Headnote Mutual Reliance Review System – issuer of mortgage pass-through certificates exempt from the requirement to prepare, file and deliver annual report, where applicable, interim and annual financial statements and annual reports, where applicable, in lieu of an information circular subject to conditions, including the requirement to prepare, file and deliver monthly and annual reports regarding performance of pools of assets. Applicable Ontario Statutory Provisions Securities Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.S.5, as am., 77, 78,79, 80(b)(iii) and 81(2). Rules Cited National Instrument 44-101 Short Form Prospectus Distributions. National Instrument 54-101 Communication with Beneficial Owners of Securities of a Reporting Issuer
IN THE MATTER OF THE SECURITIES LEGISLATION OF BRITISH COLUMBIA, ALBERTA, SASKATCHEWAN, MANITOBA, ONTARIO, QUEBEC, NOVA SCOTIA AND NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR
AND IN THE MATTER OF THE MUTUAL RELIANCE REVIEW SYSTEM FOR EXEMPTIVE RELIEF APPLICATIONS AND IN THE MATTER OF GMAC COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES OF CANADA, INC./GMAC TITRES HYPOTHÉCAIRES COMMERCIAUX DU CANADA INC. MRRS DECISION DOCUMENT WHEREAS the local securities regulatory authority or regulator (the “Decision Maker”) in each of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador (the “Jurisdictions”) has received an application from GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities of Canada, Inc./GMAC titres hypothécaires commerciaux du Canada Inc. (the “Issuer”) for a decision pursuant to the securities legislation of the Jurisdictions (the “Legislation”) that the provisions of the Legislation concerning the preparation, filing and delivery of an annual report, where applicable, interim and annual financial statements and the annual filing, where applicable, in lieu of an information circular, shall not apply to the Issuer in connection with public offerings of mortgage pass-through certificates (“Certificates”) of the Issuer; AND WHEREAS , unless otherwise defined, the terms herein have the meaning set out in National Instrument 14-101-Definitions or Quebec Commission Notice 14-101; AND WHEREAS pursuant to the Mutual Reliance Review System for Exemptive Relief Applications (the “System”), the Ontario Securities Commission is the Principal Regulator for this application; AND WHEREAS the Issuer has represented to the Decision Makers as follows: 1. The Issuer was incorporated under the laws of Canada on March 25, 2002 and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of GMAC Commercial Mortgage of Canada, Limited (“ GMACCM Canada”). The head office of the Issuer is located in Toronto, Ontario. The Issuer is a special purpose corporation, the only securityholders of which, excluding GMACCM Canada, will be the holders of its Certificates. The Issuer has offered and will offer mortgage pass-through certificates that entitle the holders thereof (the “Certificateholders”) to the cash flows of discrete pools of whole or participating interests in mortgages, hypothecs or other charges on real or immovable property situated in Canada, and all related assets (including the proceeds thereof and any related security) (collectively, “Assets”) that by their terms convert into cash within a finite time period, and any rights or other assets designed to assure the servicing or timely distribution of proceeds to holders of the Certificates. The Certificates have been and will be sold to the public pursuant to short form prospectuses on the basis of an approved rating by an approved rating organization, as those terms are defined in National Instrument 44-101 - Short Form Prospectus Distributions, or any
2. 3.
4.
successor instrument thereto. The proceeds from the sale of Certificates will finance the purchase by the Certificateholders of undivided ownership interests in Assets. 5. As a special purpose corporation, the Issuer will not carry on any activities other than acquiring Assets and issuing Certificates. The Issuer currently has and will have no material assets or liabilities other than its rights and obligations arising from acquiring Assets and issuing Certificates. No director or officer of the Issuer or any associate thereof is indebted to the Issuer, nor has any director, officer, or any other insider, or any associate or affiliate thereof, entered into a material contract with the Issuer, other than as previously disclosed in documents filed with the Decision Makers. No insider of the Issuer, or associate or affiliate of such insider, has a direct or indirect interest in any transaction which has materially affected or which would materially affect the Issuer. The auditors of the Issuer are PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The information contained in the interim and annual financial statements of the Issuer is not and will not be relevant to the Certificateholders since such Certificateholders only have recourse to the Assets (or ownership interests therein) securing their series of Certificates and do not have any recourse to any other assets of the Issuer. For each Offering, the Issuer and, among others, GMAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation, as master servicer (the “Master Servicer”), a Canadian trust company, as custodian on behalf of Certificateholders (the “Custodian”) and a reporting agent (the “Reporting Agent”) will enter into a pooling and servicing agreement (the “Pooling and Servicing Agreement”) providing for the issuance of Certificates and governing the rights of Certificateholders. There is, however, a possibility that other parties acceptable to the rating agencies rating a particular series of Certificates may serve as Master Servicer. Each Pooling and Servicing Agreement provides or will provide for certain administrative functions relating to the Certificates, such as maintaining a register of holders of Certificates and other duties specified in each Pooling and Servicing Agreement including the making of periodic reports to Certificateholders. The Issuer, Master Servicer or Reporting Agent will provide, on the Reporting Agent’s website to be identified in the relevant short form prospectus for the Certificates or in correspondence sent to Certificateholders, or otherwise as provided for in the relevant short form prospectus, the financial and other information prescribed therein to be delivered or made available to Certificateholders on a monthly basis, such information to include information relating to distributions made in that month, as well as Commercial Mortgage Securities Association reports that would be specified in the relevant short form prospectus, together with such additional information as may be prescribed by the Decision Makers (the “Distribution Date Statement”), authorized by the Issuer or on its behalf by its duly appointed representative, and will contemporaneously file or cause to be filed reasonably contemporaneously therewith a summary of such information as contained in the Distribution Date Statement on the System for Electronic Document Analysis and Retrieval (“SEDAR”). Notwithstanding paragraph 13 hereof, the Issuer may amend the contents of the financial and other information posted on the website and filed on SEDAR in order not to disclose the names of individual obligors of Assets as may be required by confidentiality agreements or other obligations of confidentiality binding on the Issuer.
6.
7.
8.
9. 10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
There will be no annual meetings of Certificateholders. Each Pooling and Servicing Agreement provides or will provide that only the holders of a certain percentage of Certificates of each series of the Issuer have the right to direct the Custodian to take certain actions under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement with respect to such series of Certificates. On not less than an annual basis, the Issuer will request intermediaries to deliver a notice to Certificateholders pursuant to the procedures stipulated by National Instrument 54-101 Communication with Beneficial Owners of Securities of a Reporting Issuer, advising Certificateholders that the monthly information prescribed in paragraph 13 hereof, the quarterly information prescribed in paragraph 17 hereof and the annual information prescribed in paragraph 18 hereof is available on SEDAR and on a website, the website address, and that Certificateholders may request that paper copies of such reports be provided to them by ordinary mail. Within 60 days of the end of each fiscal quarter of the Issuer (or such lesser period as may be required under applicable laws), the Reporting Agent or the Issuer or its duly appointed representative or agent will post on the applicable website or mail to Certificateholders who so request and will contemporaneously file on SEDAR management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) with respect to the applicable pool of Assets included in the Issuer’s Annual Information Form filed with the Decision Makers (as supplemented by any short form prospectuses filed by the Issuer during the intervening period). Within 140 days of the end of each fiscal year of the Issuer (or such lesser period as may be required under applicable laws), the Reporting Agent or the Issuer or its duly appointed representative or agent will post on the applicable website or mail to Certificateholders who so request and will contemporaneously file on SEDAR: (a) cumulative financial and other information as prescribed by the Decision Makers for the last completed fiscal year with respect to the applicable pool of Assets; MD&A with respect to the applicable pool of Assets included in the Issuer’s Annual Information Form filed with the Decision Makers (as supplemented by any short form prospectuses filed by the Issuer during the intervening period); an annual statement of compliance signed by a senior officer of each applicable Master Servicer or other party acting in a similar capacity on behalf of the Issuer for the applicable pool of Assets, certifying that the Master Servicer or such other party acting in a similar capacity has fulfilled all of its obligations under the related Pooling and Servicing Agreement during the year or, if there has been a default, specifying each such default and the status thereof; and an annual accountants’ report in form and content acceptable to the Decision Makers prepared by a firm of independent public or chartered accountants acceptable to the Decision Makers respecting compliance by the Master Servicer (or such other party acting in a similar capacity) with the Uniform Single Attestation Program or such other servicing standard acceptable to the Decision Makers.
16.
17.
18.
(b)
(c)
(d)
19.
The Issuer will issue press releases and file material change reports in accordance with the requirements of the Legislation in respect of material changes in its affairs and in respect of changes in the status (including defaults in payments due to Certificateholders), of the Assets underlying the Certificates which may reasonably be considered to be material to Certificateholders. Fees payable in connection with the filing of annual financial statements will be paid at the time that, and in respect of, the annual financial information specified in paragraph 18 hereof is filed.
20.
21.
The provision of information to Certificateholders on a monthly, quarterly and annual basis as described in paragraphs 13, 17 and 18 hereof, as well as the annual notices to be given by the Issuer as to the availability of such information given pursuant to terms of paragraph 15 hereof will meet the objectives of allowing the Certificateholders to monitor and make informed decisions about their investment.
AND WHEREAS pursuant to the System this Decision Document evidences the decision of each Decision Maker (collectively, the “Decision”); AND WHEREAS each of the Decision Makers is satisfied that the test contained in the Legislation that provides the Decision Maker with the jurisdiction to make the Decision has been met; THE DECISION of the Decision Makers pursuant to the Legislation is that the Issuer is exempted from the requirements of the Legislation concerning the preparation, filing and delivery of an annual report, where applicable, interim and annual financial statements and the annual filing, where applicable, in lieu of an information circular, provided that: (a) (b) (c) the only securities that the Issuer distributes to the public are Certificates; the Issuer complies with paragraphs 13, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 hereof; and the exemption from the requirements of the Legislation concerning the preparation, filing and delivery of an annual report, where applicable, and the annual filing, where applicable, in lieu of an information circular, shall terminate sixty days after the occurrence of a material change in any of the representations of the Issuer contained in paragraphs 5 through 8 inclusive hereof, unless the Issuer satisfies the Decision Makers that the exemption should continue.
DATED October 16, 2002.
“Howard I. Wetston”
“Kerry D. Adams”
_________________________
_________________________
Ontario
étage
Commission des valeurs mobilières
Toronto ON M5H 3S8
P.O. Box 55, 19th Floor 20 Queen Street West Toronto ON M5H 3S8
CP 55, 19e 20, rue queen
Securities
ouest
Commission
Phone: Fax:
de l’Ontario
(416) 593-8133 (416) 593-8177
Web site: www.osc.gov.on.ca
Memorandum Date: To: From: October 7, 2002 The Commission Terry Moore Legal Counsel, Take-over/Issuer Bids, Mergers & Acquisitions Application filed by GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities of Canada Inc. under sections 80(b)(iii) and 88(2)(b) of the Securities Act (Ontario) Application No.701/02
Subject:
Application This is an application filed by GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities of Canada Inc.(the “Issuer”) under the Mutual Reliance Review System (“MRRS”) in each of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Quebec, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador (the “Jurisdictions”) for relief from the registration and prospectus requirements contained in the Legislation regarding the preparation, filing and delivery of an annual report, where applicable, interim and annual financial statements and the annual filing, where applicable, in lieu of an information circular, The Ontario Securities Commission has been selected as the principal regulator for the purposes of this application. Recommendation Staff recommends that the relief requested be granted in the form of the attached draft decision document (the “Decision Document”). Facts The facts are as set out in Decision Document. Capitalized terms used in this memorandum shall have the same meaning ascribed to them in the decision document unless otherwise indicated.
The Issuer is a special purpose CBCA company that proposes to issue asset-backed securities by way of short form prospectus. Specifically, the Issuer proposes to issue pass-through certificates that will entitle the holders thereof to the cash flows of discrete pools of whole or participating interests in mortgages and related charges on real property. Discussion and Analysis The Issuer seeks relief from the requirements to file and send annual and interim financial statements, annual report and annual filing in lieu of an information circular, where applicable. The basis for the application is that these information documents will be irrelevant to Certificateholders who have no recourse or entitlement to the assets of the Issuer, but instead have recourse to (and thereby derive their value from) the discrete pools of Assets. Instead, Certificateholders will have the benefit of monthly servicing reports on their pool of Assets that are available through a website, SEDAR, or by paper copy upon request. Certificateholders also receive annual information documents with respect to their pool of Assets. This type of relief has been granted in a number of instances, starting with a ruling granted by the OSC: In the Matter of Merrill Lynch Mortgage Loans Inc. (2000) 23 OSCB 3259 (“Merrill Lynch #1”). The facts surrounding that application are almost identical to those of the present one. Similar MRRS Decisions followed: In the Matter of Solar Trust/Fiducie Solar (2001) 24 OSCB 884; and In the Matter of Mansfield Trust/Fiducie Mansfield (2001) 24 OSCB 7648. In all cases the securities in question were mortgage-backed securities. Open-ended Relief There is a major difference between the current application and the precedents cited above. In the precedent orders, the relief was limited to specific offerings of asset-backed securities. For example, the Merrill Lynch #1 order was in respect of the offering of four specific commercial mortgage-backed securities. When Merrill Lynch wanted to issue a new series of mortgage-backed securities, they had to come back to the Decision Makers for another order. The reason for this was that Commission staff decided that granting blanket prospective relief would not be appropriate in the circumstances, given the relative novelty of the application and the novelty of asset-backed securities in Canada generally. Instead, staff agreed to issue another order to Merrill Lynch: In the Matter of Merrill Lynch Mortgage Loans Inc. (2000) 23 OSCB 8220 (“Merrill Lynch #2”). This order was similar to Merrill Lynch #1, except that it contained an Appendix that could be easily amended to add future offerings of new mortgage-backed securities. This was seen as a cost-effective way for Merrill Lynch to obtain relief for future offerings, while still giving the OSC a chance to review each offering. The Merrill Lynch #2 order was subsequently
amended in 2001 and 2002. This method of using an easily amended Appendix was used in both the Solar Trust and Mansfield decisions referred to above. According to the staff memo in Merrill Lynch #1, OSC staff would re-consider granting “open-ended” continuous disclosure relief in respect of any offering of mortgage-backed securities once a regulatory track record had been established for offerings of assetbacked securities. In the 2½ years since the first order, the OSC has granted or amended similar orders 7 times. I have spoken with the Corporate Finance staff who specialize in asset-backed securities, and they have indicated that there have been no problems with the continuous disclosure relating to the mortgage-backed securities issued by Merrill Lynch, Solar Trust or Mansfield Trust. I therefore submit that we have a sufficient track record to grant blanket relief to the Issuer in respect of any Offering, provided that it is limited to offerings of mortgage passthrough certificates. I don’t believe that this fetters the discretion of the Decision Makers any more than the continuous disclosure relief that is routinely granted to issuers who issue exchangeable shares, or those with no public shareholders. As long as the only public shareholders of the Issuer are Certificateholders, there is no need for the traditional continuous disclosure. Comments from other Jurisdictions Initially, this application was also made in PEI, New Brunswick, Nunavut, Northwest Territories and the Yukon. Since those Jurisdictions do not have continuous disclosure requirements, staff in those jurisdictions asked that the application be withdrawn and the decision amended accordingly. Auditor/Financial Expert Opinion Staff of the Alberta Commission asked that a representation be included to the effect that the issuer’s auditors/financial experts have provided an opinion or advice that GAAP and GAAS financial statements would not provide material additional information to existing or prospective security holders. A similar representation was included in some of the precedents cited. Counsel replied that an opinion from the auditors would not provide material information and is not necessary because: (a) the auditors are in no better a position, whether in terms of expertise, knowledge or otherwise, than management of the Issuer or the Decision Makers to determine what mortgage-backed securityholders would find material; (b) the rationale for the relief is very straightforward, i.e. the financial statements of the Issuer are not relevant to mortgage-backed securityholders since such holders only have recourse to the pool of Assets secured to their certificates, and the Issuer will have only nominal assets and liabilities; (c) the relief sought has been granted to a number of issuers in identical circumstances; and (d) some of the precedent orders have not required a similar representation. I agree with counsel that requiring an auditor’s opinion is unnecessary. I think that it is well established that GAAP or GAAS financial statements would not provide material
additional information to holders of asset-backed securities. If the Decision Makers thought otherwise, they wouldn't have been granting this type of relief. I can understand what the intended purpose of the representation is, namely to get an auditor to support the representation that the Issuer has no material assets or liabilities. However, I believe that the existing representation that the Issuer will have no material assets or liabilities other than its rights and obligations arising from acquiring assets and issuing certificates is sufficient. I indicated to staff of the other jurisdictions that I would not require the inclusion of the auditor/financial expert representation, and the various staff agreed with this approach. Since I don’t recommend that the auditor opinion be required, the relief granted is not conditional upon PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP continuing to be auditor of the Issuer. The precedent decisions all contained a condition that the relief would terminate if the issuer changed auditors. Quarterly Newspaper Notice Staff of the Manitoba Commission asked for a condition that the Issuer agree to publish a quarterly notice in a national business newspaper in Canada and in a French language newspaper in Montreal advising that continuous disclosure would not be mailed out, but instead would be available at a website, and that securityholders were entitled to request paper copies of this information. A similar requirement appears in all of the precedents cited. Counsel replied that this quarterly notice requirement is unnecessary because: (a) holders of securities such as these are typically sophisticated institutional investors who are already aware that the information is available on the website; (b) the information will also be available on the website and on SEDAR; (c) the prospectus for the mortgagebacked securities will state that the information is on the website and SEDAR; and (d) the Issuer will send out an annual notice to mortgage-backed securityholders advising them that the information is available on the website and on SEDAR. I tend to agree with counsel that the quarterly newspaper notices are an ineffective way of communicating with securityholders. This quarterly notice requirement was introduced in the Merrill Lynch #1 order because staff was concerned that secondary market buyers of these securities would not know that the monthly information was made available on the website instead of being mailed out quarterly. Counsel has advised that very few, if any, mortgage-backed securities are purchased by “retail” investors in the secondary market. This type of security is never listed on an exchange, and the prospectus for the Certificates states that there is no market through which the Certificates may be sold. Furthermore, even if there was a secondary “retail” market, there is no way to determine whether the newspaper notices are an effective way to reach such securityholders. Therefore, I indicated to staff of the other Jurisdictions that I propose to eliminate the quarterly newspaper notice requirement, and all staff agreed with this approach.
Other Comments This application was initially made confidentially. Staff of the BC and Manitoba Commissions sought substantive reasons why confidentiality was necessary, especially since a preliminary prospectus relating to the first offering of Certificates has already been filed by the Issuer. Counsel for the Issuer agreed that confidentiality is no longer necessary, so this application has been placed on the public record. Manitoba staff asked the Issuer to confirm whether the Certificateholders have voting rights, since the Issuer initially sought relief from the requirement to prepare and deliver proxy solicitation forms. Counsel has advised that the Certificates are not “voting securities” as defined in the Legislation, and that accordingly no relief from the requirement to prepare an information circular is necessary (since the requirement to prepare and deliver a form is only necessary where proxies are actually solicited). The Decision Document was amended accordingly. Manitoba staff also raised the issue of whether or not the relief granted by the Decision Document should be “open-ended” and should extend to subsequent Offerings by the Issuer. As discussed above, we have decided that it would be appropriate to exempt the Issuer from the continuous disclosure requirements in respect of any future offering of mortgage pass-through certificates. Manitoba staff also raised the issue of proposed National Instrument 51-102, and whether the Decision Document should recognize that this proposed Instrument will replace many of the existing continuous disclosure requirements in most or all Jurisdictions. After reviewing this issue with counsel, we have decided that the wording of the Decision Document is sufficiently broad so that it continues to apply after NI 51-102 comes into force. Quebec staff made some drafting comments and asked for a representation that all filing fees that would otherwise be payable in connection with the continuous disclosure requirements be paid by the issuer. A representation to that effect was added.