DBRS Finalises Provisional Ratings on Notes Issued by NewDay Partnership Funding 2017-1 plc

DBRS Ratings Limited (DBRS) finalised provisional ratings on the Notes (the Notes) issued by NewDay Partnership Funding 2017-1 plc as follows:

-- AAA (sf) on the Class A Notes
-- AAA (sf) on the Class B Notes
-- AA (high) (sf) on the Class C Notes
-- A (sf) on the Class D Notes
-- BBB (sf) on the Class E Notes
-- B (sf) on the Class F Notes

The rating of the Class A Notes addresses the timely payment of interest and ultimate payment of principal by the final maturity date. The ratings of the Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E and Class F Notes address the ultimate payment of interest and principal by the final maturity date.

The Notes are backed by credit card, store card and instalment credit loan receivables originated by NewDay Ltd, the Originator, in the United Kingdom.

The ratings are based on the considerations listed below:
-- The sufficiency of available credit enhancement in the form of subordination (25.9% for the Class A Notes, 16.1% for the Class B Notes, 8.7% for the Class C Notes, 5.0% for the Class D Notes, 2.1% for the Class E Notes and 0.5% for the Class F Notes), a liquidity reserve and excess spread.
-- The ability of the transaction’s structure and triggers to withstand stressed cash flow assumptions and repay the Notes in full according to the terms of the transaction documents.
-- The Originator and (if any) its delegates’ capabilities of performing activities with respect to originations, underwriting, cash management, data processing and servicing.
-- The legal structure and presence of legal opinions addressing the assignment of the assets to the Receivables Trustee and the consistency with DBRS’s “Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions” methodology.

The transaction cash flow structure was analysed in DBRS’s proprietary cash flow tool.

Notes:
All figures are in GBP unless otherwise noted.

The principal methodology applicable to the ratings is “Rating European Consumer and Commercial Asset-Backed Securitisations”.

DBRS has applied the principal methodology consistently and conducted a review of the transaction in accordance with the principal methodology.

An asset and a cashflow analysis were both conducted.

Other methodologies referenced in this transaction are listed at the end of this press release. These may be found on www.dbrs.com at: http://www.dbrs.com/about/methodologies.

For a more detailed discussion of the sovereign risk impact on Structured Finance ratings, please refer to DBRS commentary “The Effect of Sovereign Risk on Securitisations in the Euro Area” on: http://www.dbrs.com/industries/bucket/id/10036/name/commentaries/.

The sources of data and information used for these ratings include performance data relating to the receivables provided by the Originator directly. DBRS received monthly dynamic historical performance data and static performance data for the entire book and sub-portfolios of each affiliated retailer in respect of receivables balances, payment rates, yield, purchases (from January 2007 to July 2017), delinquencies (from December 2007 to July 2017), recoveries (from January 2012 to July 2017) and charge-offs (from July 2009 to July 2017). Furthermore, updated stratification tables were provided for the securitised pool.

DBRS did not rely upon third-party due diligence in order to conduct its analysis.

At the time of the rating finalisation DBRS was supplied with third-party assessments. However, this did not impact the rating analysis.

DBRS considers the data and information available to it for the purposes of providing these ratings to be of satisfactory quality.

DBRS does not audit or independently verify the data or information it receives in connection with the rating process.

The ratings concern newly issued financial instruments. These are the first DBRS ratings on these financial instruments.

This is the first rating action since the Initial Rating Date.

Information regarding DBRS ratings, including definitions, policies and methodologies, is available on www.dbrs.com.

To assess the impact of changing the transaction parameters on the rating, DBRS considered the following stress scenarios, as compared to the parameters used to determine the rating (the “Base Case”):

-- Charge-Off Rate Used: Base case of 5.0%, a 25% and 50% increase on the base case.
-- Principal Payment Rate Used: Base case of 20.5%, a 25% and 50% decrease of the base case.
-- Yield Rate Used: Base Case of 19.0%, a 25% and 50% decrease on the base case.

DBRS concludes that for the Notes:

-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class A Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class A Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class A Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class A Notes to AA (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class A Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class A Notes to AA (high) (sf).

-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class B Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class B Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class B Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class B Notes to BBB (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AAA (sf) rating of the Class B Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class B Notes to A (sf).

-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AA (high) (sf) rating of the Class C Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the AA (high) (sf) rating of the Class C Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class C Notes to A (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class C Notes to BB (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class C Notes to A (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class C Notes to BBB (sf).

-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the A (sf) rating of the Class D Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the A (sf) rating of the Class D Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class D Notes to A (low) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class D Notes to BB (low) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class D Notes to BBB (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class D Notes to BB (high) (sf).

-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would not result in a downgrade of the BBB (sf) rating of the Class E Notes.
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class E Notes to BB (low) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class E Notes to BB (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class E Notes to below B (sf).

-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class E Notes to BB (high) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class E Notes to BB (low) (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class F Notes to below B (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Payment Rate constant, a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class F Notes to below B (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class F Notes to below B (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Charge-Off Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical decrease of the base case Yield Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class F Notes to below B (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 25% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 25%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class F Notes to B (sf).
-- Whilst holding the Yield Rate constant, a hypothetical decrease of the base case Payment Rate by 50% and a hypothetical increase of the base case Charge-Off Rate by 50%, ceteris paribus, would result in a downgrade of the Class F Notes to below B (sf).

For further information on DBRS historical default rates published by the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA”) in a central repository, see:
http://cerep.esma.europa.eu/cerep-web/statistics/defaults.xhtml.

Ratings assigned by DBRS Ratings Limited are subject to EU and US regulations only.

Lead Analyst: Kevin Chiang, Senior Vice President
Rating Committee Chair: Christian Aufsatz, Managing Director Initial Rating Date: 29 September 2017

DBRS Ratings Limited
20 Fenchurch Street, 31st Floor, London EC3M 3BY United Kingdom
Registered in England and Wales: No. 7139960

The rating methodologies used in the analysis of this transaction can be found at: http://www.dbrs.com/about/methodologies.

-- Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions
-- Rating European Consumer and Commercial Asset-Backed Securitisations
-- Operational Risk Assessment for European Structured Finance Servicers
-- Operational Risk Assessment for European Structured Finance Originators
-- Unified Interest Rate Model for European Securitisations

A description of how DBRS analyses structured finance transactions and how the methodologies are collectively applied can be found at: http://www.dbrs.com/research/278375.