TCR_Public/140309.mbx          T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

               Sunday, March 9, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 67

                            Headlines

ACAS CLO 2007-1: Moody's Affirms 'Ba2' Rating on Class D Notes
ARCAP 2003-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class C Notes to 'Ba3'
ARCAP 2004-1: Moody's Affirms 'Caa3' Rating on 2 Note Classes
ARROYO I: Fitch Affirms 'CCCsf' Rating on 2 Note Classes
ASSET BACKED 1999-LB1: Moody's Ups Rating on $3MM Subprime RMBS

AVIATION CAPITAL: Fitch Affirms C Ratings on 2 Securities Classes
BAMLL COMMERCIAL 2013-WBRK: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on E Certs
BEAR STEARNS 2004-TOP14: S&P Raises Rating on Class K Notes to BB
BEAR STEARNS 2007-PWR17: S&P Hikes Rating on 2 Note Classes to B-
BEAR STEARNS 2007-TOP26: S&P Affirms B- Rating on Class C Notes

BSCMS COMMERCIAL 2004-TOP14: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on O Certs
CALLIDUS DEBT: Moody's Affirms 'B2' Rating on $13MM Class Notes
CHASE COMMERCIAL 2000-2: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. J Secs.
CITICORP MORTGAGE 2006-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Secs. to 'B2'
CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2014-A: DBRS Rates Class B-3 Notes 'BB'

CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2014-A: S&P Rates Class B3 Notes 'BB'
COMM 2004-RS1: S&P Lowers Ratings on 9 Note Classes to 'D'
CPS AUTO 2014-A: Moody's Assigns '(P)B2' Rating on Class E Notes
CPS AUTO 2014-A: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB+ Rating on Class D Notes
CROWN POINT II: S&P Affirms 'BB-' Rating on Class B-2L Notes

CSMC TRUST 2014-SAF1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class B-3 Notes
ECP CLO 2013-5: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
GE COMMERCIAL 2004-C3: S&P Lowers Rating on Class K Notes to 'D'
GE COMMERCIAL 2006-C1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class B Notes to CCC-
GMAC COMMERCIAL 2003-C3: S&P Raises Rating on Class K Notes to BB+

GOLDENTREE VIII: Moody's Rates $41.7MM Class E Notes '(P)Ba3'
GP PORTFOLIO: S&P Assigns Preliminary BB Rating on Class E Notes
GREENWICH CAPITAL 2007-GG9: S&P Affirms CCC- Rating on Cl. B Notes
GS MORTGAGE 2011-GC3: DBRS Assigns BB Rating to Class E Securities
HALCYON LOAN 2014-1: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class F Notes

ICG US CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class D Notes
JP MORGAN 1999-C8: Moody's Affirms Ratings on 3 Cert. Classes
JP MORGAN 2002-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 3 Cert. Classes
JP MORGAN 2007-CIBC19: S&P Lowers Rating on 2 Note Classes to 'D'
JP MORGAN 2014-C18: Fitch Rates $11.9MM Class F Certificates 'Bsf'

LIMEROCK CLO II: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
LNR CDO 2002-1: S&P Raises Rating on Class C Notes to BB+
MERRILL LYNCH 2005-CKI1: Moody's Affirms 'C' Rating on 2 Certs
MORGAN STANLEY 1998-WF2: Fitch Hikes Rating on Class L Certs to BB
MORGAN STANLEY 1999-RM1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X Certs

MORGAN STANLEY 2003-HQ2: S&P Lowers Rating on 2 Note Classes to D
MORGAN STANLEY 2004-TOP13: Moody's Affirms C Rating on O Notes
NORTH END: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
PACIFIC SHORES: Fitch Raises Rating on 2 Note Classes to CCCsf
PREFERRED TERM VIII: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-2 Notes to 'B-'

PREFERRED TERM X: S&P Raises Rating on 2 Note Classes to 'B+'
PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2001-1: S&P Ups Rating on Class B Notes to BB+
OZLM VI: Moody's Assigns '(P)Ba3' Rating on Class D Notes
RFC CDO 2006-1: Fitch Affirms Csf Ratings on 6 Securities Classes
TRAPEZA CDO V: S&P Raises Rating on Class A1B Notes From 'B-'

TROPIC CDO III: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-2L Notes to 'BB+'
U.S. CAPITAL I: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-2 Notes to 'BB+'
U.S. CAPITAL III: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-1 Notes to 'BB+'
WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C8: Moody's Cuts Rating on X-C Certs to Caa3
WELLS FARGO 2013-BTC: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. E Certs

WESTWOOD CDO I: Moody's Affirms 'Ba1' Rating on 2 Note Classes
WESTWOOD CDO II: Moody's Hikes Rating on $17MM Cl. D Notes to Ba1
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2011-C3: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Cl. F Certs
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-LC14: DBRS Rates Class E Certificates 'BB'

* Moody's Takes Action on $39MM of RMBS By Various Issuers
* Moody's Takes Action on $49MM of RMBS From Various Trusts
* S&P Lowers Ratings on 47 Note Classes to 'D'
* S&P Puts 8 Ratings on 4 U.S. CDO Transactions on Watch Positive
* S&P Raises Rating on 7 Tranches From 7 CDO Transactions

* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 20 Classes From 10 CDO Deals
* S&P Withdraws 85 D Ratings on 12 CMBS, 2 Re-REMICs & 1 CRE Deals
* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 6 Classes from 5 Synthetic Transactions


                             *********

ACAS CLO 2007-1: Moody's Affirms 'Ba2' Rating on Class D Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by ACAS CLO 2007-1, Ltd.:

$25,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2021, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on September 29, 2011
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf);

$22,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2021, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on September
29, 2011 Upgraded to A2 (sf); and

$21,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2021, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on September
29, 2011 Upgraded to Baa3 (sf).

Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

$110,750,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2021 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 29, 2011
Upgraded to Aaa (sf);

$135,000,000 Class A-1-S Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2021 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on April 30, 2007
Assigned Aaa (sf);

$33,750,000 Class A-1-J Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2021 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 29, 2011
Upgraded to Aaa (sf); and

$15,500,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2021, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on September 29, 2011
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf).

ACAS CLO 2007-1, Ltd., issued in April 2007, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment period will end in
April 2014.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions reflect the benefit of the short period of
time remaining before the end of the deal's reinvestment period in
April 2014. In light of the reinvestment restrictions during the
amortization period, and therefore the limited ability of the
manager to effect significant changes to the current collateral
pool, Moody's analyzed the deal assuming a higher likelihood that
the collateral pool characteristics will maintain a positive
buffer relative to certain covenant requirements. In particular,
Moody's assumed that the deal will benefit from lower WARF of
2461, compared to the covenant level of 3062. Furthermore, the
transaction's reported overcollateralization (OC) ratios have been
stable in the last 12 months.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO
documentation by different transactional parties owing to embedded
ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have
adverse consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will commence and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan
market and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the
highest payment priority.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes. Below is a summary of the impact
of different default probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on
all of the rated notes (by the difference in the number of notches
versus the current model output, for which a positive difference
corresponds to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (1969)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-1-S: 0

Class A-1-J: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +3

Class C: +2

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (2954)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-1-S: 0

Class A-1-J: 0

Class A-2: -1

Class B: -2

Class C: -2

Class D: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in February 2014.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base
case, Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing
par and principal proceeds balance of $389 million, no defaulted
par, a weighted average default probability of 15.06% (implying a
WARF of 2461), a weighted average recovery rate upon default of
50.59%, a diversity score of 54 and a weighted average spread of
3.02%.

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.


ARCAP 2003-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class C Notes to 'Ba3'
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by ARCap 2003-1 Resecuritization Trust
("ARCap 2003-1"):

Cl. B, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 1, 2013 Affirmed
B1 (sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 1, 2013
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Moody's has also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on May 1, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on May 1, 2013 Downgraded to
C (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on May 1, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has upgraded two and affirmed the ratings of three classes
of notes issued by ARCap 2003-1. The upgrades are due to material
improvement in the pool's weighted average rating factor (WARF)
and weighted recovery rate (WARR) due to approximately 29% of the
collateral pool experiencing ratings upgrades between 1 to 4
notches since last review. In addition, the senior most
outstanding class of notes has experienced rapid amortization as a
result of greater than expected recoveries on high credit risk and
defaulted collateral. The affirmations are due to the key
transaction parameters performing within levels commensurate with
the existing ratings levels. The rating action is the result of
Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real estate
collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO and Re-remic)
transactions.

ARCap 2003-1 is a cash transaction backed by a portfolio of
commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (100% of the pool
balance). As of the trustee's January 31, 2014 report, the
aggregate note balance of the transaction, including preferred
shares, is $347.6 million, compared to $414.4 million at issuance.
The current collateral par amount is $116.3 million, a decrease of
$298.1 million at issuance.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 6017,
compared to 6519 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral are as follows: Aaa-Aa3 (0.3% compared to 2.1% at
last review); A1-A3 (5.1% compared to 1.9% at last review); Baa1-
Baa3 (10.8% compared to 4.1% at last review); Ba1-Ba3 (8.6%
compared to 2.8% at last review); B1-B3 (30.5% compared to 31% at
last review); and Caa1-Ca/C (44.7%, compared to 58.1% at last
review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 3.6 years, compared to 3.1 at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
outstanding collateral pool.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 6%, compared to 4% at last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 14.4%, compared to 100% at last review.
The reduction in MAC is due to the reduction in credit risk within
a small number of collateral names.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in May 2012.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will
also affect the performance of the rated notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for the rated notes,
although a change in one key parameter assumption could be offset
by a change in one or more of the other key parameter assumptions.
The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
ratings recovery rates of the underlying collateral and credit
assessments. Reducing the recovery rates of the collateral pool to
0% from 3.8% would result in an average modeled rating movement on
the rated notes of zero to two notches down (e.g., one notch down
implies a ratings movement from Baa3 to Ba1). Increasing the
recovery rate of the collateral pool by 5% to 11% would result in
an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero to
four notches up (e.g., two notches up implies a ratings movement
from Ba2 to Baa3).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given
the weak recovery and commercial real estate property markets.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


ARCAP 2004-1: Moody's Affirms 'Caa3' Rating on 2 Note Classes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by ARCap 2004-1 Resecuritization Trust
("ARCap 2004-1"):

Cl. A, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2013 Downgraded to
B1 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2013 Downgraded to
Ca (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings of six classes of notes issued by
ARCap 2004-1. The affirmations are due to the key transaction
parameters performing within levels commensurate with the existing
ratings levels. The rating action is the result of Moody's on-
going surveillance of commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligation (CRE CDO and Re-remic) transactions.

ARCap 2004-1 is a cash transaction whose reinvestment period ended
in April 2004. The transaction is backed by a portfolio of
commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (100% of the pool
balance). As of the trustee's January 21, 2014 report, the
aggregate note balance of the transaction, including preferred
shares, is $306.8 million, compared to $340.9 million at issuance.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 5,946,
compared to 6,641 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral are as follows: Aaa-Aa3 (0.3% compared to 1.6% at
last review); A1-A3 (3.4% compared to 0.8% at last review); Baa1-
Baa3 (0% compared to 3.1% at last review); Ba1-Ba3 (21.6% compared
to 13.2% at last review); B1-B3 (14.1% compared to 19.1% at last
review); and Caa1-Ca/C (60.6%, compared to 62.2% at last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 3.5 years, compared to 4.2 at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 3.8%, same as at last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 24.5%, compared to 100% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in May 2012.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change. The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will
also affect the performance of the rated notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for the rated notes,
although a change in one key parameter assumption could be offset
by a change in one or more of the other key parameter assumptions.
The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
ratings recovery rates of the underlying collateral and credit
assessments. Reducing the recovery rates of the collateral pool to
0% from 3.8% would result in an average modeled rating movement on
the rated notes of zero to two notches down (e.g., one notch down
implies a ratings movement from Baa3 to Ba1). Increasing the
recovery rate of the collateral pool by 5% would result in an
average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero to four
notches up (e.g., two notches up implies a ratings movement from
Ba2 to Baa3).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given
the weak recovery and commercial real estate property markets.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance. Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


ARROYO I: Fitch Affirms 'CCCsf' Rating on 2 Note Classes
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one and affirmed two classes of notes
issued by Arroyo I CDO, Ltd.  The rating actions are as follows:

-- $4,176,096 class B notes upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf', Outlook
   remains Stable;
-- $10,673,643 class C-1 notes affirmed at 'CCCsf';
-- $18,883,867 class C-2 notes affirmed at 'CCCsf'.

Key Rating Drivers

The upgrade and affirmations are based on the stable performance
of the portfolio combined with the continued amortization of the
notes increasing credit enhancement (CE) levels to all the
classes.

Since Fitch's last rating action in March 2013, the credit quality
of the collateral has remained stable, with one asset comprising
approximately 3.7% of the portfolio downgraded 1.0 notch and 6.3%
upgraded a weighted average of 1.8 notches. Approximately 62.9% of
the current portfolio has a Fitch derived rating below investment
grade and 38.5% has a rating in the 'CCCsf' rating category or
lower, compared to 61.6% and 36.7%, respectively, at last review.

The class B notes have received approximately $11.4 million in
principal repayment, or 73.2% of its previous balance, since the
last review, leaving 10.8% of the original balance outstanding.
The upgrade of the class B notes is in line with the breakeven
levels from the cash flow model.

The class C notes are currently receiving their periodic interest
due; however, they still have $3.6 million of deferred interest
outstanding. The affirmation of the class C notes is in line with
the breakeven levels from the cash flow model.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Further negative migration and defaults beyond those projected in
the SF PCM as well as increasing concentration in assets of a
weaker credit quality could lead to future downgrades. Continuing
amortization accompanied by better than expected cash flows from
distressed assets could lead to an upgrade.

This review was conducted under the framework described in the
report 'Global Rating Criteria for Structured Finance CDOs' using
the Structured Finance Portfolio Credit Model (SF PCM) for
projecting future default levels for the underlying portfolio.
These default levels were then compared to the breakeven levels
generated by Fitch's cash flow model of the CDO under various
default timing and interest rate stress scenarios.


ASSET BACKED 1999-LB1: Moody's Ups Rating on $3MM Subprime RMBS
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of two tranches
from Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust
1999-LB1, which are all backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust
1999-LB1

A-3A, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2014 B3 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

Financial Guarantor: MBIA Insurance Corporation (B3 on review for
possible upgrade Feb 14, 2014)

A-5A, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 14, 2014 B3 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

Financial Guarantor: MBIA Insurance Corporation (B3 on review for
possible upgrade Feb 14, 2014)

Ratings Rationale

The upgrade actions are a result of improving performance of the
related pool and build-up in credit enhancement on the bonds. The
actions reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on the
underlying pool.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

The primary source of assumption uncertainty is the uncertainty in
our central macroeconomic forecast and performance volatility due
to servicer-related issues. The unemployment rate fell from 7.9%
in January 2013 to 6.6% in January 2014. Moody's forecasts an
unemployment central range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014.
Performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


AVIATION CAPITAL: Fitch Affirms C Ratings on 2 Securities Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed the three Aviation Capital Group Trusts
outlined below:

Aviation Capital Group Trust (ACG)

-- Affirmed class A-1 at 'Csf' RE 35% ;
-- Affirmed classes B-1, C-1, and D-1 at 'Csf' RE 0%.

Aviation Capital Group Trust II (ACG II)

-- Affirmed class B-1 at 'Bsf'; Outlook Negative.

Aviation Capital Group Trust III (ACG III)

-- Affirmed class G-1 at 'Asf' Outlook Stable;
-- Affirmed class B-1 at 'A-sf' Outlook Stable;
-- Affirmed class C-1 at 'BBBsf' Outlook Stable.

Key Rating Drivers

The affirmation of the notes in ACG reflects Fitch's view that
default is inevitable. Trust leverage has continued to increase as
all classes have loan to value (LTV) ratios in excess of 100% and
lease cash flow has continued to decrease. Fitch expects these
trends to continue, as the portfolio is comprised of lower tier,
less in-demand aircraft types. Under Fitch's base case scenario,
the class A-1 notes are not expected to pay in full. Fitch
estimates principal recoveries to be 35% of the current A-1
balance. Classes B-1, C-1, and D-1 were affirmed at 'Csf/RE0%'
reflecting the expectation they will receive no further payments.

The affirmation of the class B-1 notes in ACG II reflects the
stabilization of lease collections and leverage levels. While the
class is unable to pass scenarios commensurate with the 'Bsf'
rating category under Fitch's cash flow analysis, the transaction
has material concentrations of liquid aircraft with the potential
to generate robust cash flow for a number of years. This, along
with stabilizing performance, has led to the affirmation of the
class B-1 notes. The Negative Outlook reflects Fitch's view that
deterioration in lease collections may result in future negative
rating actions.

The affirmations of the class G-1, B-1, and C-1 notes in ACG III
reflect the credit risk of each class which is consistent with
their current ratings. The collateral pool has generated
collections within Fitch's initial expectations to date.
Meanwhile, leverage levels for all classes have decreased since
close. The results of Fitch's cash flow modeling analysis, as well
as strong collateral characteristics and decreasing leverage for
all classes has resulted in the affirmations and maintenance of
Stable Rating Outlooks.

Rating Sensitivities

Due to the correlation between the global economic conditions and
the airline industry, the ratings may be impacted by the strength
of the macro environment over the remaining term of these
transactions. Global economic scenarios that are inconsistent with
Fitch's expectations could lead to further negative rating
actions. For example, the occurrence of an extended global
recession of significantly greater severity than the last two
experienced. As such, the resulting strain on aircraft lease cash
flow, could lead to a downgrade of the notes.

Additionally, changes in the airline industry can have significant
impact on the ratings of these transactions. If the timing of or
degree of technological advancement in the commercial aviation
space differed materially from Fitch's expectations, a rating
movement may occur. Similarly, factors influencing the supply of
and demand for the certain aircraft types present in the ACG trust
portfolios could directly impact Fitch's view of the transactions'
ability to avoid a default on the notes and, thus, could result in
further rating actions.

The analysis of the ACG trusts is consistent with Fitch's April
12, 2013 report, 'Global Rating Criteria for Aircraft Operating
Lease ABS', with the following exceptions:

-- The criteria states the methodology may not apply for
transactions with less than 20 planes. While ACG retains fewer
than 20 aircraft, Fitch is able to maintain the ratings on this
trust due to sufficient asset-level information and the need to
evaluate only base case scenarios in light of the low ratings on
the issued notes.


BAMLL COMMERCIAL 2013-WBRK: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on E Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings on five classes of
BAMLL Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-WBRK, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-WBRK. Moody's
rating action is as follows:

Cl. A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Ba1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the five P&I classes were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), are
within acceptable ranges.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in defeasance in the pool or an improvement in pool performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, an increase in loan
concentration, an increase in expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 12, 2014 payment date, the transaction's
certificate balance remains unchanged from securitization at $360
million. The certificates are collateralized by a single fixed-
rate loan secured by the 492,649 SF in-line component of a 1.5
million SF super-regional mall known as Willowbrook Mall located
in Wayne, NJ. Monthly payments of interest only are made at a
fixed rate of 3.5475%, and the loan matures in March 2025.

The retail center was originally constructed in 1969, and was
renovated in 1988. The sponsor (General Growth Properties)
purchased the property in 2004. Anchor tenants at the property
include Bloomingdale's, Lord & Taylor, Macy's, and Sears. Major
tenants include H&M, XXI Forever, Old Navy, Gap/Gap Kids, and
Express. This is one of the strongest performing malls in New
Jersey with stable high occupancy and Net Operating Income (NOI)

As of the December 2013 rent roll, the property was 99% leased,
and the in-line occupancy was 97%, unchanged from securitization.
The property's year-to-date through September 2013 Net Cash Flow
(NCF) was $25.4 million. Moody's NCF is $34.0 million, the same as
at securitization. Moody's loan to value (LTV) ratio is 79%, the
same as at securitization. Moody's stressed DSCR is at 1.02X, the
same as at securitization. There are no interest shortfalls or
losses outstanding.


BEAR STEARNS 2004-TOP14: S&P Raises Rating on Class K Notes to BB
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on 11
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Bear
Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-TOP14, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  At the
same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on three classes, including
its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-1 interest-only (IO)
certificates; and S&P withdrew its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class
A-4 certificates from the same transaction.

S&P's rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow its analysis of the transaction, primarily
using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions,
which included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining loans in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

The upgrades reflect S&P's expectation of available credit
enhancement for the affected tranches, which S&P believes exceeds
its most recent estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the
rating levels; S&P's views regarding the current and future
performance of the transaction's collateral and the deleveraging
of the trust balance; and the classes' interest shortfall history.
In addition, S&P's analysis took into consideration that seven
nondefeased loans ($33.0 million; 36.1%) matured on Feb 1, 2014 or
March 1, 2014.  Of the seven matured loans, the master servicer
indicated that five ($26.2 million; 28.7%) were repaid in full as
of the March 1, 2014, maturity date.

The affirmations on the class N and O certificates reflect S&P's
expectation that the available credit enhancement for these
classes will be within its estimate of the necessary credit
enhancement required for the current outstanding ratings.  The
affirmations also reflect S&P's views regarding available
liquidity support and the collateral's current and future
performance.

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-1 IO
certificates, based on its criteria for rating IO securities.

Finally, S&P withdrew its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class A-4
certificates, following the class' full principal repayment, as
reflected in the Feb. 12, 2014, trustee remittance report.

As of the Feb. 12, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool had an aggregate trust balance of $91.5 million, down from
$894.5 million at issuance.  The pool is composed of 26 loans
(reflecting cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted loans), of
which two ($14.8 million; 16.2%) are defeased, down from 109 loans
at issuance.  To date, the transaction has experienced principal
losses totaling $3.8 million, or 0.4% of the transaction's
original certificate balance.

Using servicer-provided financial information, S&P calculated an
adjusted Standard & Poor's debt-service coverage (DSC) ratio of
1.62x and a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 56.2% for the remaining
loans in the pool, excluding the two defeased loans.  No loans are
currently reported to be with the special servicer, and 12 loans
($41.4 million; 45.2%) are on the master servicer's (Wells Fargo
Bank N.A.) watchlist.

Details on the three largest loans on the master servicer's
watchlist are as follows:

   -- The Shaw's Plaza loan ($14.2 million; 15.5%), the largest
      nondefeased loan in the pool, is secured by a 175,942-sq.-
      ft. retail property in Raynham, Mass.  The loan is on Wells
      Fargo's watchlist for its March 1, 2014, maturity.  Wells
      Fargo reported a DSC of 2.24x for year-end 2012 and an
      occupancy rate of 94.0% as of Sept. 30, 2013.  Wells Fargo
      informed S&P that the loan was repaid in full on its
      March 1, 2014, maturity date.

   -- The Brandywine Centre I loan ($5.7 million; 6.2%), the
      fourth-largest nondefeased loan in the pool, is secured by a
      69,708-sq.-ft. office building in West Palm Beach, Fla.  The
      loan is on Wells Fargo's watchlist for its March 1, 2014,
      maturity.  Wells Fargo reported a DSC of 0.73x for year-end
      2012 and an 83.2% occupancy rate as of Oct. 30, 2013.  Wells
      Fargo stated that the loan was repaid in full on its
      March 1, 2014, maturity date.

   -- The Jewel/Osco Retail Center loan ($4.3 million; 4.7%), the
      third-largest loan on Wells Fargo's watchlist, is secured by
      a 93,538-sq.-ft. retail property in Burbank, Ill.  The loan
      is on Wells Fargo's watchlist for Feb. 1, 2014, maturity.
      Wells Fargo stated that it has requested, and the special
      servicer has consented to, an additional 60-day forbearance.

   -- Wells Fargo has also informed S&P that the borrower has both
      a purchase contract and a refinance offer and has requested
      additional time to get the tenant-in-common signatures to
      finalize the purchase contract.  Wells Fargo anticipates
      that the loan will pay off on April 1, 2014.  The reported
      DSC and occupancy rate as of year-end 2012 were 1.86x and
      89.9%, respectively.

RATINGS RAISED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-TOP14
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

                Rating
Class        To         From     Credit enhancement (%)
B            AAA (sf)  AA+ (sf)                   88.68
C            AAA (sf)  AA (sf)                    80.13
D            AAA (sf)  A (sf)                     60.58
E            AAA (sf)  A- (sf)                    50.80
F            AA+ (sf)  BBB+ (sf)                  39.81
G            A+ (sf)  BBB (sf)                    33.70
H            BBB+ (sf)  BBB- (sf)                 25.14
J            BBB (sf)  BB (sf)                    20.26
K            BB (sf)  B+ (sf)                     15.37
L            B+ (sf)  B (sf)                      12.93
M            B- (sf)  CCC+ (sf)                   10.48

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-TOP14
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
Class        Rating              Credit enhancement (%)
N            CCC (sf)                              8.04
O            CCC- (sf)                             5.60
X-1          AAA (sf)                               N/A

RATING WITHDRAWN

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-TOP14
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                Rating
Class        To          From
A-4          NR          AAA (sf)

N/A-Not applicable.
NR-Not rated.


BEAR STEARNS 2007-PWR17: S&P Hikes Rating on 2 Note Classes to B-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on four
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Bear
Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-PWR17, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  At the
same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on 10 other classes from the
same transaction, including the class X-1 and X-2 interest-only
(IO) certificates.

S&P's rating actions follow its analysis of the transaction
primarily using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS
transactions.  S&P's analysis included a review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets in the
pool, the transaction structure, and the liquidity available to
the trust.

The raised ratings on the class A-M and A-MFL certificates reflect
S&P's expectation of the available credit enhancement for these
tranches, which S&P believes is greater than its most recent
estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the rating levels.
The upgrades also reflect S&P's views regarding the current and
future performance of the transaction's collateral.

S&P's raised ratings on the class C and D certificates to
'B- (sf)' from 'CCC (sf)' reflect its view of the adequate
liquidity support available to these classes.  In addition, based
on S&P's analysis, it do not believe that these classes are at
risk of default in the near term.

As of the Feb. 13, 2014, trustee remittance report, the trust
experienced monthly interest shortfalls totaling $133,882,
primarily related to appraisal subordinate entitlement reduction
amounts totaling $90,944 on five ($33.8 million, 1.3%) of the 10
($138.6 million, 5.5%) specially serviced assets, special
servicing fees of $30,871, workout fees of $10,951, and interest
on advances of $1,116.  The current monthly interest shortfalls
affect the class G certificates.

The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates reflect S&P's expectation that the available credit
enhancement for these classes will be within its estimate of the
necessary credit enhancement required for the current ratings.
The affirmed ratings also reflect S&P's analysis of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets, the
transaction-level changes, and the liquidity support available to
the classes.

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' ratings on the class X-1 and X-2 IO
certificates based on its criteria for rating IO securities.

RATINGS RAISED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-PWR17
Commercial mortgage pass through certificates

                    Rating
Class          To           From                      Credit
                                             enhancement (%)
A-M            BBB (sf)     BBB- (sf)                  17.50
A-MFL          BBB (sf)     BBB- (sf)                  17.50
C              B- (sf)      CCC (sf)                    3.99
D              B- (sf)      CCC (sf)                    3.03

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-PWR17
Commercial mortgage pass through certificates

Class              Rating                        Credit
                                        enhancement (%)
A-3                AAA (sf)                       30.37
A-AB               AAA (sf)                       30.37
A-4                AA+ (sf)                       30.37
A-1A               AA+ (sf)                       30.37
A-J                B (sf)                          6.89
B                  B- (sf)                         5.76
E                  CCC (sf)                        2.22
F                  CCC- (sf)                       1.10
X-1                AAA (sf)                         N/A
X-2                AAA (sf)                         N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


BEAR STEARNS 2007-TOP26: S&P Affirms B- Rating on Class C Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on 12
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Bear
Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-TOP26, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction,
including the class X-1 and X-2 interest-only (IO) certificates.

The affirmations follow S&P's analysis of the transaction,
primarily using its criteria for rating U.S and Canadian CMBS.
S&P's analysis included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the loans in the pool, the transaction structure,
and the liquidity available to the trust.

S&P affirmed its ratings on the principal-and-interest-paying
certificates because it expects that the available credit
enhancement for these classes will be within its estimate of the
necessary credit enhancement required for the current ratings.
The affirmations also reflect the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining loans as well as the transaction-
level changes.

The affirmed ratings on the class X-1 and X-2 IO certificates
reflect S&P's current criteria for rating IO securities.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-TOP26
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class    Rating           Credit enhancement (%)
A-3      AAA (sf)                          29.48
A-AB     AAA (sf)                          29.48
A-4      AAA (sf)                          29.48
A-1A     AAA (sf)                          29.48
A-M      AA (sf)                           16.92
A-J      BB+ (sf)                           7.34
B        B+ (sf)                            4.83
C        B- (sf)                            3.73
D        CCC (sf)                           2.01
E        CCC- (sf)                          1.06
X-1      AAA (sf)                            N/A
X-2      AAA (sf)                            N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


BSCMS COMMERCIAL 2004-TOP14: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on O Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on six classes,
upgraded the ratings on seven classes and downgraded the ratings
on one class in BSCMS Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc.,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-TOP14
as follows:

Cl. B, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded to
Aaa (sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. F, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. G, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. H, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. J, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Upgraded to B2
(sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. O, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. X-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2013
Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on the investment grade P&I class was affirmed because
the transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value
(LTV) ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR)
and the transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within
acceptable ranges. The ratings on the five below investment grade
P&I classes were affirmed because the ratings are consistent with
Moody's expected loss.

The ratings on seven P&I classes were upgraded primarily due to an
increase in credit support since Moody's last review, resulting
from paydowns and amortization, as well as Moody's expectation of
additional increases in credit support resulting from the payoff
of loans approaching maturity that are well positioned for
refinance. The pool has paid down by 79% since Moody's last
review. In addition, loans constituting 61% of the pool that have
either defeased or have debt yields exceeding10.0% are scheduled
to mature within the next 24 months.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X-1) was downgraded due to the
decline in the credit performance of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydowns of higher quality reference
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 1.5% of the
current balance, compared to 2.0% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 0.6% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 1.4% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September
2000, and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single
Borrower Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 13, compared to 31 at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 12, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 90% to $91.5
million from $894.5 million at securitization. The certificates
are collateralized by 28 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 16% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting
60% of the pool. Two loans, constituting 16% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Twelve loans, constituting 45% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

Four loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $3.8 million (for an average loss
severity of 2%). Currently there are no loans in special
servicing.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 46%.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 71%, compared to 74% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes defeased
loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted average
haircut of 14% to the most recently available net operating income
(NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization
rate of 9.5%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.58X and 1.81X,
respectively, compared to 1.75X and 1.65X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 33% of the pool balance. The
largest conduit loan is the Shaw's Plaza Loan ($14.2 million --
15.5% of the pool) which is secured by a 176,000 SF Shaw's grocery
store anchored shopping center located in Raynham, Massachusetts.
This shopping center was 92% leased as of December 2013, the same
as at last review. This loan is on the master servicer's watchlist
due to its upcoming maturity date in March 2014. Based on year end
2012 financials, the loan had an NOI debt yield of 13%. Moody's
LTV and stressed DSCR are 85% and 1.20X, respectively, compared to
82% and 1.25X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Johnston Road Plaza Loan ($8.98
million -- 9.8% of the pool), which is secured by a 79,500 SF Food
Lion grocery store anchored shopping center located in Charlotte,
North Carolina. The property was 95% leased as of December 2013.
The loan is benefitting from amortization and matures in April
2016. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 83% and 1.13X,
respectively, compared to 85% and 1.12X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Laguna Promenade Loan ($6.7 million
-- 7.3% of the pool), which is secured by a retail property in Elk
Grove, California. The property was 100% leased as of June 2013
and is shadow anchored by Nugget Market. The largest collateral
tenant is Rite Aid which lease approximately 37% of the net
rentable area through its lease expiration in January 2024. The
loan is benefitting from amortization and matures in February
2016. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 71% and 1.42X,
respectively, compared to 87% and 1.15X at the last review.


CALLIDUS DEBT: Moody's Affirms 'B2' Rating on $13MM Class Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Callidus Debt Partners CLO Fund V, Ltd.:

$21,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due November 20, 2020, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on
September 20, 2013 Upgraded to A1 (sf);

$20,600,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due November 20, 2020, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously
on September 20, 2013 Upgraded to Baa3 (sf);

$10,000,000 Class Q-1 Securities Due November 20, 2020 (current
outstanding rated balance $2,121,384.50), Upgraded to Aa3 (sf);
previously on September 20, 2013 Upgraded to A2 (sf).

Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

$30,000,000 Class A-1A Revolving Senior Secured Floating Rate
Notes Due 2020 (current outstanding balance of $26,484,508.79),
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 20, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa(sf);

$270,000,000 Class A-1B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2020 (current outstanding balance of $238,360,579.10), Affirmed
Aaa (sf); previously on September 20, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf);

$23,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2020, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 20, 2013
Upgraded to Aaa (sf);

$13,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2020, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on September 20,
2013 Upgraded to Ba2 (sf).

Callidus Debt Partners CLO Fund V, Ltd., issued in December 2006,
is a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a
portfolio of senior secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment
period ended in November 2013.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios since August 2013. The Class A-1 notes
have been paid down by approximately 11.72% or $35.15 million
since that time. Based on Moody's calculations, the over-
collateralization (OC) ratios for the Class A, Class B, Class C,
and Class D notes are 126.70%, 118.09%, 110.70% and 106.50%,
respectively, versus August 2013 levels of 124.44%, 116.84%,
110.24% and 106.44%, respectively. Moody's also notes the Class Q-
1 securities rated balance has decreased 21.2% since August 2013.

Additionally, Moody's adjusted WARF has declined since the last
rating action owing to a decline in the percentage of securities
whose ratings are on review for downgrade or have a negative
outlook. Based on Moody's calculations the the current WARF is
2442, compared to 2598 in August 2013.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO
documentation by different transactional parties owing to embedded
ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have
adverse consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will continue and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan
market and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the
highest payment priority.

5) Long-dated assets: The presence of assets that mature after the
CLO's legal maturity date exposes the deal to liquidation risk on
those assets. This risk is borne first by investors with the
lowest priority in the capital structure. Moody's assumes that the
terminal value of an asset upon liquidation at maturity will be
equal to the lower of an assumed liquidation value (depending on
the extent to which the asset's maturity lags that of the
liabilities) or the asset's current market value.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes. Below is a summary of the impact
of different default probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on
all of the rated notes (by the difference in the number of notches
versus the current model output, for which a positive difference
corresponds to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (1954)

Class A-1A: 0

Class A-1B: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +2

Class C: +3

Class D: +1

Class Q-1: +3

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (2931)

Class A-1A: 0

Class A-1B: 0

Class A-2: -1

Class B: -2

Class C: -1

Class D: -1

Class Q-1: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in February 2014.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, the weighted
average recovery rate and weighted average spread, are based on
its published methodology and could differ from the trustee's
reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the
collateral pool as having a performing par and principal proceeds
balance of $364.7 million, no defaulted par, a weighted average
default probability of 15.12% (implying a WARF of 2442), a
weighted average recovery rate upon default of 52.1%, a diversity
score of 53 and a weighted average spread of 2.98%.

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.


CHASE COMMERCIAL 2000-2: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. J Secs.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings of two classes of
Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. Series 2000-2 as
follows:

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 21, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 21, 2013 Upgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of Class J was affirmed because the rating is
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating of the IO class, Class X, was affirmed based on the
credit performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF)
of its referenced classes.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description Of Models Used

At this review Moody's uses the excel-based Large Loan Model v 8.6
in formulating a rating recommendation. The large loan model
derives credit enhancement levels based on an aggregation of
adjusted loan-level proceeds derived from Moody's loan-level LTV
ratios. Major adjustments to determining proceeds include
leverage, loan structure, property type and sponsorship. Moody's
also further adjusts these aggregated proceeds for any pooling
benefits associated with loan level diversity and other
concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate pooled certificate balance has decreased by 99.9% to $1
million from $739 million at securitization. The pool has
experienced a cumulative realized loss of $30 million. Class J,
the one remaining principal and interest bond, has already
experienced a $6 million realized loss (80% severity).

The remaining loan is the CVS Pharmacy Loan ($1 million - 100% of
the deal), which is secured by a 10,200 square foot retail
property located in Columbia, South Carolina. The property is
fully leased to CVS/Caremark Corp. The lease and loan term are
coterminous and the final principal distribution date of
January 1, 2020.


CITICORP MORTGAGE 2006-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Secs. to 'B2'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of two tranches
and downgraded the rating of one tranche issued by two issuers.
The tranches are backed by Prime Jumbo RMBS loans issued between
2003 and 2006.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc. 2006-1

Cl. IA-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. IA-8, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Wells Fargo Mortgage Backed Securities 2003-L Trust

Cl. II-A-1, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 10, 2012
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating upgrades are due to improving collateral performance
and/or faster than expected pay down of the bonds. The rating
downgrade is a result of deteriorating performance and structural
features resulting in higher expected losses for the bond than
previously anticipated. In addition, the rating action for
Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc. 2006-1 reflects modeling
updates and corrections to the cash flow model used by Moody's in
rating this transaction. The changes pertain to the calculations
of senior percentage post subordination depletion, delinquency
trigger and Z bond loss allocation.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.6% in January 2014 down from
7.9% in January 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6.0% to 7.0% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this
central scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House
prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2014-A: DBRS Rates Class B-3 Notes 'BB'
----------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Inc. has assigned the following provisional ratings to the
Mortgage Backed-Notes, Series 2014-A (the Notes) issued by
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2014-A (the Trust).

-- Class A at AA (sf)
-- Class A-IO at AA (sf)
-- Class B-1 at A (sf)
-- Class B-2 at BBB (sf)
-- Class B-3 at BB (sf)
-- Class B-4 at B (sf)

Class A-IO is interest only.  The Class A-IO balances represent
notional amounts.

The AA (sf) ratings on the Notes reflect 8.30% of credit
enhancement provided by subordinated Notes.  The A (sf), BBB (sf),
BB (sf) and B (sf) ratings reflect 5.75%, 4.05%, 2.90% and 1.20%
of credit enhancement, respectively.  Other than the specified
classes above, DBRS does not rate any other classes in this
transaction.  The transaction employs a senior-subordinate
shifting-interest cash flow structure.

The Notes are backed by approximately 1,164 loans with a total
principal balance of $378,846,222 as of the cut-off date.  The
loans were acquired by Citigroup Global Markets Realty Corp. from
terminated Citigroup Mortgage Securities Inc. transactions issued
in 2003 and 2004.  The loans are on an average 119 months
seasoned, and all current as of the cut-off date.  The loans have
generally clean payment histories.  All loans were 0 x 30 in the
past 12 months, and 95.2% of the pool were 0 x 30 in the past 36
months.

The loans will be serviced by CitiMortgage, Inc. and Citibank, N.A
will act as the Trust Administrator and Custodian.

The ratings reflect transactional strengths that include high-
quality underlying assets that have generally performed well
through the crisis.  Additionally, comprehensive third-party due
diligence review was performed on 100% of the portfolio with
respect to regulatory compliance, property valuations, data
integrity, payment history and title search.

The representations and warranties provided in this transaction
generally conform to the core list of representations and
warranties DBRS would expect to receive for a RMBS transactions
with seasoned collateral with the exception of the fraud
representation.  DBRS believes the weakness of not having the
fraud representation is mitigated by significant loan seasoning
and corresponding clean performance history.  The loans in this
transaction have all made a minimum of 36 consecutive monthly
payments and have been current in the past 12 months.  Some of the
representations and warranties provided also have knowledge
qualifiers.  For such representation and warranties, even if the
Seller did not have actual knowledge of the breach, the Seller is
still required to remedy the breach in the same manner as if no
knowledge qualifier had been made.

The enforcement mechanism for breaches of representations includes
automatic breach reviews by a third-party reviewer for any
seriously delinquent loans, any loans that incur loss upon
liquidation and any actual notices provided to the Trust
Administrator.  Resolution of disputes are ultimately subject to
determination in an arbitration proceeding.


CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2014-A: S&P Rates Class B3 Notes 'BB'
--------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2014-A's $374.3 million mortgage-
backed notes series 2014-A.

The note issuance is a residential mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by residential mortgage loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The loan's characteristics that are more risky than S&P's
      archetypical prime pool, from a credit perspective;

   -- The pool's geographic diversity compared to similar
      transactions; and

   -- The credit enhancement provided, as well as the associated
      structural deal mechanics.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2014-A

Class       Rating          Amount (mil. $)        Interest
                                                rate (%)(i)
A           AA (sf)                347.401          4.00000
A-IO        AA (sf)                   (ii)            (iii)
B1          A (sf)                   9.661          5.43877
B2          BBB (sf)                 6.440          5.43877
B3          BB (sf)                  4.357          5.43877
B4          B (sf)                   6.441          5.43877
B5          NR                       4.546          5.43877

  (i) The notes are subject to a net WAC cap.
(ii) The notional amount for class A-IO will equal the aggregate
      class A outstanding balance.
(iii) Equal to the excess, if any, of the net WAC that's higher
      than 4.00%.
IO -- Interest-only.
NR -- Not rated.
WAC -- Weighted average coupon.


COMM 2004-RS1: S&P Lowers Ratings on 9 Note Classes to 'D'
----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on 11
classes from COMM 2004-RS1, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS) resecuritized real estate mortgage investment
conduit (re-REMIC) transaction.  At the same time, S&P affirmed
its 'B- (sf)' rating on class B-2 from the same transaction.

The downgrades and affirmation reflect S&P's analysis of the
transaction's liability structure and the underlying collateral's
credit characteristics using its global collateralized debt
obligations (CDOs) of pooled structured finance assets criteria.

The downgrades on classes C and D also reflect the results of the
largest obligor default test, which is part of the supplemental
stress test.  The largest obligor default test assesses if a
tranche from a rated transaction of pooled structured finance
liabilities can withstand the default of a minimum number of the
largest credit or obligor exposures within an asset pool,
factoring in the underlying assets' credit quality.  The
downgrades on classes E through N to 'D (sf)' primarily reflect
S&P's expectation that these classes are unlikely to be repaid in
full.

According to the Feb. 4, 2014, trustee report, COMM 2004-RS1 was
collateralized by 12 CMBS tranches ($64.9 million) from 10
distinct transactions issued in 2001 or 2004.  Standard & Poor's
deems four ($25.9 million, 39.9%) of the underlying CMBS
collateral tranches to be defaulted.

COMM 2004-RS1 has the highest exposure to the following two
transactions:

   -- GE Commercial Mortgage Corp.'s series 2004-C2 (classes G, H,
      J; $14.1 million, 21.7%); and

   -- Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Inc.'s series 2004-1
      (class H; $12.0 million, 18.5%).

The rating actions remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and reflect S&P's analysis of the
transaction's liability structure and the underlying collateral's
credit characteristics.

RATINGS LOWERED
COMM 2004-RS1

          Rating                 Rating
Class     To                     From
C         CCC- (sf)              CCC+ (sf)
D         CCC- (sf)              CCC (sf)
E         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
F         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
G         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
H         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
J         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
K         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
L         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
M         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)
N         D (sf)                 CCC- (sf)

RATING AFFRIRMED
COMM 2004-RS1

Class    Rating
B-2      B- (sf)


CPS AUTO 2014-A: Moody's Assigns '(P)B2' Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to the
notes to be issued by CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2014-A. This will
be the first senior/subordinated transaction of the year for
Consumer Portfolio Services, Inc. (CPS).

Issuer: CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2014-A

Class A Notes, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Class B Notes, Assigned (P)A1 (sf)

Class C Notes, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Class D Notes, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

Class E Notes, Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's said the ratings are based on the quality of the
underlying auto loans and their expected performance, the strength
of the structure, the availability of excess spread over the life
of the transaction, the experience and expertise of CPS as
servicer, and the backup servicing arrangement with Aa3-rated
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Auto Loan-Backed ABS" published in May 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the vehicles securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly
on the US job market and the market for used vehicles. Other
reasons for better-than-expected performance include changes to
servicing practices that enhance collections or refinancing
opportunities that result in prepayments.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's original
expectations as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or
deterioration in the value of the vehicles securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly
on the US job market and the market for used vehicles. Other
reasons for worse-than-expected performance include poor
servicing, error on the part of transaction parties, inadequate
transaction governance and fraud.


CPS AUTO 2014-A: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB+ Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2014-A's $180 million asset-
backed notes.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securitization backed by
subprime auto loan receivables.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of March 5,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The availability of approximately 44.0%, 36.5%, 30.4%,
      27.1%, and 25.5% of credit support for the class A, B, C, D,
      and E notes, respectively, based on stressed cash flow
      scenarios (including excess spread).  These credit support
      levels provide coverage of 2.8x, 2.3x, 1.75x, 1.58x, and
      1.17x its 15.0%-15.4% expected cumulative net loss range for
      the class A, B, C, D, and E notes, respectively.

   -- The expectation that, under a moderate stress scenario of
      1.75x S&P's expected net loss level, the rating on the class
      A notes will not decline by more than one rating category
      during the first year, and the ratings on class B through E
      notes will not decline by more than two rating categories
      during the first year, all else being equal.  This is
      consistent with S&P's credit stability criteria, which
      outlines the outer bounds of credit deterioration equal to a
      one-category downgrade within the first year for 'AA' rated
      securities and a two-category downgrade within the first
      year for 'A', 'BBB', and 'BB' rated securities.

   -- The preliminary rated notes' underlying credit enhancement,
      which is in the form of subordination,
      overcollateralization, a reserve account, and excess spread
      for the class A, B, C, D, and E notes.

   -- The timely interest and principal payments made to the
      preliminary rated notes under S&P's stressed cash flow
      modeling scenarios, which S&P believes are appropriate for
      the assigned preliminary ratings.

   -- The transaction's payment and credit enhancement structure,
      which includes a noncurable performance trigger.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2014-A

Class     Rating        Type          Interest          Amount
                                      rate(i)         (mil. $)
A         AA- (sf)      Senior        Fixed            128.700
B         A (sf)        Subordinate   Fixed             20.700
C         BBB (sf)      Subordinate   Fixed             16.650
D         BB+ (sf)      Subordinate   Fixed              9.000
E         B+ (sf)       Subordinate   Fixed              4.950

  (i) The actual coupons of these tranches will be determined on
      the pricing date.


CROWN POINT II: S&P Affirms 'BB-' Rating on Class B-2L Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on Crown
Point CLO II Ltd./Crown Point CLO II LLC's $412.90 million
floating-rate notes following the transaction's effective date as
of Jan. 16, 2014.

Most U.S. cash flow collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) close
before purchasing the full amount of their targeted level of
portfolio collateral.  On the closing date, the collateral manager
typically covenants to purchase the remaining collateral within
the guidelines specified in the transaction documents to reach the
target level of portfolio collateral.  Typically, the CLO
transaction documents specify a date by which the targeted level
of portfolio collateral must be reached.  The "effective date" for
a CLO transaction is usually the earlier of the date on which the
transaction acquires the target level of portfolio collateral, or
the date defined in the transaction documents.  Most transaction
documents contain provisions directing the trustee to request the
rating agencies that have issued ratings upon closing to affirm
the ratings issued on the closing date after reviewing the
effective date portfolio (typically referred to as an "effective
date rating affirmation").

"An effective date rating affirmation reflects our opinion that
the portfolio collateral purchased by the issuer, as reported to
us by the trustee and collateral manager, in combination with the
transaction's structure, provides sufficient credit support to
maintain the ratings that we assigned on the transaction's closing
date.  The effective date reports provide a summary of certain
information that we used in our analysis and the results of our
review based on the information presented to us," S&P said.

S&P believes the transaction may see some benefit from allowing a
window of time after the closing date for the collateral manager
to acquire the remaining assets for a CLO transaction.  This
window of time is typically referred to as a "ramp-up period."
Because some CLO transactions may acquire most of their assets
from the new issue leveraged loan market, the ramp-up period may
give collateral managers the flexibility to acquire a more diverse
portfolio of assets.

"For a CLO that has not purchased its full target level of
portfolio collateral by the closing date, our ratings on the
closing date and prior to our effective date review are generally
based on the application of our criteria to a combination of
purchased collateral, collateral committed to be purchased, and
the indicative portfolio of assets provided to us by the
collateral manager, and may also reflect our assumptions about the
transaction's investment guidelines.  This is because not all
assets in the portfolio have been purchased," S&P added.

"When we receive a request to issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we perform quantitative and qualitative analysis of
the transaction in accordance with our criteria to assess whether
the initial ratings remain consistent with the credit enhancement
based on the effective date collateral portfolio.  Our analysis
relies on the use of CDO Evaluator to estimate a scenario default
rate at each rating level based on the effective date portfolio,
full cash flow modeling to determine the appropriate percentile
break-even default rate at each rating level, the application of
our supplemental tests, and the analytical judgment of a rating
committee," S&P noted.

"In our published effective date report, we discuss our analysis
of the information provided by the transaction's trustee and
collateral manager in support of their request for effective date
rating affirmation.  In most instances, we intend to publish an
effective date report each time we issue an effective date rating
affirmation on a publicly rated U.S. cash flow CLO," S&P said.

On an ongoing basis after S&P issues an effective date rating
affirmation, it will periodically review whether, in its view, the
current ratings on the notes remain consistent with the credit
quality of the assets, the credit enhancement available to support
the notes, and other factors, and take rating actions as it deems
necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Crown Point CLO II Ltd./Crown Point CLO II LLC

Class                      Rating                       Amount
                                                      (mil. $)
A-1L                       AAA (sf)                     157.80
A-2L                       AA (sf)                       20.80
A-3L (deferrable)          A (sf)                        19.80
B-1L (deferrable)          BBB (sf)                      18.20
B-2L (deferrable)          BB-(sf)                       10.90
B-3L (deferrable)          B (sf)                         6.80
Combination notes(i)       AA (sf)                      178.60
Subordinated notes         NR                            25.65

  (i) The combination notes consist of a maximum aggregate
      principal balance in the amount of $178.60 million, composed
      of $157.80 million of the class A-1L notes and $20.80
      million of the class A-2L notes.
  NR-Not rated.


CSMC TRUST 2014-SAF1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class B-3 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to CSMC
Trust 2014-SAF1's $291.416 million certificates series 2014-SAF1.

The note issuance is a residential mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by first-lien, fixed-rate residential mortgage
loans secured by single-family residences to prime borrowers.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the pool's high-quality
collateral and the credit enhancement and associated structural
deal mechanics.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

CSMC Trust 2014-SAF1

Class       Rating          Amount            Interest
                           (mil. $)           rate(i)
A-11        AAA (sf)        114.864           3.500
A-X-2       AAA (sf)        Notional(ii)      0.500(iii)
A-X-12      AAA (sf)        Notional(ii)      0.366(iv)
A-X-11      AAA (sf)        Notional(ii)      0.866(v)
A-1         AAA (sf)        29.000            2.500
Z-1         AAA (sf)        1.526             39.832(vi)
A-4         AAA (sf)        30.526            Net WAC
A-14        AAA (sf)        25.657            Net WAC
A-8         AAA (sf)        100.000           4.000
A-X-8       AAA (sf)        Notional(v)       0.366(iv)
B-1         AA (sf)         4.460             Net WAC
B-2         A (sf)          5.353             Net WAC
B-3         BB (sf)         5.501             Net WAC
B-4         B (sf)          5.055             Net WAC
B-5         NR              5.948             Net WAC
A-2         AAA (sf)        114.864           Net WAC
A-12        AAA (sf)        114.864           4.000
A-5         AAA (sf)        171.047           Net WAC

   (i) The certificates are subject to a net WAC cap.
  (ii) The class A-X-2, and A-X-12 certificates will accrue
       interest on a notional amount equal to the class A-11
       certificates' principal amount.
(iii) The interest rate on the class A-X-2 will be an annual rate
       equal to the excess, if any, of (a) the lesser of the net
       WAC on the distribution date and 4.00% per year or (b) the
       lesser of the net WAC on the distribution date and 3.500%
       per year.
  (iv) The interest rate on the classes A-X-12 and A-X-8
       certificates will be an annual rate equal to the excess, if
       any, of the lesser of the net WAC over 4.00%.
   (v) The interest rate on the class A-X-11 certificate will be
       an annual rate equal to the excess, if any, of (a) the net
       WAC for such distribution date over (b) 3.50% per year.
  (vi) The class Z-1 certificates comprise two components, a
       principal and interest component and an interest-only
       component. The certificate interest rate of the principal
       and interest component will be an annual rate equal to the
       net WAC.  The certificate interest rate on the interest-
       only component will be an annual rate equal to the excess,
       if any, of the net WAC for that distribution date over
       2.500% per year.  The interest-only component will accrue
       interest on a notional amount equal to the principal amount
       of the class A-1 certificates.

NR -- Not rated.
WAC -- Weighted average coupon.
IO -- Interest only.
MACR -- Modifiable and exchangeable certificate.
NR -- Not rated.
WAC -- Weighted average coupon.
IO -- Interest only.


ECP CLO 2013-5: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
--------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on ECP CLO
2013-5 Ltd./ECP CLO 2013-5 LLC's $379.10 million floating-rate
notes following the transaction's effective date as of Aug. 12,
2013.

Most U.S. cash flow collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) close
before purchasing the full amount of their targeted level of
portfolio collateral.  On the closing date, the collateral manager
typically covenants to purchase the remaining collateral within
the guidelines specified in the transaction documents to reach the
target level of portfolio collateral.  Typically, the CLO
transaction documents specify a date by which the targeted level
of portfolio collateral must be reached.  The "effective date" for
a CLO transaction is usually the earlier of the date on which the
transaction acquires the target level of portfolio collateral or
the date defined in the transaction documents.  Most transaction
documents contain provisions directing the trustee to request the
rating agencies that have issued ratings upon closing to affirm
the ratings issued on the closing date after reviewing the
effective date portfolio (typically referred to as an "effective
date rating affirmation").

"An effective date rating affirmation reflects our opinion that
the portfolio collateral purchased by the issuer, as reported to
us by the trustee and collateral manager, in combination with the
transaction's structure, provides sufficient credit support to
maintain the ratings that we assigned on the transaction's closing
date.  The effective date reports provide a summary of certain
information that we used in our analysis and the results of our
review based on the information presented to us," S&P said.

"We believe the transaction may see some benefit from allowing a
window of time after the closing date for the collateral manager
to acquire the remaining assets for a CLO transaction.  This
window of time is typically referred to as a "ramp-up period."
Because some CLO transactions may acquire most of their assets
from the new issue leveraged loan market, the ramp-up period may
give collateral managers the flexibility to acquire a more diverse
portfolio of assets," S&P added.

For a CLO that has not purchased its full target level of
portfolio collateral by the closing date, S&P's ratings on the
closing date and prior to its effective date review are generally
based on the application of its criteria to a combination of
purchased collateral, collateral committed to be purchased, and
the indicative portfolio of assets provided to S&P by the
collateral manager.  The ratings may also reflect S&P's
assumptions about the transaction's investment guidelines.  This
is because not all assets in the portfolio have been purchased.

"When we receive a request to issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we perform quantitative and qualitative analysis of
the transaction in accordance with our criteria to assess whether
the initial ratings remain consistent with the credit enhancement
based on the effective date collateral portfolio.  Our analysis
relies on the use of CDO Evaluator to estimate a scenario default
rate at each rating level based on the effective date portfolio,
full cash-flow modeling to determine the appropriate percentile
break-even default rate at each rating level, the application of
our supplemental tests, and the analytical judgment of a rating
committee," S&P added.

In S&P's published effective date report, it discusses its
analysis of the information provided by the transaction's trustee
and collateral manager in support of their request for effective
date rating affirmation.  In most instances, S&P intends to
publish an effective date report each time it issues an effective
date rating affirmation on a publicly rated U.S. cash flow CLO.

On an ongoing basis after S&P issues an effective date rating
affirmation, it will periodically review whether, in its view, the
current ratings on the notes remain consistent with the credit
quality of the assets, the credit enhancement available to support
the notes, and other factors, and S&P will take rating actions as
it deems necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

ECP CLO 2013-5 Ltd./ECP CLO 2013-5 LLC

Class                 Rating         Amount (mil. $)
A-1                   AAA (sf)                260.00
A-2                   AA (sf)                  42.80
B (deferrable)        A (sf)                   28.80
C (deferrable)        BBB (sf)                 20.00
D (deferrable)        BB (sf)                  19.50
E (deferrable         B (sf)                    8.00


GE COMMERCIAL 2004-C3: S&P Lowers Rating on Class K Notes to 'D'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on four
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from GE
Commercial Mortgage Corp., 2004-C3, a U.S. commercial mortgage-
backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  Concurrently, S&P lowered
its rating on the class K certificates from the same transaction
to 'D (sf)'.  Furthermore, S&P affirmed its ratings on seven other
classes of certificates from the same transaction, including its
'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-1 interest-only (IO)
certificates.

The rating actions follow S&P's analysis of the transaction,
primarily using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS
transactions.  S&P's analysis included a review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets in the
pool, the transaction's structure, and the liquidity available to
the trust.

"Our rating upgrades on the class B, C, D, and E certificates
reflect our view that the available credit enhancement levels for
the classes are greater than our most recent estimate of the
necessary credit enhancement required for the current ratings.
The upgrades also reflect our views regarding the current and
future performance of the transaction's collateral, and the fact
that the largest loan in the pool, 731 Lexington Avenue (Bloomberg
Headquarters)($46.8 million; 8.7%), and the second-largest loan in
the pool, Casa del Monte Manufactured Housing Community ($20.6
million; 3.8%), both paid in full on February 28, 2014," S&P said.

S&P lowered its rating on the class K certificates to 'D (sf)' to
reflect its expectation that the accumulated interest shortfalls
will remain outstanding for the foreseeable future.  The class K
certificates have experienced interest shortfalls for five
consecutive months.

As of the Feb. 10, 2014, trustee remittance report, the trust
experienced net monthly interest shortfalls totaling $70,404.  The
interest shortfalls were primarily related to appraisal
subordinate entitlement reduction (ASER) amounts of $40,709; a
shortfall due to a reduced amount of interest ($42,874) as a
result of a loan modification; special servicing fees of $3,391,
and a workout fee of $581.  The current monthly interest
shortfalls affected all classes subordinate to and including class
K.

S&P's affirmations of the ratings on principal and interest
certificates reflect its expectation that the available credit
enhancement for these classes will be within its estimate of the
necessary credit enhancement required for the current ratings.
The affirmed ratings also reflect S&P's analysis of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets, as well
as liquidity support available to the classes.

While available credit enhancement levels might suggest further
upgrades, S&P notes that 91.6% of the remaining pool balance as of
the February 2014 reporting period was scheduled to mature by
August 2014, and this tempered its rating actions.

S&P's affirmation of its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-1 IO
certificates reflects its current criteria for rating IO
securities.

RATINGS RAISED

GE Commercial Mortgage Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C3

                    Rating
Class          To            From                Credit
                                        enhancement (%)
B              AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)             24.65
C              AAA (sf)      AA (sf)              21.78
D              AA- (sf)      A+ (sf)              16.68
E              A (sf)        A- (sf)              13.81

RATING LOWERED

GE Commercial Mortgage Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C3

                    Rating
Class          To            From                Credit
                                        enhancement (%)
K              D (sf)        CCC- (sf)             2.64

RATINGS AFFIRMED

GE Commercial Mortgage Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C3

Class         Rating                  Credit
                             enhancement (%)
A-4           AAA (sf)                 30.71
A-1A          AAA (sf)                 30.71
F             BBB+ (sf)                 10.93
G             BB- (sf)                  8.70
H             CCC+ (sf)                 5.19
J             CCC (sf)                  3.92
X-1           AAA (sf)                   N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


GE COMMERCIAL 2006-C1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class B Notes to CCC-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on two
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from GE
Commercial Mortgage Corp. Series 2006-C1 Trust, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  At the same time,
S&P affirmed its ratings on five other classes from the same
transaction.

S&P's rating actions reflect its analysis of the transaction
primarily using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS.
S&P's analysis included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of all of the remaining assets in the pool, the
transaction structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

S&P lowered its rating on the class A-J certificates to 'BB- (sf)'
because there is reduced liquidity available to this class.

"We lowered our rating on the class B certificates to 'CCC- (sf)'
because we believe the accumulated interest shortfalls will remain
outstanding for the foreseeable future.  As of the Feb. 10, 2014,
trustee remittance report, the trust experienced monthly interest
shortfalls totaling $378,837, primarily related to $329,471 in
appraisal subordinate entitlement reduction amounts on four
($114.1 million, 9.3%) of the seven specially serviced assets
($136.0 million, 11.0), $47,777 special servicing fees, and $1,090
workout fees.  The current interest shortfalls affected all
classes subordinate to and including class B," S&P said.

"The affirmations of our ratings on the principal and interest
certificates reflect our expectation that the available credit
enhancement for these classes will be within our estimate of the
necessary credit enhancement required for the current outstanding
ratings.  The affirmations also reflect our review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets, as well
as the transaction-level changes," S&P added.

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-W interest-only
(IO) certificates based on its criteria for rating IO securities.

RATINGS LOWERED

GE Commercial Mortgage Corp. Series 2006-C1 Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-C1

            Rating
Class   To           From                  Credit
                                  enhancement (%)
A-J     BB- (sf)     BB (sf)                 8.02
B       CCC- (sf)    CCC (sf)                5.08

RATINGS AFFIRMED
GE Commercial Mortgage Corp. Series 2006-C1 Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-C1


Class      Rating                   Credit
                           enhancement (%)
A-AB      AAA (sf)                   32.98
A-4       AAA (sf)                   32.98
A-1A      AAA (sf)                   32.98
A-M       AAA (sf)                   19.93
X-W       AAA (sf)                     N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


GMAC COMMERCIAL 2003-C3: S&P Raises Rating on Class K Notes to BB+
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
H, J, and K commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.'s series 2003-C3, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.

The upgrades follow S&P's analysis of the transaction, primarily
using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions.
S&P's analysis included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining loans in the pool, the transaction
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

The raised ratings reflect Standard & Poor's expected credit
enhancement, which S&P believes is greater than its most recent
estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the respective
ratings.  The upgrades also reflect S&P's views regarding
available liquidity support, interest shortfall history, the
current and future performance of the transaction's collateral,
and the continued reduction of the trust balance since issuance.
In addition, S&P's analysis took into account that the special
servicer, CWCapital Asset Management LLC (CWCapital), informed S&P
that subsequent to the filing of the February 2014 trustee
remittance report, the 41 University Drive loan ($9.7 million,
31.1%) was repaid in full (including all servicer advances).
Moreover, S&P took into consideration that four ($15.9 million,
51.1%) of the remaining loans are fully amortizing loans secured
by 100%-leased single-tenant properties.

Using servicer-provided financial information, S&P calculated an
adjusted Standard & Poor's debt service coverage (DSC) ratio of
1.10x and a loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 64.6% for the remaining
loans in the pool, excluding the 41 University Drive loan.

As of the Feb. 10, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool had an aggregate trust balance of $31.2 million, down from
$1.334 billion at issuance.  The pool comprises six loans, down
from 81 loans at issuance.  No loans are reported on the master
servicer's watchlist.  In addition, no loans will be specially
serviced after the full repayment of the 41 University Drive loan,
the second-largest loan in the pool, secured by an 89,048-sq.-ft.
office property in Newton, Pa.  The largest loan in the pool is
the fully amortizing Shaw's Lewiston loan ($10.1 million, 32.4%).
The loan is secured by a 64,657-sq.-ft. grocery store in Lewiston,
Maine.  The property is 100%-leased to a subsidiary of Albertson's
LLC; the lease expires in February 2024, which is the same month
the loan matures.

RATINGS RAISED

GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2003-C3

                    Rating                      Credit
Class          To          From        enhancement (%)
H              AAA (sf)     BB- (sf)             82.92
J              AA+ (sf)     CCC+ (sf)            40.14
K              BB+ (sf)     CCC- (sf)            13.40



GOLDENTREE VIII: Moody's Rates $41.7MM Class E Notes '(P)Ba3'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to
seven classes of notes to be issued by GoldenTree Loan
Opportunities VIII, Limited.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

  $364,800,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class A Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

  $56,800,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

  $15,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2026
  (the "Class B-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

  $28,500,000 Class C Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
  due 2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

  $38,800,000 Class D Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
  due 2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

  $41,700,000 Class E Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
  due 2026 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

  $6,000,000 Class F Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

The Class A Notes, Class B-1 Notes, Class B-2 Notes, Class C
Notes, Class D Notes, Class E Notes and Class F Notes are referred
to herein, collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale of
financial instruments, but these ratings only represent Moody's
preliminary credit opinions. Upon a conclusive review of a
transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor to
assign definitive ratings. A definitive rating, if any, may differ
from a provisional rating.

Ratings Rationale

Moody's provisional ratings of the Rated Notes address the
expected losses posed to noteholders. The provisional ratings
reflect the risks due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of
assets, the transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics
of the underlying assets.

GoldenTree VIII is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will
be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist of
first lien senior secured loans and senior secured notes, and up
to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans, DIP
collateral obligations, non-senior secured notes and unsecured
loans. The Issuer's documents require the portfolio to be at least
60% ramped as of the closing date.

GoldenTree Asset Management LP (the "Manager") will direct the
selection, acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of
the Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's four year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk and credit improved assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue subordinated
notes. The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage
tests which, if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds
to pay down the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in February 2014.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount: $600,000,000

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2750

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrades or Downgrades of the Ratings:

The performance of the Rated Notes is subject to uncertainty. The
performance of the Rated Notes is sensitive to the performance of
the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and
credit conditions that may change. The Manager's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
performance of the Rated Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was an
important component in determining the ratings assigned to the
Rated Notes. This sensitivity analysis includes increased default
probability relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2750 to 3162)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2750 to 3575)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -4

Class B-2 Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -4

Moody's V Scores provide a relative assessment of the quality of
available credit information and the potential variability around
the various inputs to a rating determination. The V Score ranks
transactions by the potential for significant rating changes owing
to uncertainty around the assumptions due to data quality,
historical performance, the level of disclosure, transaction
complexity, the modeling and the transaction governance that
underlie the ratings. V Scores apply to the entire transaction,
rather than individual tranches.


GP PORTFOLIO: S&P Assigns Preliminary BB Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to GP Portfolio Trust 2014-GPP's $460.2 million commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates series 2014-GPP.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities backed by one two-year, floating-rate commercial
mortgage loan totaling $460.2 million, with three one-year
extension options, secured by first-mortgage liens on the fee
interests in 94 buildings and parcels (three of which consist of
two buildings located on a single parcel) that form 33 office,
mixed-use, and industrial properties, as well as six vacant land
parcels adjacent to some of these assets.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Feb. 27,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's
historical and projected performance, the sponsors' and managers'
experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and
the transaction's structure.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

GP Portfolio Trust 2014-GPP

Class          Rating(i)               Amount ($)
A              AAA (sf)               260,800,000
X-CP           BB (sf)                368,148,000(ii)
X-EXT          BB (sf)                460,185,000(ii)
B              AA (sf)                 39,200,000
C              A+ (sf)                 35,300,000
D              BBB- (sf)               91,700,000
E              BB (sf)                 33,185,000

   (i) The certificates will be issued to qualified institutional
       buyers according to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of
       1933.
  (ii) Notional balance.


GREENWICH CAPITAL 2007-GG9: S&P Affirms CCC- Rating on Cl. B Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on 10
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Greenwich Capital Commercial Funding Corp.'s series 2007-GG9, a
U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.

S&P's affirmations on the nine principal- and interest-paying
classes follow its analysis of the transaction, primarily using
its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions.
S&P's analysis included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining assets in the pool, the transaction
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying classes
reflect Standard & Poor's expectation that the available credit
enhancement for these classes will be within S&P's estimate of the
necessary credit enhancement required for the current ratings.
S&P also affirmed these ratings to reflect its views regarding the
current and future performance of the transaction's collateral as
well as the liquidity support available to the classes.

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X interest-only
(IO) certificates to reflect its current criteria for rating IO
securities.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Greenwich Capital Commercial Funding Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-GG9

Class          Rating            Credit enhancement (%)
A-2            AAA (sf)                           33.51
A-3            AAA (sf)                           33.51
A-AB           AAA (sf)                           33.51
A-4            A (sf)                             33.51
A-1-A          A (sf)                             33.51
A-M            B+ (sf)                            21.48
A-MFX          B+ (sf)                            21.48
A-J            CCC (sf)                           10.95
B              CCC- (sf)                          10.35
X              AAA (sf)                             N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


GS MORTGAGE 2011-GC3: DBRS Assigns BB Rating to Class E Securities
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS has confirmed the ratings of GS Mortgage Securities Trust,
Series 2011-GC3 as follows:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (high) (sf)
-- Class C at A (high) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (sf)
-- Class E at BB (sf)
-- Class F at B (sf)
-- Class X at AAA (sf)

All trends are Stable.  DBRS does not rate the first lost piece,
Class G.

The rating confirmations reflect the transaction's continued
stable performance.  The collateral consists of 56 fixed-rate
loans secured by 110 commercial properties.  The current pool
balance of $1.36 billion represents a collateral reduction of 4.1%
since issuance in March 2011.  The transaction also benefits from
defeasance collateral, as one loan, representing 0.3% of the
current pool balance, is fully defeased.  Overall, the pool has
reported stable performance, with the largest 15 loans in the
transaction reporting a weighted-average debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) and debt yield of 1.93 times (x) and 13.1%,
respectively, according to YE2012 reporting.

At issuance, DBRS shadow-rated two loans, representing 5.8% of the
current pool balance, as investment grade.  DBRS confirmed that
the performance of the loans remains consistent with investment-
grade loan characteristics.

As of the January 2014 remittance report, there are six loans on
the servicer's watchlist, representing 13.9% of the pool.

The Lakes on Post Oak loan (Prospectus ID#2) is secured by a
portfolio of three Class A office buildings totaling 1.2 million
square feet (sf) in the southern portion of Houston's Galleria
submarket.  The properties feature a diverse mix of tenants,
consisting of companies in the energy, architecture and design,
engineering, banking and law firm sectors.  According to the
September 2013 rent roll, the portfolio was 92.4% occupied, with
the largest tenant - Bechtel Oil, Gas & Chemicals (Bechtel) -
occupying 40.2% of the net rentable area on several leases
expiring in June 2024.  Bechtel, which occupies one entire
building and part of another, recently executed a ten-year lease
renewal.  The loan was added to the servicer's watchlist for the
upcoming lease expirations of four tenants in the next four
months, which combined, occupy approximately 210,000 sf.
According to CoStar, approximately 90,000 sf occupied by these
tenants is available for lease beginning in April and June.  The
Q3 2013 DSCR remained stable at 1.92x, which should insulate the
property from a temporary decrease in cash flow as a result of a
period of increased vacancy.

The Rancho Tuscana loan (Prospectus ID#30) is secured by a garden-
style multifamily property in Oceanside, California.  The loan was
added to the servicer's watchlist after the YE2012 DSCR decreased
to 1.09x, below the CREFC acceptable threshold of 1.10x.
According to Q3 2013 reporting, the DSCR remains similarly
depressed at 1.08x.  While revenue has remained flat since
issuance, there has been an increase in real estate taxes and
repair and maintenance expenses, which has resulted in a decrease
in the DSCR.  As of October 2013, the subject was 95.6% occupied,
with an average rental rate of $1,210 per unit, which compares
similarly with competing multifamily product in the submarket.
Despite the decline in performance, the loan remains current.

The DBRS analysis included an in-depth review of these five
watchlist loans as well as the top 15 loans and the shadow-rated
loans, which represent approximately 73.0% of the current pool
balance.


HALCYON LOAN 2014-1: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class F Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following ratings to notes and loans issued by Halcyon Loan
Advisors Funding 2014-1 Ltd.

  $2,250,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2026
  (the "Class X Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

  $199,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa
  (sf)

  $50,000,000 Class A Loans due 2026 (the "Class A Loans"),
  Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

  Up to $50,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes
  due 2026 (the "Class A-2 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
  Aaa (sf)

  $33,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class B-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2
  (sf)

  $20,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2026
  (the "Class B-2 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

  $21,500,000 Class C Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

  $24,500,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3
  (sf)

  $18,000,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

  $10,000,000 Class F Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class F Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's ratings of the Class X Notes, the Class A-1 Notes, the
Class A Loans, the Class A-2 Notes, the Class B-1 Notes, the Class
B-2 Notes, the Class C Notes, the Class D Notes, the Class E Notes
and the Class F Notes (collectively, the "Rated Notes and Loans")
address the expected losses posed to the holders of the Rated
Notes and Loans. The ratings reflect the risks due to defaults on
the underlying portfolio of loans, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

Halcyon 2014-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes and
loans will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first
lien senior secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio
must be invested in senior secured loans, cash and eligible
investments and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second
lien loans and unsecured loans. The Issuer's documents require the
portfolio to be at least 69% ramped as of the closing date.

Halcyon Loan Advisors 2014-1 LLC (the "Manager"), a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Halcyon Loan Advisors LP, will direct the selection,
acquisition and disposition of collateral on behalf of the Issuer
and may engage in trading activity, including discretionary
trading, during the transaction's four year reinvestment period.
Thereafter, purchases are permitted using principal proceeds from
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk obligations, and are subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes and Loans, the Issuer will issue
one class of subordinated notes. The transaction incorporates
interest and par coverage tests which, if triggered, divert
interest and principal proceeds to pay down the notes and loans in
order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash-flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in February 2014.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount of $400,000,000

Diversity of 45

WARF of 2944

Weighted Average Spread of 4.20%

Weighted Average Coupon of 7.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate of 48.5%

Weighted Average Life of 8 years

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors That Would Lead to Upgrades or Downgrades of the Ratings

The performance of the Rated Notes and Loans is subject to
uncertainty. The performance of the Rated Notes and Loans is
sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which in
turn depends on economic and credit conditions that may change.
The Manager's investment decisions and management of the
transaction will also affect the performance of the Rated Notes
and Loans.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was an
important component in determining the ratings assigned to the
Rated Notes and Loans. This sensitivity analysis includes an
increased default probability relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
and Loans (shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus
the current model output, whereby a negative difference
corresponds to higher expected losses), holding all other factors
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2944 to 3386)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A Loans: 0

Class A-2 Notes: 0

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Class F Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2944 to 3827)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A Loans: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -3

Class B-2 Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -2

Moody's V Scores provide a relative assessment of the quality of
available credit information and the potential variability around
the various inputs to a rating determination. The V Score ranks
transactions by the potential for significant rating changes owing
to uncertainty around the assumptions due to data quality,
historical performance, the level of disclosure, transaction
complexity, the modeling, and the transaction governance that
underlie the ratings. V Scores apply to the entire transaction,
rather than individual tranches.


ICG US CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to ICG US
CLO 2014-1 Ltd./ICG US CLO 2014-1 LLC's $330.25 million floating-
rate notes.

The note issuance is a CLO securitization backed by a revolving
pool consisting primarily of broadly syndicated senior secured
loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the rated notes through
      the subordination of cash flows that are payable to the
      subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not counting excess spread), and cash-flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation (CDO) criteria.

   -- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
      bankruptcy remote.

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which primarily
      comprises broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash-flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned ratings under various interest-rate
      scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from 0. 2400% to
      12.7531%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

   -- The transaction's reinvestment overcollateralization test, a
      failure of which will lead to the reclassification of excess
      interest proceeds that are available before paying uncapped
      administrative expenses and fees, subordinated hedge and
      synthetic security termination payments, portfolio manager
      incentive fees, and subordinated note payments to principal
      proceeds to purchase additional collateral assets during the
      reinvestment period.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

ICG US CLO 2014-1 Ltd./ICG US CLO 2014-1 LLC

Class               Rating         Amount
                                   (Mil. $)
A-1                 AAA (sf)        212.25
A-2                 AA (sf)          55.75
B (deferrable)      A (sf)           20.50
C (deferrable)      BBB (sf)         19.00
D (deferrable)      BB (sf)          15.25
E (deferrable)      B (sf)            7.50
Combination notes   AA (sf)         268.00
Subordinated notes  NR              40.925


JP MORGAN 1999-C8: Moody's Affirms Ratings on 3 Cert. Classes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on three
classes in J.P. Morgan Commercial Mortgage Finance Corp., Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1999-C8 as follows:

Cl. G, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2013 Upgraded to
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on one P&I class was affirmed because the transaction's
key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, Moody's
stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the transaction's
Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable ranges. In addtion,
the risk of interest shortfalls to class G still remains. The
rating on one P&I class was affirmed because the rating is
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed because the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes are consistent with Moody's expectations.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 4.1% of the
current balance, compared to 2.7% at Moody's last review.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September
2000, and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single
Borrower Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 8, the same as at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $12 million
from $732 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 11 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 20% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 99% of
the pool. One loan, constituting less than 1% of the pool, has
defeased and is secured by US government securities.

Four loans, constituting 34% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

Seventeen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $55 million (for an average loss
severity of 46%). One loan, constituting 5% of the pool, is
currently in special servicing. The specially serviced loan is the
John Rupp University Club loan (for $600,000 and 5% of the pool),
which is secured by a 36,000 SF mixed use property consisting of
classroom space and gym and athletic club space. The loan was
transferred to special servicing in December of 2013. It was
previously in special servicing from 8/20/10 through 1/11/12.
Special Servicer is pursuing foreclosure.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for one poorly
performing loan, constituting 20% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $300,000 (a 12% expected loss based on a 30%
probability default) from the troubled loan.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 79% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 34%.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 27%, compared to 55% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and specially serviced
and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a
weighted average haircut of 10% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 10%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.48X and 4.54X,
respectively, compared to 1.25X and 2.85X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 43% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Bayshore Plaza Shopping Center Loan ($2
million -- 15% of the pool), which is secured by a 51,743 SF
retail property in Huntersville, North Carolina. As of February
2014, the property was 100% leased, the same as at last review.
The largest tenant is Tony Fabric D'cor, which leases 38% of the
net rentable area through 2014. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
33% and 3.21X, respectively, compared to 38% and 2.78X at the last
review.

The second largest loan is the Plaza De Las Palmas Loan ($2
million -- 14% of the pool), which is secured by a 47,207 SF
retail property in El Cajon, CA. As of November 2013, the property
was 83% leased, compared to 90% leased as of December 2012.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 25% and 4.56X, respectively,
compared to 28% and 4.14X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Westridge Village Shopping Center
Loan ($2 million -- 14% of the pool), which is secured by a
104,489 SF retail property in Rocky Mount, NC. Property was 95%
leased as of January 2012. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 24%
and 4.47X, respectively, compared to 26% and 4.04X at the last
review.


JP MORGAN 2002-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 3 Cert. Classes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on four
classes, downgraded the rating on one class and upgraded the
ratings on two classes in J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage
Securities Corp. Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2002-C1 as follows:

Cl. F, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. G, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded to
B3 (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-1, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes were upgraded based primarily on an
increase in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and
amortization. The deal has paid down 30% since Moody's last
review. The ratings on the P&I classes were affirmed because the
ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO Class was downgraded due to the decline in
the credit performance of its reference classes resulting from
principal paydowns of higher quality reference classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 29% of the
current balance, compared to 25% at Moody's last review.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September
2000, and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single
Borrower Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 4, as compared to a Herf of 6 at Moody's last
review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 14, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 93% to $54 million
from $817 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 15 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 31% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 83% of
the pool. Five loans, constituting 17% of the pool, have defeased
and are secured by US government securities.

Two loans, constituting 3% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

Eighteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $23 million (for an average loss
severity of 30%). Three loans, constituting 34% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the Park 42 Loan (for $11 million - 20% of the pool),
which is secured by a 283,000 SF Class B flex office/warehouse
building located in Cincinnati, OH. As of October 2013, the
property was 60% leased compared to 72% as of March 2013. Property
transferred to special servicing in January 2012 and has since
become REO. The borrower has been remitting any and all excess
cash flow.

The remaining two specially serviced loans are secured by
multifamily apartments. Moody's estimates an aggregate $15 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (81% expected loss on
average).

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 96%.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 86%, compared to 94% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and specially serviced
and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a
weighted average haircut of 18% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 10%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.05X and 1.38X,
respectively, compared to 0.91X and 1.26X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 44% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Hamilton Mill Business Center Loan ($17
million -- 31% of the pool), which is secured by a 550,000 SF
single-tenant industrial property located in Buford, Georgia. The
collateral is located within a 238-acre business park that offers
3.6 million SF of industrial, office and warehouse space. Serving
as a distribution center, the property is 100% leased to Office
Depot through April 2017. The loan is current and matures in July
2017. Moody's applied a lit/dark cash flow analysis due to the
property's single-tenant exposure and the loan's balloon risk at
maturity. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 90% and 1.18X,
respectively, compared to 110% and 0.96X at the last review.

The second largest loan is The Container Store Loan ($5 million --
9% of the pool), which is secured by a 24,000 SF retail property
located in White Plains, New York. The property is 100% leased to
the Container Store through January 2016. Property performance is
stable and the loan is benefitting from amortization. Moody's
applied a lit/dark cash flow analysis due to the single-tenant
exposure and the loan's balloon risk at maturity. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 97% and 1.17X, respectively, compared to 101%
and 1.13X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Walgreens, Delta Township ($2
million -- 4% of the pool), which is secured by a 14,725 SF single
tenant Walgreens located in Lansing, MI. The Walgreens lease runs
until 8/31/21, nine months before the loan matures. Moody's
applied a lit/dark cash flow analysis due to the single tenant
exposure and the loan's balloon risk at maturity. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 57% and 1.79X, respectively, compared to 60% and
1.70X at the last review.


JP MORGAN 2007-CIBC19: S&P Lowers Rating on 2 Note Classes to 'D'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its rating on the class
A-1A commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from JPMorgan
Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-CIBC19, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction, to
'A+ (sf)' from 'A (sf)'.  Concurrently, S&P lowered its ratings on
the classes B and C certificates from the same transaction to 'D
(sf)' from 'CCC- (sf)'.  Furthermore, S&P affirmed its ratings on
six other classes of certificates from the same transaction,
including the 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X interest-only (IO)
certificates (see list).

S&P's rating actions follow its analysis of the transaction
primarily using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS
transactions.  S&P's analysis included a review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets in the
pool, the transaction structure, and the liquidity available to
the trust.

The raised rating on the class A-1A certificates reflects S&P's
expectation that the available credit enhancement for the class is
above its most recent estimate of the necessary credit enhancement
required for the current rating.  The upgrade also reflects S&P's
views regarding the current and future performance of the
transaction's collateral.

S&P lowered its ratings on the class B and C certificates to
'D (sf)' to reflect its expectation that the accumulated interest
shortfalls will remain outstanding for the foreseeable future.
The class B and C certificates currently have accumulated interest
shortfalls outstanding for three consecutive months.

As of the Feb. 12, 2014, trustee remittance report, the trust
experienced net monthly interest shortfalls totaling $924,120.
The interest shortfalls were primarily related to interest not
advanced on non-recoverable assets of $405,183, appraisal
subordinate entitlement reduction amounts of $444,420, special
servicing fees of $71,156, and workout fees of $2,371.  The
current monthly interest shortfalls affected all classes
subordinate to and including class B.

The affirmations on the principal and interest certificates
reflect S&P's expectation that the available credit enhancement
for these classes will be within its estimate of the necessary
credit enhancement required for the current ratings.  The affirmed
ratings also reflect S&P's analysis of the credit characteristics
and performance of the remaining assets, as well as liquidity
support available to the classes.

The 'AAA (sf)' rating affirmation on the class X IO certificates
reflect S&P's current criteria for rating IO securities.

RATING RAISED

JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-CIBC19
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-CIBC19

                    Rating
Class          To           From                Credit
                                       enhancement (%)
A-1A           A+ (sf)     A (sf)                29.47


RATINGS LOWERED

JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-CIBC19
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-CIBC19

                    Rating
Class          To           From         Credit enhancement (%)
B               D (sf)      CCC- (sf)             6.74
C               D (sf)      CCC- (sf)             5.38

RATINGS AFFIRMED

JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2007-CIBC19
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-CIBC19

Class              Rating                Credit enhancement (%)
A-3                AAA (sf)                      29.47
A-SB               AAA (sf)                      29.47
A-4                A+ (sf)                       29.47
A-M                BB- (sf)                      17.35
A-J                CCC- (sf)                      7.65
X                  AAA (sf)                        N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


JP MORGAN 2014-C18: Fitch Rates $11.9MM Class F Certificates 'Bsf'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Rating
Outlooks to the J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities
Trust, Series 2014-C18 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates:

-- $52,231,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $85,216,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $23,484,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $87,500,000 class A-4A1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $87,500,000 class A-4A2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $267,029,000 class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $67,360,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $725,382,000 a class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $69,426,000 a class X-B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $55,062,000 b class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $69,426,000 b class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $37,107,000 b class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $161,595,000b class EC 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $56,259,000c class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $19,152,000c class E 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $11,970,000c class F 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

a Notional amount and interest only.
b Class A-S, B, and C certificates may be exchanged for a related
  amount of class EC certificates, and class EC certificates may
  be exchanged for class A-S, class B, and class C certificates.
c Privately placed pursuant to Rule 144A.

Fitch does not rate the $38,303,883 non-rated class or the
$69,425,883 interest-only class X-C. Class X-B has been withdrawn
from the deal structure since Fitch issued its expected ratings on
Feb. 11, 2014. The classes above reflect the final ratings and
deal structure.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership in the trust,
primary assets of which are 51 loans secured by 83 commercial
properties having an aggregate principal balance of approximately
$957.6 million as of the cutoff date. The loans were contributed
to the trust by JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association;
Barclays Bank PLC; Redwood Commercial Mortgage Corporation;
Starwood Mortgage Funding II LLC; and RAIT Funding, LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 72.7% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis on 71.9%, and asset summary reviews
on 71.9% of the pool.

The transaction has a Fitch stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) of 1.16x, a Fitch stressed loan-to-value (LTV) of 100.4%,
and a Fitch debt yield of 9.1%. Fitch's aggregate net cash flow
represents a variance of 6.8% to issuer cash flows.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch Leverage: This transaction has slightly lower leverage than
other recent Fitch-rated fixed-rate deals. The pool's Fitch LTV of
100.4% is below the 2013 average of 101.6%. However, excluding the
credit opinion loan, the pool's Fitch LTV is 103.5%. The pool's
Fitch DSCR of 1.16x is below the 2013 average of 1.29x. The
conduit DSCR is 1.15x, excluding the credit opinion loans.

Pool Concentration: The pool is more concentrated by loan size and
sponsor than average transactions from 2013, as evidenced by a
loan concentration index (LCI) of 479 and sponsor concentration
index (SCI) of 479. Also the 10 largest loans represent 58.6% of
the total pool balance, which is higher than the average 2013 top
10 concentration of 54.5%.

High Retail Concentration: The pool has an above-average
concentration of retail properties at 52.4%; six of the 10 largest
assets are retail properties. The average retail concentration in
2013 was 33.2%. The largest property type is retail (52.4%),
followed by multifamily (13.9%) and hotel (11.9%).

Credit Opinion Loan: The largest loan in the pool, Miami
International Mall (10.4%), has a Fitch rating of 'BBB-sf' on a
stand-alone basis. The loan is collateralized by a super-regional
mall in Miami, FL. This loan participation is a $100 million,
controlling pari passu portion of a $160 million loan.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch performed two model-based break-even analyses to determine
the level of cash flow and value deterioration the pool could
withstand prior to $1 of loss being experienced by the 'BBB-sf'
and 'AAAsf' rated classes. Fitch found that the JPMBB 2014-C18
pool could withstand a 62.0% decline in value (based on appraised
values at issuance) and an approximately 19.6% decrease to the
most recent actual cash flow prior to experiencing a $1 of loss to
the 'BBB-sf' rated class. Additionally, Fitch found that the pool
could withstand a 69.4% decline in value and an approximately
35.3% decrease in the most recent actual cash flow prior to
experiencing $1 of loss to any 'AAAsf' rated class.

Key Rating Drivers and Rating Sensitivities are further described
in the accompanying pre-sale report.

The master servicer will be Midland Loan Services, rated 'CMS1-'
by Fitch. The special servicer will be LNR Partners, LLC, rated
'CSS1-' by Fitch.


LIMEROCK CLO II: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Limerock CLO II Ltd./Limerock CLO II LLC's
$615.50 million fixed- and floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation
securitization backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of
broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Feb. 27,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the preliminary rated
      notes through the subordination of cash flows that are
      payable to the subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not counting excess spread), and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation criteria.

   -- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
      bankruptcy remote.

   -- The diversified collateral portfolio, which consists
      primarily of broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior
      secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- S&P's projections regarding the timely interest and ultimate
      principal payments on the preliminary rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned preliminary ratings under
      various interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging
      from 0.2429%-13.8385%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest
      coverage tests, a failure of which will lead to the
      diversion of interest and principal proceeds to reduce the
      balance of the rated notes outstanding.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Limerock CLO II Ltd./Limerock CLO II LLC

Class                 Rating                Amount (mil. $)
A                     AAA (sf)                       406.25
B-1                   AA (sf)                         59.75
B-2                   AA (sf)                         20.00
C-1 (deferrable)      A (sf)                          47.00
C-2 (deferrable)      A (sf)                           1.50
D (deferrable)        BBB (sf)                        34.75
E (deferrable)        BB (sf)                         30.25
F (deferrable)        B (sf)                          16.00
Subordinated notes    NR                              54.25

NR--Not rated.


LNR CDO 2002-1: S&P Raises Rating on Class C Notes to BB+
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B and C notes from LNR CDO 2002-1 Ltd.  In addition, S&P affirmed
its ratings on the class D-FL, D-FX, E-FL, E-FX, E-FXD, F-FL, F-
FX, G, and H notes from the same transaction.  At the same time,
S&P removed its ratings on the class B and C notes from
CreditWatch, where S&P had placed them with positive implications
on Nov. 25, 2013.

LNR CDO 2002-1 Ltd. is a collateralized debt obligation (CDO)
transaction backed primarily by commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS) and managed by LNR Property Corp.

The upgrades reflect the full paydown of the class A notes since
S&P's last rating action in August 2012, as well as $75.54 million
in paydowns (95.54%) of the class B notes.  The improvements have
led to an increase in the class B/C, D, E, and F
overcollateralization (O/C) ratios since S&P's August 2012 rating
actions.  For example, the class B/C O/C ratio increased to
505.75% according to the January 2014 trustee report, up from the
213.00% noted in the July 2012 trustee report.

The affirmations reflect sufficient credit support available to
the notes at the current rating levels.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

RATINGS AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

LNR CDO 2002-1 Ltd.
                   Rating
Class         To           From
B             A (sf)       BB- (sf)/Watch Pos
C             BB+ (sf)     B+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

LNR CDO 2002-1 Ltd.
Class         Rating
D-FL          CCC- (sf)
D-FX          CCC- (sf)
E-FL          CC (sf)
E-FX          CC (sf)
E-FXD         CC (sf)
F-FL          CC (sf)
F-FX          CC (sf)
G             D (sf)
H             D (sf)


MERRILL LYNCH 2005-CKI1: Moody's Affirms 'C' Rating on 2 Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on 11 classes
in Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2005-CKI1 as follows:

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. AM, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. AJ, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to
B3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes A-1A through C were affirmed
because the transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-
value (LTV) ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) and the transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within
acceptable ranges. The ratings on the P&I classes D through G were
affirmed because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected
loss.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed based on the credit
performance of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 4.6% of the
current balance, compared to 8.1% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 7.7% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 8.0% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To A Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in
April 2005.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf 26, the same as at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the February 12, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 39% to $1.8 billion
from $3.1 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 138 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 14% of the pool, with the top ten loans representing
43% of the pool. Eight loans, representing 5% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by U.S. Government securities. The pool
contains one loan with an investment grade credit assessment,
representing 1% of the pool.

Thirty-one loans, representing 13% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans which meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of our
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist
to assess which loans have material issues that could impact
performance.

Twenty one loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
a realized loss of $150.9 million (50% loss severity). Currently
nine loans, representing 4% of the pool, are in special servicing.
The largest specially serviced loan is the Midori and Holcomb
Place Loan ($14.9 million -- 0.8% of the pool), which is secured
by two cross collateralized, cross defaulted office properties
located in Norcross, Georgia totaling 176,000 square feet (SF).
The loan transferred to special servicing in July 2012 due to
maturity default. Both properties are real estate owned (REO) and
listed for sale. The properties have a weighted average occupancy
of 95%. The remaining eight specially serviced loans are secured
by a mix of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $33.3
million loss for the specially serviced loans (43% expected loss
on average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 13 poorly-
performing loans representing 6% of the pool. Moody's analysis
attributes to these troubled loans an aggregate $17.1 million loss
(16% expected loss severity based on a 50% probability of
default).

Moody's was provided with full year 2012 and partial year 2013
operating results for 96% and 94% of the pool, respectively.
Excluding specially serviced and troubled loans, Moody's weighted
average LTV is 95% compared to 98% at Moody's prior review.
Moody's net cash flow reflects a weighted average haircut of 11.0%
to the most recently available net operating income. Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.3%.

Excluding specially serviced and troubled loans, Moody's actual
and stressed DSCRs are 1.43X and 1.12X, respectively, compared to
1.34X and 1.07X at last review. Moody's actual DSCR is based on
Moody's net cash flow (NCF) and the loan's actual debt service.
Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a 9.25% stressed
rate applied to the loan balance.

The largest loan with a credit assessment is the Blue Cross
Building Loan ($25.7 million -- 1.4% of the pool), which is
secured by two adjacent office buildings totaling 517,000 SF
located in Richardson, Texas. The buildings are triple-net leased
to Blue Cross Blue Shield through 2020. The loan amortizes on a
25-year schedule. Moody's credit assessment and stressed DSCR are
Baa1 and 1.52X, respectively, compared to Baa1 and 1.47X at last
review.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 26% of the pool
balance. The largest conduit loan is the Galileo NXL Retail
Portfolio and Westminster City Center Loan ($255.0 million --
13.7% of the pool), which is secured by the fee and leasehold
interests in a portfolio of 19 anchored community shopping centers
totaling 3.1 million SF and the Westminster City Center, a 342,000
SF anchored community center located in Westminster, Colorado. The
properties are cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted and
located across 14 states. As of September 2013, the Galileo NXL
Retail Portfolio was 91% leased, the same as last review, while
Westminster City Center was 77% leased compared to 83% at last
review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 103% and 0.91X,
respectively, compared to 109% and 0.87X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Ashford Hotel Portfolio Loan
($148.7 million -- 8.0% of the pool), which is secured by a
portfolio of ten cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted hotel
properties totaling 1,703 guestrooms located across seven states
including Florida (42% of the allocated balance), California (14%)
and Minnesota (12%). Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 100% and
1.22X, respectively, compared to 101% and 1.21X at last review.

The third largest loan is the 1201 North Market Street (previously
Chase Manhattan Centre) Loan ($84.4 million -- 4.5% of the pool),
which is secured by a 22-story Class A office property located in
Wilmington, Delaware. The property is the tallest building in the
state of Delaware. As of September 2013, the property was 88%
leased, compared to 80% at last review. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR is 103% and 0.97X, respectively, compared to 107% and 0.93X
at last review.


MORGAN STANLEY 1998-WF2: Fitch Hikes Rating on Class L Certs to BB
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded two classes and affirmed four classes
of Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust's commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates series 1998-WF2. A detailed list of rating
actions follows at the end of this press release.

Key Rating Drivers

The upgrades and affirmations are based on the stable performance
of the underlying collateral pool and the continued expected
amortization. Fitch modeled losses of 1.1% of the remaining pool;
expected losses on the original pool balance total 0.9%, including
$9.1 million (0.9% of the original pool balance) in realized
losses to date. Fitch has designated one loan (63.3%) as a Fitch
Loan of Concern. There are no specially serviced loans.

As of the January 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 95.2% to $50.8 million from
$1.06 billion at issuance. Per the servicer reporting, one loan
(13.9% of the pool) is defeased. Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes M and N.

Rating Sensitivity

The Stable Rating Outlook on classes G, K and L and Positive
Rating Outlook on classes H and J are due to increasing credit
enhancement and continued paydown of the pool. If stable
performance continues without a risk of interest shortfalls
upgrades are likely for classes H and J.

The pool is concentrated, with the largest loan representing 63%
of the remaining pool. The loan is secured by a 437,961 square
foot (sf), 13-story, office building located at 1201 Pennsylvania
Avenue in Washington, DC. The year-to-date net operating income
debt service coverage ratio (NOI DSCR) as of second quarter 2013
was 0.89x. The DSCR was similar when compared with prior year
analysis which reported a DSCR of 0.91x and a decrease when
compared to the 2011 analysis which reported a DSCR of 1.58x. The
property was 82% occupied as of second quarter 2013. It has also
been reported that the building's largest tenant, Covington and
Burling, has signed a lease which will move their headquarters
from 1201 Pennsylvania to CityCenter, DC. Covington and Burling is
a prominent law firm who currently occupies approximately 63% of
the net rentable area at 1201 Pennsylvania with a lease expiring
in August 2016. Although the property has experienced a recent
decline in performance, Fitch has not modeled any losses as the
high-quality property is well located, low levered and on a fully
amortizing repayment schedule.

Fitch upgrades the following classes and revises Rating Outlooks
as indicated:

-- $8 million class K to 'BBBsf' from 'BB+sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $15.9 million class L to 'BBsf' from 'B-sf', Outlook to Stable
   from Negative.

Fitch affirms the following classes and revises Rating Outlooks as
indicated:

-- $4.1 million class G at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $10.6 million class H at 'AAsf', Outlook to Positive from
   Stable;
-- $8 million class J at 'Asf', Outlook to Positive from Stable;
-- $4.1 million class M at 'Dsf', RE 100%.

The class A-1, A-2, B, C, D, E and F certificates have paid in
full. Fitch does not rate the class N certificates. Fitch
previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only class X
certificates.


MORGAN STANLEY 1999-RM1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed one class, and upgraded the
rating on one class of Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital I Inc.,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1999-RM1 as
follows:

Cl. N, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Jul 25, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 25, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on the P&I class was upgraded based primarily on an
increase in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and
amortization. The deal has paid down 44% since Moody's last
review.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed because the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes are consistent with Moody's expectations.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 0.4% of the
current balance, compared to 2.6% at Moody's last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September
2000, and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single
Borrower Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 4, as compared to a Herf of 7 at last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $8 million
from $859 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by six mortgage loans ranging in size from 7% to
25% of the pool. One loan, constituting 20% of the pool, has
defeased and is secured by US government securities.

Two loans, constituting 31% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

Fifteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $14 million (for an average loss
severity of 24%). No loans are currently in special servicing.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 100%.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 53%, compared to 49% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and specially serviced
and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a
weighted average haircut of 18% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.03X and 2.38X,
respectively, compared to 1.25X and 2.83X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 63% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Claremont Commons Loan ($2 million -- 25% of
the pool), which is secured by a 37,023 SF retail property located
in Claremont, North Carolina. Lowe's Food Store occupies 87% of
the center with a lease expiration in March 2018. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 78% and 1.32X, respectively, compared to 78% and
1.31X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the Springrove Mobile Home Park Loan
($2 million -- 23% of the pool), which is secured by a 424 unit
mobile home park located in Springfield Township, Missouri. The
property is currently on the watchlist due to low DSCR from a
decrease in occupancy and an increase in expenses. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 52% and 1.98X, respectively, compared to 44% and
2.32X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Northampton Apartments Loan ($1
million -- 15% of the pool), which is secured by a 150-unit
multifamily property located in Akron, OH. The loan is fully
amortizing. The property was 97% occupied as of September 2013,
compared to 96% as of December 2012. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 21% and 4.69X, respectively, compared to 21% and 4.60X at the
last review.


MORGAN STANLEY 2003-HQ2: S&P Lowers Rating on 2 Note Classes to D
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on four
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Trust 2003-HQ2, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.
Concurrently, S&P affirmed its ratings on two classes from the
same transaction.

The rating actions follow our analysis of the transaction,
primarily using S&P's criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS
transactions, which included a review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets in the
pool, the transaction structure, and the liquidity available to
the trust.

S&P lowered its ratings on classes K, L, M, and N because of
ongoing interest shortfalls that have affected these classes.  In
addition, S&P downgraded classes M and N to 'D (sf)' because it
believes the accumulated interest shortfalls will remain
outstanding for the foreseeable future.  The accumulated interest
shortfalls on classes M and N were outstanding for 12 and 14
months, respectively.  As of the Feb. 12, 2014, trustee remittance
report, the trust experienced net monthly interest shortfalls
totaling $67,080 because of $39,754 in interest reductions from
nonrecoverability determination, $21,336 in appraisal subordinate
entitlement reduction amounts, $3,017 in special servicing fees,
$3,643 in a rate reduction from a loan modification, and
$116 in workout fees.  The current reported interest shortfalls
have affected all classes subordinate to and including class K. If
classes K and L continue to experience interest shortfalls for an
extended period of time, S&P may further lower the ratings on
these classes to 'D (sf)'.

The affirmations on classes H and J reflect S&P's expectation that
the available credit enhancement for these classes will be within
its estimate of the necessary credit enhancement required for the
current outstanding ratings.  The affirmations also reflect S&P's
review of the remaining assets' credit characteristics and
performance, as well as the transaction-level changes.

While available credit enhancement levels may suggest positive
rating movements on classes H and J, S&P's analysis also
considered the reduced liquidity support available to the trust
with ongoing interest shortfalls from the three assets with the
special servicer ($14.0 million, 66.0% of the trust balance) and
one modified loan ($3.0 million, 14.1%) that is also currently on
the master servicer's watchlist, the potential for additional
interest shortfalls from the specially serviced assets, and the
relatively small pool size comprising five remaining assets in the
trust.

                        TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Feb. 12, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool had a $21.2 million aggregate pooled trust balance, down from
$931.6 million at issuance.  The pool comprises three loans and
two real-estate owned (REO) assets, down from 51 loans at
issuance.  To date, the transaction's principal losses totaled
$6.8 million (0.7% of the original trust balance).  The master
servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. (Wells Fargo), reported one loan
($3.0 million, 14.1%) on its watchlist, which the special servicer
had modified.  Three assets ($14.0 million, 66.0%) are with the
special servicer, C-III Asset Management LLC (C-III).

Details on the pool's five remaining assets are as follows:

   -- The 200 SW Michigan Building REO asset is the largest asset
      in the pool and the largest asset with C-III.  The asset has
      a $7.1 million trust balance (33.5% of the pooled trust
      balance) and $7.1 million in total reported exposure.  The
      property consists of a 82,642-sq.-ft. office property in
      Seattle.  The loan was transferred to special servicing on
      Nov. 6, 2012, because of maturity default (it matured on
      Nov. 1, 2012) and the property became REO on Sept. 13, 2013.
      C-III has deemed this asset nonrecoverable.  Based on the
      most recent appraisal provided by C-III and S&P's estimated
      value, it expects a moderate loss upon this asset's
      resolution.

   -- The Arlington Green Executive Center REO asset is the
      second-largest asset in the pool and the second-largest
      asset with C-III.  The asset has a $4.7 million trust
      balance (22.4% of the pooled trust balance) and $5.5 million
      in total reported exposure.  The property comprises a
      62,311-sq.-ft. office property in Arlington Heights, Ill.
      The loan was transferred to special servicing on Feb. 23,
      2012, because of imminent monetary default and the property
      became REO on Aug. 30, 2013.  A $3.9 million appraisal
      reduction amount (ARA) is in effect against this asset.

   -- S&P expects a significant loss upon this asset's resolution.

   -- The 2310 & 2344 Washington Street loan ($4.2 million, 19.9%)
      is secured by a 43,679-sq.-ft. office property in Eastham,
      Mass.  The reported occupancy and debt service coverage
      (DSC) for the nine months ending Sept. 30, 2013, were 100.0%
      and 1.60x, respectively.

   -- The Star Village Commons loan ($3.0 million, 14.1%), the
      only loan on Wells Fargo's watchlist, is secured by a
      40,248-sq.-ft. retail property in Fort Worth, Texas.  The
      loan appears on the master servicer's watchlist because of a
      low reported occupancy.  The loan was modified in October
      2010, where the maturity date was extended by 36 months to
      Jan. 1, 2016, the interest rate was modified to 4.5% from
      5.91%, and a $1.5 million principal and accrued interest
      forgiveness reduced the trust balance to $3.0 million.  The
      reported occupancy and DSC for the nine months ending
      Sept. 30, 2013, were 73.6% and 1.81x, respectively.

   -- The Salisbury Professional Center loan is the third-largest
      specially serviced asset in the pool and the smallest asset
      in the trust.  The loan has a $2.2 million trust balance
      (10.1% of the pooled trust balance) and $2.2 million in
      total reported exposure.  The loan is secured by a 38,759-
      sq.-ft. medical office property in Jacksonville, Fla.  The
      loan was transferred to special servicing on Dec. 4, 2012,
      because of maturity default.  The loan matured on Dec. 1,
      2012.  C-III stated that the loan was modified in September
      2013, when the maturity date was extended to December 2014.
      According to C-III, the borrower has not been able to make
      timely debt service payments and has indicated they can no
      longer support the property.  C-III will exercise its
      available rights and remedies to resolve the loan.  S&P
      expects a minimal loss, if any, upon this loan's resolution.

With respect to the specially serviced assets noted above, a
minimal loss is less than 25%, a moderate loss is 26%-59%, and a
significant loss is 60% or greater.

RATINGS LOWERED

Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Trust 2003-HQ2
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

                 Rating
Class      To             From          Credit enhancement (%)
K          CCC- (sf)      B+ (sf)                        61.15
L          CCC- (sf)      B- (sf)                        50.18
M          D (sf)         CCC (sf)                       28.23
N          D (sf)         CCC- (sf)                      17.26

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Trust 2003-HQ2
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class      Rating                       Credit enhancement (%)
H          BB+ (sf)                                      99.55
J          BB- (sf)                                      72.12


MORGAN STANLEY 2004-TOP13: Moody's Affirms C Rating on O Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service upgraded the ratings of four classes,
downgraded one class and affirmed eight classes of Morgan Stanley
Capital I Trust 2004-TOP13 as follows:

Cl. C, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Upgraded to
Aaa (sf)

Cl. E, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Upgraded to
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. F, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Upgraded to
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. G, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Upgraded to
A1 (sf)

Cl. H, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Upgraded to
A3 (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. O, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Nov 7, 2013 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The upgrades are due to increased credit support from paydowns and
amortization as well as improved overall pool performance.

The affirmation of the investment grade P&I classes are due to key
parameters, including Moody's loan to value (LTV) ratio, Moody's
stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the Herfindahl
Index (Herf), remaining within acceptable ranges. The ratings of
the below-investment grade P&I classes are consistent with Moody's
expected loss and thus are affirmed.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X-1) was downgraded due to the
decline in the credit performance of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydowns of higher quality reference
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 6.8% of the
current balance, compared to 4.4% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.2% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 1.4% at the last review.

Factors That Would Lead To An Upgrade Or Downgrade Of The Rating

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating Fusion U.S. CMBS Transactions" published in April 2005, and
"Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 13, compared to 27 at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 13, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 91% to $106.1
million from $1.2 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 30 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 16% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 70% of
the pool. One loan, constituting 16% of the pool, has an
investment-grade credit assessment. Two loans, constituting 4% of
the pool, have defeased and are secured by US government
securities.

Six loans, constituting 21% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

Nine loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $7.8 million. Two loans, constituting
8% of the pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest
specially serviced loan is the Great Western Shopping Center Loan
($4.5 million -- 4.3% of the pool), which is secured by 343,000
square foot (SF) grocery anchored shopping center in Columbus,
Ohio. The loan transferred to special servicing in December 2013
for imminent default. As of September 2013 the 67% leased,
however, two tenants, representing a combined 59,800 SF have since
vacated or indicated they will vacate at their lease expiration in
April 2014.

The remaining specially serviced loan, the 1501 Luna Road Loan, is
secured by a 100% vacant industrial / flex building located in
Carrolton, Texas. Moody's has also assumed a high default
probability for one poorly performing loan, constituting 4% of the
pool, and has estimated an aggregate loss of $5.7 million (a 47%
expected loss on average) from these specially serviced and
troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 96% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 86%.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 55%, compared to 61% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
credit assessments, defeased, specially serviced and troubled
loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted average
haircut of 16% to the most recently available net operating income
(NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization
rate of 9.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.66X and 2.56X,
respectively, compared to 1.75X and 2.23X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The loan with a credit assessment is the Gallup Headquarters Loan
($16.8 million -- 15.8% of the pool), which is secured by a
296,000 SF office building located in Omaha, Nebraska. The
property is 100% leased to Gallup, Inc. under a triple net lease
that expires in October 2018. The lease expiration is co-terminus
with the loan's maturity date and the loan is fully amortizing.
Moody's credit assessment and stressed DSCR are Aa3 and 2.94X,
respectively, compared to Aa3 and 2.75X at last review.

The top three conduit loans represent 31% of the pool balance. The
largest conduit loan is the Highlander Plaza Loan ($12.4 million -
- 11.7% of the pool), which is secured by a 161,600 SF, grocery-
anchored retail property in Salem, Massachusetts. The anchor is
Shaw's Supermarket, which leases approximately 39% of the NRA
through February 2016. As of December 2013, the property was 100%
leased, compared to 99% at last review. After an initial ten year
interest-only period, the loan is now benefitting from a 30-year
amortization schedule. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 52% and
1.88X, respectively, compared to 54% and 1.90X at last review.

The second largest conduit loan is the Faisal Apartment Portfolio
Loan ($11.6 million -- 10.9% of the pool), which is secured by a
portfolio of seven Class B multifamily buildings totaling 116
units and built between 1899 and 1940. The properties are located
in the Allston-Brighton and South End sections of Boston as well
as in Brookline, Massachusetts. The majority of tenants are
students with leases that run from September 1 through August 31.
The loan was previously on the watchlist for low DSCR but was
removed in July 2013. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 88% and
1.16X, respectively, compared to are 99% and 1.04X at last review.

The third largest loan is the Highlands Village Center Loan ($9.2
million -- 8.7% of the pool), which is secured by a retail
property in Basking Ridge, New Jersey. The property was 90% leased
as of June 2013 and the largest tenant is Rite Aid, which leases
approximately 18% of the NRA through October 2019. This loan had
an original 15 year term and is benefitting from a 25-year
amortization schedule. The loan is currently on the watchlist due
to low DSCR and matures in November 2018. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 102% and 1.01X, respectively, compared to are 111% and
0.92X at last review.


NORTH END: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on North
End CLO Ltd./North End CLO LLC's $381.00 million floating-rate
notes following the transaction's effective date as of Dec. 4,
2013.

Most U.S. cash flow collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) close
before purchasing the full amount of their targeted level of
portfolio collateral.  On the closing date, the collateral manager
typically covenants to purchase the remaining collateral within
the guidelines specified in the transaction documents to reach the
target level of portfolio collateral.  Typically, the CLO
transaction documents specify a date by which the targeted level
of portfolio collateral must be reached.  The "effective date" for
a CLO transaction is usually the earlier of the date on which the
transaction acquires the target level of portfolio collateral or
the date defined in the transaction documents.  Most transaction
documents contain provisions directing the trustee to request the
rating agencies that have issued ratings upon closing to affirm
the ratings issued on the closing date after reviewing the
effective date portfolio (typically referred to as an "effective
date rating affirmation").

"An effective date rating affirmation reflects our opinion that
the portfolio collateral purchased by the issuer, as reported to
us by the trustee and collateral manager, in combination with the
transaction's structure, provides sufficient credit support to
maintain the ratings that we assigned on the transaction's closing
date.  The effective date reports provide a summary of certain
information that we used in our analysis and the results of our
review based on the information presented to us," S&P said.

"We believe the transaction may see some benefit from allowing a
window of time after the closing date for the collateral manager
to acquire the remaining assets for a CLO transaction.  This
window of time is typically referred to as a "ramp-up period."
Because some CLO transactions may acquire most of their assets
from the new issue leveraged loan market, the ramp-up period may
give collateral managers the flexibility to acquire a more diverse
portfolio of assets," S&P added.

For a CLO that has not purchased its full target level of
portfolio collateral by the closing date, S&P's ratings on the
closing date and prior to its effective date review are generally
based on the application of its criteria to a combination of
purchased collateral, collateral committed to be purchased, and
the indicative portfolio of assets provided to S&P by the
collateral manager.  The ratings may also reflect S&P's
assumptions about the transaction's investment guidelines.  This
is because not all assets in the portfolio have been purchased.

"When we receive a request to issue an effective date rating
affirmation, we perform quantitative and qualitative analysis of
the transaction in accordance with our criteria to assess whether
the initial ratings remain consistent with the credit enhancement
based on the effective date collateral portfolio.  Our analysis
relies on the use of CDO Evaluator to estimate a scenario default
rate at each rating level based on the effective date portfolio,
full cash-flow modeling to determine the appropriate percentile
break-even default rate at each rating level, the application of
our supplemental tests, and the analytical judgment of a rating
committee," S&P added.

"In our published effective date report, we discuss our analysis
of the information provided by the transaction's trustee and
collateral manager in support of their request for effective date
rating affirmation.  In most instances, we intend to publish an
effective date report each time we issue an effective date rating
affirmation on a publicly rated U.S. cash flow CLO," S&P noted.

On an ongoing basis after S&P issues an effective date rating
affirmation, it will periodically review whether, in its view, the
current ratings on the notes remain consistent with the credit
quality of the assets, the credit enhancement available to support
the notes, and other factors, and S&P will take rating actions as
it deems necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

North End CLO Ltd./North End CLO LLC

Class                 Rating         Amount (Mil. $)
A                     AAA (sf)                246.50
B                     AA (sf)                  56.00
C (deferrable)        A (sf)                   29.50
D (deferrable)        BBB (sf)                 21.00
E (deferrable         BB (sf)                  18.00
F (deferrable)        B (sf)                   10.00


PACIFIC SHORES: Fitch Raises Rating on 2 Note Classes to CCCsf
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has taken the following rating actions on four notes
issued by Pacific Shores CDO, Ltd./Inc. (Pacific Shores CDO) as
follows:

-- $5,760,892 class A notes upgraded to 'AAAsf' from 'Asf';
   Outlook remains Stable;
-- $96,000,000 class B-1 notes upgraded to 'CCCsf' from 'CCsf';
-- $16,000,000 class B-2 notes upgraded to 'CCCsf' from 'CCsf';
-- $27,107,204 class C notes affirmed at 'Csf'.

Key Rating Drivers

Since Fitch's last review, the class A notes have received
approximately $27.3 million from portfolio amortization and excess
spread due to a failing class A/B coverage test. As a result, the
credit enhancement level has improved for the notes and they are
now passing at 'AAAsf' in all cash flow modeling scenarios. Fitch
expects the notes to be paid in full within the next one to two
quarterly payment dates.

Fitch has maintained an Outlook Stable on the class A notes to
reflect the expectation that the performance of the notes will
remain stable until they are fully paid down.

The class B-1 and B-2 (collectively, class B) notes have been
upgraded due to the continued deleveraging offsetting moderate
credit deterioration of the underlying collateral. The notes are
current on accrued interest payments and are expected to begin
receiving principal paydowns once the class A notes are paid in
full. The 'CCCsf' level is in line with the cash flow modeling
results. Additionally, the transaction's interest rate swap is
scheduled to expire in July 2014, which is expected to increase
the amount of excess spread available to pay down the notes.

The credit enhancement level for the class C notes remains
exceeded by the level of losses corresponding to the SF PCM
'CCCsf' rating level. For this class, Fitch compared the CE level
to the expected losses from distressed and defaulted assets in the
portfolio (rated 'CCsf' or lower). This comparison indicates that
default continues to appear inevitable for the notes.

Fitch's analysis focused on an underlying portfolio balance of
$161.0 million held across 102 obligors and $1.4 million in
principal collections. The weighted average rating factor has
remained stable at 'B-/CCC+'. Fitch currently considers 35.9% of
the assets to be rated 'CCC' or below in the portfolio, versus
29.6% at the last review. There are 37 defaulted assets in the
portfolio totaling approximately $37.1 million.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Further negative migration and defaults beyond those projected by
SF PCM as well as increasing concentration in assets of a weaker
credit quality could lead to downgrades. Conversely, higher than
expected cash flows from the distressed assets could lead to
potential future upgrades.

Pacific Shores is a cash flow structured finance collateralized
debt obligation (SF CDO) that closed on June 27, 2002 and is
managed by Pacific Investment Management Co. The portfolio is
comprised of 66.8% residential mortgage-backed securities, 19.8%
corporate debt, 9.4% commercial and consumer asset-backed
securities, 3.5% commercial mortgage-backed securities, and 0.6%
SF CDOs from primarily 2001 through 2004 vintage transactions.

This review was conducted under the framework described in the
report 'Global Rating Criteria for Structured Finance CDOs' using
the Structured Finance Portfolio Credit Model (SF PCM) for
projecting future default levels for the underlying portfolio.
These default levels were then compared to the breakeven levels
generated by Fitch's cash flow model of the CDO under various
default timing and interest rate stress scenarios.


PREFERRED TERM VIII: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-2 Notes to 'B-'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1 and A-2 notes from Preferred Term Securities VIII Ltd., a
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) transaction backed by trust
preferred securities (TruPs) issued by financial institutions.  At
the same time, S&P removed these ratings from CreditWatch with
positive implications, where S&P placed them on Nov. 25, 2013.

The upgrades reflect paydowns to the class A-1 notes and the
improved credit support available to the notes since S&P last
upgraded the class A-1 and A-2 notes in February 2013.  Since
S&P's February 2013 rating actions, the transaction has paid down
the class A-1 notes by approximately $28.66 million, leaving the
notes at 7.3% of their original balance.  The paydowns can be
attributed to interest proceeds being used to redeem the notes
because the transaction failed one or more coverage tests, as well
as principal proceeds from prepayments.

The upgrades also reflect the improved overcollateralization (O/C)
available to the class A-1 and A-2 notes, mainly because of the
aforementioned paydowns, since S&P's February 2013 rating actions.
According to the December 2013 trustee report, the senior O/C
ratio was 120.7%, compared with 113.3% reported in December 2012.

Standard & Poor's will continue to review whether, in its view,
the ratings assigned to the notes remain consistent with the
credit enhancement available to support them and take further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Preferred Term Securities VIII Ltd.

              Rating       Rating
Class         To           From
A-1           A+ (sf)      BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2           B- (sf)      CCC+ (sf)/Watch Pos


PREFERRED TERM X: S&P Raises Rating on 2 Note Classes to 'B+'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2, and A-3 notes from Preferred Term Securities X Ltd., a
collateralized debt obligation transaction backed by trust-
preferred securities (TruPs) issued by financial institutions.  At
the same time, Standard & Poor's removed these ratings from
CreditWatch, where it placed them with positive implications on
Nov. 25, 2013.

The upgrades reflect paydowns to the class A-1 notes and the
improved credit support available to the notes since February
2013, when S&P last raised the ratings.  Since that time, the
transaction has paid down the class A-1 notes by approximately
$42.8 million, leaving them at 24.10% of their original balance.
The paydowns can be attributed to principal proceeds and interest
proceeds captured due to the failure of the transaction's coverage
tests.

The upgrades also reflect the improved overcollateralization (O/C)
available to the notes, mainly due to the aforementioned paydowns,
since S&P's February 2013 rating action.  In the January 2014 note
valuation report, the trustee cited a class A O/C ratio of
176.19%, up from 149.06% reported in January 2013.

The upgrades further reflect a slight decline in the amount of
nonperforming assets since the time of the last action.  According
the to the December 2013 quarterly trustee report, there were
$131.5 million in defaulted and deferring securities, down from
the $146.83 million cited in the December 2012 report.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
further rating actions as it deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Preferred Term Securities X Ltd.

              Rating       Rating
Class         To           From
A-1           BBB- (sf)    BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2           B+ (sf)      B (sf)/Watch Pos
A-3           B+ (sf)      B (sf)/Watch Pos


PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2001-1: S&P Ups Rating on Class B Notes to BB+
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-2 and B notes from Putnam Structured Product CDO 2001-1 Ltd.,
and S&P removed these ratings from CreditWatch, where it had
placed them with positive implications on Nov. 25, 2013.  At the
same time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the class A-1MM-A, A-1MM-B,
and A-1SS notes.  Finally, S&P affirmed its 'CCC- (sf)' ratings on
the class C-1 and C-2 notes.

Putnam Structured Product CDO 2001-1 Ltd. is a cash flow
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) transaction backed primarily
by various asset-backed securities (ABS) such as commercial
mortgage backed securities, residential mortgage-backed
securities, and corporate debt.

The transaction has continued to pay down its notes in a
sequential manner, because of the failure of the class C
overcollateralization (O/C) test.  The remaining balances of the
class A-1MM-A, A-1MM-B, and A-1SS notes -- all pari passu -- were
fully paid off on Feb. 25, 2014.

As a result of the senior notes' reduced balance, the class A/B
O/C ratio has increased.  As per the January 2014 monthly trustee
report, the class A/B O/C ratio was 121.74%, up from 107.31% in
the June 2012 monthly trustee report (which S&P used for its
August 2012 analysis when it affirmed all of the ratings).  This
ratio will most likely increase once the Feb. 25, 2014, paydowns
are considered.

Since the class A/B coverage tests were passing, the class C-1 and
C-2 notes received their current interest.  However, the class C
O/C ratio continues to fail -- as of the January 2014 monthly
trustee report, it was 92.23%, versus the minimum requirement of
101.00%.  As long as this failure continues, all available
interest and principal proceeds, after payment of the class C
interest, will be used to pay down the class A-2 notes.

For calculation of the O/C ratio, the trustee haircuts the portion
of lower-rated collateral that exceeds the threshold specified in
the transaction documents.  This haircut was about 11.8% in the
January 2014 monthly trustee report.

S&P withdrew its ratings on the class A-1MM-A, A-1MM-B, and A-1SS
notes as a result of their full paydown.  S&P raised the ratings
on the class A-2 and B notes following an increase in credit
support.  S&P's affirmations of the ratings on the class C-1 and
C-2 notes reflect the availability of adequate credit support at
the current rating levels.

S&P's ratings on the class C notes reflect the application of its
largest-obligor default test, which is one of the two supplemental
tests in S&P's criteria.  S&P applies the supplemental tests to
address event risk and model risk that might be present in rated
transactions.  The largest-obligor default test assesses whether a
CDO tranche has sufficient credit enhancement (excluding excess
spread) to withstand specified combinations of underlying asset
defaults based on the ratings on the underlying assets, with a
flat recovery.

"Our review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis to
estimate future performance, based on the portfolio and
transaction as reflected in the aforementioned trustee report.  In
line with our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-
looking assumptions on the expected default timing, pattern, and
recoveries under various interest-rate and macroeconomic
scenarios.  In addition, our analysis considered the transaction's
ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate principal to each
of the rated tranches.  The results of the cash flow analysis
demonstrated, in our view, that all of the rated outstanding
classes have adequate credit enhancement available at the rating
levels associated with this rating action," S&P said.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

RATINGS RAISED

Putnam Structured Product CDO 2001-1 Ltd.

                      Rating
Class             To          From

A-2               AA (sf)     A (sf)/Watch Pos
B                 BB+ (sf)    B+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

Putnam Structured Product CDO 2001-1 Ltd.

                      Rating
Class             To          From
A-1MM-A           NR          AA (sf)
A-1MM-B           NR          AA (sf)
A-1SS             NR          AA (sf)

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Putnam Structured Product CDO 2001-1 Ltd.

Class             Rating

C-1               CCC- (sf)
C-2               CCC- (sf)


OZLM VI: Moody's Assigns '(P)Ba3' Rating on Class D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following provisional ratings to notes to be issued by OZLM VI,
Ltd. (the "Issuer" or "OZLM VI"):

$375,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

$49,500,000 Class A-2a Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-2A Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

$30,000,000 Class A-2b Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2026
(the "Class A-2B Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

$36,750,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class B Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

$37,500,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

$27,000,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

$12,000,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale of
financial instruments, but these ratings only represent Moody's
preliminary credit opinions. Upon a conclusive review of a
transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor to
assign definitive ratings. A definitive rating (if any) may differ
from a provisional rating.

Ratings Rationale

Moody's provisional ratings of the Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2a
Notes, the Class A-2b Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class C Notes,
the Class D Notes and the Class E Notes (collectively, the "Rated
Notes") address the expected losses posed to the holders of the
Rated Notes. The provisional ratings reflect the risks due to
defaults on the underlying portfolio of loans, the transaction's
legal structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

OZLM VI is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must be
invested in senior secured loans and eligible investments and up
to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
unsecured loans. The underlying collateral pool is expected to be
approximately 60% ramped as of the closing date.

Och-Ziff Loan Management LP ("Och-Ziff" or the "Manager") will
direct the selection, acquisition and disposition of collateral on
behalf of the Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's four year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, purchases are permitted using
principal proceeds from unscheduled principal payments and
proceeds from sales of credit risk obligations, and are subject to
certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue one class of
subordinated notes. The transaction incorporates interest and par
coverage tests which, if triggered, divert interest and principal
proceeds to pay down the notes and loans in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash-flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in February 2014.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions:

Par amount of $600,000,000

Diversity of 55

WARF of 2850

Weighted Average Spread of 4%

Weighted Average Coupon of 7.5%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate of 47%

Weighted Average Life of 8 years

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating:

The performance of the Rated Notes is subject to uncertainty. The
performance of the Rated Notes is sensitive to the performance of
the underlying portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and
credit conditions that may change. The Manager's investment
decisions and management of the transaction will also affect the
performance of the Rated Notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was an
important component in determining the ratings assigned to the
Rated Notes. This sensitivity analysis includes an increased
default probability relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), holding all other factors equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2850 to 3278)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2a Notes: -2

Class A-2b Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: 0

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2850 to 3705)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2a Notes: -3

Class A-2b Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -2

Moody's V Scores provide a relative assessment of the quality of
available credit information and the potential variability around
the various inputs to a rating determination. The V Score ranks
transactions by the potential for significant rating changes owing
to uncertainty around the assumptions due to data quality,
historical performance, the level of disclosure, transaction
complexity, the modeling, and the transaction governance that
underlie the ratings. V Scores apply to the entire transaction,
rather than individual tranches.


RFC CDO 2006-1: Fitch Affirms Csf Ratings on 6 Securities Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of RFC CDO 2006-1, Ltd.
/LLC (RFC 2006-1) reflecting Fitch's base case loss expectation of
67.5%.

Fitch's performance expectation incorporates prospective views
regarding commercial real estate market value and cash flow
declines, and factors in concerns regarding the ability of the
current asset manager to effectively manage the collateralized
debt obligation (CDO). A detailed list of rating actions follows
at the end of this release.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect portfolio performance consistent with
Fitch's expectation at the last rating action in March 2013.

Since Fitch's last rating action, the CDO liabilities have paid
down an additional $31.8 million. Total paydown since issuance has
reached $388.1 million (64.7% of the original transaction
balance). The recent paydowns were due to the full payoff of two
assets, partial proceeds from the discounted payoff (DPO) of
another asset, asset amortization and the diversion of interest
proceeds from the failure of coverage tests. Realized losses since
last review totaled $46 million. The CDO is under-collateralized
by $97.3 million.

In June 2013, the two remaining swaps in the transaction were
terminated due to the declining collateral quality and concern of
insufficient interest income to cover monthly obligation. The
swaps had a notional balance of $43.7 million and $26.95 million,
and mature in 2018 and 2016, respectively. Total termination cost
of $10.2 million was covered by the proceeds from the DPO. The
termination has lowered the risk of triggering an Event of Default
(EOD) caused by an inability to pay timely interest on the class
A-1, A-2, and B notes.

The portfolio is highly concentrated with only 18 assets
remaining. As of the February 2014 trustee report and per Fitch
categorizations, the CDO consists of the following: whole loans
(41.3%), commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS: 41.2%), and
mezzanine debt (17.4%). Defaulted assets and Fitch Loans of
Concern, combined, currently comprise 73.2% of the pool compared
to 76.8% at Fitch's last rating action. Further, the trustee
classifies 69.6% of the collateral pool as impaired. The weighted
average rating of the CMBS bonds is 'B-/CCC+', compared to
'CCC+/CCC' at last review.

Under Fitch's methodology, approximately 94.2% of the portfolio is
modeled to default in the base case stress scenario, defined as
the 'B' stress. In this scenario, the modeled average cash flow
decline is 7% from year-end 2013. Fitch estimates that average
recoveries will be low at 15.5% due to the concentration of
defaulted assets, subordinate debt positions, and speculative
grade-rated CMBS bonds.

This transaction was analyzed according to the 'Surveillance
Criteria for U.S. CREL CDOs and CMBS Large Loan Floating-Rate
Transactions', which applies stresses to property cash flows and
debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) tests to project future default
levels for the underlying portfolio. Recoveries for the loan
assets are based on stressed cash flows and Fitch's long-term
capitalization rates.

The credit enhancement to the timely pay class A-2 was then
compared to the modeled expected losses. In consideration of the
significant concentration of the pool, high percentage of
defaulted and LOC assets, and related risk of future insufficient
interest and principal proceeds to pay interest on these classes,
the credit enhancement was determined to be consistent with the
rating assigned below. Based on prior modeling results, no
material impact was anticipated from cash flow modeling the
transaction.

The 'CCC' and below ratings assigned to classes B through K are
based on a deterministic analysis that considers Fitch's base case
loss expectation for the pool and the current percentage of
defaulted assets and Fitch Loans of Concern factoring in
anticipated recoveries relative to each classes credit
enhancement, as well as the likelihood for OC tests to cure.

The largest component of Fitch's base case loss expectation is a
whole loan (28.6% of the pool) secured by a 72-room boutique hotel
located in the Times Square area of New York City. In 2012, the
loan was restructured. The loan's maturity was extended to 2019.
The loan currently consists of an A-Note and a Hope Note. Current
property cash flow remains significantly below issuance and
underwritten expectations. Fitch modeled a substantial loss in its
base case scenario.

The second largest component of Fitch's base case loss expectation
is the CMBS portion of the collateral comprised of 16 CMBS bonds
(41.2%). The majority of the portfolio has speculative grade
ratings.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Future upgrades to the senior classes are unlikely due to concerns
over the CDOs ability to make timely interest payments; the
increasing concentration of the transaction; poor quality of the
collateral pool, and the uncertainty regarding the current
collateral manager's capability to effectively manage the assets.
The distressed classes (rated below 'B') may be subject to further
rating actions as losses are realized.

RFC 2006-1 is a commercial real estate CDO. The transaction exited
its reinvestment period in April 2011. The CDO's asset manager was
formerly known as Realty Finance Corp. (RFC). In February 2011,
RFC entered into an agreement to outsource its asset management
functions for the CDO to Waldron H. Rand & Company, P.C.
(Waldron), an accounting firm based in Massachusetts with real
estate experience. In August 2013, RFC acquired and merged with
ClearVue Management, Inc. a California-based private real estate
investment company that specializes in the acquisition,
stabilization and disposition of distressed/nonperforming
residential real estate loans across the United States, and
changed its name to CV Holdings, Inc. As a result of the merger,
both accounting and asset management functions for the CDO were
brought back in-house.

The transaction was formerly known as CBRE Realty Finance CDO
2006-1, Ltd./LLC.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $19.7 million class A-2 at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%;
-- $34.5 million class B at 'CCCsf'; RE 30%;
-- $15 million class C at 'CCCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $13.5 million class D at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $9 million class E at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $10.5 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $13.5 million class G a at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $4.5 million class H at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $24 million class J at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $20.3 million class K at 'Csf'; RE 0%.

Class A-1 has paid in full. Fitch does not rate the preferred
shares.


TRAPEZA CDO V: S&P Raises Rating on Class A1B Notes From 'B-'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A1A and A1B notes from Trapeza CDO V Ltd., a collateralized debt
obligation (CDO) transaction backed by trust preferred securities
(TruPs) issued by financial institutions.  At the same time, S&P
removed them from CreditWatch with positive implications, where it
placed them on Nov. 25, 2013.

The upgrades reflect paydowns to the class A1A notes and the
improved credit support available to the notes since S&P last
upgraded the class A1A and A1B notes in May 2012.  Since S&P's May
2012 rating actions, the transaction has paid down the class A1A
notes by approximately $37.9 million, leaving the notes at 34.6%
of their original balance.  The paydowns can be attributed to
interest proceeds being used to redeem the notes because the
transaction failed one or more coverage tests, as well as
principal proceeds from prepayments.

The upgrades also reflect the improved overcollateralization (O/C)
available to the notes, mainly because of the aforementioned
paydowns, since S&P's May 2012 rating actions.  According to the
January 2014 trustee report, the class A/B O/C ratio was 140.3%,
compared with 111.3% reported in April 2012.

Standard & Poor's will continue to review whether, in its view,
the ratings assigned to the notes remain consistent with the
credit enhancement available to support them and take further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Trapeza CDO V Ltd.

              Rating       Rating
Class         To           From
A1A           A+ (sf)      BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos
A1B           BBB (sf)     B- (sf)/Watch Pos


TROPIC CDO III: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-2L Notes to 'BB+'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1L and A-2L notes from Tropic CDO III Ltd., a U.S.
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) backed by bank trust-
preferred securities.  In addition, S&P removed both ratings from
CreditWatch, where it placed them with positive implications on
Nov. 25, 2013.

The upgrades reflect a large paydown on the class A-1L notes since
our Feb. 28, 2013, rating action.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the Jan. 7, 2014, trustee report.

The transaction is current on its interest payments on all of the
rated tranches.  The senior subordinate overcollateralization
(O/C) test was failing as of the January 2014 payment date,
however the transaction was able to cure the failure using
available interest proceeds, with enough interest proceeds
remaining to pay the class A-4 notes' current interest due and
delever the class A-1L notes in connection with the failing
subordinate O/C test.  As of the Jan. 7, 2014, trustee report, the
subordinate O/C test showed 82.045%, compared with a 104.00%
required minimum.

According to the January 2014 trustee report, the transaction held
$80.70 million in underlying collateral obligations that are
considered defaulted.  This has decreased since S&P's previous
rating action, with $121.70 million shown in the January 2013
trustee report, which S&P used for its February 2013 rating
action.

The underlying collateral's principal amortization combined with
the diversion of excess interest proceeds resulting from the
coverage test failures have caused $28.11 million in paydowns to
the class A-1L notes since S&P's previous rating action.  This,
combined with the drop in defaulted obligations, has brought about
improved O/C ratios (see table).

S&P received a notice from the trustee dated Dec. 9, 2013,
informing S&P that they filed a petition on Sept. 30, 2013,
requesting a judicial determination of the correct interpretation
of the indenture's payment provisions for a number of trust-
preferred transactions, including Tropic CDO III Ltd.  This was
due to a claim by an investor of some of the junior notes in an
unrelated transaction that the trustee had incorrectly allocated
the funds for that transaction in 2011 and 2012.  The filing of
the petition, as a result of that claim, has resulted in the
trustee withholding funds in that unrelated transaction until a
court resolution is obtained.

The trustee is not currently withholding funds on Tropic CDO III
Ltd., and S&P's rating actions reflect the aforementioned
improvements in the transaction.  S&P will continue to monitor the
outcome of the litigation, and take further rating action if
necessary.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, its cash flow scenarios applied forward-
looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis
considered the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or
ultimate principal to each of the rated tranches.  The cash flow
analysis results demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the
rated outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement
available at the rating levels associated with these rating
actions.

Standard & Poor's will continue to review whether, in its view,
the ratings assigned to the notes remain consistent with the
credit enhancement available to support them and take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

CAPITAL STRUCTURE COMPARISON

                              Notional balance (mil. $)
Class                        Jan 2013        Jan 2014(i)
A-1L                           105.84              77.74
A-2L                            45.00              45.00

O/C tests (%)                Jan 2013           Jan 2014
Senior                         114.14             155.82
Senior subordinate              94.68             124.54
Subordinate                     65.75              82.04

I/C test(%)                  Jan 2013           Jan 2014
Senior                         268.16             560.15
Subordinate                      8.75              11.12

(i) Statistics reported reflect the application of proceeds on
     the Jan. 15, 2014, payment date.
O/C -- Overcollateralization.
I/C -- Interest coverage.

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

Tropic CDO III Ltd.
                   Rating       Rating
Class              To           From
A-1L               BBB+ (sf)    BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2L               BB+ (sf)     CCC+ (sf)/Watch Pos


U.S. CAPITAL I: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-2 Notes to 'BB+'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1 and A-2 notes from U.S. Capital Funding I Ltd., a
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) transaction backed by trust-
preferred securities (TruPs) issued by financial institutions.  At
the same time, S&P removed its rating on the class A-1 notes from
CreditWatch, where it had placed it with positive implications on
Nov. 25, 2013.

The upgrades reflect paydowns to the class A-1 notes and the
improved credit support available to these notes since S&P's
rating upgrade in May 2012, following an update to its criteria
for rating CDOs backed by bank TruPs.  Since that time, the
transaction has paid down the class A-1 notes by approximately
$31.9 million, leaving the notes at 41.27% of their original
balance.  S&P attributes the paydowns to interest proceeds
captured as a result of the transaction's failure of its coverage
tests, as well as to principal proceeds.

The paydowns have also resulted in improved overcollateralization
(O/C) available to the notes since S&P's May 2012 rating action.
The trustee reported the following O/C ratios in the January 2014
monthly report:

   -- The class A O/C ratio was 203.88%, up from a reported ratio
      of 153.21% in April 2012.

   -- The class B O/C ratio was 99.30%, up from a reported ratio
      of 89.83% in March 2012.

The upgrades also reflect the portfolio's credit improvement, as
evidenced by the decline in nonperforming assets since the time of
our last rating action.  According to the January 2014 monthly
report, defaulted and deferring securities totaled $19 million,
down from $32.0 million reported in the April 2012 report.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

U.S. Capital Funding I Ltd.

              Rating         Rating
Class         To             From
A-1           BBB (sf)       B+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2           BB+ (sf)       CCC-


U.S. CAPITAL III: S&P Raises Rating on Class A-1 Notes to 'BB+'
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1 and A-2 notes from U.S. Capital Funding III Ltd., a U.S.
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) backed by bank trust
preferred securities, and removed them from CreditWatch, where S&P
placed them with positive implications on Nov. 25, 2013.

The upgrades reflect a large paydown on the class A-1 notes since
S&P's May 2012 rating actions.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the Nov. 26, 2013, quarterly trustee
report.

The transaction is current on its interest payments on all of the
tranches (including the unrated class B-1 and B-2 notes) and is
continuing to divert excess interest proceeds to pay down the
rated notes in connection with a failure of the senior subordinate
principal coverage test.  Following the December 2013 distribution
date, the senior subordinate principal coverage test continues to
fail, with the November 2013 trustee report showing 84.23%
compared with a required minimum of 103.98%.

According to the November 2013 trustee report, the transaction
held $51.15 million in underlying collateral obligations that the
transaction considers defaulted.  This has remained stable since
S&P's previous rating action, with $51.15 million shown in the
February 2012 trustee report, which S&P used for its May 2012
rating actions.

The underlying collateral's principal amortization, combined with
the diversion of excess interest proceeds in connection with the
coverage test failure, has resulted in $32.36 million in paydowns
to the class A-1 notes since S&P's previous rating actions.
Consequently, the transaction's senior principal coverage test has
improved to 185.01% from the 153.21% reported in the February 2012
trustee report.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, its cash flow scenarios applied forward-
looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis
considered the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or
ultimate principal to each of the rated tranches.  The cash flow
analysis results demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the
rated outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement
available at the rating levels associated with these rating
actions.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them, and S&P will take rating
actions as it deems necessary.

CAPITAL STRUCTURE COMPARISON

Class                          Notional balance (mil. $)
                             Feb. 2012         Nov. 2013(i)
A-1                              82.16                49.80
A-2                              23.00                23.00
B-1                              39.10                39.10
B-2                              48.00                48.00

Principal coverage tests (%) Feb. 2012         Nov. 2013(i)
Senior                          153.21               185.01
Senior subordinate               83.80                84.23

Interest coverage tests (%)  Feb. 2012         Nov. 2013(i)
Senior                          724.60             1,026.39
Senior subordinate              272.82               272.03

  (i) Statistics reported reflect the application of proceeds on
      the Dec. 2, 2013, payment date.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

U.S. Capital Funding III Ltd.
                       Rating
Class              To           From
A-1                BB+ (sf)     B+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2                B- (sf)      CCC- (sf)/Watch Pos


WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C8: Moody's Cuts Rating on X-C Certs to Caa3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of one class
and affirmed eight classes of Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage
Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003-
C8 as follows:

Cl. G, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded to
B1 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. O, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-C, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013
Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on Class G was affirmed because the transaction's key
metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, Moody's
stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the transaction's
Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable ranges, combined
with the risk of future interest shortfalls resulting from adverse
selection as the deal pays down.

The rating on classes H through O were affirmed because the
ratings are consistent with expected recovery of principal and
interest from liquidated and troubled loans.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X-C) was downgraded due to the
decline in the credit performance of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydowns of higher quality reference
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 59% of the
current balance compared to 13% at Moody's last review.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The methodologies used in this rating were "Moody's Approach to
Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in September
2000, and "Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single
Borrower Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v 2.64,
which it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Conduit
model results at the Aa2 (sf) level are driven by property type,
Moody's actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality
grade (which reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to
estimate Moody's value). Conduit model results at the B2 (sf)
level are based on a paydown analysis using the individual loan-
level Moody's LTV ratio. Moody's may consider other concentrations
and correlations in its analysis. Based on the model pooled credit
enhancement levels of Aa2 (sf) and B2 (sf), the required credit
enhancement on the remaining conduit classes are either
interpolated between these two data points or determined based on
a multiple or ratio of either of these two data points. For fusion
deals, Moody's merges the credit enhancement for loans with
investment-grade credit assessments with the conduit model credit
enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's incorporates
negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the credit
assessment level) for loans with similar credit assessments in the
same transaction.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 2, compared to 14 at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.6 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 94% to $62 million
from $974 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by eight mortgage loans ranging in size from 1% to
65% of the pool. The pool contains no loans with investment-grade
credit assessments and no defeased loans.

Two loans, constituting 24% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

As of the February remittance date, the Regency Square Mall Loan
($40 million -- 65% of the pool) was the single loan in special
servicing. The asset was sold in a short sale which took place in
February 2014. The sale will be reflected in the March 2014
trustee report. The loan was secured by a troubled regional mall
in Jacksonville, Florida that had been modified in 2010 as part of
the General Growth Properties bankruptcy reorganization. The loan
represented a 50% participation interest in a combined $81 million
mortgage loan. As of February 2013, the mall's inline space was
only 27% occupied. Moody's analysis incorporates a high loss
severity for this loan.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results for 57% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 59%, compared to
76% at Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 13% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.59X and 1.86X,
respectively, compared to 1.55X and 1.47X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three performing loans represent 27% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the Washington State Portfolio Loan ($8
million -- 13% of the pool), which is secured by two 1980s-vintage
office properties in Bellingham and Olympia, Washington. The
properties are 100% occupied by government agencies of the State
of Washington. The lease for the Bellingham property expired in
June 2013, but was recently extended for a five-year term. The
loan passed its anticipated repayment date (ARD) in October 2008,
causing the loan to be added to the watchlist. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 66% and 1.73X, respectively, compared to 66% and
1.52X at prior review.

The second largest loan is the Park West at Gateway Centre Loan
($7 million -- 11% of the pool). The loan is secured by a seven-
unit industrial property in Pinellas Park, Florida, which is part
of the Tampa Bay region. The loan is on the watchlist following a
recent return to the master servicer from the special servicer.
While in special servicing, in October 2013, the loan was modified
to an interest-only structure and the loan maturity date was
changed to May 2017. Property occupancy was 76% as of September
2013. Occupancy has remained in the 70-80% range since year-end
2011 reporting. The largest tenant is GE Aviation Services,
occupying approximately 31% of the property net rentable area
(NRA) on a lease set to expire in March 2015. While most tenants
at the property have renewal options which extend their leases for
three to five years, all current leases at the property --
including the GE lease -- are set to expire before 2018. Moody's
has identified this as a troubled loan due to concerns about weak
property performance, low DSCR, and lease rollover as the loan
approaches its maturity date. Moody's analysis incorporates an
elevated expected loss for this loan.

The third largest loan is the Walgreens -- Spartanburg, SC Loan
($2 million -- 3% of the pool). The loan is secured by a 15,000
square foot retail property which is 100% leased to Walgreen Co.
(Moody's senior unsecured rating Baa1, Negative) through November
2023. The loan is fully amortizing with a maturity date that
coincides with the Walgreen lease expiration. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 58% and, 1.68X, respectively, compared to 62%
and 1.58X at the last review.


WELLS FARGO 2013-BTC: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. E Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings on six classes of
Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2013-BTC, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-BTC. Moody's
rating action is as follows:

Cl. A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 26, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Apr 26, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Apr 26, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 26, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Apr 26, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 26, 2013 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio and Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), are
within acceptable ranges.

The rating on the IO class was affirmed because the weighted
average rating factor or WARF of the referenced classes are
consistent with Moody's expectations. Moody's does not rate the
most junior principal class, Class F.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase
in defeasance in the pool or an improvement in pool performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, an increase in loan
concentration, an increase in expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower Transactions"
published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.6. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the February 19, 2014 payment date, the transaction's
certificate balance remains unchanged from securitization at $300
million. The certificates are collateralized by a single fixed-
rate loan secured by the west parcel (1 million SF) of a regional
outlet center known as Bergen Town Center located in Bergen
County, NJ. The east parcel (210,709 SF) is not part of the
collateral. Monthly payments of interest only are made at a fixed
rate of 3.56%, and the loan matures in April 2023.

The retail center was originally constructed in 1957 as an
enclosed regional mall, and was renovated and repositioned by the
sponsor (Vornado Realty Trust) post purchase in 2003. Anchor
tenants at the property include Target, Whole Foods, and Century
21. Major tenants include Marshall's, Nordstrom Rack, Saks Off
Fifth, HomeGoods, H&M, and Bloomingdale's Outlet. The property is
located along the Paramus, NJ retail corridor which is a dominant
retail hub catering to the wealthy suburbs surrounding NYC.

As of the September 2013 rent roll, the property was 89% leased;
however, this figure did not include the HomeGoods (28,478 SF with
lease commencement date in November 2013) and H&M (27,742 SF with
lease commencement date in December 2013) leases. The Borrower had
provided two separate master leases for the previously vacant
space; and with the commencement of both leases, master leases
have been cancelled.

The property's year-to-date through September 2013 Net Cash Flow
(NCF) was $18.4 million. Moody's NCF is $25.3 million, the same as
at securitization. Moody's loan to value (LTV) ratio is 92%, the
same as at securitization. Moody's stressed DSCR is at 0.91X, the
same as at securitization. There are no interest shortfalls or
losses outstanding.


WESTWOOD CDO I: Moody's Affirms 'Ba1' Rating on 2 Note Classes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Westwood CDO I, Ltd.:

  $342,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
  March 25, 2021 (current outstanding balance of $330,297,558),
  Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on August 25, 2011 Upgraded to
  Aa1 (sf)

  $22,500,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
  March 25, 2021, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on August 25,
  2011 Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

  $30,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes Due March 25, 2021, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on
  August 25, 2011 Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

  $16,600,000 Class C-1 Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes Due March 25, 2021, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on
  August 25, 2011 Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

  $4,400,000 Class C-2 Senior Secured Deferrable Fixed Rate Notes
  Due March 25, 2021, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on August 25,
  2011 Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

  $13,500,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
  Due March 25, 2021, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on August 25,
  2011 Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Westwood CDO I, Ltd., issued in January 2007, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment period will end in
March 2014.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions reflect the benefit of the short period of
time remaining before the end of the deal's reinvestment period in
March 2014. In light of the reinvestment restrictions during the
amortization period, and therefore the limited ability of the
manager to effect significant changes to the current collateral
pool, Moody's analyzed the deal assuming a higher likelihood that
the collateral pool characteristics will maintain a positive
buffer relative to certain covenant requirements. In particular,
Moody's assumed that the deal will benefit from lower WARF and
higher spread levels compared to the covenant levels. Moody's
modeled a WARF of 2568 compared to the covenant level of 2892 and
a weighted average spread (WAS) of 3.22% compared to the covenant
level of 2.80%. Furthermore, the transaction's reported OC ratios
have been stable since February 2013.

The rating actions also reflect a correction to Moody's modeling
of the payment step in the waterfall. Due to an input error,
remaining interest proceeds, in addition to principal proceeds,
were used to repay the notes in the amortization period in the
August 25, 2011 rating action. This error has now been corrected,
and today's rating actions reflect this change.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO
documentation by different transactional parties owing to embedded
ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have
adverse consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will commence and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan
market and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the
highest payment priority.

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

6) Long-dated assets: The presence of assets that mature after the
CLO's legal maturity date exposes the deal to liquidation risk on
those assets. This risk is borne first by investors with the
lowest priority in the capital structure. Moody's assumes that the
terminal value of an asset upon liquidation at maturity will be
equal to the lower of an assumed liquidation value (depending on
the extent to which the asset's maturity lags that of the
liabilities) or the asset's current market value.

7) Post-Reinvestment Period Trading: Subject to certain
requirements, the deal can reinvest certain proceeds after the end
of the reinvestment period, and as such the manager has the
ability to erode some of the collateral quality metrics to the
covenant levels. Such reinvestment could affect the transaction
either positively or negatively. In particular, Moody's tested for
a possible extension of the actual weighted average life in its
analysis given that the post-reinvestment period reinvesting
criteria has loose restrictions on the weighted average life of
the portfolio.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes. Below is a summary of the impact
of different default probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on
all of the rated notes (by the difference in the number of notches
versus the current model output, for which a positive difference
corresponds to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (2054)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: +1

Class B: +3

Class C-1: +1

Class C-2: +1

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3082)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: -2

Class B: -1

Class C-1: -1

Class C-2: -1

Class D: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in February 2014.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted average
spread and the weighted average recovery rate, are based on its
published methodology and could differ from the trustee's reported
numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as
having a performing par and principal proceeds balance of $436.2
million, defaulted par of $1.9 million, a weighted average default
probability of 17.84% (implying a WARF of 2568), a weighted
average recovery rate upon default of 50.20%, a diversity score of
60 and a weighted average spread of 3.22%.

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.


WESTWOOD CDO II: Moody's Hikes Rating on $17MM Cl. D Notes to Ba1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Westwood CDO II, Ltd.:

$26,425,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes Due April 25, 2022,
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on August 8, 2011 Upgraded to Aa3
(sf)

$8,750,000 Class B Floating Rate Notes Due April 25, 2022,
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on August 8, 2011 Upgraded to A1
(sf)

$19,250,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due April 25,
2022, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on August 8, 2011 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

$17,500,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due April 25,
2022, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on August 8, 2011 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

$14,000,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due April 25,
2022, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on August 8, 2011 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

$237,825,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Notes Due April 25, 2022
(current outstanding balance of $221,773,752.88), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on August 8, 2011 Upgraded to Aaa (sf)

Westwood CDO II, Ltd., issued in April 2007, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment period will end in
April 2014.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions reflect the benefit of the short period of
time remaining before the end of the deal's reinvestment period in
April 2014. In light of the reinvestment restrictions during the
amortization period, and therefore the limited ability of the
manager to effect significant changes to the current collateral
pool, Moody's analyzed the deal assuming a higher likelihood that
the collateral pool characteristics will maintain a positive
buffer relative to certain covenant requirements. In particular,
Moody's assumed that the deal will benefit from lower WARF, higher
spread and higher diversity levels compared to the covenant
levels. Moody's modeled a WARF of 2495, WAS of 3.2%, and diversity
of 62 compared to the covenant levels of, 2749, 2.55% and 50
respectively.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
February 2014.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to a)
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy and b)
the large concentration of upcoming speculative-grade debt
maturities, which could make refinancing difficult for issuers.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO
documentation by different transactional parties owing to embedded
ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: A shift towards collateral of better
credit quality, or better credit performance of assets
collateralizing the transaction than Moody's current expectations,
can lead to positive CLO performance. Conversely, a negative shift
in credit quality or performance of the collateral can have
adverse consequences for CLO performance.

4) Deleveraging: An important source of uncertainty in this
transaction is whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal
proceeds will commence and at what pace. Deleveraging of the CLO
could accelerate owing to high prepayment levels in the loan
market and/or collateral sales by the manager, which could have a
significant impact on the notes' ratings. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations will usually have a
positive impact on CLO notes, beginning with those with the
highest payment priority.

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

6) Post-Reinvestment Period Trading: Subject to certain
requirements, the deal can reinvest certain proceeds after the end
of the reinvestment period, and as such the manager has the
ability to erode some of the collateral quality metrics to the
covenant levels. Such reinvestment could affect the transaction
either positively or negatively. In particular, Moody's tested for
a possible extension of the actual weighted average life in its
analysis given that the post-reinvestment period reinvesting
criteria has loose restrictions on the weighted average life of
the portfolio.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes. Below is a summary of the impact
of different default probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on
all of the rated notes (by the difference in the number of notches
versus the current model output, for which a positive difference
corresponds to lower expected loss):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (1996)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +1

Class C: +3

Class D: +2

Class E: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (2994)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: -1

Class B: -3

Class C: -2

Class D: -1

Class E: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in February 2014.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, the weighted
average recovery rate and weighted average spread, are based on
its published methodology and could differ from the trustee's
reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the
collateral pool as having a performing par and principal proceeds
balance of $321.2 million, defaulted par of $1.4 million, a
weighted average default probability of 17.5% (implying a WARF of
2495), a weighted average recovery rate upon default of 49.95%, a
diversity score of 62 and a weighted average spread of 3.20%.

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2011-C3: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Cl. F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2011-C3 commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch's affirmations are based on the relatively stable
performance of the underlying collateral pool since issuance.
Fitch reviewed the servicer-provided year-end (YE) 2012 and
partial YE 2013 financial performance of the collateral pool in
addition to updated rent rolls for the top 15 loans which
represent 58.5% of the transaction.

As of the January 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 3.6% to $1.39 billion from
$1.45 billion at issuance. No loans are defeased. Interest
shortfalls are currently affecting class G. Fitch identified three
Fitch Loans of Concern, two of which are specially serviced.

The largest specially serviced loan, The Commons at Manahawkin
Village, is a 326,128 SF shopping center located in Manahawkin,
New Jersey. The year-to-date net operating income debt service
coverage ratio (NOI DSCR) as of third quarter 2013 was 1.38x. The
DSCR declined slightly when compared with prior year analysis
which reported a DSCR of 1.54x. Despite the property having stable
financial performance, the loan has been chronically late on
payments since its inception in 2011; the loan has been on the
Watchlist since September 2012 and was transferred to special
servicing in September 2013. The mezzanine lender has cured 100%
of payments when noticed by the special servicer. The mezzanine
lender has moved for a UCC foreclosure, which is currently being
litigated in New Jersey State Court. Fitch has not modeled losses
on the loan given the stable performance of the collateral and the
continued support from the mezzanine lender.

The second specially serviced loan, Campus Habitat 15, is secured
by a 481-unit multifamily project located in Laramie, Wyoming. The
year-to-date NOI DSCR as of first quarter 2013 was 0.37x. The DSCR
declined considerably when compared with prior year analysis which
reported a DSCR of 1.15x. The property was 69% occupied as of
first quarter 2013. The loan was transferred to special servicing
in August 2013 due to monetary default. In December 2012 the
borrower filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Fitch has
modeled losses on the loan as a result of the decline in financial
performance and the defaulted status of the loan.

RATING SENSITIVITY
The Rating Outlooks remain Stable for all classes. Fitch does not
foresee rating changes until a material economic or asset-level
event changes the transaction's overall portfolio-level metrics.
Additional information on rating sensitivity is available in the
report 'WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2011-C3', dated
September 6, 2011.

Fitch affirms the following classes as indicated:

-- $51.4 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $313.1 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $123.5 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $102 million class A-3FL at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $557 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $1.15 billion* class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $41.6 million class B at 'AAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $47 million class C at 'Asf', Outlook Stable;
-- $79.5 million class D at 'BBB-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $21.7 million class E at 'BBsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $19.9 million class F at 'Bsf', Outlook Stable.

* Notional amount and interest-only

Fitch does not rate the interest-only class X-B or class G
certificates.


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-LC14: DBRS Rates Class E Certificates 'BB'
----------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS has assigned final ratings to the following classes of
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-LC14,
to be issued by WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-LC14.  The
trends are Stable.

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-S at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-B at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-C at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class C at A (low) (sf)
-- Class PEX at A (low) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class E at BB (sf)
-- Class F at B (sf)

In addition, the previous rating of Class A-3 has been
discontinued, and the following new ratings have been assigned,
both with Stable trends.

-- Class A-3FL at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3FX at AAA (sf)

Classes A-3FL, A-3FX, X-C, D, E, F and G will be privately placed
pursuant to Rule 144A.

The Class X balances are notional.  DBRS ratings on interest-only
certificates address the likelihood of receiving interest based on
the notional amount outstanding.  DBRS considers the interest-only
certificates' position within the transaction payment waterfall
when determining the appropriate rating.

Up to the full certificate balance of the Class A-S, Class B and
Class C certificates may be exchanged for Class PEX certificates.
Class PEX certificates may be exchanged for up to the full
certificate balance of the Class A-S, Class B and Class C
certificates.

The aggregate principal balance of the Class A-3FL and A-3FX
certificates will at all times equal the principal balance of the
Class A-3FX regular interest.

The collateral consists of 71 fixed-rate loans secured by 144
commercial and multifamily properties.  The transaction has a
balance of $1,255,596,034.  The pool exhibits a DBRS weighted-
average term debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and debt yield of
1.54 times (x) and 9.6%, respectively, based on the senior trust
balances.  The DBRS sample included 30 loans, representing 72.2%
of the pool.  Two loans, representing 17.5% of the pool, were
shadow-rated investment-grade by DBRS.  Properties representing
28.5% of the pool are located in urban markets with increased
liquidity, greater than in recent conduit transactions.
Additionally, the pool is relatively diverse based on loan size,
with a concentration profile equivalent to that of a pool of 27
equal-sized loans.

DBRS identified nine loans, representing 15.8% of the pool, with
sponsorship that have had bankruptcies, foreclosures or reported
very limited net worth and liquidity.  In order to account for
this, DBRS increased the probability of default (POD) for loans
with identified sponsorship concerns.  Additionally, at 33.0%, the
pool has a high concentration of loans with DBRS Refi DSCRs below
1.00x, based on the trust balance.  However, these DSCRs are based
on a weighted-average stressed refinance constant of 9.8%, which
implies an interest rate of 9.1%, amortizing on a 30-year
schedule.  This represents a significant stress of nearly 4.1%
over the weighted-average contractual interest rate of the loans
in the pool.

The ratings assigned to the Certificates by DBRS are based
exclusively on the credit provided by the transaction structure
and underlying trust assets.  All classes will be subject to
ongoing surveillance, which could result in upgrades or downgrades
by DBRS after the date of issuance.


* Moody's Takes Action on $39MM of RMBS By Various Issuers
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating of one tranche
and downgraded the ratings of four tranches from two transactions
backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating action is as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2006-PC1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on May 1, 2013 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Centex Home Equity Loan Trust 2002-A

Cl. AF-4, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. AF-5, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. AF-6, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. MF-1, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools. The upgrade is a result of improving performance of the
related pools and/or faster pay-down of the bonds due to high
prepayments/faster liquidations. The downgrades are primarily due
to the outstanding interest shortfalls on the bonds.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 6.6% in January 2014 from 7.9%
in January 2013 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range
of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this central
scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House prices
are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's expects
house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases than
Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Takes Action on $49MM of RMBS From Various Trusts
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of five
tranches from four transactions and downgraded the ratings of 15
tranches from three transactions backed by Subprime mortgage
loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: AFC Mtg Loan AB Notes 2000-1

Cl. 1A, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Upgraded to
B3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (Insured
Rating Withdrawn Mar 25, 2009)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2004-CB3, C-Bass
Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012
Confirmed at Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Equity One Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2002-3

Cl. AV-1, Downgraded to A3 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to A1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Equity One Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2003-2

M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: IndyMac Home Equity Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Trust, SPMD
2004-B

Cl. M-3, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Cl. M-5, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Cl. M-6, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Cl. M-7, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Cl. M-8, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Cl. M-9, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Issuer: Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC Trust 2004-OP2

Cl. M-2, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. B-1, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. B-2, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. B-3, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. B-4, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: WMC Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2000-A

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 4, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools. The upgrades are a result of improving performance of
the related pools and/or faster pay-down of the bonds due to high
prepayments/faster liquidations. The downgrades are a result of
deteriorating performance and/or structural features resulting in
higher expected losses for the bonds than previously anticipated.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating

The primary source of assumption uncertainty is the uncertainty in
our central macroeconomic forecast and performance volatility due
to servicer-related issues. The unemployment rate fell from 7.9%
in January 2013 to 6.6% in January 2014. Moody's forecasts an
unemployment central range of 6.5% to 7.5% for the 2014 year.
Moody's expects house prices to continue to rise in 2014.
Performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


* S&P Lowers Ratings on 47 Note Classes to 'D'
----------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on 47
classes from 26 U.S. residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS)
transactions to 'D (sf)', and placed its ratings on 19 classes
from 15 additional U.S. RMBS transactions on CreditWatch with
negative implications.

The downgrades reflect S&P's assessment of the interest shortfalls
the affected classes incurred during recent remittance periods and
S&P's belief that it is unlikely the certificateholders will be
reimbursed.  All of the ratings were either 'CCC (sf)' or 'CC
(sf)' before S&P lowered them.

The CreditWatch placements reflect that the trustee reported
potential interest shortfalls for the affected classes in recent
remittance periods, which could negatively affect S&P's ratings on
those classes.  S&P is currently verifying these possible interest
shortfalls and, upon the reported data's confirmation, will adjust
the ratings as it considers appropriate, according to S&P's
criteria.

These transactions are supported by mixed collateral of fixed- and
adjustable-rate mortgage loans.  A combination of subordination,
excess spread, and overcollateralization (where applicable)
provide credit enhancement for all of the transactions in this
review.


* S&P Puts 8 Ratings on 4 U.S. CDO Transactions on Watch Positive
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its ratings on eight
tranches from four U.S. collateralized debt obligation (CDO)
transactions on CreditWatch with positive implications.  Six of
the eight tranches are from three CDO transactions backed by
trust-preferred securities (TRuPS) and the remaining two are from
one CDO of structured finance securities.

The CreditWatch placements follow paydowns to the liabilities,
which have increased coverage and credit enhancement levels
available to these notes.  In addition, in the TRuPs-backed CDOs,
the number of assets deferring their interest payments has
decreased.

The eight tranches have a total original issuance amount of
$1.28 billion.

S&P will resolve the CreditWatch placements after it completes a
comprehensive cash flow analysis and committee review for each of
the affected transactions.  S&P expects to resolve these
CreditWatch placements within 90 days.  S&P will continue to
monitor the CDO transactions we rate and take rating actions,
including CreditWatch placements, as it deems appropriate.

RATINGS PLACED ON CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

Attentus CDO I Ltd.
                    Rating                  Rating
Class               To                      From
A1                  B- (sf)/Watch Pos       B- (sf)
A2                  CCC+ (sf)/Watch Pos     CCC+ (sf)

C-Bass CBO VII Ltd.
                    Rating                  Rating
Class               To                      From
C                   BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos     BBB+ (sf)
D                   CCC- (sf)/Watch Pos     CCC- (sf)

Preferred Term Securities XI Ltd.
                    Rating                  Rating
Class               To                      From
A-1                 BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos      BB+ (sf)
A-2                 CCC (sf)/Watch Pos      CCC (sf)

Preferred Term Securities XXI Ltd.
                    Rating                  Rating
Class               To                      From
A-1                 BB- (sf)/Watch Pos      BB- (sf)
A-2                 CCC (sf)/Watch Pos      CCC (sf)


* S&P Raises Rating on 7 Tranches From 7 CDO Transactions
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on seven
tranches from seven investment-grade corporate-backed synthetic
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) transactions, and S&P removed
these ratings from CreditWatch, where it had placed them with
positive implications.  At the same time, S&P placed its ratings
on 11 tranches from 11 investment-grade corporate-backed synthetic
CDO transactions on CreditWatch Positive.  These rating actions
followed S&P's monthly review of synthetic CDO transactions.

The CreditWatch Positive placements and ratings upgrades reflect
the transactions' seasoning, the rating stability of the obligors
in the underlying reference portfolios over the past few months,
and the synthetic rated overcollateralization ratios, which had
risen above 100% at the next-highest rating level.

RATINGS RAISED

Cloverie PLC
Series 43
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Notes               BB (sf)               BB- (sf)/Watch Pos

Cloverie PLC
Series 44
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Notes               BB (sf)               BB- (sf)/Watch Pos

Credit Default Swap
US$500 mil. Credit Default Swap - CRA700426
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Swap                AAAsrp (sf)           AA+srp (sf)/Watch Pos

Credit Default Swap
US$500 mil. Credit Default Swap - CRA700436
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Swap                AAAsrp (sf)           AA+srp (sf)/Watch Pos

Landgrove Synthetic CDO SPC
Series 2007-2
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
A                   BB+ (sf)              BB (sf)/Watch Pos

Marvel Finance 2007-4 LLC
Series 2007-4
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
IA                  BBB (sf)              BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos

Rutland Rated Investments
Series DRYDEN06-3
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
A6-$LS              B+ (sf)               B (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS PLACED ON CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

Athenee CDO PLC
EUR12.5 mil tranche A Hunter Valley CDO II floating-rate notes
due June 30
2107 series 2007-3
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Tranche A           BB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BB- (sf)

Athenee CDO PLC
EUR5 mil tranche A Hunter Valley CDO II fixed-rate notes
due June 30, 2017 series 2007-8
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Tranche A           BB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BB- (sf)

Camber Master Trust Series 10
                            Rating
                    To                    From
                    B- (sf)/Watch Pos     B- (sf)

Camber Master Trust Series 7
                            Rating
                    To                    From
                    B (sf)/Watch Pos      B (sf)

Camber Master Trust Series 8
                            Rating
                    To                    From
                    B (sf)/Watch Pos      B (sf)

Camber Master Trust Series 9
                            Rating
                    To                    From
                    B- (sf)/Watch Pos     B- (sf)

Credit Default Swap
Series 227212/227229/227230
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
Tranche             BB+srp (sf)/Watch Pos BB+srp (sf)

Morgan Stanley ACES SPC
Series 2007-8
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
A2                  B- (sf)/Watch Pos     B- (sf)

Morgan Stanley Managed ACES SPC
Series 2007-16
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
IB                  BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB- (sf)

REVE SPC
EUR50 mil., JPY3 bil., US$154 mil REVE SPC Dryden XVII Notes
Series 2007-1
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
A Series 18         BB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BB- (sf)

REVE SPC
EUR5 mil Series 26 Dryden XVII Notes of Series 2008-1 Class B
                            Rating
Class               To                    From
B                   B+ (sf)/Watch Pos     B+ (sf)


* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 20 Classes From 10 CDO Deals
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its ratings on 16
classes of notes from seven collateralized loan obligation (CLO)
transactions, two classes from a cash flow collateralized debt
obligation (CDO) backed by commercial mortgage-backed securities,
and two classes from two cash flow CDO transactions backed
primarily by trust-preferred securities.

The withdrawals follow the complete paydown of the notes as
reflected in the most recent trustee-issued note payment reports.

Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2005-1 Ltd. and Symphony CLO I Ltd.
redeemed their classes in full after notifying us that the equity
holders directed optional redemptions.

Crest G-Star 2001-2 Ltd. redeemed its classes in full after
notifying S&P of a collateral disposition redemption that the
issuers directed.

Gallatin CLO II 2005-1 Ltd. fully paid off its last rated notes.

The remaining six transactions have other rated tranches still
outstanding in their capital structures.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

Avenue CLO Fund Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2L                NR                  AAA (sf)

Ballyrock CLO III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)

Carlyle Daytona CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C-2                 NR                  AA+p (sf)

Crest G-Star 2001-2 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  CC (sf)
Composite           NR                  CCC- (sf)

Dekania CDO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
Composite           NR                  A-p (sf)

Gallatin CLO II 2005-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2L                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-3L                NR                  AAA (sf)
B-1L                NR                  A+ (sf)
B-2L                NR                  BB+ (sf)

Greyrock CDO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1L                NR                  AAA (sf)

Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2005-1 Ltd.
                                                 Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)
D                   NR                  AAA (sf)

I-Preferred Term Securities III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AA (sf)

Symphony CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1A                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-1B                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
C                   NR                  BBB+ (sf)
D                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

NR--Not rated.


* S&P Withdraws 85 D Ratings on 12 CMBS, 2 Re-REMICs & 1 CRE Deals
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its 'D (sf)' ratings
on 85 classes from 12 U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities
(CMBS), two re-securitized real estate mortgage investment
conduits (re-REMIC), and one commercial real estate-collateralized
debt obligation (CRE-CDO) transaction.

The withdrawals are due to the outstanding 'D (sf)' ratings
remaining for each of the affected transactions.  S&P had
previously lowered the ratings to 'D (sf)' because of principal
losses to the classes, accumulated interest shortfalls that S&P
believed would remain outstanding for an extended period of time,
interest shortfalls that the nondeferrable classes experienced,
and S&P's expectation that the classes were unlikely to be repaid
in full.

The accumulated interest shortfalls are primarily a result of one
or more of the following factors:

   -- Appraisal subordinate entitlement reduction amounts in
      effect for the specially serviced assets;

   -- Trust expenses that may include, but are not limited to,
      property operating expenses, property taxes, insurance
      payments, and legal expenses; and

   -- Special servicing fees.

Below S&P provides details of each of the 12 CMBS, two re-REMIC,
and one CRE CDO transactions on which S&P had previously lowered
the outstanding ratings to 'D (sf)'.

                   ACT 2005-RR DEPOSITOR CORP.

S&P lowered its ratings to 'D (sf)' on classes A-1FL, A-2, and A-3
in 2010 through 2013 because of principal losses these respective
classes had incurred.

                  ANTHRACITE CRE CDO 2006-HY3 LTD.

S&P lowered the ratings on classes A through G to 'D (sf)' in 2012
through 2014 because of interest shortfalls the nondeferrable
classes experienced and S&P's expectations that the deferrable
classes were unlikely to be repaid in full.

                     ASSET SECURITIZATION CORP.

SERIES 1996-D2

As of April 10, 2002, S&P lowered the rating on class B-1H to
reflect a principal loss, and it also the lowered rating on class
B-1B to reflect cumulative interest shortfalls.  As of May 10,
2001, S&P lowered its ratings to 'D (sf)' on the class B-2 and B-
2H due to appraisal reductions.  Full interest is no longer being
paid to classes B-2 and B-2H.

               BANC OF AMERICA COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE INC.

SERIES 2003-1

As of Jan. 5, 2011, S&P lowered its rating to 'D (sf)' on the
classes L, M, N, and O due to recurring interest shortfalls S&P
expects to continue for the foreseeable future.

           BEAR STEARNS COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC.

SERIES 2001-TOP2

S&P lowered the ratings on classes E through J to 'D (sf)' in 2006
through 2013 because of interest shortfalls that S&P believes will
remain outstanding in the near term.

        CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.

SERIES 2002-CKN2

S&P lowered its ratings on classes F through N to 'D (sf)' in 2010
through 2013 because these classes incurred principal losses or
because they accumulated shortfalls that we believe will remain
outstanding for the foreseeable future.

        CREDIT SUISSE FIRST BOSTON MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.

SERIES 2002-CKS4

S&P lowered its ratings on classes G through P to 'D (sf)' in 2010
through 2014 due to these classes incurring principal losses or
due to accumulated shortfalls that we believe will remain
outstanding for the foreseeable future.

              GMAC COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC.

SERIES 2002-C3

S&P lowered the ratings on classes J through N and classes O-1 and
O-2 to 'D (sf)' in 2006 through 2013 because of interest
shortfalls that S&P believes will remain outstanding in the near
term.

             GMAC COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC.

SERIES 2003-C2

S&P lowered its rating on class J to 'D (sf)' in December 2013 due
to principal loss incurred by the class.  S&P also lowered its
ratings on classes K through O in December 2010 due to recurring
interest shortfalls we expect to continue for the foreseeable
future.

        J.P. MORGAN CHASE COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORP.

SERIES 2001-A

S&P lowered the ratings on classes E through G to 'D (sf)' in 2010
through 2012 because of interest shortfalls that S&P believes will
remain outstanding in the near term.

JPMORGAN-CIBC COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES TRUST 2006-RR1

S&P lowered its rating on class A-1 to 'D (sf)' in February 2014
due to principal losses incurred by the class.  S&P also lowered
its ratings on classes A-2 through L in 2010 through 2011 due to
recurring interest shortfalls that S&P expects to continue for the
foreseeable future.

              LB-UBS COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE TRUST 2001-C7

S&P lowered its rating to 'D (sf)' on the classes P and Q on
Nov. 29, 2011 due to accumulated interest shortfalls outstanding
for four and eight months, respectively.

             MORGAN STANLEY CAPITAL I TRUST 1999-LIFE1

S&P lowered the ratings on classes J through L to 'D (sf)' in 2010
through 2012 because of interest shortfalls that S&P believes will
remain outstanding in the near term.

         MORGAN STANLEY DEAN WITTER CAPITAL I TRUST 2002-HQ

S&P lowered the ratings on classes L through N to 'D (sf)' in 2011
because of interest shortfalls that we believe will remain
outstanding over the near term.

         SALOMON BROTHERS COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE TRUST 2000-C3

S&P lowered the ratings on classes H through N to 'D (sf)' in 2009
through 2011 because of interest shortfalls that S&P believes will
remain outstanding over the near term.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

ACT 2005-RR Depositor Corp.
Commercial mortgage-backed securities pass-through certificates
               Rating
Class                    To                  From
A-1FL                    NR                  D (sf)
A-2                      NR                  D (sf)
A-3                      NR                  D (sf)

Anthracite CRE CDO 2006-HY3 Ltd.
Collateralized debt obligations
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
A                        NR                  D (sf)
B-FL                     NR                  D (sf)
B-FX                     NR                  D (sf)
C-FL                     NR                  D (sf)
C-FX                     NR                  D (sf)
D                        NR                  D (sf)
E-FL                     NR                  D (sf)
E-FX                     NR                  D (sf)
F                        NR                  D (sf)
G                        NR                  D (sf)

Asset Securitization Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 1996-D2
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
B-1B                     NR                  D (sf)
B-1H                     NR                  D (sf)
B-2                      NR                  D (sf)
B-2H                     NR                  D (sf)

Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Inc.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2003-1
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)
O                        NR                  D (sf)

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2001-TOP2
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
E                        NR                  D (sf)
F                        NR                  D (sf)
G                        NR                  D (sf)
H                        NR                  D (sf)
J                        NR                  D (sf)

Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2002-CKN2
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
F                        NR                  D (sf)
G                        NR                  D (sf)
H                        NR                  D (sf)
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)

Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2002-CKS4
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
G                        NR                  D (sf)
H                        NR                  D (sf)
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)
O                        NR                  D (sf)
P                        NR                  D (sf)

GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2002-C3
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)
O-1                      NR                  D (sf)
O-2                      NR                  D (sf)

GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities Inc.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2003-C2
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)
O                        NR                  D (sf)

JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2001-A
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
E                        NR                  D (sf)
F                        NR                  D (sf)
G                        NR                  D (sf)

JPMorgan-CIBC Commercial Mortgage-Backed Secs Trust 2006-RR1
Commercial mortgage-backed securities pass-through certificates
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
A-1                      NR                  D (sf)
A-2                      NR                  D (sf)
B                        NR                  D (sf)
C                        NR                  D (sf)
D                        NR                  D (sf)
E                        NR                  D (sf)
F                        NR                  D (sf)
G                        NR                  D (sf)
H                        NR                  D (sf)
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)

LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2001-C7
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
P                        NR                  D (sf)
Q                        NR                  D (sf)

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 1999-LIFE1
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)

Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Trust 2002-HQ
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)

Salomon Brothers Commercial Mortgage Trust 2000-C3
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                                 Rating
Class                    To                  From
H                        NR                  D (sf)
J                        NR                  D (sf)
K                        NR                  D (sf)
L                        NR                  D (sf)
M                        NR                  D (sf)
N                        NR                  D (sf)

NR--Not rated.


* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 6 Classes from 5 Synthetic Transactions
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its rating on six
classes from five synthetic collateralized debt obligation
transactions.

The rating withdrawals follow the receipt of notice of redemption
or termination by the five transactions.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

Morgan Stanley Managed ACES SPC
Series 2007-12
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
IIIA                NR                  B+ (sf)
IVA                 NR                  CCC- (sf)

STARTS (CAYMAN) Ltd.
Series 2007-28
                            Rating
Class               To                   From
A4-D4               NR                   B+ (sf)

Mt. Kailash Series II
                            Rating
Class               To                   From
Cr Link Ln          NR                   B+ (sf)

Mt. Kailash Series III
                            Rating
Class               To                   From
Cr Lkd Ln           NR                   A- (sf)

REVE SPC
Dryden XVII notes series 2007-1
                            Rating
Class               To                   From
A Series 7          NR                   BB+ (sf)

NR-Not rated.



                             *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers'
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look like
the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.
Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical cost
net of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm's
assets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet for
liabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at which
equity securities trade in public market are determined by more
than a balance sheet solvency test.

A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the TCR.  Submissions about insolvency-
related conferences are encouraged.  Send announcements to
conferences@bankrupt.com by e-mail.

On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filed
Chapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets and
liabilities delivered to the nation's bankruptcy courts.  The
list includes links to freely downloadable of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF documents.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book of
interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today.

Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday edition
of the TCR.

The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the week
then-ending.

                           *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter is a daily newsletter co-published
by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante, Rousel Elaine
Tumanda, Valerie Udtuhan, Howard C. Tolentino, Carmel Paderog,
Meriam Fernandez, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Cecil R. Villacampa,
Sheryl Joy P. Olano, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo Fernandez,
Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2014.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9474.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.  Information contained
herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is
not guaranteed.

The TCR subscription rate is $975 for 6 months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Peter A.
Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.


                  *** End of Transmission ***