Well Amex declines to answer Securitisation Question

[angry cat]

They are hardly going to admit it, are they.

 

It is up to them to prove that the account has not been securitized and not to play semantics!

[angry cat]

No Point just asking though;

they must prove that the account has not been securitized, in the form of a notarised document, duly stamped and signed (by a Notary Public) and

counter signed by their Company Secretary.

 

Not the time to fiddle faddle about, do it under CPR 31.16.

 

AC

[angry cat]

The rules differ here in the UK;

read and enjoy:

 

http://www.jura.uni-frankfurt.de/ifawz1/baums/Bilder_und_Daten/Arbeitspapiere/a0294.pdf

[angry cat]

different rules apply here in the UK, to that of the US!

[angry cat]

In the UK, there are generally three methods of transferring a receivable, novation,

assignment and sub-participation50. Since novation (essentially a re-creation of the

obligation) requires the consent and cooperation of all three parties - the SPV, the

originator and the account debtor - it's infrequently done51. Therefore this method of

transfer will not be discussed here any further.

There are two methods of transferring by assignment. They are legal and equitable

assignmet. Legal assignment seems at first glance ideal for asset securitization, since the

consequence of a legal assignment is that the whole and beneficial title is transferred to the

SPV, leaving little doubt that the transaction is a "true sale"52. Legal assignment, however,

includes a statutory requirement to give written notice to the account debtor53. This notice

requirement can pose problems for a potential asset securitizer because it is

administratively cumbersome, and because the securitizing institution may not wish to let

their account debtors know that their receivables have been financed, because it gives the

wrong impression54.

Equitable assigment may prove an attractive alternative to legal assignment, since under

English law, an equitable assignment would qualify as a "true sale" and would not require

notice to the account debtor55. There are several disadvantages, however, to using

equitable assignment as opposed to legal assignment56. First, without notice, the account

debtor can discharge the receivable by payment to the originator57. Second, the SPV is

subject to any set-off which the account debtor might obtain against the originator, both

before and after transfer58. Third, there remains the possibility that a later sale of the SPV's

receivable to a bona-fide purchaser would defeat the SPV's interest in such receivable59.

Fourth and finally, the SPV procedurally would not be able to sue directly, it must join the

originator in any legal proceeding60.

The final method for transferring receivables."

 

We know already that block of debt are being sold through Dublin and mainly equitable assignment.

 

AC

[angry cat]

Amex; looks like the first securitization of card receivables was in 1992!

 

Amex plans card-backed bond issue. (American Express Co., credit card receivables) | Article from American Banker | HighBeam Research

[angry cat]

Yes BRW,

Incidentally MBNA charged off my account in $USD!

 

Nice little read for you all with lots of Links:

Fiducitation - Credit Card Securitization

[angry cat]

It is not sufficient to ask, has the account been securitized;

they must prove that it has not been securitized!

 

AC

[angry cat]

Ah Yes,

Chester Trading Standards;

MBNA & AMEX!!!!

 

AC

[angry cat]

I asked them if my account had been securitised, and they just refused to answer, by saying, basically, its none of your business!

 

Alan

 

To Reiterate:

 

The way to go about this, is not to ask them;

has the account been securitized?

Because, they will simply say; NO or it is None of your business.

 

Far better, to request proof, in the form of a notarised document, counter signed by the company secretary, that the account has NOT been securitized.

 

AC

[angry cat]

This sounds like a plan AC:D However, would they say NO outright if it wasnt true.. just in case they got tripped up in court:cool:

 

CB, by requesting a stamped and sealed certificate that has been signed by a 'notary public' stating that the account has not/never been securitized, puts the matter onto a legal footing.

 

AC

Edited June 30, 2009 by angry cat
spelling

[angry cat]

I dont see why they would possibly respond to this though, surely they could dismiss this request on the grouds of costs alone?

 

S.

 

Generally, a notary public charges approx. £80 fee, hardly an immense amount of money.

 

The point is, by making this request one is demanding proof that the account has NOT been securitized.

 

If the party concerned fails to respond, that is their problem, because the request has been recorded within ones file of papers.

 

If the party again refuses to respond under a Part 31.16;

one could only presume that the account has indeed been securitized!

 

What is the old saying?

Silence is Consent.

 

AC

[angry cat]

My Pleasure, Shadow:)

 

AC

[angry cat]

You've taken my question out of context.. I was referring to using a notary public.

 

S.

 

A Notary is an officer of the law who holds an internationally recognised public office. The duty and function of a Notary is to prepare, attest, authenticate and certify deeds and other documents, for use anywhere in the world. His signature and official seal renders them acceptable, as proof of the matter attested by him, to the judicial or other public authorities in the country where they are to be used.

 

AC

[angry cat]

Not sure why you are confused S.

 

I simply posted up a description about Notary Public's, for any members who may be unaware what a 'Notary' is used for.

 

AC

[angry cat]

Sorry!

 

only trying to assist:)

 

AC

[angry cat]

Regarding Securitisation, has anyone looked at MBNA doing this both in the past and now they are owned by Bank of America

 

Yes!

 

MBNA Securitized Credit Cards.

[angry cat]

Found this PDF of a letter from CEO of MBNA to the US SEC telling them how proud MBNA are to have securitized $146Bn of managed assets (ie: our credit card debts). Does this count?

 

http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s72104/wright071204.pdf

 

Thanks for that retap-falco!

 

AC

[angry cat]

Wilmington Trust SP Services:

Securitization.Net

 

AC

[angry cat]

http://www.isr-e.com/PDFs/ISR/ISR_DIRECTORY_2009.pdf

[angry cat]

ASF Conference Page: Sponsors at the ASF 2005

[angry cat]

Wilmington Trust Strikes Corporate Debt Trustee Deal with Bank of America

 

Note Link buy the MBNA debts through Wilmington Trust SP! (plus others)

 

Company Name: Asset Link Capital (Holdings) Limited

Business Description: A group engaged in comprise the collection of charged-off consumer receivables.

Sectors: Support Services

Cost of Sales: £32.1m

Parent Company: WILMINGTON TRUST SP SERVICES (LONDON) LIMITED

 

Also known as BCT Conduit Limited

[angry cat]

isn't all this notarised document stuff colony-law?

 

Colony-Law?

 

Notary Public's pre-date the colonies...

 

 

Notaries are still appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and are regulated by the Archbishop’s Court of Faculties.

 

AC

[angry cat]

There are approximately 900 Notary Publics in England and Wales that are recorded with the Scriveners Society.

 

It is true that Notary Publics are often used in relation to overseas matters but they are also used for UK to verify facts in relation to Banking and Shipping etc...

 

I have personally used the services of a Notary myself, several times.

 

Kraken, your comment re: the colonies made me smile;

Amex is based in the 'colonies' and bucket loads of toxic debt has been securitized (securitised) from the colonies, through places such as the Cayman Islands, the Channel Islands and The Republic of Ireland (Eire) etc.

 

AC