TCR_Public/140406.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, April 6, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 95

                            Headlines

ABSPOKE 2005: Fitch Affirms & Withdraws Class A Notes' Dsf Rating
AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Class E Notes
APIDOS CLO XV: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
AVIATION CAPITAL: S&P Withdraws 'BB+' Ratings on 2 Note Classes
BANC OF AMERICA 2006-6: S&P Lifts Rating on Class A-M Certs to BB+

BANC OF AMERICA 2007-4: S&P Raises Rating on 3 Notes Classes to B-
BAYVIEW COMMERCIAL: Moody's Takes Action on $450MM of Biz Loans
BEAR STEARNS 2003-PWR2: Fitch Raises Rating on Class J notes to BB
BEAR STEARNS 2004-PWR6: S&P Affirms CCC- Rating on Class M Notes
C-BASS CBO VIII: Moody's Hikes Rating on $12MM Cl. D-1 Notes to Ca

CAPITALSOURCE 2006-A: Moodys Affirms 'Caa3' Ratings on 5 Notes
CARFINANCE CAPITAL 2014-1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class D Notes
CBA COMMERCIAL 2006-1: S&P Cuts Class A Securities Rating to CCC-
CEDAR CREEK: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
CENTURION CDO 8: Moody's Hikes Rating $16.5MM Class D Notes to Ba2

CFIP CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
CREDIT SUISSE 2001-CK1: Fitch Affirms B- Rating on Class J Notes
CREDIT SUISSE 2004-C4: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to BB+
DRYDEN XI: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Class D Notes
DUANE STREET III: S&P Raises Rating on Class E Notes to 'BB+'

EAGLE CREEK: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on $11.8MM Class Notes
EIG GLOBAL: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Ratings on 2 Note Classes
FORTRESS CREDIT III: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Cl. E Notes
GMAC COMMERCIAL 1999-C1: Fitch Hikes Class H Notes Rating to BBsf
GP PORTFOLIO 2014-GPP: S&P Assigns 'BB' Ratings on 3 Note Classes

GULF STREAM-COMPASS 2007: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
JAY STREET: S&P Lowers Rating on Class B Notes to 'CCC'
JP MORGAN 2004-C1: Fitch Hikes Rating on Class J Notes to 'BB'
JP MORGAN 2014-FL4: S&P Assigns 'BB' Ratings on 3 Note Classes
KINNEY HILL: S&P Lowers Rating on Class C-1 Notes to 'BB'

LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2001-C2: Fitch Affirms 'D' Ratings on 6 Notes
LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2003-C8: Moody's Cuts X-CL Certs Rating to Caa3
LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2005-C7: Fitch Affirms CC Ratings on 2 Notes
LIMEROCK CLO II: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
MERRILL LYNCH 2005-LC1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class F Notes to B+

MORGAN STANLEY 2002-HQ: Moody's Cuts Rating on Cl. L Certs to C
MWAM CBO 2001-1: Fitch Affirms Csf Rating on Class C-1 Notes
NACM CLO I: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB+'
PREMIUM LOAN: Moody's Lowers Class C Notes to 'Ca(sf)'
PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2002-1: Moody's Affirms Cl. B Notes' Ba3 Rating

REPACS TRUST: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Debt Units to 'B2'
RIVERFRONT RE: S&P Assigns 'BB-' Rating to Variable Rate Notes
SATURNS TRUST 2003-1: S&P Affirms 'CCC+' Rating on $60.19MM Units
SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2014-1: Fitch Rates Class B-4 Certificates 'BBsf'
SNAAC AUTO 2014-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes

SOUND POINT: Moody's Assigns 'B2' Rating on $16MM Class F Notes
SOVEREIGN COMMERCIAL: Fitch Affirms C Ratings on 2 Note Classes
STANFIELD CARRERA: S&P Lowers Rating on 4 Note Classes to 'D'
STONE TOWER I: S&P Lowers Ratings on 7 Note Classes to 'BB'
SYMPHONY CREDIT: S&P Lowers Rating on 3 Note Classes to 'BB'

THL CREDIT 2013-2: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
TICP CLO I: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
UBS COMMERCIAL 2012-C1: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Cl. F Certs
VITESSE CLO: Moody's Hikes Rating on $17MM Class B-2L Notes to Ba1
WACHOVIA BANK 2005-C16: S&P Lowers Rating on Class O Notes to D

WACHOVIA 2006-WHALE 7: Fitch Puts 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Notes
WELLS FARGO 2014-TISH: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class WTS-2 Notes
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-C19: Fitch Rates Class E Notes 'BB-'
WFRBS 2014-C19: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. X-B Securities
ZAIS CLO 1: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes

* Fitch Lowers 86 Distressed Bonds in 51 RMBS Deals to 'Dsf'
* Moody's Takes Action on $657MM Subprime RMBS by Various Trusts
* Moody's Takes Action on $407 Million of Prime Jumbo RMBS
* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 30 Classes From 18 CDO Transactions
* S&P Lowers 210 Ratings on 126 U.S. RMBS Deals to 'D'

* U.S. Auto Loan ABS Losses Inch Higher in February, Fitch Says


                             *********

ABSPOKE 2005: Fitch Affirms & Withdraws Class A Notes' Dsf Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has withdrawn the rating on the class A notes issued
by ABSpoke 2005-VIA, Ltd.

-- $0 class A notes affirmed at 'Dsf' and withdrawn.

Key Rating Drivers

The rating action follows the exercise of the Optional Termination
on March 24, 2014.  As a result of the termination, approximately
$3.4 million in principal proceeds were distributed to the class A
notes.  Fitch does not consider this final distribution to be a
full repayment of the class' initial rated balance as prior to the
exercise of the Optional Termination, the notes were experiencing
writedowns and were downgraded to 'Dsf'.

ABSpoke 2005-VIA was a partially funded, synthetic collateralized
debt obligation (CDO), which closed in July 2005. The transaction
allowed investors to achieve leveraged exposure to a diversified
portfolio of asset-backed securities.  Credit enhancement to the
transaction was based primarily on subordination provided by the
first loss amount.


AMERICREDIT FINANCIAL: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investor Services has upgraded 2 tranches and affirmed 4
tranches from AmeriCredit 2013-4 securitization sponsored by
AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc (AmeriCredit).

The complete rating actions as follow:

Issuer: AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2013-4

Class A-2 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class A-3 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class B Notes, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Class C Notes, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Class D Notes, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa1 (sf)

Class E Notes, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2013
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of build-up of credit enhancement
relative to remaining losses due to the sequential pay structure
and non-declining reserve account. The combined target credit
enhancement level which consists of a combination of over-
collateralization and a non-declining reserve account is 14.25% of
the outstanding pool balance. The combined credit enhancement is
still building to its target level providing little incremental
credit protection for the most subordinate bonds. The target level
will be maintained until it reaches a floor of 2.50% of the
original pool balance. The cumulative lifetime net loss
expectation on the transaction remains unchanged from the loss
expectation at closing.

Principal Methodology

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

Below are key performance metrics (as of the March 2014
distribution date) and credit assumptions for each affected
transaction. Credit assumptions include Moody's expected lifetime
CNL expected range/loss which is expressed as a percentage of the
original pool balance; Moody's lifetime remaining CNL expectation
and Moody's Aaa (sf) level which are expressed as a percentage of
the current pool balance. The Aaa (sf) level is the level of
credit enhancement that would be consistent with a Aaa (sf) rating
for the given asset pool. Performance metrics include pool factor
which is the ratio of the current collateral balance to the
original collateral balance at closing; total credit enhancement,
which typically consists of subordination, overcollateralization,
and a reserve fund; and per annum excess spread.

Issuer: AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust 2013-4

  Lifetime CNL expectation - 10.00%; prior expectation (at
  closing) - 10.00%

  Lifetime Remaining CNL expectation -- 10.66%

  Aaa (sf) level -- 36.50%

  Pool factor -- 84.76%

  Total Hard credit enhancement -- Class A 45.73%, Class B 37.18%,
  Class C 26.56%, Class D 16.12%, Class E 13.34%

  Excess Spread per annum -- Approximately 8.9%

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are greater than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could lead
to an upgrade of the rating. Moody's current expectations of loss
may be better than its original expectations because of lower
frequency of default by the underlying obligors or appreciation in
the value of the vehicles that secure the obligor's promise of
payment. The US job market and the market for used vehicle are
primary drivers of performance. Other reasons for better
performance than Moody's expected include changes in servicing
practices to maximize collections on the loans or refinancing
opportunities that result in a prepayment of the loan.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could lead to a
downgrade of the ratings. Moody's current expectations of loss may
be worse than its original expectations because of higher
frequency of default by the underlying obligors of the loans or a
deterioration in the value of the vehicles that secure the
obligor's promise of payment. The US job market and the market for
used vehicle are primary drivers of performance. Other reasons for
worse performance than Moody's expected include poor servicing,
error on the part of transaction parties, lack of transactional
governance and fraud.


APIDOS CLO XV: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on Apidos
CLO XV/Apidos CLO XV LLC's $469 million fixed- and floating-rate
notes following the transaction's effective date as of Jan. 8,
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.

"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 S&P's 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, and may also reflect its 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 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 added.

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 S&P deems
necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Apidos CLO XV/Apidos CLO XV LLC

Class                      Rating                       Amount
                                                      (mil. $)
A-1                        AAA (sf)                     304.00
A-2A                       AA (sf)                       58.00
A-2B                       AA (sf)                       10.00
B-1 (deferrable)           A (sf)                        10.00
B-2 (deferrable)           A (sf)                        25.00
C (deferrable)             BBB (sf)                      28.00
D (deferrable)             BB (sf)                       23.00
E (deferrable)             B (sf)                        11.00


AVIATION CAPITAL: S&P Withdraws 'BB+' Ratings on 2 Note Classes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its ratings on the
class G-1, G-2, and B-1 notes from Aviation Capital Group Trust
II, which is backed by lease revenue and sale proceeds from a
commercial aircraft portfolio.

The withdrawals follow the recent complete paydown of the notes on
the March 20, 2014, payment date.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

Aviation Capital Group Trust II

                     Rating
Class             To        From
G-1               NR        BB+ (sf)
G-2               NR        BB+ (sf)
B-1               NR        B (sf)

NR-Not rated.


BANC OF AMERICA 2006-6: S&P Lifts Rating on Class A-M Certs to BB+
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on three
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Banc
of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2006-6, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  At the same time,
S&P affirmed its ratings on six 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.

The raised ratings on the class A-4, A-1A, and A-M certificates
reflect S&P's expectation of the available credit enhancement for
these tranches, which S&P believes exceeds its most recent
estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the rating levels.

The affirmations of S&P's ratings on the 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 outstanding
ratings.  The affirmations also reflect S&P's review of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets, as well
as the transaction-level changes.

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

RATINGS RAISED

Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2006-6
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-6

        Rating       Rating         Credit enhancement
Class   To           From                  (%)
A-4     AA (sf)      A (sf)               40.22
A-1A    AA (sf)      A (sf)               40.22
A-M     BB+ (sf)     BB- (sf)             26.17

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2006-6
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-6

Class      Rating                  Credit enhancement (%)
A-2        AAA (sf)                       40.22
A-3        AAA (sf)                       40.22
A-SB       AAA (sf)                       40.22
A-J        B- (sf)                        15.11
B          CCC (sf)                       12.30
XC         AAA (sf)                        N/A

N/A--Not applicable.


BANC OF AMERICA 2007-4: S&P Raises Rating on 3 Notes Classes to B-
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on seven
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Banc
of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-4, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  At the same time,
S&P affirmed its 'CCC- (sf)' ratings on three 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
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 upgrades reflect S&P's expectation of the available credit
enhancement for these classes, which S&P believes is greater than
its current estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the most
recent rating levels.  The upgrades also follow S&P's view
regarding the current and future performance of the transaction's
collateral.

The upgrades on classes A-4, A-1A, A-M, and A-J reflect the trust
balance's significant reduction as well as the better-than-
expected recovery of the corrected Hines Office Portfolio crossed
mortgage loans ($237.3 million original trust balance), and the
full repayment of the Sawgrass Mills loan ($132.6 million original
trust balance), and the Arundel Mills loan ($128.3 million
original trust balance).

The upgrades on classes B, C, and D reflect S&P's view of the
adequate liquidity support available to the classes and, based on
S&P's analysis, it do not believe that these classes are at risk
of default in the near term.

The affirmations 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 affirmations 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's analysis also considered the duration and
magnitude of the accumulated interest shortfalls currently
outstanding on classes E, F, and G.

As of the March 10, 2014, trustee remittance report, the trust
experienced net monthly interest shortfalls totaling $121,066,
primarily related to net appraisal subordinate entitlement
reduction amounts totaling $108,015 on the seven ($44.7 million,
3.2%) specially serviced assets, $8,707 in special servicing fees,
$811 in workout fees, and $3,577 in reimbursement of interest on
advances.

RATINGS RAISED

Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-4
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
               Rating
Class    To           From          Credit enhancement (%)
A-4      AAA (sf)     A+ (sf)                        41.10
A-1A     AAA (sf)     A+ (sf)                        41.10
A-M      A (sf)       BB+ (sf)                       25.22
A-J      B (sf)       B- (sf)                        12.52
B        B- (sf)      CCC+ (sf)                      10.93
C        B- (sf)      CCC (sf)                        9.54
D        B- (sf)      CCC- (sf)                       7.96

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-4
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class      Rating      Credit enhancement (%)
E          CCC- (sf)                     6.37
F          CCC- (sf)                     5.38
G          CCC- (sf)                     4.18


BAYVIEW COMMERCIAL: Moody's Takes Action on $450MM of Biz Loans
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on six
tranches, and downgraded the ratings on eleven tranches from nine
securitizations of small business loans issued by Bayview
Commercial Asset Trusts. The loans are secured primarily by small
commercial real estate properties in the U.S. owned by small
businesses and investors.

Complete rating actions as follow:

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2003-2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Cl. B, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012 Downgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2005-1

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Issuer: BayView Commercial Asset Trust 2005-4

Cl. M-5, Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-6, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2006-3

Cl. M-4, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2007-1

Cl. M-4, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2012
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2007-4

Cl. A-1, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. A-2, Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Oct 31, 2013
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2007-5

Cl. A-4, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Oct 31, 2013
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: BayView Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-SP1

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to A3 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-SP2

Cl. B-1, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on May 31, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The upgrade actions were prompted by a build-up in credit
enhancement due to non-declining overcollateralization, in the
case of Bayview 2006-SP1, non-amortization of the subordinate
tranches, and availability of excess spread in combination with
relatively stable collateral performance.

The downgrades are generally due to continued realized losses on
the underlying pools in combination with depleted credit
enhancement from overcollateralization and subordinate tranches.
Over the past year, cumulative net losses for Bayview 2005-4,
2006-3, 2007-1, 2007-4, 2007-5, and 2006-SP2 increased to a range
of 21 to 30% as of the March 2014 distribution date from a range
of 17 to 25% as of the March 2013 distribution date, in each case
as a percent of the original pool balance. For the pro-rata pay
deals, as a result of continuing losses, Moody's believes that the
remaining amount of time the lower subordinate tranches which have
been downgraded to Caa3 or Ca ratings will receive principal
payments is limited.

Over the past 12 months for the Bayview portfolio excluding the
Canadian transactions, delinquencies of 60 days or more, including
loans in foreclosure and REO, decreased to 17% of the outstanding
pool balances from 21%. Average severities are still high in the
75% to 80% range. Despite a modest rebound in small balance
commercial property values, delinquencies remain at these fairly
high levels due to newly delinquent loans and re-defaults by
modified loans. Recoveries on loans stemming from liquidated
properties are expected to trend modestly higher because of
shorter REO timelines and higher commercial property values.
However, expenses such as foreclosure costs, property maintenance
and accumulated servicer advances continue to limit recoveries to
the trust.

A key factor in Moody's updated loss projections is its evaluation
and treatment of modified loans. Bayview Loan Servicing has
modified approximately 50% to 55% of the loans it now classifies
as current in the deals affected by the rating actions. Most of
these loans had performance problems and were delinquent before
modification and are therefore more likely to become delinquent in
the future than non-modified loans. Moody's evaluation of loan-
level data shows that these current, modified loans are at least
twice as likely to become delinquent and default compared to
current, non-modified loans. Moody's accounted for this likelihood
in its loss projection methodology described below.

Methodology

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Moody's Global
Approach to Rating SME Balance Sheet Securitizations published in
January 2014.

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 below Moody's expectations as
a result of a decrease in seriously delinquent loans and lower
severities than expected on liquidated loans.

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 expectations as a
result of an increase in seriously delinquent loans and higher
severities than expected on liquidated loans.

Moody's evaluated the sufficiency of credit enhancement by first
analyzing the loans to determine an expected lifetime net loss for
each collateral pool. Moody's compared these net losses with the
available credit enhancement, consisting of subordination and
excess spread, as well as a reserve account or
overcollateralization. Moody's evaluated the sufficiency of loss
coverage provided by credit enhancement in light of 1) the
magnitude and projected variability of losses on the collateral
and 2) servicer quality.

For the lower subordinate tranches, Moody's identified relatively
near term future writedowns by examining the current pace of
writedowns and the expected losses from loans in foreclosure and
REO in relation to a tranche's available credit enhancement.

To forecast expected losses for the Bayview small business ABS
collateral pools, Moody's evaluated each pool according to the
delinquency and modification status of the underlying loans,
applying different roll rates to default to loans according to
each status. In order to determine the roll rates to default,
Moody's first assessed the past 12 months of monthly roll rate
behavior for loans according to their modification and delinquency
status. Then, to translate this recent historical data into
lifetime default rates, Moody's applied the recent roll rates to
each delinquency and modification category for a stress period of
15 months. Moody's then decreased the monthly roll rates to more
stable historical norms for the remainder of the period over which
Moody's calculates the loss, typically until the pool of loans
pays down to 5% to 10% of its original balance. This approach
generally assumes that the modification strategy pursued by
Bayview Loan Servicing will continue to be viable and will
continue to prevent losses on some loans that would otherwise
default.

This approach leads to a wide range of lifetime default rates. For
modified current loans, the lifetime default rate was 20%, double
the lifetime default rate estimate of 10% for non-modified current
loans. In the deals affected by the rating actions, roughly 50-55%
of loans classified as current have been modified by Bayview Loan
Servicing and are now classified as current. For delinquent loans,
the lifetime default rates range from 20% to 60% depending on
delinquency and modification status. For loans in foreclosure or
REO, the lifetime default rates are roughly 45% to 65% and 95% to
100%, respectively, depending on vintage and modification status.

For loss severities, Moody's generally applied recent severities
for the stress period of the loss calculation. Recent severities
have been, in aggregate, over 87% for non-modified loans and about
75% for modified loans. For the period after the stress period,
Moody's applied severities ranging from 65% to 75%. The resulting
remaining expected losses are 5.6%, 13.2%, 23.5%, 32.6%, 17.7%,
29.3%, 32.7%, 33.5%, and 25.7% of the original pool balances for
the 2003-2, 2005-1, 2005-4, 2006-3, 2006-SP1, 2007-1, 2007-4,
2007-5, and 2006-SP2 deals, respectively.

Because the ultimate re-default risk of small business loan
modifications and the success of Bayview's modification program is
unknown, Moody's considers the potential volatility of expected
losses for these pools to be higher than pools with no
modifications.


BEAR STEARNS 2003-PWR2: Fitch Raises Rating on Class J notes to BB
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded four and affirmed seven classes of Bear
Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2003-PWR2.

Key Rating Drivers

The upgrades to classes E through H are due to increased credit
enhancement from significant paydowns and the relatively stable
performance of the pool.  Fitch modeled losses of 15% of the
remaining pool; expected losses on the original pool balance total
2%, including losses already incurred.  The pool has experienced
$6.5 million (0.6% of the original pool balance) in realized
losses to date.  Fitch has designated four (30.8%) of the
remaining 10 loans as Fitch Loans of Concern, which includes one
specially serviced asset (17.3%).  One loan (0.8%) is currently
defeased.

As of the March 2013 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 90.9% to $97.5 million from
$1.1 billion at issuance.  Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes M through P.

The largest contributor to Fitch's modeled losses is a 128,829
square foot (sf) office building (17.3%) located in Farmington
Hills, MI.  At origination the property was occupied by a single
tenant.  The sole tenant vacated in December 2011 and a new tenant
took occupancy in April 2012.  The loan transferred to the special
servicer in June 2012 due to imminent monetary default.  The
property is 76% occupied by one tenant as of first quarter 2014
while the special servicer continues to actively marketing the
vacant space.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The ratings on the class C through H notes are expected to be
stable as the credit enhancement remains high.  The class J and K
notes are expected to be upgraded as the transaction continues to
delever.  Classes L through N may be subject to further downgrades
as losses are realized.

Fitch upgrades the following classes:

-- $12.0 million class E notes to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook
    Stable;

-- $10.7 million class F notes to 'AAsf' from 'A-sf'; Outlook
    Stable;

-- $9.3 million class G notes at to 'Asf' from 'BBB+sf'; Outlook
    Stable;

-- $13.3 million class H notes to 'BBBsf' from 'BBB-sf'; Outlook
    to Stable from Negative.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $14.7 million class C notes at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

-- $9.3 million class D notes at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

-- $5.3 million class J notes at 'BBsf'; Outlook to Positive from
    Negative;

-- $5.3 million class K notes at 'Bsf'; Outlook to Positive from
    Negative;

-- $4.0 million class L notes at 'CCCsf'; RE 70%;

-- $5.3 million class M notes at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;

-- $2.7 million class N notes at 'CCsf'; RE 0%.

Class A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and B have paid in full.  Fitch does not
rate the $5.4 million class P.  Fitch has previously withdrawn the
rating on the interest-only classes X-1 and X-2.


BEAR STEARNS 2004-PWR6: S&P Affirms CCC- Rating on Class M Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on five
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Bear
Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-PWR6, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  At the
same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on nine classes, including its
'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-1 interest-only (IO)
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 assets in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

The upgrades reflect S&P's expectation of the available credit
enhancement for these classes s, which S&P believes exceeds its
most recent estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the most
recent rating levels, S&P's views of the current and future
performance of the transaction's collateral, and the reduction of
the trust balance.

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 outstanding
ratings.  The affirmations also reflect S&P's views of the
available liquidity support, transaction-level changes, and the
collateral's current and future performance.  In addition, S&P's
analysis also considered the magnitude of nondefeased performing
loans maturing in 2014 (47 loans; $374.9 million, 55.9%).

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

RATINGS RAISED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-PWR6
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

                Rating
Class        To         From     Credit enhancement (%)
B            AAA (sf)   AA (sf)                   14.84
C            AAA (sf)   AA- (sf)                  13.25
D            AA (sf)    A (sf)                    10.86
E            AA- (sf)   A- (sf)                    9.27
F            A (sf)     BBB+ (sf)                  7.08

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2004-PWR6
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class        Rating              Credit enhancement (%)
A-6          AAA (sf)                             30.15
A-J          AAA (sf)                             19.81
G            BBB (sf)                              5.69
H            BB+ (sf)                              3.51
J            BB (sf)                               3.11
K            BB- (sf)                              2.51
L            B+ (sf)                               1.72
M            CCC- (sf)                             0.92
X-1          AAA (sf)                               N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


C-BASS CBO VIII: Moody's Hikes Rating on $12MM Cl. D-1 Notes to Ca
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on notes issued
by C-Bass CBO VIII Ltd.:

  $18,350,000 Class B Third Priority Senior Secured Floating Rate
  Notes Due 2038 (current outstanding balance $2,768,626),
  Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on March 6, 2014 Baa2 (sf)
  Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

  $20,700,000 Class C Fourth Priority Secured Floating Rate
  Deferrable Interest Notes Due 2038 (current outstanding balance
  $20,801,220), Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on March 6, 2014
  Caa3 (sf) Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

  $12,000,000 Class D-1 Fifth Priority Secured Floating Rate
  Deferrable Interest Notes Due 2038 (current outstanding balance
  $6,779,774), Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 7, 2010
  Downgraded to C (sf)

  $4,950,000 Class D-2 Fifth Priority Secured Fixed Rate
  Deferrable Interest Notes Due 2038 (current outstanding balance
  $3,208,468), Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 7, 2010
  Downgraded to C (sf)

C-Bass CBO VIII Ltd., issued in November 2003, is a collateralized
debt obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of RMBS, CMBS and
ABS assets originated in 2003.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are due primarily to the deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios since October 2013. The Class B notes
have paid down by approximately 82% or $12.6 million since October
2013. Based on the trustee's February 2014 report, the over-
collateralization ratios of the Class B Notes, Class C Notes, and
Class D Notes are 1132.78%, 132.63%, and 88.12%, respectively,
versus October 2013 levels of 276.61%, 115.87%, and 88.14%,
respectively.

The rating action on Class B notes reflects the amount of cash
available to pay down the notes on the next payment date. Moody's
notes that the deal currently has $5.2 MM in its principal
collection account, and the Class B notes are expected to be paid
down in full on the next payment date in May 2014.

The deal also benefit from the updates to Moody's SF CDO
methodology described in "Moody's Approach to Rating SF CDOs"
published on March 6, 2014. These updates include: (i) lowering
the resecuritization stress factors for RMBS (US Prime, Subprime,
Manufactured Housing), CDOs exposed to investment grade corporate
assets, and ABS backed by franchise loans or by mutual fund fees;
(ii) using a common table of recovery rates for all structured
finance assets (except for CMBS and SF CDO); and (iii) providing
more guidance on the rating caps Moody's apply to deals
experiencing event of default. In taking the foregoing actions,
Moody's also announced that it had concluded its review of its
rating(s) on the issuer's Class B Notes and Class C Notes
announced on March 6, 2014. At that time, Moody's said that it had
placed the rating(s) on review for upgrade as a result of the
aforementioned methodology updates.

Despite benefits of the deleveraging, the credit quality of the
portfolio has deteriorated since October 2013. Based on the
trustee's February 2014 report, the weighted average rating factor
is currently 4084 compared to 3387 on October 2013.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs," published in March 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, as described below:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: Primary causes of uncertainty about
assumptions are the extent of any slowdown in growth in the
current macroeconomic environment and in the commercial and
residential real estate property markets. Although the commercial
real estate property markets are gaining momentum, consistent
growth will be unlikely until the volume of transactions
increases, distressed properties are cleared from the pipeline and
job creation rebounds. The residential real estate property market
is subject to uncertainty about housing prices; the pace of
residential mortgage foreclosures, loan modifications and
refinancing; the unemployment rate; and interest rates.

2) Deleveraging: One source of uncertainty in this transaction is
whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal proceeds,
recoveries from defaulted assets, and excess interest proceeds
will continue and at what pace. Faster deleveraging than Moody's
expects could have a significant impact on the notes' ratings.

3) Recovery of defaulted assets: The amount of recoveries received
from defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that
Moody's assumes as having defaulted as well as the timing of these
recoveries create additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed
defaulted assets assuming no recoveries, and therefore,
realization of any recoveries in the future would positively
impact the notes' ratings.

4) Lack of portfolio granularity: The performance of the portfolio
depends to a large extent on the credit conditions of a few large
obligors Moody's rates Caa1 or lower, especially if they jump to
default. Because of the deal's lack of granularity, Moody's
supplemented its analysis with a individual scenario analysis.

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's applies a Monte Carlo simulation framework in Moody's
CDOROM(TM) to model the loss distribution for SF CDOs. The
simulated defaults and recoveries for each of the Monte Carlo
scenarios define the reference pool's loss distribution. Moody's
then uses the loss distribution as an input in the CDOEdge(TM)
cash flow model.

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):

Caa ratings notched up by two rating notches (2792):

Class B: 0

Class C: +2

Class D-1: 0

Class D-2: 0

Caa ratings notched down by two rating notches (4214):

Class B: 0

Class C: 0

Class D-1: 0

Class D-2: 0


CAPITALSOURCE 2006-A: Moodys Affirms 'Caa3' Ratings on 5 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by CapitalSource Real Estate Loan Trust
2006-A:

Cl. A-1A, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed
A3 (sf)

Cl. A-1R, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed
A3 (sf)

Cl. A-2A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

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

Cl. A-2B, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed
Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Apr 5, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has upgraded the ratings of the notes due to rapid
amortization of senior classes from higher credit risk collateral,
and stable weighted average rating factor (WARF) and weighted
average recovery rate (WARR) since last review. Moody's has
affirmed the ratings of the notes because its key transaction
metrics are commensurate with existing ratings. The affirmation is
the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real
estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO CLO) transactions.

CapSource 2006-A is a currently static cash transaction whose
reinvestment period ended in January 2012. The transaction is
wholly backed by a portfolio of whole loans (93.7% of the current
pool balance), b-notes (2.8%), asset backed securities (2.2%) and
commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (1.3%). As of the
trustee's February 28, 2014 report, the aggregate note balance of
the transaction, including preferred shares, has decreased to
$726.8 million from $1.3 billion at issuance with pay-downs
currently directed to the senior most classes of notes; including
certain pari-passu classes.

The Issuer had its Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) status
revoked on June 18, 2009, therefore federal and state income taxes
became payable pursuant to the transaction's Indenture. However,
NorthStar Realty Finance Corp. ("NorthStar") stated that in July
2010 it purchased classes J, K and Equity and became the
collateral manager delegate as well as special servicer delegate.
NorthStar subsequently was approved as the replacement special
servicer for the transaction. NorthStar is a qualified REIT and
holder of the transaction's equity, and has decided to no longer
escrow for the payment of such taxes as of October 2011. However,
based on documentation received to date, Moody's modeling
continues to assume income taxes are deducted in the cash flow
waterfall. Since all interest coverage tests are passing, the
income taxes are primarily absorbed by the non-rated equity
classes.

The pool contains two assets totaling $3.7 million (0.5% of the
collateral pool balance) that are listed as defaulted securities
as of the trustee's February 28, 2014 report. All of these assets
(100.0% of the defaulted balance) are commercial real estate
loans. While there have been limited realized losses on the
underlying collateral to date, Moody's does expect moderate losses
to occur on the defaulted securities.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO CLO 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 CLO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 6,822,
compared to 5,976 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (1.3% compared to 3.2% at last
review), A1-A3 (2.3% compared to 3.1% at last review), Baa1-Baa3
(4.3% compared to 3.7% at last review), Ba1-Ba3 (2.2% compared to
2.1% at last review), B1-B3 (18.8% compared to 18.9% at last
review), and Caa1-Ca/C (71.1% compared to 69.0% at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 4.0 years, compared to 4.1 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 44.7%, compared to 45.7% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 99.9%, compared to 17.2% at last review.
The increased MAC is due to a greater concentration of a smaller
number of high credit risk obligors.

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 some of 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 recovery rates of the underlying collateral and
credit assessments. Holding all other key parameters static,
changing the recovery rate assumption down from 44.7% to 34.7% or
up to 54.7% would result in a modeled rating movement on the rated
tranches of 0 to 8 notches downward and 0 to 11 notches upward,
respectively (e.g., two notches down implies a ratings movement of
Baa3 to Ba2).

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.


CARFINANCE CAPITAL 2014-1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
CarFinance Capital Auto Trust 2014-1's $235.20 million automobile
receivables-backed notes series 2014-1.

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

The ratings reflect:

   -- The availability of approximately 40.3%, 29.1%, 24.9%,
      21.4%, and 18.8% credit support for the class A, B, C, D,
      and E notes, respectively, based on stressed cash flow
      scenarios (including excess spread), which provides coverage
      of more than 2.50x, 2.25x, 1.85x, 1.60x, and 1.40x S&P's
      12.0%-12.5% expected cumulative net loss.

   -- The timely interest and principal payments made to the rated
      notes by the assumed legal final maturity dates under
      stressed cash flow modeling scenarios that S&P believes is
      appropriate for the assigned ratings.

   -- S&P's expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress
      scenario, all else being equal, its ratings on the class A
      notes would remain within one rating category of its 'A
      (sf)' rating during the first year; and S&P's ratings on the
      class B, C, D, and E notes would remain within two rating
      categories of its 'A- (sf)', 'BBB (sf)', 'BB (sf)', and 'BB-
      (sf)' ratings, respectively, during the first year.  These
      potential rating movements are consistent with S&P's credit
      stability criteria, which outline the outer bound of credit
      deterioration as a two-category downgrade within the first
      year for 'A' through 'BB' rated securities under the
      moderate stress conditions.

   -- The collateral characteristics of the subprime automobile
      loans securitized in this transaction.

   -- The transaction's cumulative net loss trigger.

   -- The transaction's payment and legal structure.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

CarFinance Capital Auto Trust 2014-1

Class       Rating       Type           Interest          Amount
                                        rate            (mil. $)
A           A (sf)       Senior         Fixed             168.00
B           A- (sf)      Subordinate    Fixed              38.40
C           BBB (sf)     Subordinate    Fixed              13.32
D           BB (sf)      Subordinate    Fixed              10.08
E(i)        BB- (sf)     Subordinate    Fixed               5.40

(i) The class E notes are not being offered.


CBA COMMERCIAL 2006-1: S&P Cuts Class A Securities Rating to CCC-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on class A
from CBA Commercial Assets LLC series 2006-1, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction, to 'CCC- (sf)' from
'CCC+ (sf)'.

The downgrade reflects anticipated credit enhancement erosion upon
the liquidation of the transaction's specially serviced assets.
As of the March 2014 remittance report, 35 assets ($13.0 million,
23.9%) were reported as being with the special servicer, Ocwen
Loan Servicing LLC.  S&P analyzed the specially serviced assets
using primarily recent broker price opinions and appraisals to
arrive at loss estimates for the collateral.  S&P's estimates also
considered expenses and fees required to complete the workout
process.  S&P's loss estimates indicate that class A should
experience significant credit enhancement erosion upon the
liquidation of these assets.  S&P's weighted-average estimated
loss severity for the specially serviced assets was 37.5%.

The collateral pool for the transaction consists of 109 loans and
five real estate-owned (REO) assets with an aggregate trust
balance of $54.5 million compared with 316 loans totaling $166.8
million at issuance.  Since issuance, the transaction has paid
down $89.8 million of the principal amount and has experienced
$22.4 million in realized losses.  The top three property types
remaining in the pool are multifamily ($16.6 million, 30.5%),
retail ($15.0 million, 27.5%), and office ($11.7 million, 21.5%).
The properties are primarily located in California ($10.0 million,
18.4%) and Louisiana ($9.0 million, 16.5%). As of the March 2014
remittance report, 35 assets ($13.0 million, 23.9%) were reported
as being with the special servicer.  The reported payment status
of the specially serviced assets is as follows: five ($1.2
million, 2.2%) are REO, 17 ($6.9 million, 12.6%) are in
foreclosure, 11 ($4.6 million, 8.5%) are 90-plus days delinquent,
one ($252,454, 0.5%) is 30 days delinquent, and one ($77,532,
0.1%) is current.

As part of S&P's analysis, it stressed the specially serviced
assets and certain other loans in the pool.


CEDAR CREEK: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on Cedar
Creek CLO Ltd./Cedar Creek CLO LLC's $371.60 million floating-rate
notes following the transaction's effective date as of June 30,
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.

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, S&P's ratings on the
closing date and prior to its effective date review are generally
based on the application of S&P's 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, and may also reflect its 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 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 added.

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 S&P deems
necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Cedar Creek CLO Ltd./Cedar Creek CLO LLC

Class             Rating      Amount (mil. $)
A                 AAA (sf)             264.00
B                 AA (sf)               35.00
C (deferrable)    A (sf)                37.40
D (deferrable)    BBB (sf)              16.20
E (deferrable)    BB (sf)               17.00
F (deferrable)    B- (sf)                2.00


CENTURION CDO 8: Moody's Hikes Rating $16.5MM Class D Notes to Ba2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Centurion CDO 8 Limited:

  $13,000,000 Class B-1 Deferrable Fixed Rate Notes Due 2017,
  Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on July 31, 2013 Upgraded to
  Aa2 (sf);

  $41,000,000 Class B-2 Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due 2017,
  Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on July 31, 2013 Upgraded to
  Aa2 (sf);

  $16,500,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due 2017,
  Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on July 31, 2013 Upgraded to
  Baa1 (sf);

  $16,500,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due 2017
  (current balance of $ 16,251,453), Upgraded to Ba2 (sf);
  previously on July 31, 2013 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf).

Moody's also affirmed the rating on the following note:

  $465,000,000 Class A Floating Rate Notes Due 2017 (current
  Balance: $ 110,331,309.76), Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on
  July 31, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf).

Centurion CDO 8 Limited, issued in January 2005, is a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a
portfolio of senior secured loans.

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 July 2013. The Class A notes have
been paid down by approximately 43% or $83.9 million since July
2013. Based on the trustee's March 2014 report, the over-
collateralization (OC) ratios for the Class A, Class B, Class C
and Class D notes are reported at 173.8%, 129.89%, 120.58% and
112.63%, respectively, versus July 2013 levels of 160.65%,
125.71%, 117.88% and 111.06%, respectively.

Moody's notes that the transaction holds significant amount of
equity securities which are part of recoveries from defaulted or
restructured issuers. Moody's considered alternative scenarios in
its analysis where a limited amount of credit was given to these
holdings.

The portfolio includes a number of investments in securities that
mature after the notes do. Based on the trustee's March 2014
report, securities that mature after the notes do currently make
up approximately 18.66% of the portfolio. These investments could
expose the notes to market risk in the event of liquidation when
the notes mature.

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) 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. The deal's
increased exposure owing to amendments to loan agreements
extending maturities continues. In light of the deal's sizable
exposure to long-dated assets, which increases its sensitivity to
the liquidation assumptions in the rating analysis, Moody's ran
scenarios using a range of liquidation value assumptions. However,
actual long-dated asset exposures and prevailing market prices and
conditions at the CLO's maturity will drive the deal's actual
losses, if any, from long-dated assets.

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% (2006)

Class A: 0

Class B-1: +1

Class B-2: +1

Class C: +3

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3008)

Class A: 0

Class B-1: -1

Class B-2: -1

Class C: -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 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 $217.8 million, defaulted
par of $13.7 million, a weighted average default probability of
12.14% (implying a WARF of 2507), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 49.68%, a diversity score of 32 and a weighted
average spread of 2.96%.

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.


CFIP CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to CFIP CLO 2014-1 Ltd./CFIP CLO 2014-1 LLC's $371.25
million floating-rate notes.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of March 28,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

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

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the preliminary rated
      notes through the subordination of cash flows that are
      payable to the income 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 0.2356%-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

CFIP CLO 2014-1 Ltd./CFIP CLO 2014-1 LLC

Class                Rating             Amount (mil. $)
A-1                  AAA (sf)                    189.00
A-2                  AAA (sf)                     64.50
B                    AA (sf)                      50.00
C (deferrable)       A (sf)                       31.25
D (deferrable)       BBB (sf)                     20.00
E (deferrable)       BB (sf)                      16.50
Income notes         NR                           40.55


CREDIT SUISSE 2001-CK1: Fitch Affirms B- Rating on Class J Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed three classes of Credit Suisse First
Boston Mortgage Securities Corp., series 2001-CK1 (CSFB 2001-CK1)
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

Key Rating Drivers

The affirmations are due to sufficient credit enhancement to the
remaining classes, despite expected losses.

Fitch modeled losses of 28.5% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 4.4%, including losses
already incurred.  The pool has experienced $35.9 million (3.6% of
the original pool balance) in realized losses to date.  There are
four loans remaining in the pool three (95.4%) of which are
designated as Fitch Loans of Concern, including two specially
serviced assets (33.7%).

As of the March 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 97.4% to $26.2 million from
$997.1 million at issuance.  Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting the class K through O notes.

The largest specially serviced asset is a 191,653 square foot (sf)
community center located in Albuquerque, NM (25.8% of the pool).
The loan transferred to the special servicer in March 2010 due to
imminent monetary default.  The property became REO on March 30,
2011 and is 72% occupied as of September 2013.  The special
servicer continues working to stabilize the property by actively
marketing the vacant spaces.

The largest loan in the pool is a 160,509 sf office property
located in Raleigh, NC (61.7%).  The loan transferred to the
special servicer in January 2011 due to maturity default.  The
loan was transferred back to the master servicer after the
borrower's bankruptcy plan was approved and the loan was modified.
The loan faces significant rollover risk before year-end 2014.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The rating on the class J are expected to be stable as the credit
enhancement remains high. Class K is likely to be downgraded to
'Dsf' as losses are likely.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $12 million class J at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7.5 million class K at 'Csf'; RE 65%;
-- $2.7 million class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Fitch does not rate classes M, N, and O certificates and
previously withdrew the ratings on the A-X and A-CP notes.
Classes A-1 through H have paid in full.


CREDIT SUISSE 2004-C4: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to BB+
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on four
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.'s series
2004-C4, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)
transaction.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on six
classes, including its 'AAA (sf)' ratings on the class A-X and A-Y
interest-only (IO) 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.  The upgrades also reflect S&P's views regarding
available liquidity support, the current and future performance of
the transaction's collateral, and the continued reduction of the
trust balance since issuance.  The transaction's principal balance
has been paid down by 27.9% since S&P's last review in September
2013.  At that time, the balance was approximately $541.7 million.

The affirmations 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.

Although available credit enhancement levels may suggest further
positive rating movements on classes B, C, D, E, and F, S&P's
analysis considered its view on available liquidity support, the
32 ($64.9 million, 16.5%) loans on the master servicers' combined
watchlist, and the 70 ($227.6 million, 59.4%) nondefeased loans
scheduled to mature this year.

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

RATINGS RAISED

Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C4

                Rating
Class        To         From     Credit enhancement (%)
B            AA+ (sf)   A (sf)                    17.66
C            A (sf)     BBB+ (sf)                 10.98
D            BB+ (sf)   BB- (sf)                   8.20
E            B- (sf)    CCC (sf)                   4.84

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C4

Class        Rating              Credit enhancement (%)
A-6          AAA (sf)                             28.06
A-1-A        AAA (sf)                             28.06
A-J          AAA (sf)                             28.06
F            CCC- (sf)                             2.61
A-X          AAA (sf)                               N/A
A-Y          AAA (sf)                               N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


DRYDEN XI: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2B, A-3, and B notes from Dryden XI-Leveraged Loan CDO
2006, a U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction
managed by Prudential Investment Management.  At the same time,
S&P affirmed its ratings on the A-2A, C-1, C-2, and D notes from
the same transaction.  In addition, S&P removed the ratings on the
A-1, A-2B, A-3, B, C-1, C-2, and D notes from CreditWatch, where
S&P placed them with positive implications on Jan. 22, 2014.

Dryden XI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006 ended its reinvestment period in
April 2013.  The upgrades mainly reflect paydowns to the class A-1
and A-2A notes due to delivering.

This transaction has a pro rata-sequential structure.  The A-1 and
the A-2 notes pay pro rata, but between each other, A-2A is senior
to A-2B.  The A-2B notes will receive any payments of principal
only after the A-2A notes have been paid in full.  Since S&P's
February 2013 review, the class A-1 and A-2A notes have paid down
about $181 million in total, and they are currently at 65.71% and
61.90%, respectively, of their balances at issuance.  As a result,
the credit enhancement available to support the notes has improved
since our last rating action.

The paydowns and resulting increased credit enhancement are
reflected in the transaction's overcollateralization (O/C) ratios.
According to the March 7, 2014, trustee report, which S&P used for
its current review, all the O/C ratios improved since its February
2013 review:

   -- The class A-3 O/C ratio is 134.99%, up from 124.84% in
      January 2013.

   -- The class B O/C ratio is 120.84%, up from 115.52% in January
      2013.

   -- The class C-2 O/C ratio is 111.56%, up from 109.05% in
      January 2013.

   -- The class D O/C ratio is 107.13%, up from 105.86% in January
      2013.

According to the trustee report dated March 7, 2014, which S&P
used for its current rating actions, the transaction held $5.67
million in defaulted assets.  This number is marginally higher
than the $4.6 million noted in the January 4, 2013, trustee
report, which S&P used for its review in February 2013.

Given the shorter weighted average life of the portfolio, the
delevering of the transaction, and the overall improvements, the
back-ended default stresses were not given much consideration, and
the ratings of the class D notes were affirmed at 'BB+ (sf)'.  S&P
affirmed its ratings on the class A-2A, C-1, and C-2 notes to
reflect its opinion that there is sufficient support at the
current ratings.

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Dryden XI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow     Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)    rating
A-1    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)        11.31%    AAA (sf)
A-2A   AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)        24.46%    AAA (sf)
A-2B   AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)        11.31%    AAA (sf)
A-3    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)         4.16%    AAA (sf)
B      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA (sf)          1.77%    AA (sf)
C-1    BBB (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB (sf)         0.11%    BBB (sf)
C-2    BBB (sf)/Watch Pos  BBB (sf)          0.11%    BBB (sf)
D      BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos  B+ (sf)       8.92%      BB+ (sf)

(i) The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
     default rate above the scenario default rate at the cash flow
     implied rating for a given class of rated notes.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, it generated additional
scenarios in which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the
current collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each
tranche's weighted average recovery rate.

S&P also generated other scenarios by adjusting the intra- and
inter-industry correlations to assess the current portfolio's
sensitivity to different correlation assumptions assuming the
correlation scenarios outlined below.

Correlation
Scenario        Within industry (%)  Between industries (%)
Below base case                15.0                     5.0
Base case                      20.0                     7.5
Above base case                25.0                    10.0

                  Recovery   Correlation  Correlation
       Cash flow  decrease   increase     decrease
       implied    implied    implied      implied     Final
Class  rating     rating     rating       rating      rating
A-1    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2A   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2B   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-3    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B      AA (sf)    AA- (sf)   AA- (sf)     AA (sf)     AA (sf)
C-1    BBB (sf)   BB+ (sf)   BBB- (sf)    BBB (sf)    BBB (sf)
C-2    BBB (sf)   BB+ (sf)   BBB- (sf)    BBB (sf)    BBB (sf)
D      B+ (sf)    B+ (sf)    B+ (sf)      B+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

To assess whether the current portfolio has sufficient diversity,
S&P biased defaults on the assets in the current collateral pool
with the highest spread and lowest base-case recoveries.

                    Spread        Recovery
       Cash flow    compression   compression
       implied      implied       implied       Final
Class  rating       rating        rating        rating
A-1    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2A   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2B   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-3    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)
B      AA (sf)      AA- (sf)      A- (sf)       AA (sf)
C-1    BBB (sf)     BBB- (sf)     BB- (sf)      BBB (sf)
C-2    BBB (sf)     BBB- (sf)     BB- (sf)      BBB (sf)
D      B+ (sf)      B+ (sf        CCC (sf)      BB+ (sf)

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Dryden XI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006
                   Rating
Class         To           From
A-1           AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2A          AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
A-2B          AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-3           AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B             AA (sf)      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C-1           BBB (sf)     BBB (sf)/Watch Pos
C-2           BBB (sf)     BBB (sf)/Watch Pos
D             BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos

TRANSACTION INFORMATION
Issuer:             Dryden XI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006
Co-issuer:          Dryden XI-Leveraged Loan CDO 2006 Corp.
Collateral manager: Prudential Investment Management
Trustee:            The Bank of New York Mellon
Transaction type:   Cash flow CLO


DUANE STREET III: S&P Raises Rating on Class E Notes to 'BB+'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B, C, D, and E notes and affirmed its ratings on the class A1,
A2a, and A2b notes from Duane Street CLO III Ltd..  At the same
time, S&P removed the ratings on the class B, C, D, and E notes
from CreditWatch, where it had placed them with positive
implications on Jan. 22, 2013.  Duane Street CLO III Ltd. is a
collateralized loan obligation transaction (CLO) that closed in
January 2007.

The transaction's reinvestment period ended in December 2012.  S&P
upgraded all seven classes in May 2013 following paydowns to the
class A1 and A2a notes.  Since S&P's May 2013 rating actions, the
class A1 and A2a notes have received over $159.4 million in
additional combined paydowns.  The deal is structured such that
though the class A1 and A2 notes are pari passu, the class A2a
notes receive paydowns before the class A2b notes and, hence, can
be paid down in full before the class A1 and A2b notes.

The upgrades reflect paydowns to the class A1 and A2a notes, which
increased credit support for the subordinate notes.  The
improvements are also evident in the increased senior and
mezzanine overcollateralization ratios since S&P's May 2013 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 further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Duane Street CLO III Ltd.

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion (i)  rating

A-1    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    25.96%       AAA (sf)
A-2a   AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    25.96%       AAA (sf)
A-2b   AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    25.96%       AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)    14.50%       AAA (sf)
C      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)    10.38%       AA+ (sf)
D      BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos  A- (sf)     1.83%        A- (sf)
E      B+ (sf)/Watch Pos    BB+ (sf)    9.06%        BB+ (sf)

(i)The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
default rate above the scenario default rate at the cash flow
implied rating for a given class of rated notes.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, it generated additional
scenarios in which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the
current collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each
tranche's weighted average recovery rate.

S&P also generated other scenarios by adjusting the intra- and
inter-industry correlations to assess the current portfolio's
sensitivity to different correlation assumptions assuming the
correlation scenarios outlined below.

CORRELATION
Scenario        Within industry (%)  Between industries (%)

Below base case               15.0                     5.0
Base case                     20.0                     7.5
Above base case               25.0                    10.0

                  Recovery   Correlation Correlation
       Cash flow  decrease   increase    decrease
       implied    implied    implied     implied     Final
Class  rating     rating     rating      rating      rating

A-1    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2a   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2b   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
C      AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
D      A- (sf)    BBB+ (sf)  BBB+ (sf)   A+ (sf)     A- (sf)
E      BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)    BBB- (sf)   BB+ (sf)

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

To assess whether the current portfolio has sufficient diversity,
S&P biased defaults on the assets in the current collateral pool
with the highest spread and lowest base-case recoveries.

                    Spread        Recovery
       Cash flow    compression   compression
       implied      implied       implied       Final
Class  rating       rating        rating        rating

A-1    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2a   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2b   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B      AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
C      AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AA- (sf)      AA+ (sf)
D      A- (sf)      A- (sf)       BB+ (sf)      A- (sf)
E      BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)      CCC (sf)      BB+ (sf)

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Duane Street CLO III Ltd.


                   Rating
Class         To           From

B             AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C             AA+ (sf)     A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D             A- (sf)      BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos
E             BB+ (sf)     B+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Duane Street CLO III Ltd.

Class         Rating

A1            AAA (sf)
A2a           AAA (sf)
A2b           AAA (sf)


EAGLE CREEK: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on $11.8MM Class Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Eagle Creek CLO Ltd.:

  $23,200,000 Class B Second Priority Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes Due February 28, 2018, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on
  September 23, 2013 Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

  $12,700,000 Class C Third Priority Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes Due February 28, 2018, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously
  on September 23, 2013 Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

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

  $183,600,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
  February 28, 2018 (current outstanding balance of $8,164,365),
  Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 23, 2013 Affirmed
  Aaa(sf)

  $45,900,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
  February 28, 2018, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September
  23, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

  $11,800,000 Class D Fourth Priority Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes Due February 28, 2018 (current outstanding balance of
  $10,460,103),Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on September 23, 2013
  Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

Eagle Creek CLO Ltd., issued in February 2006, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment period ended in
February 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 September 2013. The Class A-1 notes
have been paid down by approximately 84% or $43.6 million since
September 2013. Based on the trustee's February 2014 report, the
over-collateralization (OC) ratios for the Class A, Class B, Class
C and Class D notes are reported at 164.8%, 127.9%, 113.9% and
104.5%, respectively, versus August 2013 levels of 144.3%, 121.0%,
111.2% and 104.3%, respectively.

The deal has benefited from an improvement in the credit quality
of the portfolio since September 2013. Based on the trustee's
February 2014 report, the weighted average rating factor is
currently 1914 compared to 2005 in August 2013.

The action on the notes also reflects corrections to the modeling
of the Excess Interest Deflection Test and the diversion of excess
interest proceeds when the interest diversion test fails. In
previous rating actions, Moody's did not model the expected
recovery on defaults in the Excess Interest Deflection Test, and
interest proceeds were modeled to pay down the notes when they
should have been modeled as being reinvested. The aforementioned
errors have now been corrected and the rating action reflects this
correction.

The portfolio includes a number of investments in securities that
mature after the notes do. Based on Moody's calculation,
securities that mature after the notes do currently make up
approximately 18.6% of the portfolio. These investments could
expose the notes to market risk in the event of liquidation when
the notes mature.

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) 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. In light of the deal's
sizable exposure to long-dated assets, which increases its
sensitivity to the liquidation assumptions in the rating analysis,
Moody's ran scenarios using a range of liquidation value
assumptions. However, actual long-dated asset exposures and
prevailing market prices and conditions at the CLO's maturity will
drive the deal's actual losses, if any, from long-dated assets.

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% (1677)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: 0

Class C: +2

Class D: +2

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (2516)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: -1

Class C: -2

Class D: -2

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 $105.4 million, defaulted
par of $0.77 million, a weighted average default probability of
10.61% (implying a WARF of 2096), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 48.61%, a diversity score of 22 and a weighted
average spread of 2.63%.

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.


EIG GLOBAL: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Ratings on 2 Note Classes
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on the
class A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C and revolving notes from EIG Global
Project Fund III Ltd., a cash flow collateralized debt obligation
(CDO) managed by EIG Management Co. LLC and collateralized by
project finance securities.

The actions follow the application of S&P's updated criteria for
rating CDOs of project finance debt and S&P's review of the
transaction's performance.

Since S&P's February 2013 rating actions, the revolving notes have
paid down by $179 million to 11% of their initial issuance amount.
After the March 2014 principal paydown to the revolving notes, the
trustee reported the following overcollateralization (O/C) ratios:

   -- The class A O/C ratio was 172.0%,
   -- The class B O/C ratio was 139.3%, and
   -- The class C O/C ratio was 120.9%.

There are currently no defaults in the portfolio; however, there
could be concentration risk as there are currently only 20
obligors remaining in the portfolio.

Following S&P's model-based default analysis and the supplemental
test, it found that the available credit enhancement for all of
the rated notes is sufficient to support the current rating
levels.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

EIG Global Project Fund III Ltd.

Class         Rating
Revolving     AAA (sf)
A-1           AAA (sf)
A-2           A+ (sf)
B-1           BB+ (sf)
B-2           BB+ (sf)
C             B+ (sf)


FORTRESS CREDIT III: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Cl. E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Fortress Credit Opportunities III CLO L.P.'s $624
million floating- and fixed-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of middle-market
senior secured loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 2,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

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

   -- 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.

   -- The transaction's ability to make 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 0.2386%-12.8177%.

   -- 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
      available excess interest as principal proceeds to purchase
      additional collateral assets during the reinvestment period,
      before paying uncapped administrative expenses and fees,
      subordinated hedge termination payments, and payments on the
      partnership interests.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Fortress Credit Opportunities III CLO L.P.

Class                   Rating              Amount (mil. $)
A-1R(i)                 AAA (sf)                     100.00
A-1T                    AAA (sf)                     228.00
A-2T                    AAA (sf)                      40.00
B-1                     AA (sf)                       20.00
B-2                     AA (sf)                       68.00
C (deferrable)          A (sf)                        64.00
D (deferrable)          BBB (sf)                      56.00
E (deferrable)          BB (sf)                       48.00
Partnership interests   NR                           176.00

(i) The class A-1R notes are revolving notes that may be drawn
     and repaid throughout the commitment period.
  NR - Not rated.


GMAC COMMERCIAL 1999-C1: Fitch Hikes Class H Notes Rating to BBsf
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one class and affirmed one class of
GMAC Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc. 1999-C1 commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates.

Key Rating Drivers

The upgrade of class H is a result of stable performance of the
remaining collateral, with low leveraged loans.  Despite high
credit enhancement and minimal expected losses, upgrades were
limited given the concentrated nature of the pool.  There are 13
loans remaining, three are defeased (19.5%) and one is designated
as a Fitch Loan of Concern (12.2%).  None of the loans are
specially serviced.

Expected losses on the original pool balance total 3.1%, including
$39 million (2.9% of the original pool balance) in realized losses
to date.  As of the March 2014 distribution date, the pool's
aggregate principal balance has been reduced by 98.8% to $16
million from $1.33 billion at issuance.

The Loan of Concern is the River Walk - Uniprop NCII loan (12.2%
of the pool), which was originally secured by a 197 pad mobile
home park located in Raleigh, NC.  The property ceased operations
in September 2008 and has been vacant ever since.  The master
servicer reports that the borrower has been trying to sell the
property since it closed due to the rezoning of the land for
multifamily use.  The loan has remained current since issuance.
There are several single tenant property concentrations in the
remaining pool, with six loans (34.2% of the pool) being occupied
by a single tenant.  Five of the loans (29.2%) are currently
occupied by Rite Aids, four of which have lease expirations in
2018 and one in 2016.  The remaining single tenant property (5%)
is occupied by a CVS, which has a lease expiration in 2017.

RATING SENSITIVITY

The Rating Outlook on class H has been revised to Stable from
Negative due to increasing credit enhancement and continued
paydown.  Upgrades are not expected due to the credit quality of
the remaining pool, with assets located in tertiary markets.
Class J will remain at 'Dsf' due to already realized losses.

Fitch upgrades the following class and revises the Rating Outlook:

   -- $5 million class H to 'BBsf' from 'B+sf', Outlook to Stable
      from Negative.

Fitch affirms the following class:

   -- $11 million class J at 'Dsf', RE 60%.

Fitch previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only class X
certificates.


GP PORTFOLIO 2014-GPP: S&P Assigns 'BB' Ratings on 3 Note Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to GP
Portfolio Trust 2014-GPP's $460.2 million commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2014-GPP.

The note issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction 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 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.

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.


GULF STREAM-COMPASS 2007: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1B and C notes from Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2007 Ltd., a U.S.
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by GSAM Apollo
Holdings LLC, and removed them from CreditWatch with positive
implications.  Simultaneously, S&P affirmed its ratings on the
class A-1A, B, D, and E notes and removed its ratings on classes
B, D, and E from CreditWatch with positive implications.

The upgrades mainly reflect the increased credit support that
resulted from the continued paydowns of the senior notes.  The
affirmations reflect the sufficient credit enhancement at the
current rating levels.

The transaction's reinvestment period ended in October 2012.
Since then, it has paid down approximately $50.66 million to the
class A-1A notes, which now stand at 70.79% of the original
balance.

The note paydowns have increased the transaction's
overcollateralization (O/C) ratios.  According to the February
2014 monthly trustee report, the O/C ratios increased for each
class of notes as follows:

   -- The class B O/C ratio is 130.20%, up from 123.90% in the
      August 2012 trustee report used in our August 2012 analysis;

   -- The class C O/C ratio is 121.50%, up from 117.40% in August
      2012;

   -- The class D O/C ratio is 113.00%, up from 110.70% in August
      2012; and

   -- The class E O/C ratio is 107.70%, up from 106.40% in August
      2012.

As of the February 2014 trustee report, the transaction had no
defaulted assets and approximately $10.89 million in assets from
obligors with ratings in the 'CCC' range.  This compares to $0.76
million in defaults and approximately $12.54 million in assets
from obligors with ratings in the 'CCC' range as noted in the July
2012 trustee report, which S&P referenced for its August 2012
rating actions.

Since S&P's August 2012 rating actions, the transaction's exposure
to long-dated assets (assets maturing after the stated maturity of
the CLO) has increased.  According to the February 2014 trustee
report, the balance of long-dated assets is approximately $6.81
million or 2.9% of the portfolio, up from no long-dated assets at
the time of the August 2012 rating actions.  This exposes the
transaction to market-value risk if the assets need to be sold at
or near the maturity of the transaction.

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2007 Ltd.

Cash Flow
       Previous             Implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating     cushion(i)    rating
A1A    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)       29.86%    AAA (sf)
A1B    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)        5.65%    AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AA+ (sf)        9.45%    AA+ (sf)
C      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA- (sf)        1.80%    AA- (sf)
D      BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos  BBB- (sf)       2.15%    BBB+ (sf)
E      BB (sf)/Watch Pos    BB (sf)         0.82%    BB (sf)

(i) The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
     default rate above the scenario default rate at the cash flow
     implied rating for a given class of rated notes.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, it generated additional
scenarios in which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the
current collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each
tranche's weighted average recovery rate

S&P also generated other scenarios by adjusting the intra- and
inter-industry correlations to assess the current portfolio's
sensitivity to different correlation assumptions assuming the
correlation scenarios outlined below.

Correlation
Scenario        Within industry (%)  Between industries (%)
Below base case                15.0                     5.0
Base case                      20.0                     7.5
Above base case                25.0                    10.0

Recovery Rate
                  Recovery   Correlation Correlation
       Cash flow  decrease   increase    decrease
       implied    implied    implied     implied     Final
Class  rating     rating     rating      rating      rating
A1A    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A1B    AA+ (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
C      A+ (sf)    A+ (sf)    A+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)    AA- (sf)
D      BBB+ (sf)  BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)    BBB (sf)    BBB+ (sf)
E      BB (sf)    B+ (sf)    B+ (sf)     B+ (sf)     BB (sf)

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

To assess whether the current portfolio has sufficient diversity,
S&P biased defaults on the assets in the current collateral pool
with the highest spread and lowest base-case recoveries.

Default Biasing Sensitivity
                    Spread        Recovery
       Cash flow    compression   compression
       implied      implied       implied       Final
Class  rating       rating        rating        rating
A1A    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A1B    AA+ (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)
C      A+ (sf)      AA- (sf)      A- (sf)       AA- (sf)
D      BBB+ (sf)    BBB- (sf)     B (sf)        BBB+ (sf)
E      BB (sf)      B+ (sf)       CCC (sf)      BB (sf)

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 further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2007 Ltd.
                        Rating
Class              To           From
A-1B               AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B                  AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C                  AA- (sf)     A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D                  BBB+ (sf)    BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E                  BB (sf)      BB (sf)/Watch Pos

RATING AFFIRMED

Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2007 Ltd.

Class              Rating
A-1A               AAA (sf)

TRANSACTION INFORMATION

Issuer:              Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2007 Ltd.
Co-issuer:           Gulf Stream-Compass CLO 2007 Corp.
Collateral manager:  GSAM Apollo Holdings LLC
Trustee:             U.S. Bank N.A.
Transaction type:    Cash flow CLO


JAY STREET: S&P Lowers Rating on Class B Notes to 'CCC'
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on both of
the rated notes from Jay Street Market Value CLO I Ltd., a U.S.
market value collateralized debt obligation (CDO).  At the same
time, S&P removed the ratings from CreditWatch, where it had
placed them with negative implications on Dec. 23, 2013, following
a review of the transaction ratings under S&P's updated criteria
for rating market value securities.

Market value securities rely on liquidating collateral as their
primary source of repayment, which is an inherent risk because the
underlying collateral's value fluctuates over time.  Therefore,
S&P's analysis focuses on this potential market value fluctuation.

According to the Jan. 29, 2014 compliance report, the majority of
the underlying securities were non-investment-grade corporate
securities (rated 'BB+' or lower).  The updated criteria increased
the "haircut" to these type of securities, among other changes.
The haircut determines the expected price depreciation upon the
sale of the financial assets backing rated notes.  The haircut
will vary based on the rating assigned to the notes, the asset,
program/fund-specific considerations, and the estimated worst
historical price declines for each class of financial assets
backing the rated notes.

The downgrades reflect the quantitative analysis using S&P's
Market Value Evaluator, which indicated that the assets were
insufficient, given their characteristics and corresponding
haircuts as determined by S&P's updated criteria, to support the
previous ratings.  S&P also considered rating caps outlined in its
updated criteria and the fact that the transaction documents will
not be amended.  In addition, S&P considered the decision to not
provide a representation that the fund abides by the asset
limitations outlined in paragraph 52 of the updated criteria in
the calculation of the fund's borrowing base.

The downgrades also reflect an increase in the funded amount of
the class A VFN notes since S&P's CreditWatch placement on
Dec. 23, 2013.  According to the Nov. 27, 2013 report, which S&P
used for its CreditWatch analysis, the funded portion of the class
A VFN notes was $65 million.  However, this amount increased to
$210 million, its current amount, as of the Dec. 26, 2013 monthly
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 further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

RATINGS LOWERED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Jay Street Market Value CLO I Ltd.

                           Rating
Class                  To           From

A VFN                  BB- (sf)     AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
B                      CCC (sf)     A (sf)/Watch Neg


JP MORGAN 2004-C1: Fitch Hikes Rating on Class J Notes to 'BB'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded five classes and affirmed five classes
of J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. 2004-C1
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The upgrades are the result of increased credit enhancement from
loan payoffs and a significant amount of defeasance remaining in
the pool.  The affirmations are due to the increasing
concentration risk and adverse selection of the remaining pool.

There are 19 loans remaining in the pool, three of which are
defeased (37.5%).  Fitch has designated six loans (22.3%) as Fitch
Loans of Concern, which includes four specially serviced assets
(17.4%).  Fitch modeled losses of 8.6% of the remaining pool;
expected losses on the original pool balance total 1.5%, including
$9.6 million (0.9% of the original pool balance) in realized
losses to date.

As of the March 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 92.8% to $74.9 million from
$1.04 billion at issuance.  Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting class NR.

The largest contributor to expected losses is a 40,563 square foot
(sf) office complex located in Bloomfield Hills, MI (5.2% of the
pool).  The loan transferred to special servicing in November 2013
due to maturity default.  As per the special servicer, the
property was foreclosed upon in March 2014 and a receiver has been
appointed during the six month right of redemption period.  As per
the property's year-end 2013 rent roll, occupancy was 96.1%.
Although, the largest tenant (50.7% of the net rentable area) has
not renewed their lease which expires in July 2014.

The second largest contributor to Fitch expected losses is a
specially-serviced loan (3.9%), which was originally secured by
10,908 sf single tenant retail property located in Audubon, NJ.
The loan transferred to special servicing upon maturity in January
2014.  Eckerd, the single credit tenant, vacated the property
around 2007 after it was acquired by Rite Aid.  Rite Aid assumed
the lease and remains obligated to pay rent until November 2023.
The special servicer reports that the loan remains current under
its lockbox payment.  Additionally, the special servicer states
the borrower has been unresponsive regarding payoff.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is a 15,760 sf
office building located in Lawrenceville, GA, a distant suburb of
Atlanta.  The loan transferred to special servicing in January
2013 for imminent default after the largest tenant vacated.
Foreclosure occurred in August 2013 and the special servicer is
trying to lease-up the property and reports the March 2014
occupancy is at 75%.

RATING SENSITIVITY

Rating Outlooks on classes E through K are Stable due to
increasing credit enhancement, continued paydown and expected
payoff from defeasance.  Upgrades to the lower rated classes are
possible if losses are lower than expected.

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

   -- $11.5 million class E to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $11.7 million class F to 'AAAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $9.1 million class G to 'AAAsf' from 'BBBsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $10.4 million class H to 'Asf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook to
      Stable from Negative;

   -- $6.5 million class J to 'BBsf' from 'Bsf'; Outlook to Stable
      from Negative.

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

   -- $5.2 million class K at 'Bsf'; Outlook to Stable from
      Negative;

   -- $3.9 million class L at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%;

   -- $5.2 million class M at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%;

   -- $2.6 million class N at 'CCsf'; RE 100%;

   -- $2.6 million class P at 'Csf'; RE 100%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3, A-1A, B, C, D and X-2 certificates have
paid in full.  Fitch does not rate the class NR certificates.
Fitch previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only class X-
1 certificates.


JP MORGAN 2014-FL4: S&P Assigns 'BB' Ratings on 3 Note Classes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL4's
$755.3 million commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
series 2014-FL4.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by nine commercial mortgage loans
with an aggregate principal balance of $755.3 million, secured by
the fee and leasehold interests in 61 properties across 10 U.S.
states, Mexico, and Canada.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the underlying collateral's
economics, the trustee-provided liquidity, the collateral pool's
relative diversity, and S&P's overall qualitative assessment of
the transaction.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL4

Class       Rating                    Amount ($)
A           AAA (sf)                 392,400,000
X-CP        BB (sf)              755,300,000(ii)
X-EXT(i)    BB (sf)              755,300,000(ii)
B           AA- (sf)                 110,300,000
C           A (sf)                    77,000,000
D           BBB- (sf)                135,700,000
E           BB (sf)                   39,900,000

  (i) Non-offered certificates.
(ii) Notional balance.


KINNEY HILL: S&P Lowers Rating on Class C-1 Notes to 'BB'
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on all of
the rated notes from Kinney Hill Credit Opportunities Fund Ltd., a
U.S. market value collateralized debt obligation (CDO).  At the
same time, S&P removed these ratings from CreditWatch with
negative implications, where they were placed on Dec. 23, 2013,
following a review of the transaction ratings under S&P's updated
criteria for rating market value securities, including leverage
funds regulated in the U.S. under the Investment Company Act of
1940.

Market value securities rely on liquidating collateral as their
primary source of repayment, which is an inherent risk because the
underlying collateral's value fluctuates over time.  Therefore,
S&P's analysis focuses on this potential market value fluctuation.

According to the Jan. 31, 2014, compliance report, the majority of
the underlying securities were noninvestment-grade corporate
securities.  The updated criteria applied a more conservative
"haircut" to these securities.  The haircut determines the price
depreciation applicable to financial assets backing rated notes.
The haircut will vary based on the rating assigned to the notes,
the asset and program/fund-specific considerations, and the
estimated worst historical price declines for each financial asset
backing the rated notes.

The downgrades reflect the quantitative analysis using S&P's
Market Value Evaluator, which indicated that the assets were
insufficient, given the haircuts in the updated criteria, to
support the current rating.  S&P considered that the manager did
not intend to incorporate the updated criteria into its
transaction documents.  However, S&P did receive a representation
from the fund manager that the fund currently abides and is
expected to abide in the future by the asset limitations outlined
in paragraph 52 of the updated criteria, which S&P uses to
calculate the fund's borrowing base.

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 further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

RATINGS LOWERED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Kinney Hill Credit Opportunities Fund Ltd.

                       Rating       Rating
Class                  To           From
A-1                    A (sf)       AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
B-1                    BBB (sf)     AA (sf)/Watch Neg
C-1                    BB (sf)      A (sf)/Watch Neg
D-1                    BB- (sf)     BBB (Sf)/Watch Neg


LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2001-C2: Fitch Affirms 'D' Ratings on 6 Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed seven classes of LB-UBS Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2001-C2 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect the uncertainty surrounding recoveries of
the lone remaining asset.  The pool has experienced $67.8 million
(5.1% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to date.
The remaining asset in the pool is specially serviced.

As of the March 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 99.3% to $9.1 million from
$1.3 billion at issuance. Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes H through Q.

The remaining asset is a 106,000 square foot class B office
building located in Carrollton, TX.  The loan transferred to the
special servicer in December 2009 due to a technical loan default.
Subsequently, the loan was foreclosed and is currently real estate
owned (REO).  The property was enter into an REO auction in July
2013 but failed to receive a bid.  At the time of the auction the
property was 75% occupied.  The occupancy has improved to 100% as
of Sept. 2013.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Higher than expected losses on the remaining loan may lead to a
downgrade of the class H notes.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $4.4 million class H notes at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%.
-- $4.8 million class J notes at 'Dsf'; RE 50%;
-- Class K notes at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- Class L notes at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- Class M notes at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- Class N notes at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- Class P notes at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Fitch does not rate the class Q notes and previously withdrew the
ratings on the X notes. Classes A-1, A-2, B, C, D, E, F, and G
notes have paid in full.


LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2003-C8: Moody's Cuts X-CL Certs Rating to Caa3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating of one class and
downgraded one class in LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003-C8 as
follows:

Cl. N, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. X-CL, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating on Class N was upgraded based primarily on an increase
in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and amortization.
The deal has paid down 88% since Moody's last review. Although
Class N is fully covered by a defeased loan, Moody's is concerned
that this class may experience interest shortfalls caused by
specially serviced loans.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X-CL) was downgraded due to a
decline in the weighted average rating factor or WARF of its
referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 45% of the
current balance compared to 7% at Moody's prior review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.6% of the
original pooled balance compared to 1.8% at the prior review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for
conduit and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://v3.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may
cause an upgrade of the ratings include significant loan paydowns
or amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in the overall
performance of the pool, loan concentration, increased expected
losses from specially serviced and troubled loans or interest
shortfalls.

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

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 3 compared to 8 at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v 8.7 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 March 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $18.1
million from $1.4 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by five mortgage loans ranging in size from 6% to
37% of the pool. One loan, representing 37% of the pool has
defeased and is secured by US Government securities. The remaining
loans are all in special servicing.

Fourteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $14.6 million (19% loss severity on
average). Four loans, representing 63% of the pool, are currently
in special servicing. The largest specially serviced loan is the
PGA Commons Loan ($6.5 million -- 36% of the pool), which is
secured by a 38,054 square foot retail/office property Palm Beach
Gardens, Florida. The property was 25% leased as of February 2014.
The servicer has recognized an $5.4 million appraisal reduction
for this loan.

The remaining four specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $8.1 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (71% expected loss on
average).


LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2005-C7: Fitch Affirms CC Ratings on 2 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 25 classes of LB-UBS Commercial
Mortgage Trust commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
series 2005-C7.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect stable performance and sufficient credit
enhancement to offset Fitch modeled losses for the pool.  Fitch
modeled losses of 4% of the remaining pool; expected losses on the
original pool balance total 6.2%, including $83 million (3.4% of
the original pool balance) in realized losses to date.  Fitch has
designated 23 loans (11.3%) as Fitch Loans of Concern, which
includes seven specially serviced assets (6.1%).

RATING SENSITIVITY

The ratings on the super senior and mezzanine 'AAA' rated classes
are expected to remain Stable due to sufficient credit
enhancement, stable performance and continued paydown.  Fitch
revised the Rating Outlooks on classes A-J, B, and C to Positive
from Stable as future upgrades may be warranted if collateral
performance continues to remain stable, and credit enhancement
improves as loans repay at their maturities over the next 24
months.

As of the March 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 30.2% to $1.61 billion from
$2.34 billion at issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, five loans
(10.3% of the pool) are defeased.  Interest shortfalls are
currently affecting classes H through T.

The largest contributor to Fitch-modeled losses is attributed to
the Sarasota Main Plaza (2.21% of the pool balance).  The loan is
secured by a 253,504 square foot (sf) mixed use (office/retail)
building located in the downtown sector of Sarasota, FL.  The
original $36 million loan on this property had transferred to the
special servicer in December 2008 for imminent default.  The loan
was modified while in special servicing, and returned back to the
master servicer in February 2013.  Terms of the modification
included an extension of the interest only payment period, and
bifurcation of the loan into a senior ($21.3 million) and junior
($14.6 million) component.  Although losses are not expected
imminently, any recovery to the B-note is contingent upon full
recovery to the A-note proceeds at the loan's maturity in
September 2015.  Unless collateral performance improves, recovery
to the B-note component is unlikely.  The loan had returned back
to special servicing in October 2013 upon the borrowers request
for a discounted sale of the property, which is currently under
review by the servicer.  The loan has been amortizing as of
January 2014, and is paid through the February 2014 payment date.
The next largest contributor to expected losses is secured by
159,629sf of a 299,831sf retail center located in Provo, UT
(0.9%).  The property transferred to special servicing in January
2012 due to legal action brought by the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) against the original borrowing entities.  The
loan had gone into payment default in February 2012.  The special
servicer was unable to appoint a receiver or pursue foreclosure
until January 2013, after the initial court ordered SEC receiver
was approved to abandon the property.  The special servicer had
completed foreclosure of the property in October 2013.  Occupancy
at the property is 76.5% as of January 2014, compared to 62% in
February 2013.  The servicer continues to market the vacant space,
and expects to market the property for sale in the second quarter
of 2014.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is secured by a
253,459sf office property in Southfield, MI.  The property
transferred to special servicing in April 2013 for payment
default.  According to the servicer, the property has experienced
cash flow issues due to declining rental rates and growing
property expenses.  A receiver was appointed in June 2013, and the
special servicer had completed foreclosure in February 2014. The
property is currently 93.2% occupied, compared to 93% at December
2012, and 78% in 2011.

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

-- $37.2 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $20.1 million class A-AB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $847.8 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $84.5 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $233.9 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $195.9 million class A-J at 'Asf'; Outlook to Positive from
    Stable;
-- $14.2 million class B at 'BBBsf'; Outlook to Positive from
    Stable;
-- $35.2 million class C at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook to Positive from
    Stable;
-- $29.3 million class D at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $23.5 million class E at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $23.5 million class F at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%;
-- $26.4 million class G at 'CCsf'; RE 50%;
-- $17.5 million class H at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $17.5 million class J at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $4.3 million class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class S at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $1 million class CM-1 at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $5 million class CM-2 at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $956,000 class CM-3 at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $3 million class CM-4 at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable.

The class A-1 and A-2 certificates have paid in full.  Fitch does
not rate the class T certificate.  Fitch previously withdrew the
ratings on the interest-only class X-CP and X-CL certificates.
The CM rake classes represent the $10 million B-note for the
Cherryvale Mall.  The $69.9 million A-note is included in the
pooled portion of the trust.  Fitch does not rate the SP-1 through
SP-7 rake classes, which are specific to the Station Place I $63
million B-note.  An $8 million A-note for Station Place I is
included in the pooled portion of the trust.


LIMEROCK CLO II: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its 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 ratings reflect:

   -- 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 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 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 0.2429%-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.

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.


MERRILL LYNCH 2005-LC1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class F Notes to B+
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its rating on the class
A-J commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Merrill
Lynch Mortgage Trust's series 2005-LC1, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction, to 'AA- (sf)' from
'A (sf)'.  In addition, S&P lowered its ratings on three other
classes and affirmed its ratings on nine additional classes from
the same transaction.

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 upgrade reflects S&P's expectation of available credit
enhancement for the affected tranche, which S&P believes exceeds
its most recent estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the
rating levels.  The upgrade also reflects S&P's views of the
current and future performance of the transaction's collateral and
the deleveraging of the trust balance.

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 outstanding ratings.
The affirmations also reflect S&P's views of available liquidity
support and the collateral's current and future performance.

The affirmation on class A-4FC also reflects the application of
S&P's counterparty criteria for structured finance transactions.
Floating-rate interest payments to the certificateholders are
partially dependent on the performance of the credit support
provider of the interest rate swap counterparty.  Bank of America
Corp. (A-/Negative/A-2) is the swap counterparty and the
guarantor. We affirmed the rating on class A-4FC at 'A (sf)',
which is one notch above S&P's rating on the guarantor, primarily
based on its understanding that the derivative obligation contains
a counterparty replacement framework.

S&P lowered its ratings on classes F and G to reflect the credit
support erosion that S&P anticipates will occur upon the eventual
resolution of the eight assets ($61.1 million, 5.9%) currently
with the special servicer, LNR Partners LLC.

S&P lowered its rating on class H to 'D (sf)' because it believes
the bond's accumulated interest shortfalls will remain outstanding
for the foreseeable future.  As of the March 12, 2014, trustee
remittance report, the trust experienced monthly interest
shortfalls totaling $130,524, primarily related to net appraisal
subordinate entitlement reduction amounts of $97,742 (net of
recoveries of $3,340) on seven ($59.0 million, 5.7%) of the eight
specially serviced assets ($61.1 million, 5.9%), special servicing
fees of $32,431, and workout fees of $177.  The interest
shortfalls affected all of the classes subordinate to, and
including, class H.

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

RATING RAISED

Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-LC1
                  Rating
Class        To         From      Credit enhancement (%)
A-J          AA- (sf)   A (sf)                     17.14

RATINGS LOWERED

Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-LC1

                  Rating
Class        To          From      Credit enhancement (%)
F            B+ (sf)     BB- (sf)                    5.76
G            B- (sf)     B+ (sf)                     3.89
H            D (sf)      CCC- (sf)                   1.84

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust 2005-LC1
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-LC1

Class        Rating           Credit enhancement (%)
A-4          AAA (sf)                          41.23
A-4FC        A (sf)                            41.23
A-1A         AAA (sf)                          41.23
A-M          AAA (sf)                          26.29
B            A- (sf)                           13.97
C            BBB+ (sf)                         12.48
D            BBB- (sf)                          9.68
E            BB+ (sf)                           8.18
X            AAA (sf)                            N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


MORGAN STANLEY 2002-HQ: Moody's Cuts Rating on Cl. L Certs to C
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded one class and affirmed
the ratings of three classes of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital
I Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2002-HQ as follows:

Cl. L, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Apr 25, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 25, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 25, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 25, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Class L, was downgraded due to higher realized and
anticipated losses from specially serviced loan.

The ratings on Classes M and N were affirmed due to ratings being
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO class, Class X-1 was affirmed based on the
weighted average rating factor or WARF of the 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.

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 100% of the pool is in
special servicing. In this approach, Moody's determines a
probability of default for each specially serviced loan that it
expects will generate a loss and estimates a loss given default
based on a review of broker's opinions of value (if available),
other information from the special servicer, available market data
and Moody's internal data. The loss given default for each loan
also takes into consideration repayment of servicer advances to
date, estimated future advances and closing costs. Translating the
probability of default and loss given default into an expected
loss estimate, Moody's then applies the aggregate loss from
specially serviced loans to the most junior class(es) and the
recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior class(es).

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

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 one compared to two at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model v8.7 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 March 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $13.6
million from $845.9 million at securitization. The certificates
are collateralized by one mortgage loan that is currently in
special servicing.

Five loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $11.9 million (for an average loss
severity of 56%). The specially serviced loan is the Armstrong
Corporate Park 2 & 4 Loan ($13.6 million -- 100% of the pool),
which is secured by a 151,703 square foot office complex located
in Shelton, Connecticut. The loan transferred to special servicing
in May 2011 due to imminent monetary default and became REO in
January 2014. As of July 2013, the property was 52% leased
compared to 63% leased at Moody's last review, with 9% of the net
rentable area (NRA) expiring in 2014 and 3% in 2016. Moody's
anticipates a significant loss on this loan.


MWAM CBO 2001-1: Fitch Affirms Csf Rating on Class C-1 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one class and affirmed two classes of
notes issued by MWAM CBO 2001-1, Ltd./Inc. (MWAM 2001-1) as
follows:

  -- $6,066,132 class B notes upgraded to 'Asf' from 'CCCsf';
     assign Outlook Stable;
  -- $17,641,519 class C-1 notes affirmed at 'Csf';
  -- $13,249,668 class C-2 notes affirmed at 'Csf'.

Key Rating Drivers

The upgrade of the class B notes is attributed to the increased
credit enhancement (CE) to the class as a result of the
transaction's deleveraging over the last year, as well as the
notes' robust performance under Fitch's cash flow model analysis.

Following the full repayment of principal to the class A notes in
July 2013, the class B notes have received approximately $15.8
million or 72.3% of their initial rated balance.  The CE to the
notes has subsequently increased to 85.6% from 48.7%.  Although
the notes are able to pass higher than the 'Asf' rating stress
under Fitch's cash flow analysis, the class remains susceptible to
the highly concentrated portfolio of only 31 obligors.

The Outlook reflects Fitch's expectation of stable performance
until the notes are fully paid down.

The class C-1 and C-2 notes (collectively, class C) are currently
receiving their periodic interest due.  Although the CE level of
the notes has increased since Fitch's last review, it is still
exceeded by the expected losses from the distressed and defaulted
collateral (rated 'CCsf' or lower) in the underlying portfolio.

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

Rating Sensitivities

The class B notes have limited rating sensitivity given their CE
level and the likelihood for the class to pay in full within the
next two to four payment periods.

The class C notes are already rated 'Csf' and have limited
downward rating sensitivity.  However, higher than expected
recoveries, from the portfolio's distressed collateral, could lead
to upgrades above the notes' current rating.

MWAM 2001-1 is a structured finance collateralized debt obligation
(SF CDO) that closed on Jan. 24, 2001.  As of the Feb. 28, 2014
report, the portfolio is comprised of residential mortgage-backed
securities (45.3%), corporate bonds (29.5%), commercial asset-
backed securities (16.8%), commercial mortgage-backed securities
(5.2%), and SF CDOs (3.2%), from 1992 through 2003 vintage
transactions.


NACM CLO I: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB+'
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
C and D notes from NACM CLO I, a collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) transaction, and S&P removed the ratings from CreditWatch,
where it had placed them with positive implications on Jan. 22,
2014.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the class A-
1, A-2, and B notes from the same transaction, and removed its
rating on the Class B notes from CreditWatch with positive
implications.

The upgrades reflect paydowns to the class A-1 notes since S&P's
last rating actions in July 2013, when it raised its ratings on
four classes.  Since then, the class A-1 notes have paid down
$60.8 million, reducing the notes to about 22.4% of their original
balance, and increasing credit support for the subordinate notes.
In addition, the class A, B, C, and D par value ratios have
increased since S&P's July 2013 rating actions.

S&P's rating affirmations on the class A-1, A-2, and B notes
reflect the availability of adequate credit support 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 further
rating actions as it deems necessary.

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

NACM CLO I

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow   Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)  rating
A-1    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    26.01%      AAA (sf)
A-2    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    24.77%      AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AA+ (sf)    14.31%      AA+ (sf)
C      A- (sf)/Watch Pos    A+ (sf)     5.88%       A+ (sf)
D      BB (sf)/Watch Pos    BB+ (sf)    8.58%       BB+ (sf)

(i) The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
     default rate above the scenario default rate at the cash flow
     implied rating for a given class of rated notes.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, it generated additional
scenarios in which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the
current collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each
tranche's weighted average recovery rate.

S&P also generated other scenarios by adjusting the intra- and
inter-industry correlations to assess the current portfolio's
sensitivity to different correlation assumptions assuming the
correlation scenarios outlined below.

Correlation
Scenario        Within industry (%)  Between industries (%)
Below base case                15.0                     5.0
Base case                      20.0                     7.5
Above base case                25.0                    10.0

                  Recovery   Correlation  Correlation
       Cash flow  decrease   increase     decrease
       implied    implied    implied      implied     Final
Class  rating     rating     rating       rating      rating
A-1    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)     AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
C      A+ (sf)    A (sf)     A+ (sf)      AA- (sf)    A+ (sf)
D      BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)     BBB- (sf)   BB+ (sf)

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

To assess whether the current portfolio has sufficient diversity,
S&P biased defaults on the assets in the current collateral pool
with the highest spread and lowest base-case recoveries.

                    Spread        Recovery
       Cash flow    compression   compression
       implied      implied       implied       Final
Class  rating       rating        rating        rating
A-1    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)
C      A+ (sf)      A+ (sf)       BBB+ (sf)     A+ (sf)
D      BB+ (sf)     BBB- (sf      B- (sf)       BB+ (sf)

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

NACM CLO I
                  Rating
Class         To          From
C             A+ (sf)     A- (sf)/Watch Pos
D             BB+ (sf)    BB (sf)/Watch Pos

RATING AFFIRMED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

NACM CLO I
                  Rating
Class         To          From
B             AA+ (sf)    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

NACM CLO I
Class          Rating
A-1           AAA (sf)
A-2           AAA (sf)


PREMIUM LOAN: Moody's Lowers Class C Notes to 'Ca(sf)'
------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating on the
following notes issued by Premium Loan Trust I, Ltd.:

  US$11,000,000 Class C Secured Notes Due October 25, 2014
  (current outstanding balance of $1,869,433), Downgraded to Ca
  (sf); previously on October 18, 2012 Downgraded to Caa2 (sf).

Premium Loan Trust I, Ltd., issued in November 2004, is a
collateralized loan obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of
senior secured loans. The CLO currently has one performing obligor
and three defaulted assets. The transaction will mature in October
2014.

Ratings Rationale

The rating action is primarily a result of insufficient asset
coverage for the Class C notes which has deteriorated
significantly over the last year. Based on the trustee's February
28, 2014 report, the over-collateralization (OC) ratio for the
Class C notes is reported at 14.73% versus 73.06% in March 2013.
The Class C notes are likely to suffer material principal losses
at its maturity due to the insufficient coverage.

The rating action also reflects growing concerns about a potential
interest payment default on the Class C notes on the April 25th
payment date. Moody's expects that the interest collections will
not be sufficient to pay the current interest due on the Class C
notes.

The CLO portfolio currently consists of one Caa1-rated performing
security that matures after the notes do and three defaulted
assets. These assets could expose the notes to market risk in the
event of liquidation when the notes mature.

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 rating:

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) 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.

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.

6) Lack of portfolio granularity: The performance of the portfolio
depends on the credit conditions of one performing obligor Moody's
rates Caa1, especially if it jumps to default.

7) Equity holdings: The transaction holds significant amount of
equity securities which are part of recoveries from defaulted or
restructured issuers. The equity securities are privately held,
hence there is high uncertainty around the timing and the amount
of proceeds from these securities.

Moody's did not model the transaction and no additional
sensitivities or stress scenarios were run because Moody's
analyzed the transaction by assessing the overcollateralization of
the rated notes.


PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2002-1: Moody's Affirms Cl. B Notes' Ba3 Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by Putnam Structured Product CDO 2002-1
Ltd.

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MT -a Medium Term Floating Rate Notes Du
2038, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2
(sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MT -b Medium Term Floating Rate Notes
Due 2038, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MT -c Medium Term Floating Rate Notes
Due 2038, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -d Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -e Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -f Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -g Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -h Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -i Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$176,000,000 Class A-1MM -j Floating Rate Notes Due 2038,
Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

U.S.$80,000,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes Due 2038, Affirmed
Caa3 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

U.S.$150,000,000 Class B Participating Notes Due 2038, Affirmed
Ba3 (sf); previously on May 14, 2013 Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings of the notes because its key
transaction metrics are commensurate with existing ratings. The
affirmations are the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of
commercial real estate collateralized debt obligation CRE CDO and
RE-REMIC transactions.

Putnam Structured Product CDO 2002-1 Ltd. is a static cash
transaction backed by a portfolio of commercial mortgage backed
securities (CMBS) (46.8% of the pool balance), asset backed
securities (ABS) (42.5%; of which 42.1% of these are government-
sponsored mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) and the remainder is
primarily in the form of subprime and Alt-A; and CRE CDOs (10.7%).
As of the trustee's March 3, 2014 report, the aggregate note
balance of the transaction, including preferred shares, is $631.3
million, compared to 2.0 billion at issuance.

The pool contains thirteen assets totaling $63.6 million (8.9% of
the collateral pool balance) that are listed as defaulted
securities as of the trustee's March 3, 2014 report. Three of
these assets (46.6% of the defaulted balance) are CMBS, one asset
is CRE CDO (19.2%), and nine assets are ABS (primarily in the form
of non-government backed RMBS (34.2%). While there have been no
realized losses on the underlying collateral to date, Moody's does
expect moderate losses to occur on the defaulted securities.

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 3,441,
compared to 3,040 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (30.5% compared to 37.7% at last
review); A1-A3 (9.1% compared to 8.6% at last review); Baa1-Baa3
(3.6%, compared to 4.1% at last review); Ba1-Ba3 (3.2% compared to
4.1% at last review); B1-B3 (19.5% compared to 15.5% at last
review); and Caa1-Ca/C (34.1% compared to 30% at last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 5.1 years, the same as last review.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 25.3%, compared to 38% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 0%, same as last review.

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 some of 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 recovery rates of the underlying collateral and
credit assessments. Reducing the recovery rates of the collateral
pool by 10% would result in an average modeled rating movement on
the rated notes of zero to one notch (e.g., one notch down implies
a ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1). Increasing the recovery rate
of the collateral pool by 10% would result in an average modeled
rating movement on the rated notes of zero to one notch (e.g., one
notch up implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Baa2).

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.


REPACS TRUST: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Debt Units to 'B2'
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced the following rating action on
REPACS Trust Series Bayshore I:

$35,000,000 Class A Debt Unit, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on
March 16, 2012 Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

$750,000 Class B Debt Unit, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on
March 16, 2012 Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

This transaction is a corporate synthetic collateralized debt
obligation (CSO) referencing a portfolio of structured finance
assets and six portfolios of corporate senior unsecured bonds,
originally rated in 2004.

Ratings Rationale

According to Moody's, the rating upgrades taken on the CSOs are
due to a shorter time-to-maturity and a sufficient level of credit
enhancement remaining since the last review. In addition, the
actions are also the result of the placement of MBIA Insurance
Corporation's rating on review for upgrade on February 14, 2014.

Based on the trustee's February 2014 report, eight credit events
across all six corporate bond portfolios have taken place on Ambac
Assurance Corp., Ambac Financial Group, Inc., Delphi Corp., Fannie
Mae, General Motors Corp., Lehman Brothers Holdings, Takefuji
Corp., and Washington Mutual Inc. The effective attachments for
the Class A and Class B Notes are 23.84% and 18.11%, respectively.
There have been no additional credit events since the last review.

The ten-year weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the
portfolio of structured finance assets is 2160. There is one C
(sf) rated asset, comprising 13.25% of the portfolio. The WARF of
the six corporate bond portfolios range between 1268 and 1518,
averaging 1415 across all six portfolios. Moody's rates the
majority of these reference credits investment-grade, with an
average of 12.42% rated Caa (sf) or lower across all six
portfolios.

The CSO has a remaining life of 0.6 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Corporate Synthetic Collateralized Debt
Obligations" published in November 2013.

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

These transactions are subject to a high level of uncertainty,
primarily because of 1) unexpected volatility in the credit and
macroeconomic environment; 2) divergence in the legal
interpretation of documentation by different transactional parties
because of embedded ambiguities; and 3) unexpected changes in the
portfolio composition as a result of the actions of the
transaction parties.

For CSOs, the performance of the credit default swaps can be
affected either positively or negatively by 1) variations over
time in default rates for instruments with a given rating; 2)
variations in recovery rates for instruments with particular
seniority/security characteristics; and 3) uncertainty about the
default and recovery correlations characteristics of the reference
pool. Given the tranched nature of CSO liabilities, rating
transitions in the reference pool can have leveraged rating
implications for the ratings of the CSO liabilities that could
lead to a high degree of rating volatility, which is likely to be
higher for the more junior or thinner liabilities.

In addition to the base case analysis described above, Moody's
also conducted sensitivity analyses, discussed below. Results are
in the form of the difference in the number of notches from the
base case, in which a higher number of notches corresponds to
lower expected losses, and vice-versa.

Moody's ran a scenario in which it removed the adjustment for
forward-looking measures of reference credits that are on review
for upgrade or downgrade, or with a negative outlook, from the
calculation of the MIR gap. The result of this run was comparable
to the base case.

In addition to the quantitative factors Moody's models explicitly,
rating committees also consider qualitative factors in the rating
process. These qualitative factors include a transaction's
structural protections, recent deal performance in the current
market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation
features and the portfolio manager's track record. All information
available to rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts,
input from other Moody's analytical groups, market factors, and
judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on
the transactions, can influence the final rating decision.


RIVERFRONT RE: S&P Assigns 'BB-' Rating to Variable Rate Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said that it assigned its
'BB-(sf)' rating to Riverfront Re Ltd.'s principal-at-risk
variable rate notes.  The notes cover losses in the covered areas
arising from named storms, earthquakes, fire following, severe
thunderstorms, and winter storms on a per-occurrence basis between
the attachment point of $100 million and the exhaustion point of
$200 million.

S&P based the rating on the lowest of the natural-catastrophe risk
factor ('BB-'), the rating on the assets in the collateral account
('AAAm'), and the rating on the ceding insurer.

The cedants will be Great American Insurance Co. and its
affiliates, Mid-Continent Casualty Co. and American Empire Surplus
Lines Insurance Co. Great American Insurance Co. will act as agent
of the companies comprising the ceding insurer for purposes of
sending and receiving required notices as well as remitting or
receiving all payments when due.

This is the first catastrophe bond issued by Great American
Insurance Co.

RATINGS LIST

New Rating
Riverfront Re Ltd.
Principal-At-Risk Variable-Rate Notes         BB-(sf)


SATURNS TRUST 2003-1: S&P Affirms 'CCC+' Rating on $60.19MM Units
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its 'CCC+' rating on
SATURNS Trust No. 2003-1's $60.192 million units, and removed the
rating from CreditWatch, where S&P had placed it with negative
implications on Jan. 17, 2014.

S&P's rating on the units is dependent on its rating on the
underlying security, Sears Roebuck Acceptance Corp.'s 7.00% notes
due June 1, 2032 ('CCC+').

The rating action follows S&P's March 24, 2014, affirmation of its
'CCC+' rating on the underlying security and its subsequent
removal from CreditWatch Negative.  S&P could take further rating
actions on the units as a result of changes in S&P's rating on the
underlying security.


SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2014-1: Fitch Rates Class B-4 Certificates 'BBsf'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings assigns the following ratings to Sequoia Mortgage
Trust 2014-1, mortgage pass-through certificates, series 2014-1
(SEMT 2014-1):

   -- $136,463,000 class 1-A1 certificate 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $136,463,000 class 1-AIO notional certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $186,703,000 class 2-A1 exchangeable certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $93,352,000 class 2-A2 certificate 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $93,351,000 class 2-A3 certificate 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $93,352,000 class 2-A4 exchangeable certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $179,731,000 class 2-A5 exchangeable certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $6,972,000 class 2-A6 exchangeable certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $93,352,000 class 2-AIO1 notional certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $186,703,000 class 2-AIO notional certificate 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $7,294,000 class B-1 certificate 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $6,251,000 class B-2 certificate 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $5,210,000 class B-3 certificate 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $1,736,000 non-offered class B-4 certificate 'BBsf'; Outlook
      Stable.

The 'AAAsf' rating on the senior certificates reflects the 6.95%
subordination provided by the 2.10% class B-1, 1.80% class B-2,
1.50% class B-3, 0.50% non-offered class B-4 and 1.05% non-offered
class B-5.  The $3,647,602 non-offered class B-5 certificates will
not be rated by Fitch.

Fitch's ratings reflect the high quality of the underlying
collateral, the clear capital structure and the high percentage of
loans reviewed by third party underwriters.  In addition,
CitiMortgage, Inc. will act as the master servicer, and Wilmington
Trust will act as the Trustee for the transaction.  For federal
income tax purposes, elections will be made to treat the trust as
two or more real estate mortgage investment conduits (REMICs).
SEMT 2014-1 will be Redwood Residential Acquisition Corporation's
1st transaction of prime residential mortgages in 2014.  The
certificates are supported by a pool of prime mortgage loans with
57.8% 30-year fixed rate mortgages (FRMs), 28.6% 15-year FRMs and
13.6% 10-year hybrid adjustable rate mortgages (ARMs).  All but
3.2% of the loans are fully amortizing. The aggregate pool
included loans originated from First Republic Bank (19.9%), Opes
Advisors, Inc. (7.3%), JMAC Lending, Inc. (6.2%), Amerisave
Mortgage Corporation (5.8%), and PrimeLending (5.3%).  The
remainder of the mortgage loans was originated by various mortgage
lending institutions, each of which contributed nearly 5% or less
to the transaction.

As of the cut-off date, the aggregate pool consisted of 429 loans
with a total balance of $347,304,602; an average balance of
$809,568; a weighted average original combined loan-to-value ratio
(CLTV) of 68.4%, and a weighted average coupon (WAC) of 4.2%.

Rate/term and cash out refinances account for 40% and 11.1% of the
loans, respectively.  The weighted average original FICO credit
score of the pool is 765.  Owner-occupied properties comprise
92.4% of the loans.  The states that represent the largest
geographic concentration are California (54.1%), Texas (7.2%) and
Massachusetts (5.7%).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High-Quality Mortgage Pool: The collateral pool consists of 15-
and 30-year fixed-rate, and 10-year adjustable-rate, fully
documented loans to borrowers with strong credit profiles, low
leverage and substantial liquid reserves.  Third-party, loan-level
due diligence was conducted on 94.4% of the pool, and Fitch
believes the results indicate strong underwriting controls.

Market Value Decline Sensitivity: Fitch considered additional
market value decline (MVD) sensitivities in addition to those
generated by its sustainable home price model.  These scenarios
aligned Fitch's 'Asf' MVD stress assumptions with peak-to-trough
MVDs experienced during the housing crisis through 2009.  The
sensitivity analysis, which was factored into Fitch's loss
expectations, resulted in Fitch assuming a base-case sustainable
MVD (sMVD) of 17%, rather than the model-generated base-case sMVD
of 20%.

Aggregator Quality: Redwood's loan acquisition platform and
underwriting overlays it applies to loans it acquires are robust,
as evidenced by the very limited findings from the due diligence
review.  Fitch factored these qualitative strengths in its loss
expectations despite the continued increase in the number of
unknown lenders participating in Sequoia transactions.  Fitch
believes that Redwood's sound acquisition strategy is also
reflected in the very strong performance of the post-crisis
Sequoia pools.

Cash Flow Structure: The transaction features a 'Y' structure in
which the two senior certificate groups are backed by their
individual mortgage pools, and credit support is provided by the
single set of subordinate classes.  There is limited cross-
collateralization so that one class does not have a
disproportionate exposure to another.  Furthermore, the trust
provides for expenses, including indemnification amounts and costs
of arbitration, to be paid by the net weighted average coupon
(WAC) of the loans, which does not impact the contractual interest
due on the certificates.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch's analysis incorporates sensitivity analyses to demonstrate
how the ratings would react to steeper market value declines
(MVDs) than assumed at both the metropolitan statistical area
(MSA) and national levels.  The implied rating sensitivities are
only an indication of some of the potential outcomes and do not
consider other risk factors that the transaction may become
exposed to or be considered in the surveillance of the
transaction.

Fitch conducted sensitivity analysis determining how the ratings
would react to steeper MVDs at the national level.  The analysis
assumes MVDs of 10%, 20%, and 30%, in addition to the model-
projected 18% for this pool.  The analysis indicates there is some
potential rating migration with higher MVDs, compared with the
model projection.

Fitch also conducted defined rating sensitivities, which determine
the stresses to MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full
category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.  For example,
additional MVDs of 4%, 23% and 41% would potentially reduce the
'AAAsf' rated class down one rating category, to non-investment
grade, and to 'CCCsf', respectively.

Additional detail on the transaction is described in the new issue
report 'Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2014-1'.


SNAAC AUTO 2014-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to SNAAC Auto Receivables Trust 2014-1's $210 million auto
receivables-backed notes series 2014-1.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of March 31,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

   -- The availability of approximately 40.0%, 35.3%, 28.7%,
      22.4%, and 18.5% of credit support for the class A, B, C, D,
      and E notes, respectively, based on stress cash-flow
      scenarios (including excess spread), which provide coverage
      of approximately 3.55x, 3.10x, 2.40x, 1.75x, and 1.50x
      S&P's 10.5%-11.5% expected cumulative net loss.

   -- The timely interest and principal payments made under stress
      cash flow modeling scenarios appropriate to the assigned
      preliminary ratings.

   -- S&P's expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress
      scenario, all else being equal, its ratings on the class A
      and B notes would remain within one rating category of its
      preliminary 'AAA (sf)' and 'AA (sf)' ratings, respectively,
      within the first year and our ratings on the class C, D,
      and E notes would remain within two rating categories of
      S&P's preliminary 'A (sf)', 'BBB (sf)', and 'BB (sf)'
      ratings, respectively, within the first year.  These
      potential rating movements are consistent with S&P's credit
      stability criteria, which outline the outer bound of credit
      deterioration equal to a one-category downgrade within the
      first year for 'AAA' and 'AA' rated securities and a two-
      category downgrade within the first year for 'A' through
      'BB' rated securities under moderate stress conditions.

   -- The credit enhancement in the form of subordination,
      overcollateralization, reserve account, and excess spread.

   -- The favorable track record of the management team, which has
      many years of experience individually in the industry and
      together at the company.

   -- The collateral's characteristics.

   -- The transaction's payment and legal structures.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

SNAAC Auto Receivables Trust 2014-1

Class     Rating        Type          Interest         Amount
                                      rate(i)     (mil. $)(i)
A         AAA (sf)      Senior        Fixed            152.25
B         AA (sf)       Subordinate   Fixed             12.60
C         A (sf)        Subordinate   Fixed             17.85
D         BBB (sf)      Subordinate   Fixed             17.85
E         BB (sf)       Subordinate   Fixed              9.45

  (i) The interest rates and actual sizes of these tranches will
      be determined on the pricing date.


SOUND POINT: Moody's Assigns 'B2' Rating on $16MM Class F Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following ratings to notes issued by Sound Point CLO V, Ltd.:

  $4,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2026
  (the "Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

  $390,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2026
  (the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

  $37,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

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

  $32,500,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

  $35,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

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

  $16,000 000 Class F Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2026 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned B2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's ratings of the Class X Notes, the Class A 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 (the "Notes")
address the expected losses posed to noteholders. 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.

Sound Point CLO V is a managed cash flow CLO. The transaction is
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 92.5% of the portfolio must be invested
in first lien senior secured loans and eligible investments and up
to 7.5% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
first-lien last-out loans. The underlying collateral pool is
approximately 61% ramped as of the closing date.

Sound Point Capital Management, LP ("Sound Point") 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, unscheduled principal payments
and proceeds from sales of credit risk assets may be used to
purchase additional collateral obligations, subject to certain
restrictions.

In addition to the notes rated by Moody's, the Issuer issued
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:

Target Par Amount of $600,000,000

Diversity: 48

WARF: 2500

Weighted Average Spread: 3.75%

Weighted Average Coupon: 6.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate: 48.0%

Weighted Average Life: 8 years

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

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

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
Notes. This sensitivity analysis includes increased default
probability relative to the base case.

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

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the 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 Moody's WARF -- Moody's WARF + 15% (from 2500
to 2875)

Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: 0

Class B-1 Notes: -1

Class B-2 Notes: -1

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: 0

Class E Notes: 0

Class F Notes: 0

Percentage Change in Moody's WARF -- Moody's WARF +30% (from 2500
to 3250)

Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

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: 0

Class F Notes: 0

The V Score for this transaction is Medium/High.

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.


SOVEREIGN COMMERCIAL: Fitch Affirms C Ratings on 2 Note Classes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded three classes and affirmed nine classes
of Sovereign Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates, series 2007-C1.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch modeled losses of 24% of the remaining pool; expected losses
on the original pool balance total 4.2%, including $23.3 million
(2.3% of the pool) in realized losses to date.  Fitch has
designated 28 loans (79%) as Fitch Loans of Concern, which
includes seven specially serviced assets (34.8%).  While modeled
losses are slightly higher, the upgrades reflect increased credit
enhancement to the senior classes as a result of paydown of $123
million (39%) since Fitch's last review.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The loans in this transaction do not have the same features as
typical commercial mortgage conduit loans originated for
securitization.  Additionally, the loans lack some of the typical
structural features and reporting requirements seen in CMBS
transactions.  Therefore, Fitch applied additional stresses,
including adjustments of operating income and cap rates.  Fitch
modeled losses are based on actual performance or expected changes
in performance.  The ratings reflect the potential for adverse
selection and higher than modeled losses on distressed and highly
leveraged assets, as this could rapidly deteriorate the credit
enhancement of the subordinate classes.  No further upgrades are
expected on the remaining classes given the increasing pool
concentration and the potential for adverse selection.

As of the March 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 92.2% to $78.7 million from
$1.01 billion at issuance.  No loans are defeased.  Interest
shortfalls are currently affecting classes F through N.
The largest specially serviced asset (15.2% of the pool) is
secured by a 106,981 square foot (sf) office property located in
Dublin, OH.  The loan transferred to special servicing in January
2014 for maturity default.  The borrower is attempting to
refinance the loan which matured in December 2013.

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

-- $4.9 million class A-J to 'Asf' from 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $15.2 million class B to 'BBBsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17.7 million class C to 'BBsf' from 'Bsf'; to Outlook Stable
    from Outlook Negative.

Fitch affirms the following classes and updates Recovery Estimates
as indicated:

-- $20.3 million class D at 'CCCsf', RE 100%;
-- $10.1 million class E at 'CCsf'; RE 25%;
-- $7.6 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $2.5 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $1.2 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The fully depleted classes J, K, L and M remain at 'Dsf', RE 0%
due to realized losses.

The class A-1, A-2, and A1-A 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.


STANFIELD CARRERA: S&P Lowers Rating on 4 Note Classes to 'D'
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on the
class C-1 and C-2 notes (collectively, the class C notes) from
Stanfield Carrera CLO Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO)
transaction, to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC- (sf)'.  In addition, S&P
lowered its ratings on the class D-1 and D-2 notes (collectively,
the class D notes) from the same transaction to 'D (sf)' from 'CC
(sf)'.

After the class B-1 and B-2 notes (collectively, the class B
notes) were paid down in full on the December 2012 payment date,
the class C notes became the senior nondeferrable notes, according
to the indenture.  On Dec. 26, 2012, S&P withdrew its ratings on
the class B notes and simultaneously lowered its ratings on the
class C and D notes to 'CCC- (sf)' and 'CC (sf)', respectively,
due to the transaction's concentration risk, which caused the top
obligor tests to fail for both notes, and exposure to distressed
assets.  As of the March 2014 trustee report, the class C and D
overcollateralization ratios were 261% and 63%, respectively.

S&P lowered its ratings on the class C notes to 'D (sf)' because,
according to the March 2014 trustee note valuation report, they
failed to make timely interest payments on a nondeferrable note,
which triggered an event of default.

S&P also lowered its ratings on the class D notes to 'D (sf)'.
S&P do not expect the principal balance and the interest deferral
balance to be paid in full upon the transaction's legal final
maturity date.

RATINGS LOWERED

Stanfield Carrera CLO Ltd.

              Rating
Class     To          From
C-1       D (sf)      CCC- (sf)
C-2       D (sf)      CCC- (sf)
D-1       D (sf)      CC (sf)
D-2       D (sf)      CC (sf)


STONE TOWER I: S&P Lowers Ratings on 7 Note Classes to 'BB'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on seven
classes from Stone Tower Credit Funding I Ltd. to 'BB (sf)' from
'AAA (sf)' and removed them from CreditWatch with negative
implications, where they were placed on Dec. 23, 2013, following
the application of S&P's updated criteria for rating market value
securities.

Market value securities rely on liquidating collateral as their
primary source of repayment, which is an inherent risk because the
underlying collateral's value fluctuates over time.  Therefore,
S&P's analysis focused on this potential market value fluctuation.

The downgrades reflect the quantitative analysis using S&P's
Market Value Evaluator, which indicated that the assets were
insufficient, given their characteristics and corresponding
haircuts as determined by S&P's updated criteria, to support the
current ratings assigned.

According to the Jan. 31, 2014, compliance report, the majority of
the underlying securities held within the transaction are non-
investment-grade corporate securities (rated 'BB+' or lower).  The
updated criteria increased the "haircut" to these types of
securities, among other changes.  The haircut determines the
potential price depreciation upon the sale of the financial assets
backing the rated notes under different economic stresses.  The
haircut will vary based on the rating assigned to the notes, the
asset, program/fund-specific considerations, and the estimated
worst-historical price declines for each asset type.

S&P also considered the rating caps outlined in its updated
criteria, including the manager's decision to not incorporate the
updated criteria into the transaction's documents.  In addition,
S&P considered the manager's decision to not provide a
representation that the fund abides by the asset limitations
outlined in paragraph 52 of the updated criteria in the
calculation of the fund's borrowing base.

RATINGS LOWERED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Stone Tower Credit Funding I Ltd.
                  Rating
Class          To         From
2006-1         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
2006-2         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
2006-3         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
2006-4         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
2007-1         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
2007-2         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg
2007-3         BB (sf)    AAA (sf)/Watch Neg


SYMPHONY CREDIT: S&P Lowers Rating on 3 Note Classes to 'BB'
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on four
classes of notes from Symphony Credit Opportunities Fund Ltd., a
market value collateralized debt obligation (CDO).  S&P also
removed these ratings from CreditWatch, where it had placed them
with negative implications on Dec. 23, 2013, following the
application of S&P's updated criteria for rating market value
securities.

Market value securities rely on liquidating collateral as their
primary source of repayment, which is an inherent risk because the
underlying collateral's value fluctuates over time.  Therefore,
S&P's analysis focuses on this potential market value fluctuation.

According to the Jan. 31, 2014 compliance report, the majority of
the underlying securities held within the transaction are non-
investment-grade corporate securities (rated 'BB+' or lower).  The
updated criteria increased the "haircut" to these types of
securities, among other changes.  The haircut determines the
potential price depreciation upon the sale of the financial assets
backing rated notes under different economic stresses.  The
haircut will vary based on the rating assigned to the notes, the
asset, program/fund-specific considerations, and the estimated
worst historical price declines for each asset type.

The downgrades reflect the quantitative analysis using S&P's
Market Value Evaluator, which indicated that the assets were
insufficient, given their characteristics and corresponding
haircuts as determined by S&P's updated criteria, to support the
previous ratings.  S&P also considered rating caps outlined in its
updated criteria, including the manager's decision to not
incorporate the updated criteria into the transaction's documents.
In addition, S&P considered the manager's decision to not provide
a representation that the fund abides by the asset limitations
outlined in paragraph 52 of the updated criteria in the
calculation of the fund's borrowing base.

RATINGS LOWERED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH

Symphony Credit Opportunities Fund Ltd.

                          Rating
Class                 To         From

A VFN                 BB(sf)     AAA(sf)/Watch Neg
B                     BB(sf)     AA(sf)/Watch Neg
C                     BB(sf)     A(sf)/Watch Neg
D                     B(sf)      BBB(sf)/Watch Neg


THL CREDIT 2013-2: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on THL
Credit Wind River 2013-2 CLO Ltd./THL Credit Wind River 2013-2 CLO
LLC's $405.13 million fixed- and floating-rate notes following the
transaction's effective date as of Feb. 21, 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.

"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, and may also reflect its 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 take rating actions as it deems
necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

THL Credit Wind River 2013-2 CLO Ltd/
THL Credit Wind River 2013-2 CLO LLC
                                               Amount
Class                      Rating                     (Mil. $)
A-1                        AAA (sf)                     93.735
A-2a                       AAA (sf)                    147.500
A-2b                       AAA (sf)                      7.765
A-3                        AAA (sf)                     20.000
B-1                        AA (sf)                      25.850
B-2                        AA (sf)                      33.570
C (deferrable)             A (sf)                       30.250
D (deferrable)             BBB (sf)                     21.340
E (deferrable)             BB (sf)                      18.640
F (deferrable)             B (sf)                        6.480


TICP CLO I: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to TICP
CLO I Ltd./TICP CLO I LLC's $434.00 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 ratings reflect:

   -- 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 the 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 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 0.2365%-13.8385%.

   -- The transaction's overcollateralization and interest z
      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 interest diversion test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of excess interest
      proceeds that are available before paying uncapped
      administrative expenses, incentive management fees, and
      subordinated note payments into principal proceeds for
      additional collateral asset purchases during the
      reinvestment period.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

TICP CLO I Ltd./TICP CLO I LLC

Class                     Rating        Amount (mil. $)
A-1                       AAA (sf)               283.50
A-2A                      AA (sf)                 10.00
A-2B                      AA (sf)                 40.75
A-2C                      AA (sf)                 15.00
B (deferrable)            A (sf)                  27.25
C (deferrable)            BBB (sf)                25.00
D (deferrable)            BB (sf)                 22.00
E (deferrable)            B (sf)                  10.50
Subordinated notes        NR                      45.00

NR-Not rated.


UBS COMMERCIAL 2012-C1: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Cl. F Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed the ratings of 12 classes of
UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2012-C1, Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2012-C1 as follows:

Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-AB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-S, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed Aa2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. X-B, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2013 Affirmed
Ba3 (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, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable
ranges.

The ratings on the IO classes, Classes X-A and X-B, were affirmed
based on the credit performance (or the weighted average rating
factor or WARF) of their referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.5% of the
current balance, compared to 2.3% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 2.5% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 2.3% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for
conduit and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://v3.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

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.

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 25 compared to 25 at Moody's last review.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the March 12, 2014 payment date, the transaction's aggregate
certificate balance has decreased by approximately 2% to $1.30
billion from $1.33 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 73 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 9% of the pool. The pool does not contain any investment
grade credit assessments or defeased loans.

Six loans, representing 10% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines 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
impact performance.

Currently, there are no loans in special servicing. The pool has
not experienced any realized losses to date.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 99% of the
pool and a partial or full year 2013 operating results for 93% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 97% compared to
101% 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 9% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.22%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.39X and 1.06X,
respectively, compared to 1.33X and 1.0X at the 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% stress rate the agency applied to the loan
balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 23% of the pool. The largest
conduit loan is the Dream Hotel Downtown Net Lease Loan ($120.0
million -- 9.2% of the pool), which is secured by the borrower's
fee simple interest in a parcel located at 17th Street and 9th
Avenue in Chelsea, Manhattan. The borrower leased its interest in
the collateral to Northquay Properties, LLC (Hotel Tenant) and
Northglen Properties LLC (Banquet/Conference Space Tenant) under
two separate Net Leases. The only asset of each Net Lease Tenant
is its respective Net Lease. The Net Leases are structured with
step ups in lease payments. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 100%
and 0.64X, respectively, the same as at last review.

The second largest conduit loan is the Civic Opera House Loan
($92.6 million -- 7.1% of the pool), which is secured by 44-story
Class B office building located within CBD of Chicago, Illinois.
The tenant base is diverse with none of the tenants occupying more
than 7% of the net rentable area (NRA). The property was 76%
leased as of September 2013 compared to 75% at last review. The
loan is on the servicer's watchlist due to low DSCR. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 115% and 0.87X, respectively, compared to
114% and 0.88X at last review.

The third largest conduit loan is the Trinity Centre Loan ($87.4
million -- 6.7% of the pool), which represents a 55% pari-passu
interest in a first mortgage loan. The loan is secured by two
adjacent pre-war office buildings containing 90,744 square feet
located in Downtown Manhattan, New York. The property is also
encumbered with $25.0 million of mezzanine financing. The largest
tenant is the Port Authority of NY & NJ (18% of the NRA) with
lease expirations in July 2015 and December 2016. The property was
89% leased as of August 2013 compared to 84% at last review.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 108% and 0.88X, respectively,
compared to 109% and 0.87X at last review.


VITESSE CLO: Moody's Hikes Rating on $17MM Class B-2L Notes to Ba1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Vitesse CLO Ltd.

$41,000,000 Class A-3L Floating Rate Notes Due August 17, 2020,
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on August 14, 2013 Upgraded to A1
(sf)

$25,000,000 Class B-1L Floating Rate Notes Due August 17, 2020,
Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on August 14, 2013 Upgraded to
Baa3 (sf)

$17,000,000 Class B-2L Floating Rate Notes Due August 17, 2020
(current outstanding balance $16,517,456), Upgraded to Ba1 (sf);
previously on August 14, 2013 Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

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

$374,000,000 Class A-1L Floating Rate Notes Due August 17, 2020
(current outstanding balance $139,980,613, Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on August 14, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

$80,000,000 Class A-1LR Floating Rate Revolving Notes Due August
17, 2020 (current outstanding balance $29,942,377), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on August 14, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

$28,000,000 Class A-2L Floating Rate Notes Due August 17, 2020,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on August 14, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Vitesse CLO Ltd., issued in May 2006, is a collateralized loan
obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of senior secured
loans. The transaction's reinvestment period ended in February
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 the last rating action in August
2013. The Class A-1 Notes have been paid down by approximately by
45% (or $139 million ) since the last rating action. Based on the
trustee's March 2014 report, the over-collateralization (OC)
ratios for the Senior Class A, Class A, Class B-1L, Class B-2L
notes are reported at 155.2%, 128.6%, 116.4% and 109.5%,
respectively versus 132.9%, 118.5%, 111.2% and 106.8%,
respectively in the July 2013 trustee report.

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) 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.

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% (2108)

Class A-1L: 0

Class A-1LR: 0

Class A-2L: 0

Class A-3L: +1

Class B-1L: +2

Class B-2L: +2

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3162)

Class A-1L: 0

Class A-1LR: 0

Class A-2L: 0

Class A-3L: -1

Class B-1L: -2

Class B-2L: 0

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 $362 million, defaulted par
of $7million, a weighted average default probability of 16.58%
(implying a WARF of 2635) a weighted average recovery rate upon
default of 52.39%, a diversity score of 40 and a weighted average
spread of 3.15%.

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.


WACHOVIA BANK 2005-C16: S&P Lowers Rating on Class O Notes to D
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on two
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust's series 2005-C16, a U.S.
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.
Concurrently, S&P affirmed its ratings on 17 other classes from
the same transaction, including the 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class
XC interest-only (IO) certificates.

"Our rating actions follow our analysis of the transaction
primarily using our criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS
transactions.  Our 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" S&P said.

"Our rating actions also considered the monthly interest
shortfalls that are affecting the trust.  We lowered our rating on
the class N certificates to 'CCC (sf)' to reflect reduced
liquidity support available to this class because of interest
shortfalls from the specially serviced assets.  In addition, we
lowered our rating on the class O certificates to 'D (sf)' to
reflect our expectation that the accumulated interest shortfalls
will remain outstanding for the foreseeable future.  The class O
certificates currently have accumulated interest shortfalls
outstanding for 10 consecutive months," S&P noted.

As of the March 17, 2014, trustee remittance report, the trust
experienced monthly interest shortfalls totaling $287,191.
According to the master servicer, the interest shortfalls were
primarily related to a one-time $258,378 payment for real estate
taxes on the Grenoble Square Shopping Center real estate owned
(REO) asset ($1.8 million, 0.2%), as well as $7,286 of interest
not advanced from that same REO asset's nonrecoverability
determination, $14,043 in appraisal subordinate entitlement
reduction amounts, $2,809 special servicing fees, and $3,346
workout fees.  The current monthly interest shortfalls affected
all classes subordinate to and including class H.

The affirmed ratings 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 affirmations also reflect S&P's analysis of the credit
characteristics and performance of the remaining assets, the
transaction-level changes, as well as the liquidity support
available to the classes.

While available credit enhancement levels may suggest positive
rating movements on classes C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, L, and M,
S&P's analysis reflects its view of the available liquidity
support and the magnitude of remaining nonspecially serviced loans
maturing by January 2015 (121 loans; $1.08 billion, 96.5%).  S&P's
analysis also considered that nine loans totaling $51.6 million
(4.6%) are corrected mortgage loans maturing in October, November,
or December of 2014.  According to the transaction documents, the
special servicer is entitled to a workout fee with respect to a
corrected mortgage loan, which is generally equal to 1.00% of all
interest and principal payments received on the mortgage loan for
as long as it remains a corrected mortgage loan.

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

RATINGS LOWERED

Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-C16

                    Rating
Class          To           From               Credit
                                      enhancement (%)
N              CCC (sf)     B- (sf)              1.63
O              D (sf)       CCC+ (sf)            1.17

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-C16

Class          Rating                    Credit
                                enhancement (%)
A-3            AAA (sf)                   35.10
A-PB           AAA (sf)                   35.10
A-4            AAA (sf)                   35.10
A-1A           AAA (sf)                   35.10
A-J            AAA (sf)                   23.33
B              AAA (sf)                   18.25
C              AA+ (sf)                   15.94
D              AA (sf)                    12.94
E              AA- (sf)                   11.10
F              A (sf)                      8.79
G              BBB+ (sf)                   6.94
H              BB+ (sf)                    4.40
J              BB (sf)                     4.17
K              BB- (sf)                    3.48
L              B+ (sf)                     2.56
M              B (sf)                      2.10
X-C            AAA (sf)                     N/A

N/A-Not applicable.


WACHOVIA 2006-WHALE 7: Fitch Puts 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has placed the following classes in Wachovia Bank
Commercial Mortgage Trust 2006-WHALE 7 on Rating Watch Positive:

-- $43.2 million class G 'Bsf';
-- $64.9 million class H 'CCsf' RE 100%.

In addition, Fitch has downgraded the $5.8 million class K and
zero balance classes, WA and CM to 'Dsf' from 'Csf'; RE 0%, due to
realized losses.

Key Rating Drivers

The rating actions are the result of the disposition of two
properties at slightly lower losses than Fitch modeled at its last
rating action in November 2013.  The Westin Aruba REO asset was
disposed for approximately $110 million which resulted in a loss
severity of approximately 33%.  While the gross proceeds of the
sale exceeded the former loan amount, there were almost $46
million in fees and expenses that were repaid.  The Colonial Mall
Myrtle Beach, now known as the Myrtle Beach Mall, was paid off as
part of a modification and forbearance agreement executed in
December 2010.  Net proceeds were approximately $15 million and
with $160,890 in fees and expenses, the resulting loss severity
was approximately 46%.

Rating Sensitivities

One loan remains in the transaction, The Jameson Hotel Portfolio.
The loan is currently collateralized by approximately 6,600 rooms
in 103 properties across 16 states.  Fitch is currently reviewing
the most recent operating reports and other details provided by
the special servicer. Due to the relatively low leverage of the
loan and better than expected recoveries on the disposed assets,
classes G and H may be upgraded one to two categories.  Fitch
expects to review the transaction in detail in the next several
weeks.


WELLS FARGO 2014-TISH: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class WTS-2 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to Wells
Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-TISH's $381.0 million
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2014-TISH.

The issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by two commercial mortgage loans totaling
$381.0 million secured by first-mortgage liens on the borrowers'
leased fee interests in the 873-room Westin New York at Times
Square hotel (senior pooled component: $150.0 million; subordinate
nonpooled component: $60.0 million) and the 1,214-room Sheraton
Chicago Hotel & Towers (senior pooled component: $122.6 million;
subordinate nonpooled component: $48.4 million).  The two loans
are neither cross-collateralized nor cross-defaulted.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's historical and
projected performance, the sponsors' and managers' experience, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the loans' terms, and the
transaction's structure.  S&P determined that the loans have a
71.8% beginning and ending loan-to-value ratio, based on its
valuation of the two properties backing the transaction.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-TISH

Class       Rating(i)         Amount ($)
A           AAA (sf)         168,100,000
X-1         A- (sf)      272,600,000(ii)
X-2         A- (sf)      272,600,000(ii)
B           AA- (sf)          59,940,000
C           A- (sf)           44,560,000
WTS-1       BBB- (sf)         32,807,000
WTS-2       BB (sf)           27,193,000
SCH-1       BBB- (sf)         26,124,000
SCH-2       BB (sf)           22,276,000

  (i) The issuer will issue the certificates to qualified
      institutional buyers in line with Rule 144A of the
      Securities Act of 1933.

(ii )Notional balance.  The aggregate principal distributions and
      realized losses allocated to the pooled certificates will
      reduce the class X-1 and X-2 certificates' notional amount.


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-C19: Fitch Rates Class E Notes 'BB-'
----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Rating
Outlooks to WFRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-C19 pass-through
certificates:

   -- $75,637,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $36,949,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $98,933,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $210,000,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $249,163,000 class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $101,859,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $73,116,000b class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $845,657,000* class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $75,875,000b class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $40,006,000b class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $188,997,000b class PEX 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $175,202,000* class X-B 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $59,321,000a class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $27,590,000a class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $11,037,000a class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

* Notional amount and interest-only.
a Privately placed pursuant to Rule 144A.
b Class A-S, B and C certificates may be exchanged for class PEX
  certificates; and class PEX certificates may be exchanged for
  class A-S, B and C certificates.

Fitch does not rate the $44,145,379 class G.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership in the trust,
primary assets of which are 99 loans secured by 133 commercial
properties having an aggregate principal balance of approximately
$1.104 billion as of the cutoff date.  The loans were contributed
to the trust by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association; The Royal
Bank of Scotland; Liberty Island Group I LLC; Basis Real Estate
Capital II LLC; C-III Commercial Mortgage LLC.; and NCB, FSB.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 76.4% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 82.7%, and asset summary reviews
on 85.4% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch Leverage: This transaction has leverage metrics that are
slightly higher than recent Fitch-rated fixed-rate deals.  The
pool's Fitch debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and loan to value
(LTV) are 1.27x and 103.8%, respectively, compared with the 2013
averages of 1.29x and 101.6%, respectively.  Excluding the eight
loans collateralized by cooperative housing (co-op) properties,
which comprise 3.3% of the pool, the Fitch DSCR and LTV are 1.17x
and 106.4%, respectively.

Lower Loan Concentration: The pool is less concentrated by loan
size and sponsor, as compared to other recent Fitch-rated fixed-
rate deals.  The top 10 loans represent 38.9% of the pool, which
is less than the 2013 average concentration of 54.5%.  Comprising
99 loans and 133 properties, the pool is more diverse on an
aggregate loan and property basis when compared to the 2013
averages of 70 loans and 106 properties.  The pool has a loan
concentration index (LCI) and sponsor concentration index (SCI) of
252 and 297, respectively, which represents one of the least
concentrated transactions in 2013 and 2014 to date.

More Amortization: Of the pool, four loans (3.8%) are full
interest-only and 17 loans (28.2%) are partial interest-only.  The
remaining pool (78 loans, 68%) consists of amortizing balloon
loans with loan terms of five to 10 years.  As a result, the pool
is scheduled to amortize by 16.8%.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 20.2% below
the most recent net operating income (NOI) (for properties for
which historical NOI was provided, excluding properties that were
stabilizing during the most recent reporting period).

Unanticipated further declines in property-level NCF could result
in higher defaults and loss severity on defaulted loans, and could
result in potential rating actions on the certificates.  Fitch
evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to WFRBS 2014-
C19 certificates and found that the transaction displays average
sensitivity to further declines in NCF.  In a scenario in which
NCF declined a further 20% from Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of the
junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'A-sf' could result.  In a more
severe scenario, in which NCF declined a further 30% from Fitch's
NCF, a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'BBBsf'
could result.  The presale report includes a detailed explanation
of additional stresses and sensitivities on pages 79-80.

The master servicers will be Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association and NCB, FSB, rated 'CMS1-' and 'CMS2-', respectively,
by Fitch.  The special servicers will be LNR Partners, LLC, and
NCB, FSB rated 'CSS1-' and 'CSS3+', respectively, by Fitch.


WFRBS 2014-C19: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. X-B Securities
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive ratings to
twelve classes of CMBS securities, issued by WFRBS Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2014-C19:

Cl. A-1, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-S**, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. X-A*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. X-B*, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B**, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. PEX**, Definitive Rating Assigned A1 (sf)

Cl. C**, Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

* Interest Only Class

** Reflects Exchangeable Certificates

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Certificates are collateralized by 99 fixed rate loans secured
by 133 properties. The ratings are based on the collateral and the
structure of the transaction.

Moody's CMBS ratings methodology combines both commercial real
estate and structured finance analysis. Based on commercial real
estate analysis, Moody's determines the credit quality of each
mortgage loan and calculates an expected loss on a loan specific
basis. Under structured finance, the credit enhancement for each
certificate typically depends on the expected frequency, severity,
and timing of future losses. Moody's also considers a range of
qualitative issues as well as the transaction's structural and
legal aspects.

The credit risk of loans is determined primarily by two factors:
1) Moody's assessment of the probability of default, which is
largely driven by each loan's DSCR, and 2) Moody's assessment of
the severity of loss upon a default, which is largely driven by
each loan's LTV ratio.

The Moody's Actual DSCR of 1.58X is greater than the 2007
conduit/fusion transaction average of 1.31X. The Moody's Stressed
DSCR of 1.11X is greater than the 2007 conduit/fusion transaction
average of 0.92X.

Moody's Trust LTV ratio of 105.2% is lower than the 2007
conduit/fusion transaction average of 110.6%. Moody's Total LTV
ratio (inclusive of subordinated, mezzanine and debt-like
preferred equity financing) of 105.8% is also considered when
analyzing various stress scenarios for the rated debt.

Moody's also grades properties on a scale of 1 to 5 (best to
worst) and considers those grades when assessing the likelihood of
debt payment. The factors considered include property age, quality
of construction, location, market, and tenancy. The pool's
weighted average property quality grade is 2.5, which is weaker
than the indices calculated in most multi-borrower transactions
since 2009. The weighted average grade is indicative of the
average market composition of the pool and the stability of the
cash flows underlying the assets.

Moody's also considers both loan level diversity and property
level diversity when selecting a ratings approach. With respect to
loan level diversity, the pool's loan level (includes cross
collateralized and cross defaulted loans) Herfindahl Index is
39.7. The transaction's loan level diversity is greater than
Herfindahl score calculated in most multi-borrower transactions
issued since 2010. With respect to property level diversity, the
pool's property level Herfindahl Index is 55.2. The transaction's
property diversity profile is greater than the indices calculated
in most multi-borrower transactions issued since 2010.

This deal has a super-senior Aaa classes with 30% credit
enhancement. Although the additional enhancement offered to the
senior most certificate holders provides additional protection
against pool loss, the super-senior structure is credit negative
for the certificate that supports the super-senior class. If the
support certificate were to take a loss, the loss would have the
potential to be quite large on a percentage basis. Thin tranches
need more subordination to reduce the probability of default in
recognition that their loss-given default is higher. This
adjustment helps keep expected loss in balance and consistent
across deals. The transaction was structured with additional
subordination at class A-S to mitigate the potential increased
severity to class A-S.

In terms of waterfall structure, the transaction contains a group
of exchangeable certificates. Classes A-S (Aaa (sf)), B (Aa3 (sf))
and C (A3 (sf)) may be exchanged for Class PEX (A1 (sf))
certificates and Class PEX may be exchanged for the Classes A-S, B
and C. The PEX certificates will be entitled to receive the sum of
interest and principal distributable on the Classes A-S, B and C
certificates that are exchanged for such PEX certificates. The
initial certificate balance of the Class PEX certificates is equal
to the aggregate of the initial certificate balances of the Class
A-S, B and C and represent the maximum certificate balance of the
PEX certificates that may be issued in an exchange.

Moody's analysis employs the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v2.64
which derives credit enhancement levels based on an aggregation of
adjusted loan level proceeds derived from Moody's loan level DSCR
and LTV ratios. Major adjustments to determining proceeds include
loan structure, property type, sponsorship, and diversity. Moody's
analysis also uses the CMBS IO calculator ver1.1, which references
the following inputs to calculate the proposed IO rating based on
the published methodology: original and current bond ratings and
credit estimates; original and current bond balances grossed up
for losses for all bonds the IO(s) reference(s) within the
transaction; and IO type corresponding to an IO type as defined in
the published methodology.

The V Score for this transaction is assessed as Low/Medium, the
same as the V score assigned to the U.S. Conduit and CMBS sector.
This reflects typical volatility with respect to the critical
assumptions used in the rating process as well as an average
disclosure of securitization collateral and ongoing performance.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: If Moody's value of the
collateral used in determining the initial rating were decreased
by 5%, 14%, and 23%, the model-indicated rating for the currently
rated Aaa Super Senior class would be Aaa, Aaa, and Aa1,
respectively; for the most junior Aaa rated class A-S would be
Aa1, Aa2, and Aa3, respectively. Parameter Sensitivities are not
intended to measure how the rating of the security might migrate
over time; rather they are designed to provide a quantitative
calculation of how the initial rating might change if key input
parameters used in the initial rating process differed. The
analysis assumes that the deal has not aged. Parameter
Sensitivities only reflect the ratings impact of each scenario
from a quantitative/model-indicated standpoint. Qualitative
factors are also taken into consideration in the ratings process,
so the actual ratings that would be assigned in each case could
vary from the information presented in the Parameter Sensitivity
analysis.

These ratings: (a) are based solely on information in the public
domain and/or information communicated to Moody's by the issuer at
the date it was prepared and such information has not been
independently verified by Moody's; (b) must be construed solely as
a statement of opinion and not a statement of fact or an offer,
invitation, inducement or recommendation to purchase, sell or hold
any securities or otherwise act in relation to the issuer or any
other entity or in connection with any other matter. Moody's does
not guarantee or make any representation or warranty as to the
correctness of any information, rating or communication relating
to the issuer. Moody's shall not be liable in contract, tort,
statutory duty or otherwise to the issuer or any other third party
for any loss, injury or cost caused to the issuer or any other
third party, in whole or in part, including by any negligence (but
excluding fraud, dishonesty and/or willful misconduct or any other
type of liability that by law cannot be excluded) on the part of,
or any contingency beyond the control of Moody's, or any of its
employees or agents, including any losses arising from or in
connection with the procurement, compilation, analysis,
interpretation, communication, dissemination, or delivery of any
information or rating relating to the issuer.

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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may
cause an upgrade of the ratings include significant loan paydowns
or amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in the overall
performance of the pool, loan concentration, increased expected
losses from specially serviced and troubled loans or interest
shortfalls.


ZAIS CLO 1: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to Zais
CLO 1 Ltd./Zais CLO 1 LLC's $284.20 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 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 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 0.24% to 12.84%.

   -- 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.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Zais CLO 1 Ltd./Zais CLO 1 LLC

Class               Rating          Amount (Mil. $)
A-1                 AAA (sf)                 187.40
A-2                 AA (sf)                   39.10
B (deferrable)      A (sf)                    21.30
C (deferrable)      BBB (sf)                  15.10
D (deferrable)      BB (sf)                   12.70
E (deferrable)      B (sf)                     8.60
Combination notes   AA (sf)                  226.50 (i)

  (i) Combination notes consist of an aggregate amount of up to
      $226,500,000, with the components consisting of up to
      $187,400,000 of the class A-1 notes and $39,100,000 of the
      class A-2 notes.  On the closing date, the issuer expects to
      have a total of $166,350,000 of combination notes
      outstanding, consisting of $137,633,510 of class A-1 notes
      and $28,716,490 of class A-2 notes.  The individual
      components of the combination notes are included in the
      outstanding amount of the related components and will earn
      interest in the same manner as the related components. The
      component amounts outstanding can vary, subject to
      conditions as described in the indenture.


* Fitch Lowers 86 Distressed Bonds in 51 RMBS Deals to 'Dsf'
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded 86 distressed bonds in 51 U.S. RMBS
transactions to 'Dsf'.  The downgrades indicate that the bonds
have incurred a principal write-down.  Of the bonds downgraded to
'Dsf', 85 classes were previously rated 'Csf' and one class was
rated 'CCsf'.  All ratings below 'CCCsf' indicate a default is
expected.

As part of this review, the Recovery Estimates (REs) of the
defaulted bonds were not revised.  In addition, the review focused
only on the bonds which defaulted and did not include any other
bonds in the affected transactions.

Of the 86 classes affected by these downgrades, 50 are Prime, 25
are Alt-A, and 10 are Subprime.  The remaining transaction types
are other sectors.  Approximately, 51% of the bonds have an RE of
50%-100%, which indicates that the bonds will recover 50%-100% of
the current outstanding balance, while 21% have an RE of 0%.

Key Rating Drivers

All of the affected classes had incurred a principal write-down
and are expected to endure additional losses in the future.

Rating Sensitivities

While the bonds that have defaulted are not expected to recover
any material amount of lost principal in the future there is a
limited possibility this may happen.  In this unlikely scenario,
Fitch would further review the affected class.


* Moody's Takes Action on $657MM Subprime RMBS by Various Trusts
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of eight
tranches from four transactions and downgraded the ratings of two
tranches from one transaction backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Carrington Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-NC1

Cl. M-1, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 26, 2013
Downgraded to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Feb 26, 2013
Affirmed Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Carrington Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2006-NC1

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Apr 29, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-WFHE3

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: CSFB Home Equity Asset Trust 2005-8

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Issuer: CSFB Home Equity Asset Trust 2006-2

Cl. 1-A-1, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-A-4, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Caa3 (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 downgrade actions on classes M-1 and M-2 issued by Carrington
2005-NC-1 are driven by recent interest shortfalls reported on the
bonds. The tranches missed their interest payments in Feb 2014 and
structural limitations in the transaction prevent recoupment of
the missed interest even if funds are available in subsequent
periods.

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 7.7%
in February 2013 to 6.7% in February 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.


* Moody's Takes Action on $407 Million of Prime Jumbo RMBS
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 14 tranches
and downgraded the ratings of nine tranches issued by various
issuers. The tranches are backed by Prime Jumbo RMBS loans issued
between 2003 and 2006.

Issuer: Citicorp Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-4

Cl. IA-11, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2012
Confirmed at Caa1 (sf)

Cl. IA-IO, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc. 2005-1

Cl. IIIA-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 27, 2013
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. IIIA-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: Citicorp Mortgage Securities, Inc. 2005-8

Cl. IA-6, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. IIA-1, Downgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Sep 12, 2013
Confirmed at A3 (sf)

Cl. IIA-2, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Sep 12, 2013
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. IIA-3, Downgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Sep 12, 2013
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-6

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Sep 21, 2012 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: CWMBS Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2004-HYB4

Cl. 1-A, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2012
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Cl. 2-A-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2012
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. 2-A-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2012
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. 3-A, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2012
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Issuer: GSR Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-AR3

Cl. 8A1, Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2010
Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Issuer: RFMSI Series 2005-S5 Trust

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Aug 30, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2003-AR9
Trust

Cl. II-A, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 3, 2012
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: WaMu Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2003-AR3

Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 11, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: Wells Fargo Mortgage Backed Securities 2004-6 Trust

Cl. A-6, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 19, 2013
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A-7, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 19, 2013
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A-12, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Feb 19, 2013
Downgraded to Baa3 (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 rating upgrades are a result of improving
performance of the related pools and/or faster pay-down of the
bonds due to high prepayments/fast liquidations. The rating
downgrades are a result of deteriorating performance and
structural features resulting in higher expected losses for the
bond than previously anticipated. The rating actions for Citigroup
Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-6 and GSR Mortgage Loan Trust
2005-AR3 also reflect updates and corrections to the cash-flow
models used by Moody's in rating these transactions. For both
deals, the changes pertain to the calculations of the senior
percentage post subordination depletion and the loss allocation
amounts. In addition, the cash-flow model for Citigroup Mortgage
Loan Trust, Series 2005-6 has corrected calculations for interest
payments to the Class X and subordinate bonds. The rating
downgrade action for Class IA-IO in Citicorp Mortgage Securities
Trust 2006-4 reflects the correction of an error in the prior
rating action for this transaction. The previous rating for this
bond should have been capped at the rating of the highest rated
tranche outstanding from the group backing this bond. The error
has now been corrected, and today's rating action reflects this
change.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013. Please see
the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this
methodology.

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 6.7% in February 2014 down
from 7.7% in February 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.


* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 30 Classes From 18 CDO Transactions
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its ratings on 29
classes of notes from 17 cash flow (CF) collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) transactions and one class from one CF collateral
debt obligation (CDO) transaction backed primarily by trust-
preferred securities (TRUPS).

The withdrawals follow the complete paydown of the notes, as
reflected in the most recent trustee-issued note payment reports:

   -- AMMC CLO V Ltd. (2006 CF CLO): last remaining rated tranche
      paid down

   -- Ares VR CLO Ltd. (2006 CF CLO): senior-most tranche paid
      down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd. (2006 CF CLO): last remaining
      rated tranche paid down

   -- Ballyrock CLO III Ltd. (2005 CF CLO): optional redemption in
      March 2014 Dryden IX - Senior Loan Fund 2005 plc (2005 CF
      CLO): optional redemption in March 2014

   -- Essex Park CDO Ltd. (2004 CF CLO): last remaining rated
      tranche paid down

   -- FM Leveraged Capital Fund II (2006 CF CLO): senior-most
      tranche paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- GSC Capital Corp Loan Funding 2005-1 (2006 CF CLO): optional
      redemption in February 2014

   -- GSC Partners CDO Fund V Ltd. (2004 CF CLO): senior-most
      tranche paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- InCapS Funding I Ltd. (2003 TruPS CDO): senior-most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Kingsland VI Ltd. (2013 CF CLO): class X notes* paid down,
      other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Latitude CLO I Ltd. (2005 CF CLO): senior-most tranche paid
      down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- LCM III Ltd. (2005 CF CLO): senior-most tranche paid down,
      other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- LightPoint CLO III Ltd. (2005 CF CLO): optional redemption
      in March 2014 Mountain Capital CLO IV Ltd.(2005 CF CLO):
      senior most tranche paid down, other rated tranches still
      outstanding Sargas CLO I Ltd. (2006 CF CLO): senior-most
      tranches paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Silver Creek Funding Ltd. (2004 CF CLO): senior-most
      tranches paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Venture XIV CLO Ltd. (2013 CF CLO): class X notes* paid
      down, other rated tranches still outstanding

* An "X note" within a CLO is generally a note with a principal
  balance intended to be repaid early in the CLO's life using
  interest proceeds from the senior portion of the CLO's
  waterfall.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

AMMC CLO V Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D                   NR                  BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos

Ares VR CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-3                 NR                  AAA (sf)

Ballyrock CLO 2006-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A                   NR                  AAA (sf)

Ballyrock CLO III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
D Notes             NR                  BBB+ (sf)/ Watch Pos

Dryden IX - Senior Loan Fund 2005 plc
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B-1                 NR                  A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B-2                 NR                  A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B-3                 NR                  A+ (sf)/Watch Pos

Essex Park CDO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
D                   NR                  AAA (sf)

FM Leveraged Capital Fund II
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)

GSC Capital Corp Loan Funding 2005-1
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
E                   NR                  BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos
F                   NR                  BB- (sf)/Watch Pos

GSC Partners CDO Fund V Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B Notes             NR                  AAA (sf)

InCapS Funding I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A Notes             NR                  A- (sf)

Kingsland VI
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X Notes             NR                  AAA (sf)

Latitude CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)

LCM III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A                   NR                  AAA (sf)

LightPoint CLO III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1A                NR                  AA (sf)
B                   NR                  AA (sf)
C                   NR                  BBB+ (sf)

Mountain Capital CLO IV Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1LA               NR                  AAA (sf)

Sargas CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2A                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2B                NR                  AAA (sf)

Silver Creek Funding Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B-1 Notes           NR                  BB+ (sf)
B-2 Notes           NR                  BB+ (sf)

Venture XIV CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X Notes             NR                  AAA (sf)

NR-not rated.


* S&P Lowers 210 Ratings on 126 U.S. RMBS Deals to 'D'
------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on 210
classes of mortgage pass-through certificates from 126 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 1998 and 2008 to 'D (sf)'.  At the same time, S&P placed
six ratings on CreditWatch with negative implications.

The downgrades reflect S&P's assessment of the impact of principal
write-downs on the affected classes during recent remittance
periods.  Before the rating actions, S&P rated most of these
classes either 'CCC (sf)' or 'CC (sf)'.  Two additional classes
from RFMSI Series 2004-S7 and Structured Asset Securities Corp.'s
series 2002-25A defaulted from ratings of 'B- (sf)' or higher.
Each of these two transactions is backed by RMBS prime jumbo
collateral.  Based on the two defaulted classes, S&P also placed
its ratings on six classes from these two transactions on
CreditWatch with negative implications.  S&P expects to resolve
the CreditWatch placements after it completes its review of the
related transactions.

The 210 defaulted classes consist of the following:

   -- 123 from prime jumbo transactions (58.57%).
   -- 39 from subprime transactions (18.57%).
   -- 31 from Alternative-A transactions (14.76%).
   -- 11 from RMBS negative amortization transactions (5.24%).
   -- Three from outside the guidelines transactions.
   -- Two from closed-end second-lien transactions.
   -- One from a resecuritized real estate mortgage investment
      conduit transaction.

All of the transactions in this review receive credit enhancement
from a combination of subordination, excess spread, and
overcollateralization (where applicable).

Standard & Poor's will continue to monitor its ratings on
securities that experience principal write-downs, and it will
adjust its ratings as it considers appropriate in accordance with
its criteria.


* U.S. Auto Loan ABS Losses Inch Higher in February, Fitch Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Prime and subprime annualized losses inched higher in February as
asset performance has softened somewhat over the past six months,
according to the latest index results from Fitch Ratings.
However, loss rates are still at historically low levels and only
marginally off the record low levels recorded in 2012-2013.

Fitch expects losses to improve in March and April, as tax refunds
provide a temporary uplift to consumer's cash-flow.  In the prime
sector, 60+ day delinquencies were flat in February at 0.39%
versus January, and 5% below the level in February a year earlier.
Prime ANL ticked up slightly in February month-over-month (MOM) to
0.49% from 0.48% the previous month.

February's ANL rate of 0.49% was the highest level in two years,
and 23% above February 2013. Despite this, the loss rate last
month was within range of mid-2011 levels, and still below 2001-
2010 levels, which ranged from 0.52%-2.23%.

Subprime delinquencies dropped 1% MOM through February, a good
sign for asset performance in coming months. 60+ days
delinquencies were 3.80% last month, down from 3.84% recorded in
the prior months.

Subprime ANL rose 7.5% MOM to 6.91% in February, and were 25%
higher than a year earlier as performance softened over the past
year.  Consistent with the prime sector, loss rates are still well
within loss rates recorded in the strong 2010-2013 period.
Used vehicle values were relatively flat in February, and both
demand and sales of used vehicles received support from bolstered
income levels due to tax refunds.  The Manheim Used Vehicle Value
Index was stable last month at 123.3, a 1% increase over February
2013.  The winter weather continues to stunt consumer shopping and
auto sales slowed in recent months, but this may change in coming
months particularly if manufacturers boost incentives to draw
consumers into showrooms.

On the ratings front, Fitch upgraded 18 classes of notes through
early March 2014, up from 13 upgrades issued during the same time
in 2013.  Of these 18 upgrades, 12 were issued on prime auto loan
ABS transactions and 6 on subprime transactions.  The ratings
outlook is positive for 2014, and the sector outlook on asset
performance is stable.



                             *********

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 ***