| Commitments and Contingencies | 12. Commitments and Contingencies
Legal Matters
The Company is subject to loss contingencies related to litigation, claims, investigations and legal and administrative cases and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company evaluates these contingencies based on information currently available, including advice of counsel. The Company establishes accruals for those matters when a loss contingency is considered probable and the related amount is reasonably estimable. Any accruals are periodically reviewed and may be adjusted as circumstances change. A portion of the Company’s exposure with respect to loss contingencies may be offset by applicable insurance coverage. In determining the amounts of any accruals or estimates of possible loss contingencies, the Company does not take into account the availability of insurance coverage, other than that provided by reinsurers in the insurance segment. When it is practicable, the Company estimates loss contingencies for possible litigation and claims, whether or not there is an accrued probable loss. When the Company is able to estimate such possible losses, and when it estimates that it is reasonably possible it could incur losses, in excess of amounts accrued, the Company is required to make a disclosure of the aggregate estimation. As available information changes, however, the matters for which the Company is able to estimate, as well as the estimates themselves will be adjusted, accordingly.
Assessments of litigation and claims exposures are difficult due to many factors that involve inherent unpredictability. Those factors include the following: the varying stages of the proceedings, particularly in the early stages; unspecified, unsupported, or uncertain damages; damages other than compensatory, such as punitive damages; a matter presenting meaningful legal uncertainties, including novel issues of law; multiple defendants and jurisdictions; whether discovery has begun or is complete; whether meaningful settlement discussions have commenced; and whether the claim involves a class action and if so, how the class is defined. As a result of some of these factors, the Company may be unable to estimate reasonably possible losses with respect to some or all of the pending and threatened litigation and claims asserted against the Company.
Following completion of Hilltop’s acquisition of SWS, several purported holders of shares of SWS common stock filed petitions in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware seeking appraisal for their shares pursuant to Section 262 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. These petitions were consolidated as In re SWS Group, Inc. , C.A. No. 10554-VCG. The consolidated matter represents a total of approximately 5.2 million shares of SWS common stock. The Company continues to vigorously defend this matter.
On or about November 2, 2012, FSC was named in a lawsuit pending in the state of Rhode Island Superior Court styled Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation v. Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, et al . The lawsuit relates to FSC’s role as financial advisor to the State of Rhode Island, specifically in connection with the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation’s issuance of $75 million in bonds to finance a loan to 38 Studios, LLC. 38 Studios, LLC ultimately failed to repay the loan and the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation is seeking recovery to repay the bonds it issued to make such loan. FSC intends to defend itself vigorously in this action.
The Company is involved in information-gathering requests and investigations (both formal and informal), as well as reviews, examinations and proceedings (collectively, “Inquiries”) by various governmental regulatory agencies, law enforcement authorities and self-regulatory bodies regarding certain of its businesses, business practices and policies, as well as the conduct of persons with whom it does business. Additional Inquiries will arise from time to time. In connection with those Inquiries, the Company receives document requests, subpoenas and other requests for information. The Inquiries, including the Inquiry described below, could develop into administrative, civil or criminal proceedings or enforcement actions that could result in consequences that have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows as a whole. Such consequences could include adverse judgments, findings, settlements, penalties, fines, orders, injunctions, restitution, or alterations in the Company’s business practices, and could result in additional expenses and collateral costs, including reputational damage.
As a part of an industry-wide Inquiry, PrimeLending received a subpoena from the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regarding mortgage-related practices, including those relating to origination practices for loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (the “FHA”). On August 20, 2014, PrimeLending received a Civil Investigative Demand from the United States Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) related to this Inquiry. According to the Civil Investigative Demand, the DOJ is conducting an investigation to determine whether PrimeLending has violated the False Claims Act in connection with originating and underwriting single-family residential mortgage loans insured by the FHA. No claims or demands have been asserted against PrimeLending. PrimeLending cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this investigation, and cannot make a reasonable estimate of potential liability, if any, at this time. PrimeLending continues to cooperate with the investigation.
While the final outcome of litigation and claims exposures or of any Inquiries is inherently unpredictable, management is currently of the opinion that the outcome of pending and threatened litigation and Inquiries will not have a material effect on the Company’s business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows as a whole. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is reasonably possible that an adverse outcome in any of the matters discussed above could be material to the Company’s business, consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows for any particular reporting period of occurrence.
Other Contingencies
The mortgage origination segment may be responsible for errors or omissions relating to its representations and warranties that each loan sold meets certain requirements, including representations as to underwriting standards and the validity of certain borrower representations in connection with the loan. If determined to be at fault, the mortgage origination segment either repurchases the affected loan from the investor or reimburses the investor’s losses. The mortgage origination segment has established an indemnification liability reserve for such probable losses.
Generally, the mortgage origination segment first becomes aware that an investor believes a loss has been incurred on a sold loan when it receives a written request from the investor to repurchase the loan or reimburse the investor’s losses. Upon completing its review of the investor’s request, the mortgage origination segment establishes a specific claims reserve for the loan if it concludes its obligation to the investor is both probable and reasonably estimable.
An additional reserve has been established for probable investor losses that may have been incurred, but not yet reported to the mortgage origination segment based upon a reasonable estimate of such losses. Factors considered in the calculation of this reserve include, but are not limited to, the total volume of loans sold exclusive of specific investor requests, actual investor claim settlements and the severity of estimated losses resulting from future claims, and the mortgage origination segment’s history of successfully curing defects identified in investor claim requests. While the mortgage origination segment’s sales contracts typically include borrower early payment default repurchase provisions, these provisions have not been a primary driver of investor claims to date, and therefore, are not a primary factor considered in the calculation of this reserve.
At September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the mortgage origination segment’s indemnification liability reserve totaled $19.2 million and $16.6 million, respectively. The provision for indemnification losses was $1.3 million and $1.1 million during the three months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and $3.5 million and $3.1 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The following tables provide for a rollforward of claims activity for loans put-back to the mortgage origination segment based upon an alleged breach of a representation or warranty with respect to a loan sold and related indemnification liability reserve activity (in thousands).
Representation and Warranty Specific Claims
Activity - Origination Loan Balance
Three Months Ended September 30,
Nine Months Ended September 30,
2016
2015
2016
2015
Balance, beginning of period
$
$
$
$
Claims made
Claims resolved with no payment
Repurchases
Indemnification payments
Balance, end of period
$
$
$
$
Indemnification Liability Reserve Activity
Three Months Ended September 30,
Nine Months Ended September 30,
2016
2015
2016
2015
Balance, beginning of period
$
$
$
$
Additions for new sales
Repurchases
Early payment defaults
Indemnification payments
Change in estimate
—
—
Balance, end of period
$
$
$
$
September 30,
December 31,
2016
2015
Reserve for Indemnification Liability:
Specific claims
$
$
Incurred but not reported claims
Total
$
$
Although management considers the total indemnification liability reserve to be appropriate, there may be changes in the reserve over time to address incurred losses, due to unanticipated adverse changes in the economy and historical loss patterns, discrete events adversely affecting specific borrowers or industries, and/or actions taken by institutions or investors. The impact of such matters is considered in the reserving process when probable and estimable.
In connection with the FNB Transaction, the Bank entered into two loss-share agreements with the FDIC that collectively cover $1.2 billion of loans and OREO acquired in the FNB Transaction. Pursuant to the loss-share agreements, the FDIC has agreed to reimburse the Bank the following amounts with respect to the covered assets: (i) 80% of net losses on the first $240.4 million of net losses incurred; (ii) 0% of net losses in excess of $240.4 million up to and including $365.7 million of net losses incurred; and (iii) 80% of net losses in excess of $365.7 million of net losses incurred. Net losses are defined as book value losses plus certain defined expenses incurred in the resolution of assets, less subsequent recoveries. Under the loss-share agreement for commercial assets, the amount of subsequent recoveries that are reimbursable to the FDIC for a particular asset is limited to book value losses and expenses actually billed plus any book value charge-offs incurred prior to the Bank Closing Date. There is no limit on the amount of subsequent recoveries reimbursable to the FDIC under the loss-share agreement for single family residential assets. The loss-share agreements for commercial and single family residential assets are in effect for 5 years and 10 years, respectively, from the Bank Closing Date and the loss recovery provisions to the FDIC are in effect for 8 years and 10 years, respectively, from the Bank Closing Date. As discussed in Note 6 to the consolidated financial statements, and in accordance with the loss-share agreements, the Bank may be required to make a “true-up” payment to the FDIC approximately ten years following the Bank Closing Date if its actual net realized losses over the life of the loss-share agreements are less than the FDIC’s initial estimate of losses on covered assets. The “true-up” payment is calculated using a defined formula set forth in the P&A Agreement. As of September 30, 2016, the Bank estimated that the sum of covered losses and reimbursable expenses subject to the loss-share agreements will exceed $240.4 million, but will not exceed $365.7 million. Unless actual plus projected covered losses and reimbursable expenses exceed $365.7 million, the Bank will not record additional amounts to the FDIC Indemnification Asset. As of September 30, 2016, the Bank had billed $148.5 million of covered net losses to the FDIC, of which 80%, or $118.8 million, were reimbursable under the loss-share agreements. As of September 30, 2016, the Bank had received aggregate reimbursements of $118.8 million from the FDIC, which represented reimbursable covered losses and expenses through June 30, 2016. |
