DBRS Upgrades and Confirms Ratings of Towd Point Mortgage Funding 2018-Auburn 12 Plc

DBRS Ratings Limited (DBRS) took the following rating actions on the notes issued by Towd Point Mortgage Funding 2018-Auburn 12 Plc (the Issuer):

-- Class A notes confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Class B notes confirmed at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class C notes upgraded to A (sf) from A (low) (sf)
-- Class D notes upgraded to BBB (sf) from BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class E notes confirmed at BB (low) (sf)

The rating on the Class A notes addresses the timely payment of interest and ultimate payment of principal on or before the legal final maturity date. The ratings on the Class B, Class C, Class D and Class E notes address the ultimate payment of interest (minus any net weighted-average coupon additional amounts) and 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 analytical considerations:

-- Portfolio performance, in terms of delinquencies, defaults and losses.
-- Portfolio default rate (PD), loss given default (LGD) and expected loss assumptions on the remaining receivables.
-- Current available credit enhancement to the notes to cover the expected losses at their respective rating levels.

The Issuer is a bankruptcy-remote special-purpose vehicle incorporated in the United Kingdom (U.K.). The issued notes have been used to fund the purchase of U.K. buy-to-let and owner-occupied residential mortgage loans originated by Capital Home Loans Limited (CHL). The portfolio is serviced by CHL, with Homeloan Management Limited in place as the backup servicer.

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE
As of the end of April 2019, loans that were two- to three-months in arrears represented 0.0% of the outstanding portfolio balance and the 90+ delinquency ratio was 0.1%. Realised losses represent 0.1% of the original portfolio balance, with a cumulative recovery rate of 68.1%.

PORTFOLIO ASSUMPTIONS
DBRS conducted a loan-by-loan analysis of the remaining pool of receivables and has updated its base case PD and LGD assumptions to 4.2% and 22.2%, respectively.

CREDIT ENHANCEMENT
As of the May 2019 payment date, credit enhancement to the Class A, B, C, D and E notes were at 18.2%, 11.1%, 8.0%, 5.3% and 2.7% respectively, up from 16.9%, 10.3%, 7.5%, 5.0% and 2.6% at the DBRS initial rating. Credit enhancement in each case is provided by subordination of junior classes.

HSBC Bank plc acts as the account bank for the transaction. Based on the DBRS private rating of HSBC Bank plc, the downgrade provisions outlined in the transaction documents, and other mitigating factors inherent in the transaction structure, DBRS considers the risk arising from the exposure to the account bank to be consistent with the rating assigned to the Class A notes, as described in DBRS's "Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.

The transaction structure was analysed in Intex DealMaker.

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

The principal methodology applicable to the ratings is the “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 CHL.

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

At the time of the initial ratings, 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 15 August 2018, when DBRS finalised its provisional ratings on the notes.

The lead analyst responsibilities for this transaction have been transferred to Andrew Lynch.

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 4.2% and 22.2%, 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 (high) (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 (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 (high) (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 AA (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of AA (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (sf)

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

Class C Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (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 BBB (low) (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 BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (high) (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 (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (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 B (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating 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: Andrew Lynch, Assistant Vice President
Rating Committee Chair: Quincy Tang, Managing Director
Initial Rating Date: 23 July 2018

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.