DBRS Confirms Ratings on Rochester Financing No.2 Plc

DBRS Ratings Limited (DBRS) confirmed its ratings of the notes issued by Rochester Financing No.2 Plc (the Issuer) as follows:

-- Class A at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (sf)
-- Class C at A (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (sf)
-- Class E at BB (high) (sf)
-- Class F at BB (low) (sf)

The ratings of the Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E and Class F notes (together, the Rated Notes) address the timely payment of interest and ultimate payment of principal on or before the legal final maturity date.

The rating actions follow an annual review of the transaction and are based on the following considerations:
-- Portfolio performance, in terms of delinquencies, defaults and losses, as of the September 2018 payment date.
-- Portfolio default rate (PD), loss given default (LGD) and expected loss assumptions on the remaining receivables.
-- Current available credit enhancement (CE) to the Rated Notes to cover the expected losses at their respective rating levels.

The Issuer is a securitisation of U.K. non-conforming residential mortgages originated by DB UK Bank Limited (DB U.K.), Money Partners Limited and Edeus Mortgage Creators Limited. The mortgage portfolio was purchased from DB U.K. and Odin Mortgages Limited by Rochester Mortgages Limited, wholly owned by OneSavings Bank (OSB). OSB retains a material net economic interest of no less than 5% of the transaction through holding randomly selected mortgage loans, which would otherwise have been securitised. OSB act as Master Servicer. Day-to-day servicing is delegated to Target Servicing Limited and Home Loan Management acts as the Back-Up Servicer for the transaction.

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE
As of September 2018, two- to three-month arrears represented 3.0% of the outstanding portfolio balance, up from 2.4% in September 2017. The 90+ delinquency ratio was 6.4%, up from 3.9% in September 2017. The cumulative loss ratio was 0.2%.

PORTFOLIO ASSUMPTIONS
DBRS conducted a loan-by-loan analysis of the remaining pool of receivables and updated its base case PD and LGD assumptions to 25.5% and 19.0% from 21.7% and 19.3%, respectively.

CREDIT ENHANCEMENT
CE is provided by subordination of the junior classes and a General Reserve. As of the September 2018 payment date, Class A CE was 43.6%, up from 32.0% at the DBRS initial rating; Class B CE was 32.2%, up from 23.3%; Class C CE was 25.7%, up from 18.3%; Class D CE was 20.2%, up from 14.0%; Class E CE was 15.7%, up from 10.5%; and Class F CE was 12.7%, up from 8.3% at the DBRS initial rating.

The General Reserve covers shortfalls in senior fees, interest on the Rated Notes, and principal via the Principal Deficiency Legers (PDLs) on the Rated Notes. The target balance of the General Reserve is equal to 3.0% of the initial Rated Notes balance minus the Liquidity Reserve target amount. As the Liquidity Reserve amortises, the size of the General Reserve increases through available excess spread. At the September 2018 payment date, the General Reserve was at its target level of GBP 5.7 million.

The Liquidity Reserve is sized at 2.0% of the outstanding balance of the Class A to D notes. The Liquidity Reserve covers shortfalls in senior fees and interest on the Class A to D notes. Payment on the Class B, C and D notes is subject to the PDL for each class of notes being less than 25.0% of the outstanding Class balance. At the September 2018 payment date, the Liquidity Reserve was at its target level of GBP 4.8 million.

The Class E and F notes benefit from a Junior Liquidity Reserve equal to 0.5% of the Class A to F notes. Support to the Class F notes is subject to the PDL being less than 75.0% of the outstanding Class Balance. At the September 2018 payment date, the Junior Liquidity Reserve was at its target level of GBP 1.6 million.

Elavon Financial Services DAC, U.K. Branch (Elavon) acts as the account bank for the transaction. Based on the DBRS private rating of Elavon, the downgrade provisions outlined in the transaction documents, and structural mitigants, DBRS considers the risk arising from the exposure to Elavon to be consistent with the ratings assigned to the notes, as described in DBRS's "Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.

Notes:
All figures are in British pound sterling unless otherwise noted.

The principal methodology applicable to the ratings is: “Master European Structured Finance Surveillance Methodology”. DBRS has applied the principal methodology consistently and conducted a review of the transaction in accordance with the principal methodology.

A review of the transaction legal documents was not conducted as the legal documents have remained unchanged since the most recent rating action.

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 “Appendix C: The Impact of Sovereign Ratings on Other DBRS Credit Ratings” of the “Rating Sovereign Governments” methodology at: http://dbrs.com/research/333487/rating-sovereign-governments.pdf.

The sources of data and information used for these ratings include investor reports and loan-level data provided by U.S. Bank Trustees Limited.

DBRS did not rely upon third-party due diligence in order to conduct its analysis. At the time of the initial rating, 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 last rating action on this transaction took place on 18 December 2017, when DBRS confirmed its ratings of the Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E and Class F notes.

The lead analyst responsibilities for this transaction have been transferred to Clare Wootton.

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

To assess the impact of changing the transaction parameters on the rating, DBRS considered the following stress scenarios as compared with the parameters used to determine the rating (the “Base Case”):
-- DBRS expected a lifetime base case PD and LGD for the pool based on a review of the current assets. Adverse changes to asset performance may cause stresses to base case assumptions and therefore have a negative effect on credit ratings.
-- The base case PD and LGD of the current pool of loans for the Issuer are 25.5% and 19.0%, respectively.
-- The Risk Sensitivity overview below illustrates the ratings expected if the PD and LGD increase by a certain percentage over the base case assumption. For example, if the LGD increases by 50%, the rating of the Class A notes would be expected to fall to AA (high) (sf), assuming no change in the PD. If the PD increases by 50%, the rating of the Class A notes would be expected to fall to AA (low) (sf), assuming no change in the LGD. Furthermore, if both the PD and LGD increase by 50%, the rating of the Class A notes would be expected to fall to A (low) (sf).

Class A Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of AAA (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of AA (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of AAA (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of AA (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of AA (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)

Class B Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of AA (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of A (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (low) (sf)

Class C Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)

Class D Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (low) (sf)

Class E Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)

Class F Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (low)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (low)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of B (high)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)

For further information on DBRS historic 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: Clare Wootton, Senior Financial Analyst
Rating Committee Chair: Alfonso Candelas, Senior Vice President
Initial Rating Date: 26 February 2016

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
-- Master European Structured Finance Surveillance Methodology
-- Operational Risk Assessment for European Structured Finance Servicers
-- European RMBS Insight Methodology
-- European RMBS Insight: U.K. Addendum
-- Interest Rate Stresses for European Structured Finance Transactions

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.

For more information on this credit or on this industry, visit www.dbrs.com or contact us at info@dbrs.com.