Hier der Jahresbericht 2007 der Washington Mutual Inc. & Subsidiaries, erstellt von Deloitte & Touche LLP, datiert February 28, 2008. Auszugsweise sind die wichtigsten Kapitel herausgehoben, um die übliche Prozedur der Hypotheken und Kredit-Vergabe darzustellen.
Daraus geht auch eindeutig hervor, dass die “Second and Union LLC“ eine Tochter der WMI war (wie auch von mir in meiner Objection, datiert February 18, 2011
OBJECTION TO DEBTORS SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR THE
MODIFIED SIXTH AMENDED JOINT PLAN OF AFFILIATED DEBTORS
an das Konkursgericht behauptet).
Aus gegebenen Anlass mögen andere, engagierte User die Übersetzung des Folgenden aus dem Englischen vornehmen:
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007
Commission File Number 1-14667
WASHINGTON MUTUAL, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
http://google.brand.edgar-online.com/...%2526amp%253bformtypeId%253d7
Washington Mutual, through its subsidiaries, is one of the nation's leading consumer and small business banks. At December 31, 2007, Washington Mutual and its subsidiaries had assets of $328 billion. The Company has a history dating back to 1889 and its subsidiary banks currently operate nearly 2,500 consumer and small business banking stores throughout the nation. When we refer to "the Company," "we," "our" and "us" in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we mean Washington Mutual, Inc. and subsidiaries. When we refer to "the Parent," we mean Washington Mutual, Inc.
The Company's primary executive and business segment headquarters are located at 1301 Second Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. In March 2006,
(bitte beachten!) => !!! Second and Union LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc., !!! <=
in a joint venture with the Seattle Art Museum, completed construction of the Company's headquarters building and was granted an initial certificate of occupancy. At that time, Second and Union LLC took ownership of a condominium interest in the 944,000 square foot office tower and the attached 700 stall parking garage and the Company's employees began to relocate to the new space. Concurrently, the Seattle Art Museum completed and took ownership of 243,000 square feet of future expansion space that Second and Union LLC leased, and the Company's employees will occupy, for a period of up to 25 years. The Seattle Art Museum has the right to cancel the lease, in whole or in part, at any time after the tenth year of the lease. Certain leases covering downtown Seattle locations were not renewed when their terms expired. The Company leases an additional 697,000 square feet in other downtown Seattle locations for administrative functions.
[…]
The Company's sources of revenue are net interest income and noninterest income. Net interest income is generated by interest received from loans, investment securities and other interest-earning assets, less rates paid on deposits and borrowings. The primary sources of noninterest income are revenue from loan sales and servicing and fees from financial services provided to customers.
[…]Those concerns intensified during the second half of the year and spread into the broader secondary market, resulting in a severe contraction of secondary market liquidity as investors avoided purchasing all mortgage products backed by nonconforming loan collateral. Because of this disruption, the Company transferred approximately $17 billion of real estate loans to its loan portfolio in the third quarter of 2007, representing substantially all of the Company's non( )conforming loans that had been designated as held for sale […].
[…] Mortgage Servicing Rights and Certain Other Retained Interests in Securitizations
In June 2007, the Company implemented a model that is based on an option-adjusted spread ("OAS") valuation methodology to estimate the fair value of substantially all of its MSR asset. The model projects cash flows over multiple interest rate scenarios and discounts these cash flows using risk-adjusted discount rates. Additionally, an independent broker estimate of the fair values of the mortgage servicing rights is obtained quarterly along with other market-based evidence. Management uses this information together with its OAS valuation methodology to estimate the fair value of the MSR. Models used to value MSR assets, including those employing an OAS valuation methodology, are highly sensitive to changes in certain assumptions. Different expected prepayment speeds, in particular, can result in substantial changes in the estimated fair value of MSR. If actual prepayment experience differs materially from the expected prepayment speeds used in the Company's model, this difference may result in a material change in MSR fair value.
[…]On December 6, 2007, the American Securitization Forum ("ASF"), working with various constituency groups as well as representatives of U.S. federal government agencies, issued the Streamlined Foreclosure and Loss Avoidance Framework for Securitized Subprime Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loans (the "ASF Framework") to enable residential mortgage loan servicers to streamline their loss avoidance and loan modification practices. In adopting the ASF Framework, the ASF commented that current subprime residential mortgage market conditions reflect a number of concerns that impact securitization transactions, subprime mortgage lending and the overall housing market: an increase in delinquency, default and foreclosure rates; an increase in real estate owned inventories; a decline in home prices; and a prevalence of loans with relatively low initial fixed interest rates that are entering their adjustable rate periods at significantly higher interest rate levels. The ASF Framework provides guidance for residential mortgage loan servicers to streamline subprime residential mortgage borrower evaluation procedures and to facilitate the use of foreclosure avoidance and loss prevention efforts to reduce the number of such borrowers who might default during 2008 because they cannot afford to make higher monthly loan payments after their loans reset to a higher, adjustable interest rate.
The parameters of the ASF Framework were designed by the ASF to improve administrative efficiency while still maximizing cash flows to the QSPEs in which residential mortgage loans were transferred upon securitization by stratifying subprime borrowers into the following segments: borrowers that can refinance into readily available mortgage industry products ("Segment 1"); borrowers that have demonstrated the ability to pay their introductory rates, are unable to refinance, and are unable to afford their reset rates ("Segment 2"); and borrowers that require in-depth, case-by-case analysis due to loan histories that demonstrate difficulties in making timely, introductory rate payments ("Segment 3"). Consistent with its objectives, the ASF Framework was designed to fast-track loan modifications for Segment 2 borrowers, in which default is considered to be reasonably foreseeable. Under the ASF Framework, fast-track loan modifications would be available to Segment 2 borrowers with first-lien residential mortgage loans that: (1) have an initial fixed interest rate period of 36 months or less; (2) are included in securitized pools; (3) were originated between January 1, 2005 and July 31, 2007; and (4) have an initial interest rate reset date between January 1, 2008 and July 31, 2010. To be eligible for a fast-track loan modification under the ASF Framework, Segment 2 borrowers would also have to occupy the property as their primary residence and meet a specific FICO test, which is based on their current FICO score, and the servicer must ascertain that the upcoming loan rate reset will result in an increase in the loan payment amount by more than 10%. If all of these criteria are satisfied, the servicer would be permitted to modify the Segment 2 borrower's loan interest rate by keeping it at the existing fixed interest rate, generally for five years following the upcoming reset period.
On January 8, 2008, the Securities and Exchange Commission's (the "SEC") Office of the Chief Accountant (the "OCA") issued a letter (the "OCA Letter") addressing accounting issues that may be raised by the ASF Framework. Specifically, the OCA Letter expressed the view that if a subprime loan made to a Segment 2 borrower is modified in accordance with the ASF Framework and that loan could be legally modified, the OCA would not object to continued status of the transferee as a QSPE under Statement No. 140.
As acknowledged in the OCA Letter, a uniform definition of a subprime mortgage loan does not exist within the mortgage banking industry. The Company has defined subprime residential mortgage loans by reference to the channel in which such loans were originated or purchased. Accordingly, the Company considers loans that were either originated under the Company's Long Beach Mortgage name or that were purchased from entities that are recognized as subprime lenders to comprise its population of subprime mortgage loans.
As of December 31, 2007, the Company had not yet applied the loss mitigation approaches as outlined in the ASF Framework. The Company chose to adopt this framework during the first quarter of 2008 and does not expect that its application will impact the off-balance sheet status of the QSPEs that hold these subprime ARM loans.
LG ID_pb |
Thread abonnieren
