complaint seeks, among other relief, specific performance of the loan breach remedy procedures in the transaction documents, unspecified damages and interest. On August 22, 2013, the Firm filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which was granted in part and denied in part on November 24, 2014. Based on currently available information, the Firm believes that it could incur a loss in this action of up to approximately $240 million, the total original unpaid balance of the mortgage loans for which the Firm received repurchase demands that it did not repurchase, pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs, but plaintiff is seeking to expand the number of loans at issue and the possible range of loss could increase.
On September 19, 2014, Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (“FGIC”) filed a complaint against the Firm in the Supreme Court of NY, styledFinancial Guaranty Insurance Company v. Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. et al. relating to a securitization issued by Basket of Aggregated Residential NIMS2007-1 Ltd. The complaint asserts claims for breach of contract and alleges, among other things, that the net interest margin securities (“NIMS”) in the trust breached various representations and warranties. FGIC issued a financial guaranty policy with respect to certain notes that had an original balance of approximately $475 million. The complaint seeks, among other relief, specific performance of the NIMS breach remedy procedures in the transaction documents, unspecified damages, reimbursement of certain payments made pursuant to the transaction documents, attorneys’ fees and interest. On November 24, 2014, the Firm filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which the court denied on January 19, 2017. On February 24, 2017, the Firm filed a notice of appeal of the denial of its motion to dismiss the complaint and perfected its appeal on November 22, 2017. Based on currently available information, the Firm believes that it could incur a loss in this action of up to approximately $126 million, the unpaid balance of these notes, pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs, as well as claim payments that FGIC has made and will make in the future.
On September 23, 2014, FGIC filed a complaint against the Firm in the Supreme Court of NY styledFinancial Guaranty Insurance Company v. Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. et al. relating to the Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust2007-NC4. The complaint asserts claims for breach of contract and fraudulent inducement and alleges, among other things, that the loans in the trust breached various representations and warranties and defendants made untrue statements and material omissions to induce FGIC to issue a financial guaranty policy on certain classes of certificates that had an original balance of approximately $876 million. The complaint seeks, among other relief, specific performance of
the loan breach remedy procedures in the transaction documents, compensatory, consequential and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees and interest. On January 23, 2017, the court denied the Firm’s motion to dismiss the complaint. On February 24, 2017, the Firm filed a notice of appeal of the court’s order and perfected its appeal on November 22, 2017. Based on currently available information, the Firm believes that it could incur a loss in this action of up to approximately $277 million, the total original unpaid balance of the mortgage loans for which the Firm received repurchase demands from a certificate holder and FGIC that the Firm did not repurchase, pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs, as well as claim payments that FGIC has made and will make in the future. In addition, plaintiff is seeking to expand the number of loans at issue and the possible range of loss could increase.
On January 23, 2015, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, in its capacity as trustee, filed a complaint against the Firm styledDeutsche Bank National Trust Company solely in its capacity as Trustee of the Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust2007-NC4 v. Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Holdings LLC asSuccessor-by-Merger to Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Inc., and Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc., pending in the Supreme Court of NY. The complaint asserts claims for breach of contract and alleges, among other things, that the loans in the trust, which had an original principal balance of approximately $1.05 billion, breached various representations and warranties. The complaint seeks, among other relief, specific performance of the loan breach remedy procedures in the transaction documents, compensatory, consequential, rescissory, equitable and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, costs and other related expenses, and interest. On December 11, 2015, the court granted in part and denied in part the Firm’s motion to dismiss the complaint. On February 11, 2016, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of that order, and the appeal was fully briefed on August 19, 2016. Based on currently available information, the Firm believes that it could incur a loss in this action of up to approximately $277 million, the total original unpaid balance of the mortgage loans for which the Firm received repurchase demands from a certificate holder and a monoline insurer that the Firm did not repurchase, pluspre- and post-judgment interest, fees and costs, but plaintiff is seeking to expand the number of loans at issue and the possible range of loss could increase.
In matters styledCase number 15/3637 andCase number 15/4353, the Dutch Tax Authority (“Dutch Authority”) is challenging, in the District Court in Amsterdam, the priorset-off by the Firm of approximately €124 million (approximately $145 million) plus accrued interest of withholding tax