Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees

v2.4.1.9
Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees
3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2015
Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees [Abstract]  
Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees
NOTE 7 – Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees
 
Background

The Corporation securitizes first-lien residential mortgage loans generally in the form of RMBS guaranteed by the GSEs or by GNMA in the case of FHA-insured, VA-guaranteed and Rural Housing Service-guaranteed mortgage loans, and sells pools of first-lien residential mortgage loans in the form of whole loans. In addition, in prior years, legacy companies and certain subsidiaries sold pools of first-lien residential mortgage loans and home equity loans as private-label securitizations (in certain of these securitizations, monoline insurers or other financial guarantee providers insured all or some of the securities) or in the form of whole loans. In connection with these transactions, the Corporation or certain of its subsidiaries or legacy companies make or have made various representations and warranties. These representations and warranties, as set forth in the agreements, related to, among other things, the ownership of the loan, the validity of the lien securing the loan, the absence of delinquent taxes or liens against the property securing the loan, the process used to select the loan for inclusion in a transaction, the loan's compliance with any applicable loan criteria, including underwriting standards, and the loan's compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws. Breaches of these representations and warranties have resulted in and may continue to result in the requirement to repurchase mortgage loans or to otherwise make whole or provide other remedies to the GSEs, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) with respect to FHA-insured loans, VA, whole-loan investors, securitization trusts, monoline insurers or other financial guarantors (collectively, repurchases). In all such cases, subsequent to repurchasing the loan, the Corporation would be exposed to any credit loss on the repurchased mortgage loans after accounting for any mortgage insurance (MI) or mortgage guarantee payments that it may receive.

Subject to the requirements and limitations of the applicable sales and securitization agreements, these representations and warranties can be enforced by the GSEs, HUD, VA, the whole-loan investor, the securitization trustee or others as governed by the applicable agreement or, in certain first-lien and home equity securitizations where monoline insurers or other financial guarantee providers have insured all or some of the securities issued, by the monoline insurer or other financial guarantor, where the contract so provides. In the case of private-label securitizations, the applicable agreements may permit investors, which may include the GSEs, with sufficient holdings to direct or influence action by the securitization trustee. In the case of loans sold to parties other than the GSEs or GNMA, the Corporation believes the contractual liability to repurchase typically arises only if there is a breach of the representations and warranties that materially and adversely affects the interest of the investor, or investors, or of the monoline insurer or other financial guarantor (as applicable) in the loan. Contracts with the GSEs do not contain equivalent language. The Corporation believes that the longer a loan performs prior to default, the less likely it is that an alleged underwriting breach of representations and warranties would have a material impact on the loan's performance. Currently, the volume of unresolved repurchase claims from the FHA and VA for loans in GNMA-guaranteed securities is not significant because the claims are typically resolved promptly.

The liability for representations and warranties exposures and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss is based upon currently available information, significant judgment, and a number of factors and assumptions, including those discussed in Liability for Representations and Warranties and Corporate Guarantees in this Note, that are subject to change. Changes to any one of these factors could significantly impact the liability for representations and warranties exposures and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss and could have a material adverse impact on the Corporation's results of operations for any particular period. Given that these factors vary by counterparty, the Corporation analyzes representations and warranties obligations based on the specific counterparty, or type of counterparty, with whom the sale was made. For additional information, see Note 7 – Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Corporation's 2014 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Settlement Actions

The Corporation has vigorously contested any request for repurchase when it concludes that a valid basis for repurchase does not exist and will continue to do so in the future. However, in an effort to resolve these legacy mortgage-related issues, the Corporation has reached bulk settlements, including various settlements with the GSEs, including settlement amounts which have been significant, with counterparties in lieu of a loan-by-loan review process. These bulk settlements generally did not cover all transactions with the relevant counterparties or all potential claims that may arise, including in some instances securities law, fraud and servicing claims. The Corporation's liability in connection with the transactions and claims not covered by these settlements could be material to the Corporation's results of operations or cash flows for any particular reporting period. The Corporation may reach other settlements in the future if opportunities arise on terms it believes to be advantageous. However, there can be no assurance that the Corporation will reach future settlements or, if it does, that the terms of past settlements can be relied upon to predict the terms of future settlements. The following provides a summary of the settlement with Bank of New York Mellon (BNY Mellon), which remains subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions. For a discussion of other large settlement actions entered into by the Corporation in recent years, see Note 7 – Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Corporation's 2014 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Settlement with the Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee

On June 28, 2011, the Corporation, BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP (BAC HLS, which was subsequently merged with and into BANA in July 2011), and its Countrywide affiliates entered into a settlement agreement with BNY Mellon (BNY Mellon Settlement), as trustee (the Trustee), to resolve all outstanding and potential claims related to alleged representations and warranties breaches (including repurchase claims), substantially all historical loan servicing claims and certain other historical claims with respect to 525 Countrywide first-lien and five second-lien non-GSE residential mortgage-backed securitization trusts (the Covered Trusts) containing loans principally originated between 2004 and 2008 for which BNY Mellon acts as trustee or indenture trustee. The Covered Trusts had an original principal balance of approximately $424 billion, of which $409 billion was originated between 2004 and 2008, and total outstanding principal and unpaid principal balance of loans that had defaulted (collectively, unpaid principal balance) of approximately $220 billion at June 28, 2011.

The BNY Mellon Settlement provides for a cash payment of $8.5 billion to the Trustee for distribution to the Covered Trusts after final approval of the BNY Mellon Settlement. In addition, the Corporation is obligated to pay certain attorneys' fees and costs as well as all fees and expenses incurred by the Trustee related to obtaining final approval of the BNY Mellon Settlement and certain tax rulings.

On March 5, 2015, the New York Appellate Division, First Department issued an order unanimously approving the BNY Mellon Settlement in all respects. The deadline for further appeal has passed. The BNY Mellon Settlement remains subject to certain conditions, including that an Internal Revenue Service private letter ruling be obtained confirming that the settlement will not impact the real estate mortgage investment conduit tax status of the trusts. There can be no assurance as to when or whether such conditions to the BNY Mellon Settlement will be satisfied. If final approval is not obtained by December 31, 2015, the Corporation and Countrywide may withdraw from the BNY Mellon Settlement, if the Trustee consents. If final approval is not obtained, or if the Corporation and Countrywide withdraw from the BNY Mellon Settlement in accordance with its terms, the Corporation's future representations and warranties losses could be substantially different from existing accruals and the estimated range of possible loss over existing accruals described under Private-label Securitizations and Whole-loan Sales Experience in this Note.

Unresolved Repurchase Claims

Unresolved representations and warranties repurchase claims represent the notional amount of repurchase claims made by counterparties, typically the outstanding principal balance or the unpaid principal balance at the time of default. In the case of first-lien mortgages, the claim amount is often significantly greater than the expected loss amount due to the benefit of collateral and, in some cases, MI or mortgage guarantee payments. Claims received from a counterparty remain outstanding until the underlying loan is repurchased, the claim is rescinded by the counterparty or the representations and warranties claims with respect to the applicable trust are settled, and fully and finally released. When a claim is denied and the Corporation does not receive a response from the counterparty, the claim remains in the unresolved repurchase claims balance until resolution. Certain of the claims that have been received are duplicate claims which represent more than one claim outstanding related to a particular loan, typically as the result of bulk claims submitted without individual file reviews.

The table below presents unresolved repurchase claims at March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014. The unresolved repurchase claims include only claims where the Corporation believes that the counterparty has the contractual right to submit claims. For additional information, see Private-label Securitizations and Whole-loan Sales Experience in this Note.

Unresolved Repurchase Claims by Counterparty and Product Type
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
March 31
2015
 
December 31 2014 (1)
By counterparty
 
 
 
Private-label securitization trustees, whole-loan investors, including third-party securitization sponsors and other (2, 3)
$
27,816

 
$
24,489

Monolines (4)
1,546

 
1,546

GSEs
45

 
59

Total gross claims (3)
29,407

 
26,094

Duplicate claims (5)
(3,625
)
 
(3,248
)
Total unresolved repurchase claims by counterparty, net of duplicate claims
$
25,782

 
$
22,846

By product type
 
 
 
Prime loans
$
601

 
$
587

Alt-A
2,734

 
2,397

Home equity
2,649

 
2,485

Pay option
6,399

 
6,294

Subprime
16,276

 
14,121

Other
748

 
210

Total (3)
29,407

 
26,094

Duplicate claims (5)
(3,625
)
 
(3,248
)
Total unresolved repurchase claims by product type, net of duplicate claims
$
25,782

 
$
22,846


(1) 
The December 31, 2014 amounts have been updated to reflect additional claims submitted from a single monoline, currently pursuing litigation, served in the fourth quarter of 2014, and addressed by the Corporation in 2015 pursuant to an existing litigation schedule. For more information on bond insurance litigation, see Note 12 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Corporation's 2014 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
(2) 
The total notional amount of unresolved repurchase claims does not include repurchase claims related to the trusts covered by the BNY Mellon Settlement.
(3) 
Includes $14.2 billion and $14.1 billion of claims based on individual file reviews and $13.6 billion and $10.4 billion of claims submitted without individual file reviews at March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.
(4) 
At March 31, 2015, substantially all of the unresolved monoline claims are currently the subject of litigation with a single monoline insurer and predominately pertain to second-lien loans.
(5) 
Represents more than one claim outstanding related to a particular loan, typically as the result of bulk claims submitted without individual file reviews. The March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 amounts include approximately $3.3 billion and $2.9 billion of duplicate claims related to private-label investors submitted without individual loan file reviews.

During the three months ended March 31, 2015, the Corporation received $3.4 billion in new repurchase claims, including $3.2 billion of claims submitted without individual loan file reviews. During the three months ended March 31, 2015, $161 million in claims were resolved.

The continued increase in the notional amount of unresolved repurchase claims during the three months ended March 31, 2015 is primarily due to: (1) continued submission of claims by private-label securitization trustees, (2) the level of detail, support and analysis accompanying such claims, which impact overall claim quality and, therefore, claims resolution, (3) the lack of an established process to resolve disputes related to these claims, (4) the submission of claims where the Corporation believes the statute of limitations has expired under current law and (5) the submission of duplicate claims, often in multiple submissions, on the same loan. For example, claims submitted without individual file reviews generally lack the level of detail and analysis of individual loans found in other claims that is necessary to evaluate a claim. Absent any settlements, the Corporation expects unresolved repurchase claims related to private-label securitizations to continue to increase as such claims continue to be submitted and there is not an established process for the ultimate resolution of such claims on which there is a disagreement.

In addition to the unresolved repurchase claims in the Unresolved Repurchase Claims by Counterparty and Product Type table, the Corporation has received notifications indicating that the Corporation may owe indemnity obligations pertaining to loans for which the Corporation has not received a repurchase request from sponsors of third-party securitizations with whom the Corporation engaged in whole-loan transactions. These notifications totaled $2.0 billion at both March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.

The Corporation also from time to time receives correspondence purporting to raise representations and warranties breach issues from entities that do not have contractual standing or ability to bring such claims. The Corporation believes such communications to be procedurally and/or substantively invalid, and generally does not respond to such correspondence.

The presence of repurchase claims on a given trust, receipt of notices of indemnification obligations and receipt of other communications, as discussed above, are all factors that inform the Corporation's liability for obligations under representations and warranties and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss.

Government-sponsored Enterprises Experience

As a result of various bulk settlements with the GSEs, the Corporation has resolved substantially all outstanding and potential representations and warranties repurchase claims on whole loans sold by legacy Bank of America and Countrywide to FNMA and FHLMC through June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2009, respectively. After these settlements, the Corporation's exposure to representations and warranties liability for loans originated prior to 2009 and sold to the GSEs is limited to loans with an original principal balance of $18.3 billion and loans with certain defects excluded from the settlements that the Corporation does not believe will be material, such as certain specified violations of the GSEs' charters, fraud and title defects. As of March 31, 2015, of the $18.3 billion, approximately $15.9 billion in principal has been paid and $966 million in principal has defaulted or was severely delinquent. The notional amount of unresolved repurchase claims submitted by the GSEs was $31 million related to these vintages.

Private-label Securitizations and Whole-loan Sales Experience

In private-label securitizations, the applicable contracts contain provisions that investors meet certain presentation thresholds to direct a trustee to assert repurchase claims. However, in certain circumstances, the Corporation believes that trustees have presented repurchase claims without requiring investors to meet contractual voting rights thresholds. Continued high levels of new private-label claims are primarily related to repurchase requests received from trustees for private-label securitization transactions not included in the BNY Mellon Settlement.

A December 2013 decision by the New York Appellate Division, First Department held that, under New York law, which governs many RMBS trusts, the six-year statute of limitations starts to run at the time the representations and warranties are made, not the date when the repurchase demand was denied. That decision has been applied by the state and federal courts in several RMBS lawsuits in which the Corporation is not a party, resulting in the dismissal as untimely of claims involving representations and warranties made more than six years prior to the initiation of the lawsuit. Unless overturned by New York's highest appellate court, which has taken the case for review and has scheduled arguments for April 30, 2015, this decision would apply to representations and warranties claims and lawsuits brought against the Corporation where New York law governs. A significant amount of representations and warranties claims and/or lawsuits the Corporation has received or may receive involve representations and warranties claims where the statute of limitations has expired under this ruling and has not been tolled by agreement and which the Corporation therefore believes would be untimely. It is possible that in response to the statute of limitations rulings, parties seeking to pursue representations and warranties claims and/or lawsuits with respect to trusts where the statute of limitations for representations and warranties claims against the sponsor and/or issuer has run, may pursue alternate legal theories of recovery and/or assert claims against other contractual parties. For example, in 2014, institutional investors filed lawsuits against trustees alleging failure to pursue representations and warranties claims and servicer defaults based upon alleged contractual, statutory and tort theories of liability. The impact on the Corporation, if any, of such alternative legal theories or assertions is unclear.

The Corporation provided representations and warranties in connection with the sale of whole loans and the whole-loan investors may retain the right to make repurchase claims even when the loans were aggregated with other collateral into private-label securitizations sponsored by the whole-loan investors; in other third-party securitizations, the whole-loan investor's rights to enforce the representations and warranties were transferred to the securitization trustees. Private-label securitization investors generally do not have the contractual right to demand repurchase of loans directly or the right to access loan files directly. The majority of the repurchase claims that the Corporation has received and resolved outside of those from the GSEs and monolines are from third-party whole-loan investors. The Corporation reviews properly presented repurchase claims for these whole loans on a loan-by-loan basis. If, after the Corporation's review, it does not believe a claim is valid, it will deny the claim and generally indicate a reason for the denial. When the whole-loan investor agrees with the Corporation's denial of the claim, the whole-loan investor may rescind the claim. When there is disagreement as to the resolution of the claim, meaningful dialogue and negotiation between the parties are generally necessary to reach a resolution on an individual claim. When a claim has been denied and the Corporation does not hear from the counterparty for six months, the Corporation views these claims as inactive; however, they remain in the outstanding claims balance until resolution. In the case of private-label securitization trustees and third-party sponsors, there is currently no established process in place for the parties to reach a conclusion on an individual loan if there is a disagreement on the resolution of the claim. For more information on repurchase demands, see Unresolved Repurchase Claims in this Note.

At March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, for loans originated between 2004 and 2008, the notional amount of unresolved repurchase claims, net of duplicate claims, submitted by private-label securitization trustees, whole-loan investors, including third-party securitization sponsors, and others was $24.1 billion and $21.2 billion. These repurchase claims at March 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 include claims in the amount of $6.4 billion and $4.7 billion, net of duplicate claims, where the Corporation believes the statute of limitations has expired under current law, and $4.1 billion and $4.0 billion in claims, net of duplicate claims, related to loans in specific private-label securitization groups or tranches where the Corporation owns substantially all of the outstanding securities. The Corporation has performed an initial review with respect to substantially all of these claims and, although the Corporation does not believe a valid basis for repurchase has been established by the claimant, it considers such claims activity in the computation of its liability for representations and warranties.

Monoline Insurers Experience

For a description of the Corporation's experience with monoline insurers, see Note 7 – Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees and Note 12 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Corporation's 2014 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Open Mortgage Insurance Rescission Notices

In addition to repurchase claims, the Corporation receives notices from mortgage insurance companies of claim denials, cancellations or coverage rescission (collectively, MI rescission notices). For more information, see Note 7 – Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Corporation's 2014 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Liability for Representations and Warranties and Corporate Guarantees

The liability for representations and warranties and corporate guarantees is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet and the related provision is included in mortgage banking income in the Consolidated Statement of Income. The liability for representations and warranties is established when those obligations are both probable and reasonably estimable.

The Corporation's liability and corresponding estimated range of possible loss at March 31, 2015 for obligations under representations and warranties given to the GSEs considers a number of factors. These include the Corporation's experience related to actual defaults, projected future defaults, historical loss experience, estimated home prices and other economic conditions. In addition, the liability for representations and warranties and corporate guarantees and corresponding estimated range of possible loss consider such factors as the number of payments made by the borrower prior to default as well as certain other assumptions and judgmental factors.

The Corporation's non-GSE representations and warranties liability and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss at March 31, 2015 considers, among other things, implied repurchase experience based on the BNY Mellon Settlement, adjusted to reflect differences between the Covered Trusts and the remainder of the population of private-label securitizations, and assumes that the conditions to the BNY Mellon Settlement will be met. Since the non-GSE securitization trusts that were included in the BNY Mellon Settlement differ from those that were not included in the BNY Mellon Settlement, the Corporation adjusted the repurchase experience implied in the settlement in order to determine the non-GSE representations and warranties liability and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss. The judgmental adjustments made include consideration of the differences in the mix of products in the subject securitizations, loan originator, likelihood of claims expected, the differences in the number of payments that the borrower has made prior to default and the sponsor of the securitizations. Where relevant, the Corporation also considers more recent experience, such as claim activity, notification of potential indemnification obligations, its experience with various counterparties, recent court decisions related to the statute of limitations as summarized above and other facts and circumstances, such as bulk settlements, as the Corporation believes appropriate.

A factor that impacts the non-GSE representations and warranties liability and the portion of the estimated range of possible loss corresponding to non-GSE representations and warranties exposures is the likelihood that claims will be presented, which is impacted by a number of factors, including contractual provisions that investors meet certain presentation thresholds under the non-GSE securitization agreements. A securitization trustee may investigate or demand repurchase on its own action, and most agreements contain a presentation threshold, for example 25 percent of the voting rights per trust, that allows investors to declare a servicing event of default under certain circumstances or to request certain action, such as requesting loan files, that the trustee may choose to accept and follow, exempt from liability, provided the trustee is acting in good faith. If there is an uncured servicing event of default and the trustee fails to bring suit during a 60-day period, then, under most agreements, investors may file suit. In addition to this, most agreements allow investors to direct the securitization trustee to investigate loan files or demand the repurchase of loans if security holders hold a specified percentage, for example, 25 percent, of the voting rights of each tranche of the outstanding securities. However, in certain circumstances the Corporation believes that trustees have presented repurchase claims without requiring investors to meet contractual voting rights thresholds. The population of private-label securitizations included in the BNY Mellon Settlement encompasses almost all Countrywide first-lien private-label securitizations including loans originated principally between 2004 and 2008. For the remainder of the population of private-label securitizations, claimants have come forward on certain securitizations and the Corporation believes it is probable that other claimants may continue to come forward with claims that meet the contractual requirements of other securitizations. For more information on the representations and warranties liability and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss, see Estimated Range of Possible Loss in this Note.

The table below presents a rollforward of the liability for representations and warranties and corporate guarantees.

Representations and Warranties and Corporate Guarantees
 
 
 
 
Three Months Ended March 31
(Dollars in millions)
2015
 
2014
Liability for representations and warranties and corporate guarantees, January 1
$
12,081

 
$
13,282

Additions for new sales
1

 
3

Net reductions
(174
)
 
(52
)
Provision
84

 
178

Liability for representations and warranties and corporate guarantees, March 31
$
11,992

 
$
13,411



The representations and warranties liability represents the Corporation's best estimate of probable incurred losses as of March 31, 2015. However, it is reasonably possible that future representations and warranties losses may occur in excess of the amounts recorded for these exposures. Although the Corporation has not recorded any representations and warranties liability for certain potential private-label securitization and whole-loan exposures where the applicable statute of limitations has expired under current law, these exposures are considered in the determination of the estimated range of possible loss.
Estimated Range of Possible Loss

The Corporation currently estimates that the range of possible loss for representations and warranties exposures could be up to $4 billion over existing accruals at March 31, 2015. The estimated range of possible loss reflects principally non-GSE exposures. It represents a reasonably possible loss, but does not represent a probable loss, and is based on currently available information, significant judgment and a number of assumptions that are subject to change.

The liability for representations and warranties exposures and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss do not consider losses related to servicing (except as such losses are included as potential costs of the BNY Mellon Settlement), including foreclosure and related costs, fraud, indemnity, or claims (including for RMBS) related to securities law or monoline insurance litigations. Losses with respect to one or more of these matters could be material to the Corporation's results of operations or cash flows for any particular reporting period.

Future provisions and/or ranges of possible loss for representations and warranties may be significantly impacted if actual experiences are different from the Corporation's assumptions in predictive models, including, without limitation, ultimate resolution of the BNY Mellon Settlement, estimated repurchase rates, estimated MI rescission rates, economic conditions, estimated home prices, consumer and counterparty behavior, the applicable statute of limitations and a variety of other judgmental factors. Adverse developments with respect to one or more of the assumptions underlying the liability for representations and warranties and the corresponding estimated range of possible loss could result in significant increases to future provisions and/or the estimated range of possible loss. Finally, although the Corporation believes that the representations and warranties typically given in non-GSE transactions are less rigorous than those given in GSE transactions, the Corporation does not have sufficient experience resolving loan-level claims in non-GSE transactions to measure the impact of these differences on the probability that a loan will be required to be repurchased.

Cash Payments

The Loan Repurchases and Indemnification Payments table presents first-lien and home equity loan repurchases and indemnification payments made by the Corporation to reimburse the investor or securitization trust for losses they incurred, and to resolve repurchase claims. Cash paid for loan repurchases includes the unpaid principal balance of the loan plus past due interest. The amount of loss for loan repurchases is reduced by the fair value of the underlying loan collateral. The repurchase of loans and indemnification payments related to first-lien and home equity repurchase claims generally resulted from material breaches of representations and warranties related to the loans' material compliance with the applicable underwriting standards, including borrower misrepresentation, credit exceptions without sufficient compensating factors and non-compliance with underwriting procedures. The actual representations and warranties made in a sales transaction and the resulting repurchase and indemnification activity can vary by transaction or investor. Loan repurchases or indemnification payments related to first-lien residential mortgages primarily involved the GSEs while repurchases or indemnification payments related to home equity loans primarily involved the monoline insurers.

Loan Repurchases and Indemnification Payments (excluding cash payments for settlements)
 
Three Months Ended March 31
 
2015
 
2014
(Dollars in millions)
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
 
Cash Paid
for
Repurchases
 
Loss
 
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
 
Cash Paid
for
Repurchases
 
Loss
First-lien
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Repurchases
$
35

 
$
38

 
$
10

 
$
46

 
$
51

 
$
12

Indemnification payments
99

 
23

 
23

 
101

 
28

 
28

Total first-lien
134

 
61

 
33

 
147

 
79

 
40

Home equity, indemnification payments
4

 
4

 
4

 
11

 
11

 
11

Total first-lien and home equity
$
138

 
$
65

 
$
37

 
$
158

 
$
90

 
$
51