determined that Messrs. Edwards
and Kilroy, who serve as executive officers, are not independent
Directors. Accordingly, more than two-thirds of the members of
our Board of Directors are independent as required by our
Corporate Governance Guidelines.
Non-Executive
Chairman
Mr. Krongard serves as our Non-Executive Chairman. The
Non-Executive Chairman is not a corporate officer and leads all
meetings of our Board of Directors at which he is present. The
Non-Executive Chairman serves on appropriate committees as
requested by the Board of Directors, sets meeting schedules and
agendas and manages information flow to the Board of Directors
to assure appropriate understanding of, and discussion regarding
matters of interest or concern to the Board of Directors. The
Non-Executive Chairman also has such additional powers and
performs such additional duties consistent with organizing and
leading the actions of the Board of Directors as the Board of
Directors may from
time-to-time
prescribe.
Committees
of the Board
The Board of Directors has a standing Audit Committee,
Compensation Committee and Corporate Governance Committee
consisting of Directors who have been affirmatively determined
to be independent as defined in the NYSE Listing
Standards. Each of these Committees operates pursuant to a
written charter approved by the Board of Directors and available
on our corporate website at www.phh.com under the heading
Investor RelationsCorporate Governance. A copy
of each Committee charter is also available to stockholders upon
request, addressed to the Corporate Secretary at
3000 Leadenhall Road, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054
(telephone number: 1-866-PHH-INFO or 1-856-917-1PHH). In
addition, the Board of Directors has a standing Executive
Committee which may take certain actions on behalf of the Board
of Directors when the Board is not in session.
188
Audit
Committee
The Audit Committee assists our Board of Directors in the
oversight of the integrity of our financial statements, our
independent registered public accountants qualifications
and independence, the performance of our independent registered
public accountants and our internal audit function and our
compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. The Committee
is a separately-designated standing audit committee established
in accordance with Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Exchange Act.
The Committee also oversees our corporate accounting and
reporting practices by:
|
|
|
|
§
|
meeting with our financial management and independent registered
public accountants to review our financial statements, quarterly
earnings releases and financial data;
|
|
|
§
|
appointing and pre-approving all services provided by the
independent registered public accountants that will audit our
financial statements;
|
|
|
§
|
reviewing the selection of the internal auditors that provide
internal audit services;
|
|
|
§
|
reviewing the scope, procedures and results of our
audits and
|
|
|
§
|
evaluating our key financial and accounting personnel.
|
The Audit Committee is comprised of Messrs. Van Kirk
(Chairman) and Mariner and Ms. Logan. Each member of the
Audit Committee is required to have the ability to read and
understand fundamental financial statements. The Audit Committee
is also required to have at least one member that qualifies as
an audit committee financial expert as defined by
the rules of the SEC. Our Board of Directors has determined that
Messrs. Mariner and Van Kirk qualify as audit committee
financial experts and are non-employee, independent Directors.
During 2006, the Audit Committee met 26 times.
Compensation
Committee
The Compensation Committee determines and approves all elements
of compensation for our Chief Executive Officer and senior
management; reviews and approves our compensation strategy,
including the elements of total compensation for senior
management; reviews and approves the annual bonus and long-term
bonus incentive plans and reviews and grants equity awards for
our employees. The Compensation Committee also assists us in
developing compensation and benefit strategies to attract,
develop and retain qualified employees. See Item 11.
Executive Compensation for additional information
regarding the process for the determination and consideration of
executive compensation. The Compensation Committee is comprised
of Messrs. Brinkley (Chairman) and Krongard and
Ms. Logan. During 2006, the Compensation Committee met
seven times and acted by unanimous written consent on one
occasion.
Corporate
Governance Committee
The Corporate Governance Committees responsibilities with
respect to its governance function include considering matters
of corporate governance and reviewing and revising our Board of
Directors Corporate Governance Guidelines, Code of
Business Conduct and Ethics for Directors and our Code of
Conduct for Employees and Officers. The Corporate Governance
Committee identifies, evaluates and recommends nominees for our
Board of Directors for each annual meeting (see Nomination
Process and Qualifications for Director Nominees below);
evaluates the composition, organization and governance of our
Board of Directors and its committees and develops and
recommends corporate governance principles and policies
applicable to us. The Committee is comprised of
Messrs. Krongard (Chairman), Brinkley and Mariner. During
2006, the Corporate Governance Committee met two times.
Executive
Committee
The Executive Committee may exercise all of the powers of our
Board of Directors when the Board is not in session, including
the power to authorize the issuance of stock, except that the
Executive Committee has no power to alter, amend or repeal our
by-laws or any resolution or resolutions of the Board of
Directors, declare any dividend or make any other distribution
to our stockholders, appoint any member of the Executive
Committee or take any
189
other action which legally may be taken only by the full Board
of Directors. The Executive Committee is comprised of
Messrs. Krongard (Chairman), Edwards and Kilroy. During
2006, the Executive Committee did not meet.
Board
Meetings
During 2006, our Board of Directors held 16 meetings and acted
by unanimous written consent on four occasions. In addition, the
standing Committees of the Board of Directors held an aggregate
of 35 meetings and acted by unanimous written consent on one
occasion in that period. In 2006, all incumbent Directors
attended at least 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of the
Board of Directors and Committees of the Board of Directors on
which they served. All Directors are expected to attend each
regularly scheduled Board of Directors meeting as well as each
annual meeting of our stockholders (subject to certain limited
exceptions). All of our Directors attended the 2006 annual
meeting of stockholders.
Director
Compensation
The Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing
and recommending to the Board of Directors the compensation of
our non-employee Directors. Members of our Board of Directors
who are also our officers or employees do not receive
compensation for serving as a Director (other than
travel-related expenses for Board meetings held outside of our
corporate offices). The following table sets forth the
non-employee Director retainer and stipend schedule for 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Annual Non-Executive Chairman of
the Board Retainer
|
|
$
|
170,000
|
|
Annual Non-Executive Board Member
Retainer
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
New Director Equity Grant
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
Audit Committee Chair Stipend
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Audit Committee Member Stipend
|
|
|
12,000
|
|
Compensation Committee Chair
Stipend
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
Compensation Committee Member
Stipend
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
Corporate Governance Committee
Chair Stipend
|
|
|
9,000
|
|
Corporate Governance Committee
Member Stipend
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
The non-employee Director retainers and stipends set forth in
the table above are paid in arrears at the end of each quarter
(the Fee Payment Date), half in cash and half in
restricted stock units (the Director RSUs) of PHH
Common stock (Common stock), which are issued under
our 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan and are required to be
deferred under our Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation
Plan. The Director RSUs may not be sold or otherwise transferred
for value prior to the Directors termination of service on
the Board. These Director RSUs are immediately vested and are
paid in shares of our Common stock one year after the Director
is no longer a member of the Board of Directors. A non-employee
Director may also elect to receive all or a portion of the cash
retainer, stipends or any other compensation for service as a
non-employee Director in the form of additional Director RSUs.
These Director RSUs are also immediately vested and are paid in
shares of our Common stock 200 days after the Director is
no longer a member of the Board of Directors. We do not maintain
a pension plan for non-employee Directors, and they did not
receive any other compensation for 2006.
190
Director
Compensation Table
The following table sets forth the compensation paid to or
earned by each non-employee Director for 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned or
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Employee Director
|
|
Paid in Cash
|
|
|
Awards(1)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
James W. Brinkley
|
|
$
|
71,133
|
|
|
$
|
70,864
|
|
|
$
|
141,997
|
|
A.B. Krongard
|
|
|
94,710
|
(2)
|
|
|
94,386
|
|
|
|
189,096
|
|
Ann D. Logan
|
|
|
71,133
|
|
|
|
70,864
|
|
|
|
141,997
|
|
Jonathan D. Mariner
|
|
|
69,648
|
|
|
|
69,373
|
|
|
|
139,021
|
|
Francis J. Van Kirk
|
|
|
70,097
|
|
|
|
69,870
|
|
|
|
139,967
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Following the announcement of the
delay in filing our 2005
Form 10-K,
the Board of Directors determined that the award of Director
RSUs to be granted to non-employee Directors will be postponed
until we become a current filer with the SEC. We have included
these amounts in the Director Compensation Table above because
they have been earned and will be awarded when we become a
current filer with the SEC. The amounts shown reflect the fair
value of the Director RSUs earned, but not awarded to Directors
for 2006, and are calculated using the closing price for our
Common stock on the Fee Payment Date. The table below sets forth
the fair value for the Director RSUs earned for each quarter of
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Employee Director
|
|
3/31/2006
|
|
|
6/30/2006
|
|
|
9/30/2006
|
|
|
12/31/2006
|
|
|
James
W. Brinkley
|
|
$
|
17,702
|
|
|
$
|
17,708
|
|
|
$
|
17,728
|
|
|
$
|
17,726
|
|
A.B.
Krongard
|
|
|
23,577
|
|
|
|
23,602
|
|
|
|
29,591
|
|
|
|
23,617
|
|
Ann
D. Logan
|
|
|
17,702
|
|
|
|
17,708
|
|
|
|
17,728
|
|
|
|
17,726
|
|
Jonathan
D. Mariner
|
|
|
17,328
|
|
|
|
17,350
|
|
|
|
17,344
|
|
|
|
17,351
|
|
Francis
J. Van Kirk
|
|
|
17,462
|
|
|
|
17,460
|
|
|
|
17,481
|
|
|
|
17,467
|
|
During 2006, the number of Director
RSUs was calculated by dividing the amount of deferred
compensation by the average of the highest and lowest price for
our Common stock on the last trading day prior to the Fee
Payment Date. The Board has revised the method for calculating
the number of Director RSUs for all future awards by using the
closing price for our Common stock on the Fee Payment Date. As
of December 31, 2006, Messrs. Brinkley, Krongard,
Mariner and Van Kirk and Ms. Logan had an aggregate of
7,834, 14,396, 7,724, 5,981 and 7,834 Director RSUs,
respectively, including those earned but not awarded in 2006.
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Mr. Krongard elected to defer
$65,450 of the cash portion of his retainer and stipends
pursuant to the Non-Employee Directors Deferred Compensation
Plan and received 2,375 Director RSUs which will vest
200 days after he is no longer a member of our Board of
Directors. The number of Director RSUs was calculated by
dividing the amount of cash deferred by the average of the
highest and lowest price for our Common stock on the last
trading day prior to the Fee Payment Date. The fair values of
these Director RSUs were $16,340 on March 31, 2006, $16,359
on June 30, 2006, $16,358 on September 30, 2006 and
$16,340 on December 31, 2006, which were less than the
amount of cash deferred on each Fee Payment Date.
|
Corporate
Governance
Executive
Sessions of Non-Management Directors
Executive sessions of non-management Directors without
management present are held regularly by the Board of Directors
and its Committees to discuss the criteria upon which the
performance of the Chief Executive Officer and other senior
executives is based, the performance of the Chief Executive
Officer and other senior executives against such criteria, the
compensation of the Chief Executive Officer and other senior
executives and any other relevant matters. In 2006, the
non-management Directors met in executive session without
management eight times.
Presiding
Director of Executive Sessions
Our Board of Directors has designated Mr. Krongard, our
Non-Executive Chairman and Chairman of the Corporate Governance
Committee, as the presiding Director of executive sessions of
the non-management Directors of the Board of Directors.
191
Corporate
Governance Guidelines
The Board of Directors has adopted Corporate Governance
Guidelines to assist the Board of Directors in monitoring the
effectiveness of decision-making, both at the Board of Directors
and management levels, to enhance long-term stockholder value.
The Corporate Governance Guidelines outline the following:
|
|
|
|
§
|
the responsibilities of the Board of Directors;
|
|
|
§
|
the composition of the Board of Directors, including the
requirement that two-thirds of the Directors are independent as
defined by the NYSE Listing Standards;
|
|
|
§
|
Director duties, tenure, retirement and succession;
|
|
|
§
|
conduct of Board of Directors and Committee meetings and
|
|
|
§
|
the selection and evaluation of the Chief Executive Officer.
|
Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on our
corporate website at www.phh.com under the heading
Investor RelationsCorporate Governance. A copy
of our Corporate Governance Guidelines is available to
stockholders upon request, addressed to the Corporate Secretary
at 3000 Leadenhall Road, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054
(telephone number: 1-866-PHH-INFO or 1-856-917-1PHH).
Code
of Business Conduct and Ethics for Directors
We are committed to conducting business in accordance with the
highest standards of business ethics and complying with
applicable laws, rules and regulations. In furtherance of this
commitment, our Board of Directors promotes ethical behavior and
has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for Directors
(the Directors Code) that is applicable to all of
our Directors. The Directors Code provides, among other things:
|
|
|
|
§
|
guidelines for Directors with respect to what constitutes a
conflict of interest between a Directors private interests
and interests of PHH;
|
|
|
§
|
a set of standards that must be followed whenever we contemplate
a business relationship between us and a Director;
|
|
|
§
|
restrictions on competition between our Directors and PHH and
the use of our confidential information by Directors for their
personal benefit and
|
|
|
§
|
disciplinary measures for violations of the Directors Code and
any other applicable rules and regulations.
|
The Directors Code is available on our corporate website at
www.phh.com under the heading Investor
RelationsCorporate Governance. We will post any
amendments to the Directors Code, or waivers of the provisions
thereof, to our website under the heading Investor
RelationsCorporate Governance. A copy of the
Directors Code is also available to stockholders upon request,
addressed to the Corporate Secretary at 3000 Leadenhall Road,
Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054 (telephone number: 1-866-PHH-INFO
or 1-856-917-1PHH).
Code
of Conduct for Employees and Officers
Our Board of Directors has also adopted a Code of Conduct for
Employees and Officers (the Employees and Officers
Code) that is applicable to all of our officers and
employees, including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief
Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer. The Employees
and Officers Code provides, among other things:
|
|
|
|
§
|
guidelines for our officers and employees with respect to
ethical handling of conflicts of interest, including examples of
the most common types of conflicts of interest that should be
avoided (e.g., receipt of improper personal benefits from us,
having an ownership interest in other businesses that may
compromise an officers loyalty to us, obtaining outside
employment with a competitor of ours, etc.);
|
|
|
§
|
a set of standards to promote full, fair, accurate, timely and
understandable disclosure in periodic reports required to be
filed by us, including, for example, a specific requirement that
all accounting records must be duly preserved and must
accurately reflect our assets and liabilities;
|
192
|
|
|
|
§
|
a requirement to comply with all applicable laws, rules and
regulations;
|
|
|
§
|
guidance promoting prompt internal communication of any
suspected violations of the Employees and Officers Code to the
appropriate person or persons identified in the Employees and
Officers Code and
|
|
|
§
|
disciplinary measures for violations of the Employees and
Officers Code and any other applicable rules and regulations.
|
The Employees and Officers Code is available on our corporate
website at www.phh.com under the heading Investor
RelationsCorporate Governance. We will post any
amendments to the Employees and Officers Code, or waivers of the
provisions thereof for any of our executive officers, to our
website under the heading Investor
RelationsCorporate Governance. A copy of the
Employees and Officers Code is also available to stockholders
upon request, addressed to the Corporate Secretary at 3000
Leadenhall Road, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054 (telephone
number: 1-866-PHH-INFO or 1-856-917-1PHH).
Nomination
Process and Qualifications for Director Nominees
The Board of Directors has established certain procedures and
criteria for the selection of nominees for election to our Board
of Directors. Pursuant to its charter, the Corporate Governance
Committee is required to identify individuals qualified to
become members of the Board, which shall be consistent with the
Boards criteria for selecting new Directors. The committee
considers criteria such as diversity, age, skills and experience
so as to enhance the Board of Directors ability to manage
and direct our affairs and business, including, when applicable,
to enhance the ability of Committees of the Board to fulfill
their duties
and/or to
satisfy any independence requirements imposed by law, regulation
or NYSE requirement. The Committee is also responsible for
conducting a review of the credentials of individuals it wishes
to recommend to the Board of Directors as a Director nominee,
recommending Director nominees to the Board of Directors for
submission for a shareholder vote at either an annual meeting of
stockholders or at any special meeting of stockholders called
for the purpose of electing Directors, reviewing the suitability
for continued service as a Director of each Board member when
his or her term expires and when he or she has a significant
change in status, including but not limited to an employment
change, and recommending whether such a Director should be
re-nominated to the Board or continue as a Director.
Our by-laws provide the procedure for stockholders to make
Director nominations either at any annual meeting of
stockholders or at any special meeting of stockholders called
for the purpose of electing Directors. A stockholder who is a
stockholder of record on the date of notice as provided for in
our by-laws and on the record date for the determination of
stockholders entitled to vote at such meeting who gives timely
notice can nominate persons for election to our Board of
Directors either for an annual meeting of stockholders or at any
special meeting of stockholders called for the purpose of
electing Directors. The notice must be delivered to or mailed
and received by the Corporate Secretary at 3000 Leadenhall Road,
Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054 (telephone number: 1-866-PHH-INFO
or 1-856-917-1PHH):
|
|
|
|
§
|
in the case of an annual meeting, not less than 90 days nor
more than 120 days prior to the first anniversary of the
preceding years annual meeting; provided, however, that in
the event that the date of the annual meeting is advanced by
more than 30 days or delayed by more than 60 days from
the anniversary date of the preceding years annual
meeting, notice by the stockholder must be so delivered not
earlier than the
90th day
prior to such annual meeting and not later than the close of
business on the later of the
60th day
prior to such annual meeting or the tenth day following the day
on which public announcement of the date of such annual meeting
is first made and
|
|
|
§
|
in the case of a special meeting of stockholders called for the
purpose of electing Directors, not later than the close of
business on the tenth day following the day on which notice of
the date of the special meeting was mailed or public
announcement of the date of the special meeting was made,
whichever first occurs.
|
The stockholders notice to our Corporate Secretary must be
in writing and set forth (i) as to each person whom the
stockholder proposes to nominate for election as a Director, all
information relating to such person that is required to be
disclosed in connection with solicitations of proxies for
election of Directors pursuant to
193
Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act and the rules and
regulations promulgated thereunder and (ii) as to the
stockholder giving the notice:
|
|
|
|
§
|
the name and address of the stockholder as they appear on our
books and of the beneficial owner, if any, on whose behalf the
nomination is made;
|
|
|
§
|
the class or series and number of shares of our capital stock
which are owned beneficially or of record by the stockholder and
beneficial owner;
|
|
|
§
|
a description of all arrangements or understandings between the
stockholder and each proposed nominee and any other person or
persons (including their names) pursuant to which the
nomination(s) are to be made by the stockholder;
|
|
|
§
|
a representation that the stockholder intends to appear in
person or by proxy at the meeting to nominate the person(s)
named in its notice and
|
|
|
§
|
any other information relating to the stockholder that would be
required to be disclosed in a proxy statement or other filings
required to be made in connection with solicitations of proxies
for election of Directors pursuant to Regulation 14A of the
Exchange Act and the rules and regulations promulgated
thereunder.
|
In addition, the notice must be accompanied by a written consent
of each proposed nominee to be named as a nominee and to serve
as a Director if elected.
Communication
with Non-Management Directors
In accordance with our Corporate Governance Guidelines, all
stockholder and interested party communications to any Director,
the non-management Directors as a group or the Board of
Directors shall be forwarded to the attention of the Chairman of
the Corporate Governance Committee, c/o the Corporate
Secretary, 3000 Leadenhall Road, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054.
The Corporate Secretary shall review all such stockholder and
interested party communications and discard those which
(i) are not related to our business or governance of our
company, (ii) are commercial solicitations which are not
relevant to the Boards responsibilities and duties,
(iii) pose a threat to health or safety or (iv) the
Chairman of the Corporate Governance Committee has otherwise
instructed the Corporate Secretary not to forward. The Corporate
Secretary will then forward all relevant stockholder and
interested party communications to the Chairman of the Corporate
Governance Committee for review and dissemination.
Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires our officers and
Directors, and persons who own more than ten percent of a
registered class of our equity securities, to file reports of
ownership and changes in ownership on Forms 3, 4 and 5 with
the SEC and the NYSE. Officers, Directors and greater than ten
percent beneficial owners are required to furnish us with copies
of all Forms 3, 4 and 5 they file. Based solely on our
review of the copies of such forms we have received, we believe
that all of our officers, Directors and greater than ten percent
beneficial owners complied with all filing requirements
applicable to them with respect to transactions during 2006.
Legal
Proceedings
In March and April 2006, several purported class actions were
filed against us, our Chief Executive Officer and our former
Chief Financial Officer in the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs seek to represent an
alleged 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 U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey
against us, our former Chief Financial Officer and each member
of our Board of Directors. Both of these derivative actions have
since been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs.
194
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 entered into an agreement to
sell our mortgage operations to an affiliate of The Blackstone
Group (Blackstone), a global private investment and
advisory firm. Following the announcement of the Merger in March
2007, two purported 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 seek to represent an alleged
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. On
April 5, 2007, the defendants moved to dismiss the
plaintiffs claims. See Item 3. Legal
Proceedings of this
Form 10-K
for additional information regarding these matters.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
Compensation
Committee Oversight of Executive Compensation
The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors is
comprised of three independent, non-executive Directors and is
responsible for overseeing our executive compensation policies,
including evaluating and approving the compensation of our Named
Executive Officers (as defined in Summary
Compensation Table below). The Board of Directors has
adopted a Compensation Committee Charter which sets forth the
purpose, composition, authority and responsibilities of the
Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee reviews and
determines the base salary, annual and long-term incentive
awards, equity awards and other compensation for each Named
Executive Officer, including our President and Chief Executive
Officer, and evaluates our compensation policies. The
Compensation Committee also has the authority to engage and
retain executive compensation consultants to assist with such
evaluations.
Executive
Compensation Objectives
The primary objective of our executive compensation policies is
to attract, retain and motivate qualified executive officers to
manage our business in order to maximize stockholder value. Our
executive compensation policies are intended to facilitate the
achievement of our short-term and long-term business strategies
through aligning compensation with performance by:
|
|
|
|
§
|
providing base salaries and other compensation that are
competitive and designed to attract and retain executive talent;
|
|
|
§
|
rewarding executive performance through variable, at-risk
compensation that is dependant upon meeting specified
performance targets and
|
|
|
§
|
aligning the interests of our executive officers with the
interests of our stockholders by providing equity-based
compensation as a component of total compensation.
|
The Compensation Committee does not rely upon a fixed formula or
specific numerical criteria in determining each Named Executive
Officers total compensation or the allocation of
compensation among the various components of compensation
described below. Moreover, we do not have a specific policy for
the allocation of compensation between short-term and long-term
compensation or cash and equity compensation. Rather, the
Compensation Committee exercises its business judgment in
determining total compensation based upon the following criteria
|
|
|
|
§
|
our long-term strategic objectives, financial and other
performance criteria and individual performance goals;
|
|
|
§
|
the competitive compensation levels for executive officers at
companies in similar businesses
and/or of
similar size;
|
|
|
§
|
the overall economic environment and industry conditions and
|
|
|
§
|
the recommendations of executive compensation consultants.
|
195
Based upon its analysis of these criteria, the Compensation
Committee determines on an annual basis each component of
executive compensation (as discussed below) for the Named
Executive Officers taking into consideration the total
compensation relative to the median for the Peer Group (as
defined in Benchmarking below).
Role
of Management in Executive Compensation Decisions
The Compensation Committee is responsible for reviewing and
approving the compensation for our Named Executive Officers and
stock equity awards for all employees. Generally, our Chief
Executive Officer makes recommendations to the Compensation
Committee as it relates to the compensation of the other
executive officers. In addition, our executive officers,
including our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer
and Senior Vice Presidents of Human Resources, provide input and
make proposals regarding the design, operation, objectives and
values of the various components of compensation in order to
provide appropriate performance and retention incentives for key
employees. These proposals may be made on the initiative of the
executive officers or upon the request of the Compensation
Committee.
Executive
Compensation Consultants
The Compensation Committee retained Mercer Human Resource
Consulting, Inc. (Mercer) to assist it with the
evaluation of executive compensation for 2006. Mercer analyzes
and provides comparative executive compensation data and
compensation program proposals for the Compensation
Committees consideration in evaluating and setting the
compensation of the Named Executive Officers and the overall
structure of our compensation policies. Upon the Compensation
Committees prior approval, Mercer also provides human
resource consulting services to management from
time-to-time.
The Compensation Committee does not believe that these other
services compromise Mercers ability to provide the
Compensation Committee with an independent perspective on
executive compensation.
Benchmarking
To ensure that we are competitive in attracting and retaining
executive talent, during 2006 we benchmarked our executive
compensation against a peer group consisting of
14 companies in similar businesses, including mortgage,
leasing and financial services companies,
and/or of
similar size based on total sales and total assets (the
Peer Group). The Peer Group consisted of the
following companies:
|
|
|
|
|
§ AMERCO
|
|
§ Fiserv,
Inc.
|
|
§ Radian
Group, Inc.
|
§ American
Home Mortgage
|
|
§ GATX
Corp.
|
|
§ Rent-A-Center,
Inc.
|
Investment
Corp.
|
|
§ Golden
West Financial Corp.
|
|
§ Ryder
System, Inc.
|
§ Astoria
Financial Corporation
|
|
§ IndyMac
Bancorp, Inc.
|
|
§ Sovereign
Bancorp, Inc.
|
§ CIT
Group Inc.
|
|
§ MGIC
Investment Corp.
|
|
§ Westcorp,
Inc.
|
Mercer provided the Compensation Committee with executive
compensation information for the Peer Group as well as survey
data from multiple national compensation surveys (the
Survey Data) in order to assist in the compensation
evaluation due to the unique nature of our business segments and
the lack of peer companies with a similar business segment mix
for comparison. The Compensation Committee evaluated the base
salary, short-term and long-term incentives and actual and
target total compensation levels for the Peer Group and Survey
Data, including the median and percentile ranges for each
compensation component, for comparison with that of our Named
Executive Officers. The Compensation Committee determined that
total executive compensation for the Named Executive Officers
should be targeted at or slightly above the median of the
compensation of the Peer Group in order to be competitive with
the compensation structure of the Peer Group and to attract and
retain executive talent. These targets may be adjusted based
upon the specific responsibilities, experience and performance
of each Named Executive Officer as well as other factors in the
Compensation Committees discretion.
Components
of Executive Compensation
The primary components of the executive compensation
arrangements for our Named Executive Officers are base salaries,
variable compensation programs and long-term incentive awards.
196
Base Salaries. The Compensation
Committee is responsible for determining the base salary of our
Chief Executive Officer and other Named Executive Officers,
which includes the review and approval of annual adjustments to
their base compensation. Base salaries are intended to provide a
level of cash compensation that is externally competitive in
relation to the responsibilities of the executives
position in order to attract and retain executive talent. The
Compensation Committee determines salary levels based upon
competitive compensation levels for companies in the Peer Group
and Survey Data as well as consideration of the nature of the
executive officers position and the contribution,
achievement, experience and tenure of the executive officer.
Mr. Edwards has served as our President and Chief Executive
Officer since the Spin-Off and prior to that was the President
and Chief Executive Officer of PHH Mortgage from February 1996
until the Spin-Off. In August 2005, Mr. Edwards resumed his
role as President and Chief Executive Officer of PHH Mortgage in
addition to his corporate role. Each of our other Named
Executive Officers, except for Mr. Raubenstine, has been in
their current position since the Spin-Off. Mr. Raubenstine
was appointed to serve as our Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer on February 23, 2006. See
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate
GovernanceExecutive Officers for more information
regarding positions held by each Named Executive Officer in the
past five years. Our Named Executive Officers do not have
employment agreements with us in accordance with the policy
adopted by the Board following the Spin-Off. See
Employment, Termination, Severance and Change in
Control ArrangementsEmployment Agreements below for
more information.
For 2006, the Compensation Committee evaluated our financial
performance, the performance of our Named Executive Officers and
Peer Group and Survey Data with regard to the base salaries and
total compensation of executive officers in comparable
positions. The Compensation Committee reviewed
Mr. Edwards compensation and, upon his request, made
no adjustments to his base salary for 2006, which remained at
the 2005 level of $564,635. Based upon its review of the Peer
Group and Survey Data, the Compensation Committee increased the
base salaries for Messrs. Kilroy, Danahy and Brown to the
amounts set forth in the table below, effective
February 25, 2006, to bring their base salaries in line
with the median base salaries of executive officers holding
comparable positions in the Peer Group. The Compensation
Committee set Mr. Raubenstines annual base salary at
$1,000,000 for 2006, effective on February 23, 2006. See
Executive Compensation Decisions in 2006 and
2007 for more information regarding
Mr. Raubenstines compensation arrangements. The
following table sets forth the annual base salaries for the
Named Executive Officers for 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Annual Base
|
|
Name
|
|
Title
|
|
Salary for 2006
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer; President and Chief Executive OfficerPHH Mortgage
|
|
$
|
564,635
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
President and Chief Executive
OfficerPHH Arval
|
|
|
450,000
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial OfficerPHH Mortgage
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
Senior Vice President, General
Counsel and Corporate Secretary; Senior Vice President, General
Counsel and SecretaryPHH Mortgage
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
Variable Compensation Programs. Our
Named Executive Officers may receive additional cash
compensation through participation in our annual management
incentive plans (MIPs) that are designed to motivate
eligible recipients to achieve our short-term objectives. Each
executive officer is eligible to receive an annual cash
incentive payout calculated as a percentage of the executive
officers base salary and based upon the achievement of
performance targets for the individual executive officer and
operating segment, consolidated results
and/or other
performance goals established by the Compensation Committee in
its discretion. The payout target increases as a percentage of
base salary with the executive officers duties and
responsibilities in order to tie a greater percentage of the
executive officers compensation to the achievement of our
annual performance objectives.
The Compensation Committee generally sets the performance
targets under the MIPs at levels which are considered to be
challenging based on historical performance, industry and market
conditions and adjusts such targets each year to coincide with
our overall strategy, financial performance targets and other
factors. For the three years prior to 2006, the performance
targets established for the PHH Mortgage MIPs were met or
exceeded in two of
197
the three years, and the performance targets established for the
PHH Arval MIPs were met or exceeded in all three years. Prior to
2006, we had one corporate MIP for which the performance target
was exceeded.
In consultation with management and Mercer, the Compensation
Committee approved the 2006 PHH Corporation Management
Incentive Plan (the 2006 PHH MIP), the 2006 PHH
Arval Management Incentive Plan (the 2006 Fleet MIP)
and the 2006 PHH Mortgage Management Incentive Plan (the
2006 Mortgage MIP) (collectively, the 2006
MIPs) and established performance targets for the Named
Executive Officers based on the 2006 pre-tax income after
minority interest for us, PHH Arval and PHH Mortgage,
respectively. Pursuant to the terms of the 2006 MIPs, in the
event that the performance targets were achieved or exceeded,
the participating Named Executive Officer would receive a cash
payment in an amount equal to the Named Executive Officers
base salary multiplied by the target payout percentage
multiplied by the percentage by which the performance target for
such plan was met or exceeded. The minimum payout is 100% of the
target payout and the maximum payout is 125% of the target
payout although the performance targets must be exceeded by more
than 10% for a payout above the target payout level to occur.
From 110% to 125% of the performance target, the payout is
proportionate to the percentage by which the performance target
is exceeded.
The Compensation Committee reviewed the roles and
responsibilities of each Named Executive Officer and the Peer
Group and Survey Data in evaluating the percentage of base
salary for target payouts to the Named Executive Officers under
the 2006 MIPs. In 2006, the Compensation Committee determined
that the current payout targets for Messrs. Edwards, Kilroy
and Brown were appropriate and that the target payout amount for
Mr. Danahy be increased to 75% to bring his target payout
level in line with the median target levels for comparable
executives in the Peer Group. The table below sets forth the
target payout as a percentage of base salary for each of the
Named Executive Officers participating in the 2006 MIPs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payout
|
|
|
|
Target as
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
|
of Base
|
|
Name
|
|
Salary
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
75
|
%
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
50
|
%
|
Mr. Raubenstine did not participate in the 2006 MIPs.
Messrs. Edwards and Brown participated in the 2006 PHH MIP;
Mr. Danahy participated in the 2006 Mortgage MIP and
Mr. Kilroy participated in the 2006 PHH MIP and 2006 Fleet
MIP with 50% of his target payout determined under each plan.
See Grants of Plan-Based Awards for 2006 for
additional information regarding the target payout amounts under
the 2006 MIPs for the Named Executive Officers.
In 2007, the Compensation Committee reviewed the 2006 pre-tax
income after minority interest for us, PHH Mortgage and PHH
Arval and determined that the performance targets for the Named
Executive Officers under the 2006 PHH MIP and 2006 Mortgage MIP
had not been achieved and that PHH Arval exceeded its
performance target under the 2006 Fleet MIP. As a result,
Messrs. Edwards, Danahy and Brown did not receive payouts
under the 2006 MIPs, and Mr. Kilroy will receive a payout
of $267,461 based upon the 2006 Fleet MIP, upon the filing of
this Form 10-K.
Long-Term Incentive Awards. The
Compensation Committee administers our 2005 Equity and Incentive
Plan, which provides for equity awards, including restricted
stock units (PHH RSUs) and options to purchase our
Common stock (Stock Options). The Compensation
Committee considers equity awards to our Named Executive
Officers an appropriate and effective method of retaining key
management employees and aligning their interests with the
interests of our stockholders. Eligibility for stock awards, the
number of shares underlying each award and the terms and
conditions of each award are determined by the Compensation
Committee upon consultation with management and Mercer. In June
2005, the Compensation Committee granted an annual award of PHH
RSUs and Stock Options to our Named Executive Officers, which
vest beginning on the fourth anniversary of the grant date, with
the opportunity to accelerate the vesting of 25% of the total
award for each year prior to the fourth anniversary of the grant
date based on the achievement of performance targets established
by the Compensation Committee. The
198
Compensation Committee made these awards in PHH RSUs for
Messrs. Danahy and Brown. These awards were split equally
between PHH RSUs and Stock Options for Messrs. Edwards and
Kilroy in order to further tie their compensation to the
creation of stockholder value. The Compensation Committee
establishes these performance targets annually for these and
certain other equity awards with performance-based vesting
converted from Cendant awards at the time of the Spin-Off. The
performance targets for these awards were determined generally
in the same manner as those for the annual MIPs and were based
on our 2006 pre-tax income after minority interest. See
Variable Compensation Programs for additional
information regarding establishing performance targets. In 2007,
the Compensation Committee reviewed our 2006 pre-tax income
after minority interest and determined that the performance
targets had not been met. During 2006, the Compensation
Committee did not make any equity awards under the 2005 Equity
and Incentive Plan due to the delay in the filing of our
financial statements with the SEC, which resulted in our
Registration Statement on
Form S-8
for our 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan not being effective until
we become a current filer with the SEC.
Executive
Compensation Decisions in 2006 and 2007
In February 2006, the Compensation Committee, in consultation
with the Board of Directors and management, approved the
compensation for Mr. Raubenstine, who was appointed by the
Board of Directors on February 23, 2006 to serve as
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Upon
discussions with Mr. Raubenstine, management and Mercer,
the Compensation Committee set Mr. Raubenstines base
salary for 2006 at $1,000,000 and determined that he would not
be eligible to participate in the 2006 MIPs. The Compensation
Committee considered the need for Mr. Raubenstine to split
his time between our offices in Maryland and New Jersey in this
role and agreed to reimburse him for any travel, meals and
lodging expenses which might otherwise not be a deductible
business expense and to provide a tax
gross-up on
any such amounts. As an inducement to his employment, the
Compensation Committee agreed to award Mr. Raubenstine
shares of our Common stock equivalent to $250,000. During 2006,
our intention was to make this grant in two equal installments:
the first when we became current in our filing obligations with
the SEC and were permitted to issue shares of our Common stock
from our 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan and the second on the
later of February 23, 2007 or the date on which we became a
current filer with the SEC. Due to the delay in the filing of
our financial statements with the SEC and the announcement of
the Merger, this stock award was never granted. In 2007, the
Compensation Committee, with Mr. Raubenstines
consent, determined to satisfy this arrangement through a cash
payment of $250,000 which will be paid upon the filing of this
Form 10-K.
In September 2006, the Compensation Committee reviewed and
approved the Release and Restrictive Covenants Agreement (the
Cashen Release) between us and our former Chief
Financial Officer, Mr. Neil J. Cashen, prior to its
execution on September 20, 2006. The Compensation Committee
considered the restrictive covenants, including certain
non-compete and non-solicitation provisions to which
Mr. Cashen would be subject, his length of service and his
role and position with both us and PHH Arval in evaluating and
approving the terms of the Cashen Release. The Compensation
Committee also reviewed the other terms of the Cashen Release,
including the total amounts to be paid to Mr. Cashen and
the retention of vesting and exercise rights for certain
previously awarded PHH RSUs and Stock Options, and determined
that the approval and execution of the Cashen Release was
appropriate and in our best interest.
Retirement
Benefits
Certain of our Named Executive Officers are participants in
defined benefit plans that were available to all of our
employees prior to the Spin-Off, including the PHH Corporation
Pension Plan (the PHH Pension Plan) and PHH
Corporation Retiree Medical Plan (the PHH Retiree Medical
Plan) (collectively, the Retirement Plans).
The benefits payable under these plans have been frozen for the
Named Executive Officers and the other plan participants. See
Pension Benefits for 2006 for more information
regarding benefits available to the Named Executive Officers
under these plans. In addition, all of our Named Executive
Officers participate in the PHH Corporation Employee
Savings Plan (the PHH Savings Plan) on the same
basis as other employees. The PHH Savings Plan is a
tax-qualified retirement savings plan that provides for employee
contributions made on a pre-tax basis and matching contributions
by us of up to six percent of the employees compensation
contributed to the PHH Savings Plan up to the statutory limit.
See All Other Compensation Table in
Footnote 7 under
199
Summary Compensation Table for more
information regarding matching contributions to the PHH Savings
Plan made on behalf of each Named Executive Officer.
Perquisites
We provide a limited number of perquisites to our Named
Executive Officers, which the Compensation Committee believes
are reasonable and consistent with our overall compensation
program for executive officers and necessary to attract and
retain executive talent. Our Named Executive Officers generally
are provided with or have use of company vehicles, fuel for
these vehicles, financial planning services and tax
reimbursements on the foregoing perquisites. See All
Other Compensation Table in Footnote 7 under
Summary Compensation Table for more
information regarding perquisites.
Employment,
Termination, Severance and Change in Control
Arrangements
Employment Agreements. None of our
Named Executive Officers have employment agreements. However,
immediately after the Spin-Off, we did enter into an employment
agreement with Mr. Edwards with a term ending on
February 1, 2008. In addition to providing for a minimum
base salary of $625,000 and participation in employee benefit
plans generally available to our executive officers,
Mr. Edwards agreement provided for an annual
incentive award with a target amount equal to no less than 100%
of his base salary, subject to the attainment of performance
goals, and grants of long-term incentive awards upon such terms
and conditions as determined by our Board of Directors or
Compensation Committee. In addition, Mr. Edwards was
entitled to receive an equity incentive award under the
employment agreement relating to our Common stock that would
have vested based on the achievement of specified performance
goals and would have had a value on the grant date of
$2.5 million, which value would have been based on such
performance criteria determined by the Compensation Committee.
Based upon discussions between management and the Compensation
Committee following the Spin-Off, we adopted a policy not to
enter into employment agreements with any of our executive
officers. In accordance with this policy, we and
Mr. Edwards terminated his employment agreement in February
2005 and Mr. Edwards employment with us has been on
an at-will basis since that time.
Change in Control and Other Severance
Arrangements. During 2006, we did not have
change in control agreements with our Named Executive Officers.
Generally, all unvested Stock Options granted to each of the
Named Executive Officers under our 2005 Equity and Incentive
Plan will become fully and immediately vested and exercisable,
and all PHH RSUs will vest upon the occurrence of a change in
control transaction. If consummated, the proposed Merger would
result in a change in control under the terms of the 2005 Equity
and Incentive Plan. In addition, during 2006, we had certain
severance policies for our executive officers which provide
benefits in the event of their termination without cause. See
Potential Payments upon Termination of Employment or
Change in Control below for additional information
regarding payments in the event of a change in control or other
termination of employment for each Named Executive Officer.
Deductibility
of Executive Compensation
In accordance with Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue
Code, the deductibility for federal corporate income tax
purposes of compensation paid to certain of our individual
executive officers in excess of $1 million in any year may
be restricted. The Compensation Committee believes that it is in
the best interests of our stockholders to comply with such tax
law, while still maintaining the goals of our compensation
programs. Accordingly, where it is deemed necessary and in our
best interests to attract and retain the best possible executive
talent and to motivate such executives to achieve the goals
inherent in our business strategy, the Compensation Committee
will recommend compensation to executive officers which may
exceed the limits of deductibility. In this regard, certain
portions of compensation paid to the Named Executive Officers
may not be deductible for federal income tax purposes under
Section 162(m).
200
Compensation
Committee Report on Executive Compensation
The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the
Compensation Discussion and Analysis with management and, based
on such review, has recommended to the Board of Directors that
the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this
Form 10-K.
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors
James W. Brinkley (Chairman)
A.B. Krongard
Ann D. Logan
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
The Compensation Committee is comprised entirely of
outside Directors within the meaning of the
regulations under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended, non-employee Directors
under SEC
Rule 16b-3,
and independent Directors as affirmatively
determined by the Board of Directors pursuant to the NYSE
Listing Standards. The members of the Compensation Committee are
the individuals named as signatories to the report immediately
preceding this paragraph. None of the members of the
Compensation Committee are our former officers or employees.
201
Summary
Compensation Table
The information below sets forth the compensation of our Chief
Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, the three other most
highly compensated executive officers and a former executive
officer who served as our Chief Financial Officer for a portion
of the year ended December 31, 2006 (collectively referred
to as our Named Executive Officers). The form and
amount of the compensation paid or to be paid to our Named
Executive Officers for the year ended December 31, 2006 was
determined by the Compensation Committee of our Board of
Directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
in Pension
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Value and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
Non-
|
|
|
All
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
qualified
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
Name and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Compen-
|
|
|
Compen-
|
|
|
Compen-
|
|
|
|
|
Principal Position(s)
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Salary(1)
|
|
|
Bonus(2)
|
|
|
Awards(3)
|
|
|
Awards(4)
|
|
|
sation(5)
|
|
|
sation(6)
|
|
|
sation(7)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
$
|
564,635
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
234,757
|
|
|
$
|
210,487
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
13,771
|
|
|
$
|
62,485
|
|
|
$
|
1,086,135
|
|
President and Chief
Executive Officer;
President and Chief
Executive Officer
PHH Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clair M.
Raubenstine(8)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
853,846
|
|
|
|
213,191
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,302
|
|
|
|
1,121,339
|
|
Executive Vice
President and Chief
Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
438,461
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
185,793
|
|
|
|
83,316
|
|
|
|
267,461
|
|
|
|
10,236
|
|
|
|
17,285
|
|
|
|
1,002,552
|
|
President and Chief
Executive Officer
PHH Arval
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
319,943
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
146,788
|
|
|
|
33,258
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,203
|
|
|
|
541,192
|
|
Senior Vice President
and Chief Financial
Officer PHH
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
293,846
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123,188
|
|
|
|
31,179
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,403
|
|
|
|
42,003
|
|
|
|
491,619
|
|
Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Corporate Secretary;
Senior Vice
President, General
Counsel and
Secretary PHH
Mortgage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neil J.
Cashen(9)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
274,327
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
218,070
|
|
|
|
482,344
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,169
|
|
|
|
1,982,996
|
|
|
|
2,961,906
|
|
Former Executive Vice
President and Chief
Financial Officer;
Former Chief
Financial Officer
PHH Arval
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On February 22, 2006, the
Compensation Committee increased the annual salary for
Messrs. Kilroy, Danahy and Brown to $450,000, $325,000 and
$300,000, respectively, effective on February 25, 2006.
Mr. Edwards annual salary was not changed for 2006.
No increases in annual salary have been made for the Named
Executive Officers for 2007.
|
|
(2) |
|
As an inducement to his employment,
we agreed to award Mr. Raubenstine shares of our Common
stock equivalent to $250,000. During 2006, our intention was to
make this grant in two equal installments: the first when we
became current in our filing obligations with the SEC and were
permitted to issue shares of our Common stock from our 2005
Equity and Incentive Plan and the second on the later of
February 23, 2007 or the date on which we became a current
filer with the SEC. Due to the delay in the filing of our
financial statements with the SEC and the announcement of the
Merger, this stock award was never granted. In 2007, we and
Mr. Raubenstine agreed to satisfy this arrangement through
a cash payment of $250,000 which will be paid upon the filing of
this
Form 10-K.
The amount in this column reflects the proportion of the total
amount of the bonus earned during 2006 on a straight-line basis.
|
202
|
|
|
(3) |
|
The amounts shown in this column
reflect the amount recognized by us (exclusive of the effect of
estimated forfeitures) for the year ended December 31, 2006
for financial statement reporting purposes with respect to
awards of PHH RSUs to our Named Executive Officers, which awards
were made prior to 2006 under the 2005 Equity and Incentive
Plan. There were no awards of PHH RSUs to our Named Executive
Officers in 2006. See Outstanding Equity Awards at
Fiscal Year-End for 2006 for more information regarding
existing awards of PHH RSUs. See also Note 20,
Stock-Based Compensation in the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K
for more information.
|
|
(4) |
|
The amounts shown in this column
reflect the amount recognized by us (exclusive of the effect of
estimated forfeitures) for the year ended December 31, 2006
for financial statement reporting purposes with respect to
awards of Stock Options to our Named Executive Officers, which
awards were made prior to 2006 under the 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan. There were no awards of Stock Options to our
Named Executive Officers in 2006. See Grants of
Plan-Based Awards for 2006 and Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End for 2006 for more
information regarding existing awards of Stock Options. See also
Note 20, Stock-Based Compensation in the Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K
for more information.
|
|
(5) |
|
For 2006, Messrs. Edwards,
Kilroy and Brown were participants in our 2006 PHH MIP and
Mr. Danahy was a participant in our 2006 Mortgage MIP. Each
plan provided for cash payments based upon the achievement of
certain performance targets established by our Compensation
Committee. In 2006, the performance targets for the 2006 PHH MIP
and 2006 Mortgage MIP were based on our consolidated pre-tax
income after minority interest and the pre-tax income after
minority interest for PHH Mortgage, respectively. Given his role
as President and Chief Executive Officer of PHH Arval,
Mr. Kilroys non-equity incentive plan compensation
was split equally between the achievement of the performance
targets set forth in the 2006 PHH MIP and the performance
targets set forth in the 2006 Fleet MIP, which were based on the
pre-tax net income after minority interest of PHH Arval for
2006. See Grants of Plan-Based Awards for 2006
for more information regarding the payout levels. Based on our
consolidated results and the results of PHH Arval and PHH
Mortgage for 2006, the Compensation Committee determined that
the performance targets for the 2006 PHH MIP and 2006 Mortgage
MIP were not achieved and the performance targets for the 2006
Fleet MIP were exceeded. As a result, Messrs. Edwards,
Danahy and Brown did not receive non-equity incentive
compensation under the 2006 PHH MIP or 2006 Mortgage MIP for
2006, and Mr. Kilroy will receive payment under the 2006
Fleet MIP in the amount of $267,461 which will be paid upon the
filing of this
Form 10-K.
|
|
(6) |
|
The amounts in this column reflect
the aggregate change in the actuarial present value of the
accumulated benefit under the PHH Pension Plan and PHH Retiree
Medical Plan from December 31, 2005 to December 31,
2006 for each participating Named Executive Officer.
Mr. Edwards is a participant in both the PHH Pension Plan
and the PHH Retiree Medical Plan; Messrs. Kilroy, Brown and
Cashen are participants in the PHH Pension Plan, and
Messrs. Raubenstine and Danahy are not participants in
either plan. Each of these plans was frozen and the final
average compensation and years of service for each Named
Executive Officer participating in the PHH Pension Plan is based
on the years of service and compensation earned prior to
October 31, 1999 (October 31, 2004 for
Mr. Kilroy). See Pension Benefits for
2006 for additional information regarding the benefits
accrued for each of these Named Executive Officers and
Note 15, Pension and Other Post Employment
Benefits in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
included in this
Form 10-K
for more information regarding the calculation of our pension
costs.
|
|
(7) |
|
Amounts included in this column are
set forth in the following table:
|
All
Other Compensation Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life and
|
|
|
401(k)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Travel,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
Matching
|
|
|
Financial
|
|
|
Company
|
|
|
Meals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
|
|
|
Contrib-
|
|
|
Planning
|
|
|
Car and
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Tax
|
|
|
Vacation
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Converags
|
|
|
ution
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Fuel
|
|
|
Lodging
|
|
|
Gross-Up
|
|
|
Payout
|
|
|
Payout
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
(d)
|
|
|
(e)
|
|
|
(f)
|
|
|
(g)
|
|
|
(h)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
$
|
3,229
|
|
|
$
|
13,200
|
|
|
$
|
16,635
|
|
|
$
|
13,830
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
15,591
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
62,485
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
5,167
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,840
|
|
|
|
18,295
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,302
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
2,169
|
|
|
|
9,231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,570
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,285
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
1,705
|
|
|
|
13,176
|
|
|
|
10,423
|
|
|
|
8,435
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,464
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,203
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
1,525
|
|
|
|
12,869
|
|
|
|
12,184
|
|
|
|
6,912
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,513
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,003
|
|
Neil J. Cashen
|
|
|
1,835
|
|
|
|
12,981
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,297
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,042
|
|
|
|
48,956
|
|
|
|
1,913,885
|
|
|
|
1,982,996
|
|
_
_
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
These amounts include premiums paid for life and long-term
disability insurance coverage for the Named Executive Officers
pursuant to our benefit plans and are paid for all employees.
|
|
|
(b)
|
These amounts reflect the matching contribution made by us on
behalf of each Named Executive Officer under the PHH Corporation
Employee Savings Plan. This matching contribution is available
to all of our employees up to the amount of their voluntary
contributions to the plan not to exceed the statutory limit,
which was $13,200 in 2006.
|
203
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
These amounts reflect the value of financial planning services
which were made available to the Named Executive Officers. We
also provided a tax
gross-up to
our Named Executive Officers for this amount. See Footnote
(f) below.
|
|
|
(d)
|
These amounts include the value of the personal benefit received
by each Named Executive Officer for the use of a company car and
fuel, which values are based on our costs for such benefits. We
also provided a tax
gross-up to
our Named Executive Officers for this amount. See Footnote
(f) below.
|
|
|
(e)
|
This column reflects the value of hotel accommodations, meals
and a car service to transport Mr. Raubenstine to and from
our Maryland offices during 2006 as part of his employment.
Mr. Raubenstine split his time between our New Jersey and
Maryland offices, but spent more than 50% of his time in our
Maryland offices during 2006. While Mr. Raubenstine lives
in the greater Philadelphia area, he was treated as being
domiciled in Maryland for tax purposes due to the percentage of
time that he worked in our Maryland offices. As a result, his
normal travel, meals and lodging expenses for performing
services for us in Maryland were not deductible business
expenses and were recognized as compensation. We reimbursed
Mr. Raubenstine for these expenses and provided a tax
gross-up so
that he incurred no additional taxes as a result of these
payments. See Footnote (f) below.
|
|
|
|
|
(f)
|
This column reflects the tax
gross-up
amounts paid during 2006 (i) for the financial planning,
car and fuel costs for Messrs. Edwards, Kilroy, Danahy,
Brown and Cashen and (ii) for hotel accommodations and car
service costs for Mr. Raubenstines travel to and from
our Maryland offices.
|
|
|
|
|
(g)
|
The amount in this column reflects the amount of accrued
vacation and holiday pay which was paid to Mr. Cashen when
his employment with us terminated on September 20, 2006
pursuant to the Cashen Release.
|
|
|
(h)
|
The amount in this column reflects the severance payout made to
Mr. Cashen, which includes a cash payment of $1,864,800 and
the value of his company car and a laptop computer ($47,582 and
$1,503, respectively) based on our fair value of each on
September 20, 2006, pursuant to the terms of the Cashen
Release.
|
|
|
|
(8) |
|
Effective February 23, 2006,
Mr. Raubenstine joined us as Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer. For 2006, Mr. Raubenstine received
an annual salary of $1,000,000 and was not a participant in the
2006 PHH MIP.
|
|
(9) |
|
Effective February 23, 2006,
Mr. Cashen ceased serving as our Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer and assumed the role of Senior Vice
President, Strategic Planning and Investor Relations. On
September 20, 2006, Mr. Cashen resigned his employment
and entered into the Cashen Release, which provided a release of
all claims by Mr. Cashen, except for certain
indemnification and benefit claims; non-competition restrictions
for periods ranging from three to five years and non-disclosure
and non-disparagement restrictions. The agreement provides for a
one-time lump sum cash payment of $1,864,800, the retention of
his company vehicle and laptop and continued vesting and
exercise rights in previously granted stock-based awards on the
same basis and at the same time as such awards would have vested
or been exercisable had he remained an employee through
October 11, 2009, which resulted in the recognition of
additional expense for financial statement reporting purposes
for his previously granted PHH RSU and Stock Option awards.
|
204
Grants
of Plan-Based Awards for 2006
The following table sets forth the grants of plan-based awards
for 2006, including non-equity incentive plan awards under the
2006 PHH MIP, 2006 Mortgage MIP and 2006 Fleet MIP. There were
no equity-based awards made to the Named Executive Officers for
2006. Pursuant to the terms of the Cashen Release, vesting and
exercise rights in previously granted stock-based awards were
allowed to continue on the same basis and at the same time as
such awards would have vested or been exercisable had
Mr. Cashen remained an employee through October 11,
2009. These modifications are reflected in the table below as
new awards on September 20, 2006. The number of PHH RSUs
and Stock Options, exercise prices, expiration dates and other
terms of these equity awards were not modified.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Exercise or
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
Base Price
|
|
|
Date Fair
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
of Option
|
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Future Payouts Under
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
Stock and
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
Non-Equity Incentive Plan
Awards(1)
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
per
|
|
|
Option
|
|
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
Threshold
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Share(2)
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
N/A
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
564,635
|
|
|
$
|
705,794
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
219,031
|
|
|
|
438,461
|
|
|
|
548,076
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
243,750
|
|
|
|
304,688
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
187,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neil J.
Cashen(3)
|
|
9/20/2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104,909
|
|
|
|
17.43
|
|
|
|
194,082
|
|
|
|
9/20/2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,247
|
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
|
|
201,079
|
|
|
|
9/20/2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,874
|
|
|
|
24.99
|
|
|
|
20,727
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The target payout amount is
determined based on a percentage of the annual salary of the
Named Executive Officer at the time of grant, except for
Mr. Kilroy whose target is based on a percentage of his
actual salary for the prior year pursuant to the terms of the
2006 Fleet MIP. The target payout level is 100% of salary for
Messrs. Edwards and Kilroy, 75% of salary for
Mr. Danahy and 50% of salary for Mr. Brown. The
maximum payout is 125% of the target payout although the
performance targets must be exceeded by more than 110% for a
payout above target. From 110% to 125% of target, the payout is
proportionate to the percentage by which the performance target
is exceeded. The performance targets for the 2006 PHH MIP, 2006
Mortgage MIP and 2006 Fleet MIP were based on the pre-tax income
after minority interest for us, PHH Mortgage and PHH Arval,
respectively. Messrs. Raubenstine and Cashen did not
participate in the 2006 PHH MIP, 2006 Mortgage MIP or 2006 Fleet
MIP. Mr. Danahy participates in the 2006 Mortgage MIP only
given his role with PHH Mortgage. No payments were made to the
Named Executive Officers under the 2006 PHH MIP or 2006 Mortgage
MIP. Mr. Kilroy participates equally in the 2006 PHH MIP
and 2006 Fleet MIP with a target payout equal to $219,031 under
each plan. As a result, the threshold amount for
Mr. Kilroys non-equity incentive plan award is 50% of
his target payout since the performance target under one, but
not the other, MIP was achieved. See Footnote (5) under
Summary Compensation Table for information
regarding the payout to Mr. Kilroy under the 2006 Fleet MIP.
|
|
(2) |
|
The exercise prices shown for
Mr. Cashens Stock Option Awards were not modified by
the Cashen Release and reflect the original exercise prices set
at the time of the grant of these awards. The closing price for
our Common stock on September 20, 2006 was $27.51.
|
|
(3) |
|
The terms of the Cashen Release,
including the continued vesting and exercise rights for
previously granted Stock Option and PHH RSU awards, were
approved by the Compensation Committee on September 19,
2006 and resulted in a modification of the awards upon execution
of the Cashen Release on September 20, 2006. We did not
modify the exercise price, number of shares and other terms of
the awards. As a result of the modification, we recognized net
incremental compensation cost of $533,375, which includes the
amounts set forth for each Stock Option award in the last column
of the table as well as the net incremental cost of $117,487 for
the modification to the previously granted PHH RSU awards of
15,252 shares.
|
205
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End for 2006
The following table sets forth the outstanding equity awards,
including PHH RSUs and Stock Options, for each of our Named
Executive Officers as of December 31, 2006. PHH RSUs earned
during 2006 pursuant to the vesting terms of existing award
agreements but not converted to shares of our Common stock
because we have not been a current filer with the SEC are not
presented as outstanding awards in the table. In addition, Stock
Options which were earned during 2006 are included in the table
as exercisable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Awards:
|
|
|
Market
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Market Value
|
|
|
Unearned
|
|
|
Unearned
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Units
|
|
|
of Shares or
|
|
|
Shares, Units
|
|
|
Shares,Units
|
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Stock
|
|
|
Units of
|
|
|
or Other
|
|
|
or Other
|
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exer-
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
That Have
|
|
|
Stock That
|
|
|
Rights That
|
|
|
Rights That
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Unexer-
|
|
|
cise
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
Not
|
|
|
Have Not
|
|
|
Have Not
|
|
|
Have Not
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
cisable
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Vested(1)
|
|
|
Vested(2)
|
|
|
Vested(3)
|
|
|
Vested(2)
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
183,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
20.22
|
|
|
|
1/13/2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
157,364
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.43
|
|
|
|
1/22/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,570
|
|
|
|
6,785
|
(4)
|
|
|
12.48
|
|
|
|
4/22/2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,229
|
(5)
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
|
|
3/3/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,257
|
|
|
|
18,771
|
(6)
|
|
|
24.99
|
|
|
|
6/28/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,448
|
|
|
$
|
1,023,384
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,643
|
|
|
$
|
509,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,247
|
(5)
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
|
|
3/3/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,468
|
|
|
|
10,406
|
(6)
|
|
|
24.99
|
|
|
|
6/28/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,448
|
|
|
|
1,023,384
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,796
|
|
|
|
369,421
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
43,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.55
|
|
|
|
7/17/2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,844
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.43
|
|
|
|
1/22/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,504
|
(5)
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
|
|
3/3/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,497
|
|
|
|
562,878
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,709
|
|
|
|
338,039
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
19,695
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.32
|
|
|
|
6/2/2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,085
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.22
|
|
|
|
1/13/2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,916
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.43
|
|
|
|
1/22/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,410
|
(5)
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
|
|
3/3/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,407
|
|
|
|
358,190
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,358
|
|
|
|
299,035
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neil J.
Cashen(7)
|
|
|
104,909
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.43
|
|
|
|
1/22/2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,247
|
(5)
|
|
|
20.78
|
|
|
|
3/3/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,468
|
|
|
|
10,406
|
(6)
|
|
|
24.99
|
|
|
|
6/28/2015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,433
|
|
|
|
532,161
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,110
|
|
|
|
263,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This column includes awards of PHH
RSUs made (i) on February 1, 2005 in connection with
the Spin-Off to convert existing awards of restricted stock
units of Cendant common stock granted in 2003 (the 2003
Conversion RSUs) and (ii) on June 28, 2005 as
part of our annual long-term incentive grant (the 2005
Annual Award RSUs). The following table sets forth the
|
206
|
|
|
|
|
number of 2003 Conversion RSUs and
2005 Annual Award RSUs outstanding as of December 31, 2006
for each Named Executive Officer:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of 2003
|
|
Number of 2005
|
Name
|
|
Conversion RSUs
|
|
Annual Award RSUs
|
|
Terence
W. Edwards
|
|
9,014
|
|
8,629
|
Clair
M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
George
J. Kilroy
|
|
8,012
|
|
4,784
|
Mark
R. Danahy
|
|
4,506
|
|
7,203
|
William
F. Brown
|
|
3,605
|
|
6,753
|
Neil
J. Cashen
|
|
4,326
|
|
4,784
|
|
|
|
|
|
The remaining 2003 Conversion RSUs
vest on April 22, 2007 subject to continued employment. The
2005 Annual Award RSUs vest equally in three annual installments
beginning on June 28, 2009 subject to continued employment
and acceleration of vesting of 25% of the total award in three
installments on June 28, 2007, June 28, 2008 and
June 28, 2009 upon the achievement of financial performance
targets for each of the three fiscal years ending prior to
June 28, 2009. We did not achieve our performance target
for 2006.
|
|
(2) |
|
Calculated using the closing price
of our Common stock on December 29, 2006 ($28.87).
|
|
(3) |
|
This column includes awards of PHH
RSUs made on February 1, 2005 in connection with the
Spin-Off to convert existing awards of restricted stock units of
Cendant common stock granted in 2004 (the 2004 Conversion
RSUs). The 2004 Conversion RSUs vest at either 12.5% or
18.75% of the total award on each of April 27, 2007 and
April 27, 2008 to the extent we achieve either 100% or
150%, respectively, of the financial performance target for the
fiscal year preceding the vesting date. In the event that the
performance targets for a given year are not achieved, then
12.5% of the award is forfeited. As a result of not achieving
the performance targets for 2006, 12.5% of the total award of
2004 Conversion RSUs for each participating Named Executive
Officer were forfeited on April 27, 2007. Any unvested
portion of the 2004 Conversion RSUs not previously forfeited
will vest only in the event of a change in control transaction
or the death or disability of the Named Executive Officer.
|
|
(4) |
|
These Stock Options vest on
April 22, 2007 subject to continued employment.
|
|
(5) |
|
These Stock Options vest on
March 3, 2009 subject to continued employment.
|
|
(6) |
|
These Stock Options vest annually
in three equal installments beginning on June 28, 2009,
subject to continued employment and acceleration of vesting of
25% of the total award in three installments on June 28,
2007, June 28, 2008 and June 28, 2009 upon the
achievement of financial performance targets for each of the
three fiscal years ending prior to June 28, 2009. We did
not achieve our performance target for 2006.
|
|
(7) |
|
See Grants of
Plan-Based Awards for 2006 for information regarding
certain amendments made to Mr. Cashens outstanding
equity awards.
|
Option
Exercises and Stock Vested for 2006
The following table sets forth information regarding the number
and value of our Common stock that vested during 2006 for our
Named Executive Officers. The shares of our Common stock listed
in the table below will not be issued to the Named Executive
Officers until we become a current filer with the SEC. There
were no Stock Option exercises by the Named Executive Officers
during 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
Awards(1)
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
Shares Acquired
|
|
Realized
|
|
Name
|
|
on Vesting
|
|
on Vesting
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
17,796
|
|
$
|
486,122
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
15,513
|
|
|
424,551
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
10,156
|
|
|
276,740
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
7,923
|
|
|
215,572
|
|
Neil J. Cashen
|
|
8,989
|
|
|
245,414
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The shares of our Common stock
shown represent the aggregate number of shares for each Named
Executive Officer that vested during 2006 pursuant to the terms
of the award agreements. The value realized on vesting reflects
the value of the shares on the vesting date as set forth in the
award agreements based on the closing price of our Common stock
on the vesting
|
207
|
|
|
|
|
date. Since we have not been a
current filer under the SEC rules since March 1, 2006, our
Registration Statement on
Form S-8
for our 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan is no longer effective,
and we have determined not to issue shares from this plan until
we become a current filer with the SEC.
|
Pension
Benefits for 2006
The following table sets forth information relating to the PHH
Pension Plan, which is a defined benefit employee pension plan
adopted as of the Spin-Off. The PHH Pension Plan is identical in
all material respects to the Cendant Corporation Pension Plan
(the Cendant Pension Plan), under which benefits
were frozen for participants including our Named Executive
Officers. The PHH Pension Plan assumed all liabilities and
obligations owed under the Cendant Pension Plan to Cendant
Pension Plan participants who were actively employed by us at
the time of the Spin-Off, including Messrs. Edwards,
Kilroy, Brown and Cashen. Certain of our employees, including
Messrs. Raubenstine and Danahy, were not participants in
the Cendant Pension Plan and are not participants in the PHH
Pension Plan. The benefits under the PHH Pension Plan that are
accrued to the participating Named Executive Officers were
frozen and such officers may not accrue further benefits under
the PHH Pension Plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
Present
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years of
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credited
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Name
|
|
Plan Name
|
|
Service(1)
|
|
Benefit(2)
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
PHH Corporation Pension Plan
|
|
20
|
|
$
|
255,772
|
|
|
|
PHH Corporation Retiree Medical
Plan
|
|
20
|
|
|
22,927
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
PHH Corporation Pension Plan
|
|
28
|
|
|
774,949
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
PHH Corporation Pension Plan
|
|
14
|
|
|
104,809
|
|
Neil J. Cashen
|
|
PHH Corporation Pension Plan
|
|
20
|
|
|
206,170
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The number of years of credited
service shown in this column is calculated based on the actual
years of service with us for each Named Executive Officer
through October 31, 1999 (October 31, 2004 for
Mr. Kilroy).
|
|
(2) |
|
The valuations included in this
column have been calculated as of December 31, 2006
assuming the Named Executive Officer will retire at the normal
retirement age of 65 and using the interest rate and other
assumptions as described in Note 15, Pension and
Other Post Employment Benefits in the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included in this
Form 10-K.
|
No pension benefits were paid to the Named Executive Officers in
2006. Each of the Named Executive Officers, other than
Messrs. Raubenstine and Danahy, is eligible to receive a
benefit under the PHH Pension Plan based on 2% of their final
average cash compensation times their number of years of benefit
service (up to a maximum of 30 years) minus 50% of their
annualized primary Social Security benefit. For purposes of
determining the participating Named Executive Officers
benefits under the PHH Pension Plan, their final average
compensation and years of benefit service was based on
compensation and service earned prior to October 31, 1999
(October 31, 2004 for Mr. Kilroy). The participating
Named Executive Officers will not accrue any additional benefits
under the PHH Pension Plan or under any other defined benefit
plan sponsored by us or Cendant after October 31, 1999
(October 31, 2004 for Mr. Kilroy).
208
Non-qualified
Deferred Compensation for 2006
The table below sets forth information relating to the PHH
Corporation Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the
Deferred Compensation Plan) established by our Board
of Directors in 1994 for specified executive officers at that
time. The Deferred Compensation Plan was frozen to further
participation in 1997 and Mr. Edwards is the only Named
Executive Officer eligible to participate in the plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings in
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Last Fiscal
|
|
|
Balance as of
|
|
Name
|
|
Year End
|
|
|
Last Fiscal Year
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
$
|
57,836
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
536,942
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Neil J. Cashen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The amount reported in this column
is not included as compensation in Summary
Compensation Table because the earnings were not
above-market or preferential pursuant to the applicable SEC
rules under the Exchange Act.
|
There were no contributions to, or distributions or withdrawals
from, the Deferred Compensation Plan in 2006. The Deferred
Compensation Plan is a non-qualified deferred compensation plan
pursuant to which participants may elect to defer up to 100% of
their annual salary and any awards under a non-equity incentive
plan. All deferrals by participants are 100% vested at all
times. The Deferred Compensation Plan is unfunded for tax
purposes and a bookkeeping account is established for each
participant. Amounts deferred are credited with any associated
earnings in accordance with hypothetical investment options
elected by the participant from the investment options,
including mutual funds and other funds, available under the PHH
Savings Plan, except for the fund which invests in our Common
stock. Participants are entitled to a distribution under the
Deferred Compensation Plan when they cease employment with us
for any reason. Distributions may be made in lump sum or in
monthly, quarterly or annual installments for up to ten years at
the election of the participant.
209
Potential
Payments upon Termination of Employment or Change in
Control
The following table sets forth the estimated payments and
benefits that would be provided to each Named Executive Officer
who was employed by us on December 29, 2006, pursuant to
the terms of any contract, agreement, plan or arrangement that
provides for such payments and benefits following, or in
connection with, a termination of the Named Executive Officer,
including by voluntary termination, involuntary termination not
for cause, involuntary termination for cause, retirement, death
or disability or a change in control with or without a
termination of the Named Executive Officer. For purposes of
calculating the amounts in the table, we have assumed that the
termination or change in control event took place on
December 29, 2006, the last business day of our most
recently completed fiscal year, and used the closing price of
our Common stock on such date ($28.87 per share) for
purposes of calculating the value of any stock awards in
accordance with the SEC rules under the Exchange Act. See the
discussion that follows the table for additional information
regarding the estimated payments and benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Involuntary
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
|
Change in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination
|
|
|
Involuntary
|
|
|
Control
|
|
|
Control
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name and Description
|
|
Voluntary
|
|
|
Not for
|
|
|
Termination
|
|
|
without
|
|
|
with
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Potential Payments
|
|
Termination
|
|
|
Cause
|
|
|
for Cause
|
|
|
Termination
|
|
|
Termination
|
|
|
Death
|
|
|
Disability
|
|
|
Retirement
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
572,135
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
572,135
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accelerated Vesting of Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,115,037
|
|
|
|
2,115,037
|
|
|
|
2,115,037
|
|
|
|
2,115,037
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated Payout of 2006 MIPs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
564,635
|
|
|
|
564,635
|
|
|
|
564,635
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
278,699
|
|
Deferred Compensation
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
536,942
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
536,942
|
|
|
$
|
1,109,077
|
|
|
$
|
536,942
|
|
|
$
|
2,679,672
|
|
|
$
|
3,788,749
|
|
|
$
|
3,216,614
|
|
|
$
|
2,651,979
|
|
|
$
|
815,641
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
507,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
507,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accelerated Vesting of Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated Payout of 2006 MIPs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
507,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
507,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
457,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
457,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accelerated Vesting of Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,621,248
|
|
|
|
1,621,248
|
|
|
|
1,621,248
|
|
|
|
1,621,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated Payout of 2006 MIPs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
438,461
|
|
|
|
438,461
|
|
|
|
438,461
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
774,949
|
|
Deferred Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
457,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,059,709
|
|
|
$
|
2,517,209
|
|
|
$
|
2,059,709
|
|
|
$
|
1,621,248
|
|
|
$
|
774,949
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
170,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
170,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accelerated Vesting of Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,042,525
|
|
|
|
1,042,525
|
|
|
|
1,042,525
|
|
|
|
1,042,525
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated Payout of 2006 MIPs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
243,750
|
|
|
|
243,750
|
|
|
|
243,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
170,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,286,275
|
|
|
$
|
1,456,275
|
|
|
$
|
1,286,275
|
|
|
$
|
1,042,525
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
157,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
157,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accelerated Vesting of Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
789,982
|
|
|
|
789,982
|
|
|
|
789,982
|
|
|
|
789,982
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated Payout of 2006 MIPs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104,809
|
|
Deferred Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
157,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
939,982
|
|
|
$
|
1,097,482
|
|
|
$
|
939,982
|
|
|
$
|
789,982
|
|
|
$
|
104,809
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amounts shown in the table above include estimates of what
would be paid to the Named Executive Officers upon the
occurrence of the specified event. The actual amounts to be paid
to the Named Executive Officers
210
can only be determined at the time of such event. We have
included payments related to the Retirement Plans and the
Deferred Compensation Plan in the table since these are frozen
plans and are not available to our current employees. We have
not included payments related to the Retirement Plans in the
specified events other than the Retirement column,
as these payments are not triggered by termination, death or
disability of the Named Executive Officer or a change in
control. These amounts would be payable to the Named Executive
Officer at some time after the specified event once the minimum
retirement age and other PHH Pension Plan requirements were met.
In addition, the table does not include payments of life or
disability insurance payable upon the death or disability of the
Named Executive Officers as these benefits are available to all
employees on the same basis.
Potential
Payments and Benefits
Severance. In accordance with our
policy, none of our Named Executive Officers has an employment
agreement or change in control agreement. We provide
post-termination payments of salary or severance to our Named
Executive Officers under a policy applicable to our executive
officers in the event of a reduction in our workforce or the
elimination or discontinuation of their position. Pursuant to
our policy, the minimum severance is 26 weeks of base
salary and the maximum severance is 52 weeks of base salary
for the Named Executive Officers payable in a lump sum amount.
In addition, the amounts shown in the table include $7,500 in
outplacement services pursuant to our severance policy. These
services may be declined by the Named Executive Officer in lieu
of an equivalent cash payment. The payment of severance is
conditioned upon, among other things, the execution of a general
release of us by the executive officer. If consummated, the
proposed Merger would result in a change in control under our
severance policy.
Accelerated Vesting of Stock
Awards. All of the stock awards made to our
Named Executive Officers have been granted under the 2005 Equity
and Incentive Plan and are subject to the vesting and other
terms set forth in award agreements and the 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan. Pursuant to the terms of the 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan, in the event of a Change in Control (defined
below), any Stock Option award carrying a right to exercise that
was not previously vested and exercisable becomes fully vested
and exercisable, and any restrictions, deferral limitations,
payment conditions and forfeiture conditions for PHH RSU awards
lapse and such awards are deemed fully vested. In addition, any
performance conditions imposed with respect to such awards are
deemed to be fully achieved. Pursuant to the terms of the 2005
Equity and Incentive Plan, a Change in Control is deemed to have
occurred if:
|
|
|
|
§
|
any person, as such term is used in Sections 13(d) and
14(d) of the Exchange Act (other than (i) us, (ii) any
trustee or other fiduciary holding securities under one of our
employee benefit plans and (iii) any corporation owned,
directly or indirectly, by our stockholders in substantially the
same proportions as their ownership of our Common stock), is or
becomes the beneficial owner (as defined in
Rule 13d-3
under the Exchange Act), directly or indirectly, of our Common
stock representing 30% or more of the combined voting power of
our then outstanding voting securities (excluding any person who
becomes such a beneficial owner in connection with a transaction
immediately following which the individuals who comprise our
Board of Directors immediately prior thereto constitute at least
a majority of the Board of Directors of the entity surviving
such transaction or, if we or the entity surviving the
transaction is then a subsidiary, the ultimate parent thereof);
|
|
|
§
|
the following individuals cease for any reason to constitute a
majority of the number of Directors then serving: individuals
who constitute the Board and any new Director (other than a
Director whose initial assumption of office is in connection
with an actual or threatened election contest, including but not
limited to a consent solicitation, relating to the election of
Directors) whose appointment or election by the Board or
nomination for election by our stockholders was approved or
recommended by a vote of at least two-thirds (2/3) of the
Directors then still in office who either were Directors or
whose appointment, election or nomination for election was
previously so approved or recommended;
|
|
|
§
|
there is consummated a merger or consolidation of us or any of
our direct or indirect subsidiaries with any other corporation,
other than a merger or consolidation immediately following which
the individuals who comprise our Board of Directors immediately
prior thereto constitute at least a majority of the Board of
Directors of the entity surviving such merger or consolidation
or, if we or the entity surviving such merger is then a
subsidiary, the ultimate parent thereof or
|
211
|
|
|
|
§
|
our stockholders approve a plan of complete liquidation or there
is consummated an agreement for the sale or disposition by us of
all or substantially all of our assets (or any transaction
having a similar effect), other than a sale or disposition by us
of all or substantially all of our assets to an entity,
immediately following which the individuals who comprise our
Board of Directors immediately prior thereto constitute at least
a majority of the Board of the entity to which such assets are
sold or disposed of or, if such entity is a subsidiary, the
ultimate parent thereof.
|
The amounts in the table are calculated using the closing price
of our Common stock on December 29, 2006 and the number of
Stock Options and PHH RSUs used to calculate the amounts in the
table are those unexercisable Stock Options and unvested PHH
RSUs which became exercisable and vested as a result of the
Change in Control event pursuant to the SEC rules under the
Exchange Act. If consummated, the proposed Merger would result
in a change in control under the terms of the 2005 Equity and
Incentive Plan. The following table provides the estimated
payments that each Named Executive Officer would receive as a
result of accelerated vesting of stock awards using a price of
$31.50 per share pursuant to the terms of the proposed
Merger:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accelerated
|
|
|
|
Vesting of
|
|
Name
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
Terence W. Edwards
|
|
$
|
2,451,351
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
George J. Kilroy
|
|
|
1,836,637
|
|
Mark R. Danahy
|
|
|
1,170,632
|
|
William F. Brown
|
|
|
893,013
|
|
Accelerated Payout of 2006 MIPs. Our
short-term cash incentive plans for our executive officers are
the 2006 MIPs, which are governed by the terms of the 2006
Equity and Incentive Plan and the respective 2006 MIPs. As
discussed above with regard to stock awards, in the event of a
Change in Control, the performance conditions imposed with
respect to such awards are deemed to be fully achieved and the
target payout amount is payable to the Named Executive Officers.
If consummated, the proposed Merger would result in a change in
control under the terms of the 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan.
In the event of the death of a Named Executive Officer, the
performance conditions under the 2006 MIPs are deemed to be
fully achieved and the target payout amount, pro rated according
to the time the Named Executive Officer participated in the
performance period, is payable to the Named Executive
Officers estate. See Grants of
Plan-Based Awards for 2006 above for information regarding
the 2006 MIPs.
Retirement Plans. Certain of our Named
Executive Officers were participants in the PHH Pension Plan and
PHH Retiree Medical Plan which were available to all employees
prior to 1999. Participants are entitled to payments in the form
of an annuity upon attaining retirement age. The amounts
reflected in the table are based on the estimated present value
on December 29, 2006 of the payout for each participating
Named Executive Officer assuming he had attained the normal
retirement age of 65. None of the Named Executive Officers had
attained the minimum retirement age under the PHH Pension Plan
as of December 29, 2006. See Pension
Benefits for 2006 above for more information.
Deferred Compensation. Mr. Edwards
is the only Named Executive Officer who is a participant in the
Deferred Compensation Plan. Participants are entitled to a
distribution under the Deferred Compensation Plan when they
cease employment with us for any reason. Distributions may be
made in lump sum or in monthly, quarterly or annual installments
for up to ten years at the election of the participant. See
Non-qualified Deferred Compensation for
2006 above for more information.
Director
Compensation
See Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate
Governance Director Compensation
Director Compensation Table for information regarding the
compensation of our Directors for 2006.
212
Performance
Graph
The following graph and table compare the cumulative total
stockholder return on our Common stock with (i) the Russell
2000 Index and (ii) the Russell 2000 Financial Services
Index. On January 31, 2005, all shares of our Common stock
were spun-off from Cendant to the holders of Cendants
common stock on a pro rata basis. Our Common stock began trading
on the NYSE on February 1, 2005. Cendant distributed one
share of our Common stock for every 20 shares of Cendant
common stock outstanding on the record date for the distribution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment Value as of
|
|
|
|
2/1/2005
|
|
|
3/31/2005
|
|
|
6/30/2005
|
|
|
9/30/2005
|
|
|
12/31/2005
|
|
|
3/31/2006
|
|
|
6/30/2006
|
|
|
9/30/2006
|
|
|
12/31/2006
|
|
|
Russell 2000 Index
|
|
$
|
100.00
|
|
|
$
|
98.13
|
|
|
$
|
102.37
|
|
|
$
|
107.17
|
|
|
$
|
108.39
|
|
|
$
|
123.50
|
|
|
$
|
117.29
|
|
|
$
|
117.81
|
|
|
$
|
128.30
|
|
Russell 2000 Financial Services
Index
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
95.35
|
|
|
|
101.60
|
|
|
|
102.28
|
|
|
|
104.42
|
|
|
|
114.61
|
|
|
|
111.72
|
|
|
|
114.16
|
|
|
|
120.83
|
|
PHH Common stock
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
99.86
|
|
|
|
117.44
|
|
|
|
125.39
|
|
|
|
127.95
|
|
|
|
121.92
|
|
|
|
125.75
|
|
|
|
125.11
|
|
|
|
131.83
|
|
The graph and chart above assume that $100 was invested in the
Russell 2000 Index, the Russell 2000 Financial Services Index
and our Common stock on February 1, 2005. Total stockholder
returns assume reinvestment of dividends. The stock price
performance depicted in the graph and table above may not be
indicative of future stock price performance.
213
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of our
outstanding Common stock, as of May 15, 2007, by those
persons who are known to us to be beneficial owners of 5% or
more of our Common stock, by each of our Directors, by each of
our Named Executive Officers and by our Directors and Executive
Officers as a group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Name
|
|
Owned(1)
|
|
|
Outstanding(2)
|
|
|
Principal Stockholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennant Capital Management,
LLC(3)
|
|
|
4,169,800
|
|
|
|
7.79
|
%
|
40 Main Street
Chatham, NJ 07928
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dimensional Fund Advisors
Inc.(4)
|
|
|
3,843,640
|
|
|
|
7.18
|
%
|
1299 Ocean Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90401
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directors and Named Executive
Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terence W.
Edwards(5)
|
|
|
403,887
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Clair M. Raubenstine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
George J.
Kilroy(6)
|
|
|
36,812
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Mark R.
Danahy(7)
|
|
|
99,143
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
William F.
Brown(8)
|
|
|
82,946
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Neil J.
Cashen(9)
|
|
|
126,810
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
James W.
Brinkley(10)
|
|
|
8,664
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
A.B.
Krongard(11)
|
|
|
15,703
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Ann D.
Logan(12)
|
|
|
8,414
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Jonathan D.
Mariner(13)
|
|
|
8,291
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Francis J. Van
Kirk(14)
|
|
|
6,552
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
All Directors and Executive
Officers as a Group (13
persons)(15)
|
|
|
845,192
|
|
|
|
1.58
|
%
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Represents less than one percent.
|
|
(1) |
|
Based upon information furnished to
us by the respective stockholders or contained in filings made
with the SEC. For purposes of this table, if a person has or
shares voting or investment power with respect to any of our
Common stock, then such Common stock is considered beneficially
owned by that person under the SEC rules. Shares of our Common
stock beneficially owned include direct and indirect ownership
of shares, Stock Options and PHH RSUs granted to executive
officers and Director RSUs granted to our Directors which are
vested or are expected to vest within 60 days of
May 15, 2007. Due to the delay in the filing of our
financial statements with the SEC, since March 2006, the
issuance of our Common stock for purposes of converting earned
PHH RSUs to shares for our executive officers and the award of
Director RSUs for service by Directors (collectively, the
Earned Shares) and the availability for exercise of
certain earned Stock Options have been postponed for our
Directors and executive officers until we become current with
our SEC filing requirements. These Earned Shares and Stock
Options have been included in the table in accordance with
Rule 13d-3
of the SEC rules. Unless otherwise indicated in the table, the
address of all listed stockholders is c/o PHH Corporation,
3000 Leadenhall Road, Mt. Laurel, New Jersey, 08054.
|
|
(2) |
|
Based upon 53,506,822 shares
of our Common stock outstanding as of May 15, 2007. Shares
which vest or are expected to vest within 60 days of
May 15, 2007 are deemed outstanding for the purpose of
computing the percentage ownership for the named stockholder.
|
|
(3) |
|
Reflects beneficial ownership of
shares of our Common stock as reported in a Schedule 13D/A
filed with the SEC by Pennant Capital Management, LLC on behalf
of itself and its affiliates on April 30, 2007.
|
|
(4) |
|
Reflects beneficial ownership of
shares of our Common stock as reported in a Form 13F filed
with the SEC by Dimensional Fund Advisors Inc. on behalf of
itself and its affiliates on April 19, 2007.
|
214
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Represents 10,056 shares of
our Common stock directly held by Mr. Edwards, 367,021
Stock Options and 26,810 Earned Shares.
|
|
(6) |
|
Represents 9,184 shares of our
Common stock directly held by Mr. Kilroy, 635 shares
of our Common stock held in his 401(k) account, 3,468 Stock
Options and 23,525 Earned Shares.
|
|
(7) |
|
Represents 4,925 shares of our
Common stock directly held by Mr. Danahy, 79,556 Stock
Options and 14,662 Earned Shares.
|
|
(8) |
|
Represents 3,722 shares of our
Common stock directly held by Mr. Brown, 67,696 Stock
Options and 11,528 Earned Shares.
|
|
(9) |
|
Represents 4,974 shares of our
Common stock directly held by Mr. Cashen, 144 shares
of our Common stock held in his 401(k) account, 108,377 Stock
Options and 13,315 Earned Shares.
|
|
(10) |
|
Represents 5,260 Director
RSUs, 250 shares of our Common stock held by Brinkley
Investments, LLC, a partnership among Mr. Brinkley, his
wife and his children and 3,154 Earned Shares.
|
|
(11) |
|
Represents 8,594 Director RSUs
and 7,109 Earned Shares.
|
|
(12) |
|
Represents 5,260 Director RSUs
and 3,154 Earned Shares.
|
|
(13) |
|
Represents 5,205 Director RSUs
and 3,086 Earned Shares.
|
|
(14) |
|
Represents 3,442 Director RSUs
and 3,110 Earned Shares.
|
|
(15) |
|
Represents 33,111 shares of
our Common stock directly or indirectly held by our Directors
and executive officers as a group, 779 shares of our Common
stock held in 401(k) accounts, 27,761 Director RSUs,
671,687 Stock Options and 111,854 Earned Shares.
|
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The table below reflects the number of securities issued and the
number of securities remaining which were available for issuance
under the 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan as of December 31,
2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
for Future
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Issuance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to be Issued
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Under Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upon
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of
|
|
|
Price of
|
|
|
Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
(Excluding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options,
|
|
|
Options,
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Reflected in
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
and Rights
|
|
|
and Rights
|
|
|
Column (a))
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved
by security
holders(1)
|
|
|
5,012,861
|
(2)
|
|
$
|
19.38
|
(3)
|
|
|
1,388,302
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans not
approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
5,012,861
|
|
|
$
|
19.38
|
|
|
|
1,388,302
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our 2005 Equity and Incentive Plan was approved on
January 14, 2005 by Cendant as our sole stockholder. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes 1,596,223 PHH RSUs and 3,416,638 Stock Options, of
which 912,100 PHH RSUs and 64,438 Stock Options are subject to
performance-based vesting at target levels or upon a change in
control. Depending upon the level of achievement of these
performance goals, all or a portion of the performance-based
stock awards may not vest. The number of PHH RSUs includes
16,008 Earned Shares. |
|
(3) |
|
Because there is no exercise price associated with the PHH RSUs,
those PHH RSUs described in Footnote 2 above are not
included in the weighted-average exercise price calculation. |
215
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
Review
and Approval of Related Person Transactions
We review any relationships or transactions in which we and our
Directors and executive officers, or their immediate family
members, are participants to determine whether these persons
have a direct or indirect material interest. Our Directors Code
and our Employees and Officers Code provide specific provisions
regarding such relationships between our Directors and executive
officers and us. The Corporate Governance Committee and the
Corporate Compliance Officer review any such relationships
identified under the Directors Code and the Employees and
Officers Code, respectively, which are then reviewed and
approved by the Board of Directors at least annually. The
Directors Code sets forth the following guidelines for
relationships that do not require Board approval:
|
|
|
|
§
|
the Directors sole interest in the arrangement is by
virtue of his or her status as a director, executive officer
and/or
holder of less than 10% equity interest (other than a general
partnership interest) in an entity with which we have concluded
such an arrangement;
|
|
|
§
|
the arrangement involves payments to or from the entity that
constitute less than the greater of $1 million or 2% of the
entitys consolidated gross revenues and
|
|
|
§
|
the Director is not personally involved in (i) the
negotiation and execution of the arrangement,
(ii) performance of the services or provision of the goods
or (iii) the monetary arrangement.
|
See Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and
Corporate Governance Corporate
Governance Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for
Directors and Code of Conduct for
Employees and Officers for more information. Our legal
staff is responsible for the development and implementation of
processes and controls, including regular Director and officer
questionnaires, to obtain information from the Directors and
executive officers with respect to related person transactions.
Based on the facts and circumstances identified through these
information gathering processes, the Board of Directors
determines whether the company or a related person has a direct
or indirect material interest in any transactions identified
Certain
Business Relationships
A.B. Krongard, our Non-Executive Chairman, is also an outside
director on the global Board of Directors for our principal
outside law firm, DLA Piper. Our legal fees and disbursements
paid to DLA Piper during 2006 were less than 0.4% of the
firms gross revenues for 2006.
James W. Brinkley, one of our Directors, became Vice Chairman of
Smith Barneys Global Private Client Group following
Citigroups acquisition of LMWW in December 2005. We have
certain relationships with the Corporate and Investment Banking
segment of Citigroup, including financial services, commercial
banking and other transactions. The fees paid to Citigroup,
including interest expense, were approximately $37 million
for 2006, representing less than 0.1% of Citigroups
revenues. Citigroup is a lender, along with various other
lenders, in several of our credit facilities. Our indebtedness
to Citigroup was $843 million as of December 31, 2006,
representing less than 0.1% of Citigroups total
consolidated assets, and was made in the ordinary course of
business upon terms, including interest rates and collateral,
substantially the same as those prevailing at the time for
comparable loans.
Mr. Brinkleys son, Douglas Brinkley, is a principal
at Colliers Pinkard, a member firm of Colliers, which provides
certain lease management services to us. The fees paid to
Colliers during 2006 were approximately $300,000, representing
less than 0.1% of Colliers annual revenues.
Bradford C. Burgess, who serves as a Director, Business
Development at PHH Arval since 2001, is the
son-in-law
of George J. Kilroy, one of our Directors and President and
Chief Executive Officer of PHH Arval. Mr. Burgess received
compensation, including base and bonus payments, of $120,000 for
2006 and was eligible to participate in employee benefit plans
available to employees generally. His compensation and benefits
were commensurate with other employees in comparable positions
at PHH Arval.
216
Mr. Mariner, one of our Directors, served as a director of
BankAtlantic until May 2006. PHH Mortgage has certain mortgage
banking relationships with BankAtlantic, the fees for which did
not exceed 0.2% of BankAtlantics annual revenues.
Indebtedness
of Management
One or more of our mortgage lending subsidiaries has made, in
the ordinary course of business, mortgage loans
and/or home
equity lines of credit to Directors and executive officers and
their immediate families. Such mortgage loans
and/or home
equity lines of credit were made on substantially the same
terms, including interest rates and collateral requirements, as
those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with
our other customers generally, and they did not involve more
than the normal risk of collectibility or present other
unfavorable features. Generally, we sell these mortgage loans
and/or home
equity lines of credit, soon after origination, into the
secondary market in the ordinary course of business.
Independence
of the Board of Directors
See Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and
Corporate Governance Independence of the Board of
Directors for information regarding the determination of
the independence of our Board of Directors.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
Our Audit Committee is responsible for pre-approving all audit
services and permitted non-audit services, including the fees
and terms thereof, to be performed for us and our subsidiaries
by our independent registered public accounting firm (the
Independent Auditor). The Audit Committee has
adopted a pre-approval policy and implemented procedures which
provide that all engagements of our Independent Auditor are
reviewed and pre-approved by the Audit Committee, subject to the
de minimis exception for non-audit services described in
Section 10A(i)(1)(B) of the Exchange Act which our Audit
Committee approves prior to the completion of the audit. The
pre-approval policy also permits the delegation of pre-approval
authority to a member of the Audit Committee between meetings of
the Audit Committee, and any such approvals are reviewed and
ratified by the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting.
For the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
professional services were performed for us by
Deloitte & Touche LLP, our Independent Auditor,
pursuant to the oversight of our Audit Committee. Audit and
audit-related fees aggregated $12.1 million and
$16.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005, respectively. Set forth below are the fees billed to
us by Deloitte & Touche LLP, the member firms of
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu and their respective affiliates. All
fees and services were approved in accordance with the Audit
Committees pre-approval policy since the Spin-Off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Fees by Type
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Audit fees
|
|
$
|
11.4
|
|
|
$
|
16.6
|
|
Audit-related fees
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Tax fees
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
All other fees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
16.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Audit Fees. The aggregate fees billed for
professional services rendered by the Independent Auditor were
$11.4 million and $16.6 million for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and, primarily
related to the annual audits of the Consolidated Financial
Statements included in our Annual Reports on
Form 10-Ks
and our internal control over financial reporting, as required
by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
reviews of the Consolidated Financial Statements included in our
Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q
and services provided in connection with regulatory and
statutory filings.
217
Audit-Related Fees. Audit-related fees billed
during the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 were
$0.7 million and $0.2 million, respectively, and
primarily related to audit fees for our employee benefit plans,
comfort letters related to registration statements and
securitization transactions.
Tax Fees. The aggregate fees billed for tax
services during the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005
were $0.4 million and $0.1 million, respectively.
These fees related to tax compliance, tax advice and tax
planning for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.
All Other Fees. There were no amounts billed
for other services during the year ended December 31, 2006.
The aggregate fees billed for all other services during the year
ended December 31, 2005 were approximately $2,000 and
related to software license fees.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a)(1).
Financial Statements
Information in response to this Item is included in Item 8
of Part II of this
Form 10-K.
(a)(2).
Financial Statement Schedules
Information in response to this Item is included in Item 8
of Part II of this
Form 10-K
and incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 12 attached
to this
Form 10-K.
(a)(3)
and (b). Exhibits
Information in response to this Item is incorporated herein by
reference to the Exhibit Index to this
Form 10-K.
218
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the Registrant has
duly caused this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized on this 24th day of May, 2007.
PHH CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/ TERENCE
W. EDWARDS
|
Name: Terence W. Edwards
|
|
|
|
Title:
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K
has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. The
undersigned hereby constitute and appoint Terence W. Edwards,
Clair M. Raubenstine and William F. Brown, and each of
them, their true and lawful agents and
attorneys-in-fact
with full power and authority in said agents and
attorneys-in-fact,
and in any one or more of them, to sign for the undersigned and
in their respective names as Directors and officers of PHH
Corporation, any amendment or supplement hereto. The undersigned
hereby confirm all acts taken by such agents and
attorneys-in-fact,
or any one or more of them, as herein authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ TERENCE
W. EDWARDS
Terence
W. Edwards
|
|
President, Chief Executive
Officer
and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ CLAIR
M.
RAUBENSTINE
Clair
M. Raubenstine
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ A.B.
KRONGARD
A.B.
Krongard
|
|
Non-Executive Chairman of the
Board of Directors
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAMES
W. BRINKLEY
James
W. Brinkley
|
|
Director
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ GEORGE
J. KILROY
George
J. Kilroy
|
|
Director
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ANN
D. LOGAN
Ann
D. Logan
|
|
Director
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JONATHAN
D. MARINER
Jonathan
D. Mariner
|
|
Director
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ FRANCIS
J. VAN KIRK
Francis
J. Van Kirk
|
|
Director
|
|
May 24, 2007
|
219
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
as of 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,
dated 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 (now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc.) filed on
April 4, 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 15, 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 4.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February
1, 2005.
|
|
4
|
.3
|
|
Indenture dated as of
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.
|
|
4
|
.4
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 1
dated as of 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.
|
220
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
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 4.5 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Chesapeake
Funding LLC for the year ended December 31, 2002 filed on March
10, 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 4.3 to the Amendment to the Registration Statement on
Form S-3/A (No. 333-103678) of Chesapeake Funding LLC filed on
August 1, 2003.
|
221
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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 4.4 to the Amendment to the Registration Statement on
Form S-3/A (No. 333-103678) of Chesapeake Funding LLC filed on
August 1, 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
Exhibit 4.5 to the Amendment to the Registration Statement on
Form S-3/A (No. 333-103678) of Chesapeake Funding LLC 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
Exhibit 4.6 to the Amendment to the Registration Statement on
Form S-3/A (No. 333-109007) of Chesapeake Funding LLC filed on
November 5, 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
Exhibit 10.43 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Cendant
Corporation (now known as Avis Budget Group, Inc.) 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 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.
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Amendment, dated as of
December 21, 2004, to the Three Year Competitive Advance
and Revolving Credit Agreement, dated as of June 28, 2004,
by and among 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. and Cendant Mortgage Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on February
1, 2005.
|
222
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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 filed on 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 filed on February
1, 2005.
|
|
10
|
.21
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of
January 31, 2005, by and among 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.
|
|
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.
|
223
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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.
|
|
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
Purchaser, 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
Exhibit 10.41 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2005 filed on November 14,
2005.
|
224
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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 28, 2005.
|
|
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 28, 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 28, 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 28, 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 28, 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
17, 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.
|
225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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.
|
|
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, by and 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.
|
226
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Incorporation by Reference
|
|
|
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.
|
|
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 10.5 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
Exhibit 10.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on August
16, 2006.
|
|
10
|
.64
|
|
Supplemental Indenture No. 4,
dated as of August 31, 2006, by and between PHH Corporation and
The Bank of New York (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 20, 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.
|
227
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
228
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 26, 2006, between Bishops Gate
Residential Mortgage Trust, the Issuer, and The Bank of New
York, as Indenture Trustee.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.77 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on
March 30, 2007.
|
|
10
|
.78
|
|
First Amendment, dated as of
February 22, 2007, to the 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
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.
|
229
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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, between 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 Real Estate Services
Venture Partner, Inc. (formerly known as Cendant Real Estate
Services Venture Partner, Inc.), Century 21 Real Estate
Corporation, Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation, ERA
Franchise Systems, Inc., Sothebys International Realty
Affiliates, Inc., and TM Acquisition Corp.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.82 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on
March 30, 2007.
|
|
10
|
.83
|
|
Waiver and Amendment Agreement,
dated as of March 14, 2007, between PHH Mortgage Corporation and
Merrill Lynch Credit Corporation.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.83 to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed on
March 30, 2007.
|
|
12
|
|
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings
to Fixed Charges.
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant.
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
99
|
.1
|
|
PHH Corporation Independence
Standards for Directors.
|
|
Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 99.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed
on April 27, 2006.
|
|
99
|
.2
|
|
Glossary of Terms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
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.
|
230
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Confidential treatment has been
granted for certain portions of this Exhibit pursuant to an
order under 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.
|
231