TCR_Public/141116.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, November 16, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 319

                            Headlines

ACCESS GROUP 2004-2: S&P Affirms CC Rating on 2 Note Classes
ALESCO PREFERRED II: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Notes to Caa1
ANTHRACITE CDO II: S&P Withdraws CCC+ Rating on Class E Notes
APIDOS CLO XIX: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating on $7.5MM Cl. F Notes
BEAR STEARNS 2006-PWR13: S&P Raises Rating on A-J Notes to BB+

COMM 2006-C7: Fitch Affirms 'CCsf' Rating on Class A-J Notes
COMM 2014-CCRE20: Fitch to Rate Class F Certificates 'B-sf'
COVENANT CREDIT II: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating on Class F Notes
CSFB MORTGAGE 2002-CKS4: Moody's Cuts Cl. A-X Certs Rating to C
CSMC TRUST 2014-TIKI: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating on Cl. F Certs

CSMC TRUST 2014-WIN2: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class B-4 Notes
FIGUEROA CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. B Rating on Class F Notes
FREMF 2012-K705: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. X2 Certificate
GE COMMERCIAL 2004-C1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class N Notes to D
GOLDENTREE LOAN V: S&P Raises Rating on Class E Notes to BB+

ISCHUS CDO I: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class A-1 Notes to Caa3
JAMESTOWN CLO V: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating on $8MM Cl. F Notes
JP MORGAN 2014-CBM: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Class E Notes
LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2008-C1: S&P Cuts Rating on 3 Notes to D
LEASE INVESTMENT: Moody's Cuts Rating on 2 Note Classes to Caa3

MERRILL LYNCH 2006-CANADA: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on L Debt
ML-CFC COMMERCIAL 2007-7: Moody's Hikes Cl. X Certs Rating to B3
MORGAN STANLEY 2004-IQ7: S&P Affirms BB+ Rating on Class H Notes
NORTHWOODS CAPITAL XIV: S&P Gives Prelim BB Rating on Cl. E Notes
OHA LOAN 2014-1: Fitch to Rate $50.5MM Class E Notes 'BBsf'

PANTHER TRAILS: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Series 2005 Bonds
PREFERRED TERM IX: S&P Raises Rating on 2 Note Classes From BB+
SDART 2013-5: Fitch Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
STRUCTURED ASSET 2005-8: Moody's Ups Cl. M1 Debt Rating to Ca
UCAT 2005-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on Cl. B-1-B Notes to Caa3

* Fitch Cuts Rating on Various Distressed U.S. RMBS Bonds to 'Dsf'


                             *********

ACCESS GROUP 2004-2: S&P Affirms CC Rating on 2 Note Classes
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on five
classes from Access Group Inc.'s series 2004-2, a student loan
asset-backed securities (ABS) transaction collateralized by a pool
of Consolidation and Stafford student loans originated through the
U.S. Department of Education's Federal Family Education Loan
Program (FFELP).

The affirmations reflect S&P's views of the trust's collateral
performance to date, future collateral performance, the trust's
structure, and the current credit enhancement available to support
the notes, including overcollateralization (parity), subordination
for the senior notes, capitalized interest account, and excess
spread.  S&P also considered secondary credit factors such as
credit stability, payment priority, and sector- and issuer-
specific analyses, as well as a peer analysis.

CURRENT CAPITAL STRUCTURE(i)

                Current      Note
Class           balance     factor       Maturity
name            (mil. $)      (%)        date
A-2              104.54      51.72       Jan-16
A-3              164.00     100.00       Oct-24
A-4              109.00     100.00       Apr-32
A-5               33.00     100.00       Jan-43
B                 32.32      84.22       Jan-43

(i) As of the Oct. 27, 2014, distribution date.

PAYMENT STRUCTURE

The transaction initially paid principal sequentially to the class
A-1 through A-5 notes.  The class B notes were locked out of
principal payments until the Oct. 2012 step-down date.
Thereafter, provided that no trigger event is in effect, the
transaction switches to paying principal to the class A and B
notes pro rata.  The pro rata payment to the class A is then
allocated sequentially to the class A subclasses.

A trigger event is in effect on any quarterly payment date after
the step-down date, if the total asset percentage is less than
100.5%.  Until this trigger event is cured, no principal payments
are made to the class B notes unless the senior notes have been
paid.  Instead, all principal payments are allocated to the senior
notes, effectively causing the payment priority to revert to
sequential.

As the transaction is at the total asset percentage threshold and
has reached its Oct. 2012 step-down date, it has switched to
paying principal pro rata to the class A and B notes.  As a result
of the pro rata principal allocation and the transaction's ability
to release at 101% total asset percentage, S&P expects that total
and senior asset percentages will remain relatively flat at their
current levels (approximately 101% and 108.95%, respectively),
which is consistent with the past few years.  This trust has
released excess funds since April 2009.

All classes of notes also benefit from a capitalized interest
fund, an amount that is the greater of 0.25% of the notes'
outstanding principal amount or 0.15% of the notes' principal
amount outstanding at issuance.  The capitalized interest fund is
available to, among other things, cover any periodic interest
shortfalls and principal payments owed at legal maturity if
amounts available in the collection fund are insufficient.

COLLATERAL OVERVIEW

The transaction mainly comprises Consolidation and Stafford loans
that are backed by at least 97% guaranty from the federal
government.  As of Sept. 30, 2014, approximately 97.25% of the
loans in the pool are FFELP consolidations loans.

The loans in the student loan portfolio that are in nonpaying
status (30-plus-days delinquent, deferment, forbearance, and in-
school or grace) currently account for approximately 15% of the
total pool balance.  As of Sept. 2014, 30-plus-day delinquent
loans, loans in deferment, and loans in forbearance were
approximately 5.8%, 1.7%, and 5%, respectively.  Recent historical
numbers are shown in the table.

                                  As of December 31
                        2013        2012      2011      2010
30+ days delinquent    5.88%       5.58%     4.31%     4.30%
Deferment              2.19%       3.25%     4.58%     4.47%
Forbearance            5.91%       6.79%     8.72%     9.56%

CLASS A-3, A-4, AND A-5 NOTE RATINGS

For the class A-3, A-4, and A-5 notes, S&P continues to apply its
criteria for treating the U.S. federal government in its role as
an insurer or guarantor, as well as the government agency loan-
level support it provides in structured finance transactions.

The 'AA+ (sf)' affirmations on these notes reflect S&P's view that
the current credit enhancement available in the transaction would
not be sufficient to absorb the 15% haircut to cash inflows
received from the U.S. federal government under FFELP in a 'AAA'
stress scenario as described in S&P's criteria.  They also reflect
S&P's assessment of the likelihood that principal will be paid pro
rata among the class A notes following a nonmonetary event of
default (EOD).  Generally, without any material mitigating
factors, S&P believes 120% senior parity would be sufficient to
support a 'AAA' rating.

CLASS A-2 AND B NOTE RATINGS

The 'CC (sf)' affirmation on the class A-2 notes reflects S&P's
view that it is unlikely this class will receive full and timely
principal at its legal maturity date of Jan. 25, 2016.  It is
S&P's belief that the remaining available funds to be used for
principal amortization of the class A-2 notes over the next year
will not be enough to redeem the class in full.

The 'CC (sf)' rating affirmation on the class B notes reflects
S&P's view that the probable nonpayment of the class A-2 note
principal at its legal maturity date raises the risk that the
class B notes could experience an interest shortfall concurrently.
According to the transaction's payment waterfall, if a senior
class of notes' outstanding principal amount is not paid in full
on its maturity date, the unpaid principal balance of those notes
would become due and payable.  Then, on subsequent distribution
dates, the transaction will make the necessary principal payments
to the senior class (in this case, class A-2) before making any
interest payments due to the class B notes.  The funds that would
otherwise be available to pay the class B note interest could be
allocated to pay principal to the class A-2 notes.

In addition, nonpayment of a senior note principal at its legal
maturity would constitute an EOD, which could result in the
acceleration of principal of all the notes outstanding.  Once the
notes are accelerated, the transaction's payment priority would
switch to the post-EOD waterfall, in which all payments are made
to all outstanding class A notes (in this case, class A-2, A-3, A-
4, and A-5) pro rata until the class A notes are paid in full,
before making any interest payments due to the class B notes.  In
other words, class B will be locked out of interest payment until
all outstanding class A notes are paid in full (causing an
interest shortfall on class B).

Accordingly, S&P is affirming its 'CC (sf)' rating on both the
class A-2 and B notes as it believes a default in the payment of
A-2 principal by legal final maturity and an interest shortfall on
the class B notes concurrently will be a virtual certainty.

S&P will continue to monitor the performance of the student loan
receivables backing the transaction relative to its ratings and
the trust's available credit enhancement, as well as the near-term
ratings implications for the class A-2 and B notes.  S&P will
update the market accordingly.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Access Group Inc.
Federal student loan asset-backed notes series 2004-2

    Class      CUSIP           Rating
    A-2        00432CBV2       CC (sf)
    A-3        00432CBW0       AA+ (sf)
    A-4        00432CBX8       AA+ (sf)
    A-5        00432CBY6       AA+ (sf)
    B          00432CBZ3       CC (sf)


ALESCO PREFERRED II: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Notes to Caa1
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Alesco Preferred Funding II, Limited:

$66,000,000 Class A-2 Second Priority Senior Secured Floating
Rate Notes due January 2034, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on
May 15, 2014 Upgraded to A1 (sf)

$64,300,000 Class B-1 Mezzanine Secured Floating Rate Notes due
January 2034 (current balance of $66,945,807, including deferred
interest), Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 15, 2014
Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

$40,000,000 Class B-2 Mezzanine Secured Fixed/Floating Rate
Notes due January 2034 (current balance of $41,645,914,
including deferred interest), Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously
on May 15, 2014 Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

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

$150,000,000 Class A-1 First Priority Senior Secured Floating
Rate Notes due January 2034 (current balance of $50,458,458),
Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on May 15, 2014 Upgraded to Aa1
(sf)

Alesco Preferred Funding II, Ltd., issued in December 2003, is a
collateralized debt obligation backed by a portfolio of bank trust
preferred securities (TruPS).

Ratings Rationale

The rating actions are primarily a result of the deleveraging of
the Class A-1 notes which led to an increase in the transaction's
over-collateralization ratios, and the improvement in the credit
quality of the underlying portfolio since the last rating action
in May 2014.

The Class A-1 notes have paid down by approximately 5.5% or $2.9
million, primarily using the diversion of excess interest
proceeds. Moody's also gave full par credit in its analysis to one
deferring asset that meet certain criteria, $10 million in par. As
a result, the Class A-1 notes' par coverage has improved to 418.5%
from 376.8% since May 2014, by Moody's calculations. Based on the
trustee's October 2014 report, the over-collateralization ratio of
the Class A notes was 170.5% (limit 130.0%), versus 162.1% in May
2015. The Class A-1 notes will continue to benefit from the
diversion of excess interest and the use of proceeds from
redemptions of any assets in the collateral pool.

The deal has also benefited from improvement in the credit quality
of the underlying portfolio. According to Moody's calculations,
the weighted average rating factor (WARF) improved to 783 from 933
in May 2014. Since May 2014, one previously deferring banks with a
total par of $7.5 million have resumed making interest payments on
their TruPS.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, and weighted average recovery
rate, are based on its methodology and could differ from the
trustee's reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the
underlying collateral pool has having a performing par of $211.1
million, defaulted/deferring par of $17 million, a weighted
average default probability of 8.79% (implying a WARF of 783), and
a weighted average recovery rate upon default of 10%. In addition
to the quantitative factors Moody's explicitly models, qualitative
factors are part of rating committee considerations. Moody's
considers the structural protections in the transaction, the risk
of an event of default, recent deal performance under current
market conditions, the legal environment and specific
documentation features. All information available to rating
committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, inputs 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.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating TruPS CDOs," published in June 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: TruPS CDOs performance could be
negatively affected by uncertainty about credit conditions in the
general economy. Moody's has a stable outlook on the US banking
sector.

2) Portfolio credit risk: Credit performance of the assets
collateralizing the transaction that is better than Moody's
current expectations could have a positive impact on the
transaction's performance. Conversely, asset credit performance
weaker than Moody's current expectations could have adverse
consequences on the transaction's performance.

3) Deleveraging: One source of uncertainty in this transaction is
whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal proceeds and
excess interest proceeds will continue and at what pace. Note
repayments that are faster than Moody's current expectations could
have a positive impact on the notes' ratings, beginning with the
notes with the highest payment priority.

4) Resumption of interest payments by deferring assets: A number
of banks have resumed making interest payments on their TruPS. The
timing and amount of deferral cures could have significant
positive impact on the transaction's over-collateralization ratios
and the ratings on the notes.

5) Exposure to non-publicly rated assets: The deal contains a
large number of securities whose default probability Moody's
assesses through credit scores derived using RiskCalc(TM) or
credit estimates. Because these are not public ratings, they are
subject to additional uncertainties.

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's applied a Monte Carlo simulation framework in Moody's
CDOROM(TM) v.2.13.1 to model the loss distribution for TruPS CDOs.
The simulated defaults and recoveries for each of the Monte Carlo
scenarios defined the reference pool's loss distribution. Moody's
then used the loss distribution as an input in its CDOEdge(TM)
cash flow model. CDOROM(TM) v. 2.13.1 is available on
www.moodys.com under Products and Solutions -- Analytical models,
upon receipt of a signed free license agreement.

The portfolio of this CDO contains mainly TruPS issued by small to
medium sized U.S. community banks that Moody's does not rate
publicly. To evaluate the credit quality of bank TruPS that do not
have public ratings, Moody's uses RiskCalc(TM), an econometric
model developed by Moody's Analytics, to derive credit scores.
Moody's evaluation of the credit risk of most of the bank obligors
in the pool relies on FDIC Q2-2014 financial data.

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 relative to the base case
modeling results, which may be different from the current public
ratings of the 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):

Assuming a two-notch upgrade to assets with below-investment grade
ratings or rating estimates (WARF of 512)

Class A-1: +1

Class A-2: +1

Class B-1: +2

Class B-2: +2

Assuming a two-notch downgrade to assets with below-investment
grade ratings or rating estimates (WARF of 1192)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: -1

Class B-1: -1

Class B-2: -1


ANTHRACITE CDO II: S&P Withdraws CCC+ Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its ratings on 40
classes from 16 cash flow (CF) collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) transactions, six classes from four CF collateralized debt
obligation (CDO) transactions backed by commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS), one class from one CF CDO transaction
predominantly backed by CLO tranches (CDO of CDOs), and one class
from one CF CDO retranche transaction.

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

   -- ACA CLO 2006-1 Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in Oct.
      2014

   -- Anthracite CDO II Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Apidos CDO I (CF CLO): optional redemption in Oct. 2014

   -- Ashford CDO II Ltd. (CF CDO of CDOs): senior most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Avenue CLO II Ltd. (CF CLO): senior most tranche paid down,
      other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Avery Point IV CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): class X notes(i) paid
      down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- CapitalSource Real Estate Loan Trust 2006-A (CF CDO of
      CMBS): senior most tranche paid down, other rated tranches
      still outstanding Chatham Light II CLO Ltd. (CF CLO):
      optional redemption in Oct. 2014

   -- Covenant Credit Partners CLO I Ltd. (CF CLO): class X
      notes(i) paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Crest 2002-IG Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): optional redemption in
      Oct. 2014

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

   -- Gannett Peak CLO I Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
      Oct. 2014

   -- Harch CLO II Ltd. (CF CLO): senior most tranche paid down,
      other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- KKR Financial CLO 2005-1 Ltd (CF CLO): senior most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- KVK CLO 2014-2 Ltd. (CF CLO): class X notes (i) paid down,
      other rated tranches still outstanding

   -- Lafayette CLO I Ltd. (CF CLO): last rated tranche paid down

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

   -- Loomis Sayles CLO I Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
      Oct. 2014

   -- Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. series 2005-RR6 (CF CDO of
      CMBS): senior most tranche paid down, other rated tranches
      still outstanding

   -- TICC CLO LLC (CF CLO): optional redemption in Oct. 2014

   -- TIERS Riverside Park CLO Pass Through Trust Series 2011-3
      (CF retranche): last rated tranche paid down

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

(i) 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 CLO's waterfall.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

ACA CLO 2006-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B                   NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
D                   NR                  BBB+ (sf)

Anthracite CDO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
D                   NR                  BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E                   NR                  CCC+ (sf)

Apidos CDO I
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B                   NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AA+ (sf)
D                   NR                  BBB+ (sf)

Ashford CDO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1LA               NR                  AA (sf)

Avenue CLO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2L                NR                  AAA (sf)

Avery Point IV CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

CapitalSource Real Estate Loan Trust 2006-A
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2A                NR                  A+ (sf)

Chatham Light II CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B                   NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)
D                   NR                  AA+ (sf)

Covenant Credit Partners CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

Crest 2002-IG Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
D                   NR                  CCC- (sf)

Del Mar CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-3                 NR                  AAA (sf)

Gannett Peak CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)
D-1                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)
D-2                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)

Harch CLO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)

KKR Financial CLO 2005-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)

KVK CLO 2014-2 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

Lafayette CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B                   NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)

Liberty CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1A                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-1B                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-1C                NR                  AAA (sf)

Loomis Sayles CLO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A                   NR                  AAA (sf)
B                   NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D                   NR                  BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
E                   NR                  CCC+ (sf)/Watch Pos

Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc. Series 2005-RR6
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-3FL               NR                  A (sf)
A-3FX               NR                  A (sf)

TICC CLO LLC
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A                   NR                  AAA (sf)

TIERS Riverside Park CLO Pass Through Trust Series 2011-3
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
Sr Cert             NR                  BB (sf)

WhiteHorse III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1L                NR                  AAA (sf)

NR--Not rated.


APIDOS CLO XIX: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating on $7.5MM Cl. F Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to seven classes of
notes issued by Apidos CLO XIX.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

$270,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

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

$53,250,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2026
(the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

$33,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

$29,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

$25,500,000 Class E Junior Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2026 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

$7,500,000 Class F Junior Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2026
(the "Class F Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

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

Ratings Rationale

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

Apidos XIX is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans
and unsecured loans. The Issuer's documents require the portfolio
to be at least 70% ramped as of the closing date.

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

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer has 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:

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2701

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.875%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2701 to 3106)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -1

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2701 to 3511)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -4

The V Score for this transaction is Medium/High. This V Score has
been assigned in a manner similar to the Medium/High V Score
assigned for the global cash flow CLO sector, as described in the
special report titled "V Scores and Parameter Sensitivities in the
Global Cash Flow CLO Sector," dated July 6, 2009 and available on
www.moodys.com.

Moody's V Score provides 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. The V Score applies to the entire
transaction, rather than individual tranches.


BEAR STEARNS 2006-PWR13: S&P Raises Rating on A-J Notes to BB+
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-M, A-J, and B commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-PWR13, a
U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In
addition, S&P lowered its rating on class F and affirmed its
ratings on six other classes 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.

S&P raised its ratings on classes A-M, A-J, and B to reflect its
expectation of the available credit enhancement for these classes,
which S&P believes is greater than its most recent estimate of
necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels.
The upgrades also reflect S&P's views regarding the current and
future performance of the transaction's collateral, available
liquidity support, and reduction in the trust balance.

S&P lowered its rating on class F to 'D (sf)' to reflect
accumulated interest shortfalls that S&P believes will remain
outstanding.  Class F has carried accumulated interest shortfalls
for two months.  As of the Oct. 14, 2014, trustee remittance
report, the monthly interest shortfalls totaled $316,676, and
primarily reflected:

   -- $129,872 in appraisal subordinate entitlement reduction
      (ASER) amounts;

   -- $28,641 in special servicing and workout fees; and

   -- $2,342 in interest not advanced from nonrecoverable
      determination.

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

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

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Oct. 14, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $2.2 billion, which is 75.7% of the pool balance
at issuance.  The pool currently includes 247 loans and one real
estate-owned asset (reflecting cross-collateralized and cross-
defaulted loans), down from 300 loans at issuance.  Nine of these
assets ($117.6 million, 5.3%) are currently with the special
servicer; 12 loans ($76.7 million, 3.5%) are defeased; and 98
($750.4 million, 34.1%) are on the master servicers' combined
watchlist.  The master servicers, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. and
Prudential Asset Resources Inc., reported financial information
for 97.7% of the nondefeased loans in the pool, of which a
majority was year-end 2013 data.

S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average debt service
coverage (DSC) of 1.26x and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 84.0%
using a Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate of
7.75%.  The DSC, LTV, and capitalization rate calculations exclude
the nine specially serviced assets, 12 defeased loans, and one
subordinate B hope note ($12.3 million, 0.6%).  The top 10
nondefeased loans have an aggregate outstanding pool trust balance
of $581.5 million (26.4%).  Using servicer-reported numbers, S&P
calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average DSC and LTV of
1.20x and 92.9%, respectively, for nine of the top 10 nondefeased
loans, which excludes the specially serviced loan.

To date, the transaction has experienced $103.5 million in
principal losses, or 3.6% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P
expects losses to reach approximately 5.4% of the original pool
trust balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date
and additional losses we expect upon the eventual resolution of
the nine specially serviced assets.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, San Francisco-Oakland-
Hayward, and Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell metropolitan
statistical areas (MSAs).  Standard & Poor's U.S. Public Finance
Group provides credit ratings on New Castle County, San Mateo
County, and Cobb County, which participate within those MSAs:

   -- New Castle County in the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington MSA:
      S&P considers New Castle County's (AAA/Stable general
      obligation debt rating) economy to be very strong, with
      projected per capita effective buying income at 111% of the
      U.S.  The total market value of all real estate within the
      county reached $61 billion for 2013.  The county's per
      capita real estate market value was $110,286 for 2013.  With
      a population of 0.6 million, the county participates in the
      Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington MSA in Pennsylvania, New
      Jersey, and Maryland, which S&P considers to be strong.
      Some of the loans secured by properties located in the New
      Castle County include the Brandywine Anchors, Brandywine
      Center Crescent Lower Level, and Brandywine Mixed Use loans.

   -- San Mateo County in the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward MSA:
      S&P considers San Mateo County's (AAA/Stable general
      obligation debt rating) economy to be very strong, with
      projected per capita effective buying income at 175% of the
      U.S.  The total market value of all real estate within the
      county reached $156 billion for 2014, up 5% from the prior
      year.  The county's per capita real estate market value was
      $211,638 for 2014.  With a population of 0.7 million, the
      county participates in the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward MSA
      in California, which S&P considers to be strong.  The
      county's unemployment rate for calendar-year 2013 was 5%.
      The largest loan secured by properties located in San Mateo
      County is the Alexandria Portfolio loan.

   -- Cobb County in the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell MSA: S&P
      considers Cobb County's (AAA/Stable general obligation debt
      rating) economy to be very strong, with projected per capita
      effective buying income at 114% of the U.S.  The total
      market value of all real estate within the county reached
      $76 billion for 2014, up 5% from the prior year.  The
      county's per capita real estate real estate market value was
      $106,562 for 2014.  With a population of 0.7 million, the
      county participates in the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell MSA
      in Georgia, which we consider to be strong.  The county's
      unemployment rate for calendar-year 2013 was 7%.  Some of
      the loans secured by properties located in Cobb County
      include the Paces West and Lakeside Marketplace loans.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Oct. 14, 2014, trustee remittance report, eight assets
($113.9 million, 5.2%) in the pool were with the special servicer,
Situs Asset Management (Situs).  Situs indicated that another
loan, the Raley's Office Building loan ($3.7 million, 0.1%),
secured by a 22,000-sq.-ft. office building in West Sacramento,
Calif., was transferred to the special servicer on Oct. 15, 2014,
subsequent to the Oct. 2014 trustee remittance report, because it
had a reported two months' delinquent payment status.  According
to Situs, the sole tenant at the property has vacated the
building.  Details of the two largest specially serviced assets,
one of which is a top 10 nondefeased loan, are:

   -- The First Industrial Portfolio loan ($47.5 million, 2.2%) is
      the sixth-largest nondefeased loan in the pool and has a
      total reported exposure of $47.8 million.  The loan is
      secured by 23 industrial properties totaling 960,971 sq. ft.
      in various cities in Georgia.  The loan, which has a late
      but less than one-month delinquent payment status, was
      transferred to the special servicer on June 18, 2014,
      because of imminent default.  The special servicer indicated
      that the property had cash flow issues stemming from low
      occupancy.  The reported DSC was 0.79x as of year-end 2013,
      and occupancy was 68.0% as of March 31, 2014.  S&P expects a
      minimal loss upon this loan's eventual resolution.  The
      Phillipsburg Commerce Center loan ($21.8 million, 1.0%) has
      a total reported exposure of $25.2 million.  The loan is
      secured by a 795,956-sq.-ft. industrial property in
      Phillipsburg, N.J.  The loan, which has a 90-plus days'
      delinquent payment status, was transferred to Situs on
      March 10, 2009, because of imminent default caused by the
      loss of several large tenants.  Situs indicated that a note
      sale is expected in early 2015.  Updated financial data was
      not available.  An appraisal reduction amount of $21.7
      million is in effect against this loan.  S&P expects a
      significant loss upon this loan's eventual resolution.

The seven remaining assets with the special servicer have
individual balances that account for less than 0.9% of the total
pool trust balance.  S&P estimated losses for the nine specially
serviced assets, arriving at a weighted-average loss severity of
46.5%.

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

RATINGS RAISED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-PWR13
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006 PWR13

              Rating
Class     To          From         Credit enhancement (%)
A-M       AA (sf)     A (sf)                        21.71
A-J       BB+ (sf)    BB- (sf)                      11.15
B         B+ (sf)     B (sf)                         8.18

RATING LOWERED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-PWR13
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-PWR13

              Rating
Class     To          From         Credit enhancement (%)
F         D (sf)      CCC- (sf)                      2.23

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-PWR13
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-PWR13

Class     Rating    Credit enhancement (%)
A-4       AAA (sf)                   34.92
A-1A      AAA (sf)                   34.92
C         B- (sf)                     6.86
D         B- (sf)                     5.04
E         CCC (sf)                    3.72
X-1       AAA (sf)                     N/A

N/A--Not applicable.


COMM 2006-C7: Fitch Affirms 'CCsf' Rating on Class A-J Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 16 classes of COMM Mortgage Trust
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-C7.

Key Rating Drivers

Fitch modeled losses of 11.7% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 17.7%, including $229.3
million (9.4% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date.  Fitch has designated 33 loans (24.9%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes six specially serviced assets (5.3%).

As of the Oct. 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 29% to $1.74 billion from
$2.45 billion at issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, six loans
(12.4% of the pool) are defeased.  Interest shortfalls are
currently affecting classes A-J through P.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the 700 South Flower
Plaza loan (7.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 32 story,
mixed-use (office/retail) property totaling 1.8 million square
feet (sf) consisting of 727,925 sf of office space, a 240,000 sf
Macy's Dept. store, a Sheraton Hotel (495 rooms) and 115k of
retail, and 2,000 parking spaces located in the Los Angeles, CA
CBD.  All parts of the property serve as collateral to the loan,
with the exception of Sheraton hotel.  Property performance
originally declined due to Bank of NY vacating their space in
March 2012.  Recently, Chicago Title Co. vacated at lease
expiration in Feb. 2014.  The largest three tenants are Macy's
(23% of net rentable area [NRA], rated 'BBB' by Fitch), lease
expiration Jan. 31, 2015; Lozano Enterprises (5.2%), lease
expiration May 31, 2019; and Farmers Insurance Co. (3.7%), lease
expiration Jan. 31, 2024.  The loan was previously assumed in
April 2013, and it has been reported the new Sponsor is investing
$160 million to renovate the shopping, hotel and office complex.
As of the Aug. 2014 rent roll, total property occupancy
(office/retail) declined to 64% from 69% at the last review, and
there is approximately 30% upcoming rollover in 2015 (23% of which
is Macy's).

The next largest contributor to expected losses is the Fiddler's
Green Center loan (3.5%), which is secured by two six-story Class
A office buildings totaling 410,799 sf located in the Southeast
submarket of Denver, CO.  The largest tenants are Charter
Communications (36%), lease expirations in June 2015, Jan. 2017,
October 2020; Fidelity Investments (24%), expiration March 2023;
Aetna Life Insurance Company (9%), expiration Dec. 2014.  As of
October 2014, the property is 89% occupied with average rent
$18.91 sf.  There is 10% of upcoming rollover in 2014 (of which 9%
represents Aetna).  The decline in performance is a result of
tenant turnover and lower base rent.  Per REIS as of third quarter
2014 (3Q'14), the Denver southeast office submarket vacancy is
19.9% with average asking rent $18.82 sf.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is the specially-
serviced Blue Bell loan (1.3%), which is secured by two (2) office
buildings that total 154,000 sf located 15 miles north of
Philadelphia, PA.  The loan was transferred to special servicing
in June 2010 for monetary default.  The property was foreclosed
upon in April 2011 and is currently real estate owned (REO).  One
of the properties was sold to an owner/user in Jan. 2014.  The
remaining property is currently 61% occupied and continues to be
marketed for lease.  Per the special servicer, high vacancies
continue to plague the market and capital improvements to the main
lobby and marketing office are scheduled to begin soon.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks on classes A-4 and A-1-A remain Stable due to
defeasance and continued paydown.  Class A-M is placed on Rating
Watch Negative due to the lack of updated information on leasing
activity associated with the largest loan in the pool.
Additionally, the transaction has become more concentrated and the
largest specially serviced asset remains REO since 2011 and is
being marketed for lease at this time.

Fitch affirms these classes and assigns or revises REs as
indicated:

   -- $189.7 million class A-J at 'CCsf', RE 35%.

Fitch affirms these classes as indicated:

   -- $982.1 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $249.8 million class A-1-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $52 million class B at 'Csf', RE 0%;
   -- $18.5 million class C at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class D at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class E at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class F at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class G at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class H at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class J at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 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 O at 'Dsf', RE 0%.

Fitch places this class on Rating Watch:

   -- $244.7 million class A-M rated 'Asf', Rating Watch Negative.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-AB have paid in full.  Fitch does not
rate the class P certificates.  Fitch previously withdrew the
rating on the interest-only class X certificates.


COMM 2014-CCRE20: Fitch to Rate Class F Certificates 'B-sf'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on Deutsche Bank
Securities, Inc.'s COMM 2014-CCRE20 Commercial Mortgage Trust
Pass-Through Certificates.

Fitch expects to rate the transaction and assign Rating Outlooks
as follows:

-- $57,053,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $99,016,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $79,067,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $275,000,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $317,679,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $891,379,000a class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $63,564,000b class A-M 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $57,652,000bc class B 'AA+sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $199,563,000b class PEZ 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $78,347,000b class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $135,999,000ac class X-B 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $60,608,000c class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $60,608,000ac class X-C 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $26,608,000c class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.
-- $11,826,000c class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

(a) Notional amount and interest-only.
(b) Class A-M, B and C certificates may be exchanged for class PEZ
certificates, and class PEZ certificates may be exchanged for
class A-M, B, and C certificates.
(c) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.

The expected ratings are based on information provided by the
issuer as of Oct. 15, 2014. Fitch does not expect to rate the
$26,608,000 interest-only class X-D, the $11,826,000 interest-only
class X-E, the $17,739,000 class G, the $17,739,000 interest-only
class X-F, the $38,434,627 class H or the $38,434,627 interest-
only class X-G certificates.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in
the trust, primary assets of which are 64 loans secured by 101
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
approximately $1.18 billion, as of the cutoff date. The loans were
contributed to the trust by Cantor Commercial Real Estate Lending,
L.P., German American Capital Corporation, UBS Real Estate
Securities, Inc., and Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 67% of the properties by
balance, cash flow analysis of 73.1%, and asset summary reviews on
73.1% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Fitch Leverage: This transaction has higher leverage than
other recent Fitch-rated fixed-rate deals. The pool's Fitch DSCR
of 1.19x matches the first-half 2014 average. However the pool's
Fitch LTV of 111.1% exceeds the first-half 2014 average of 105.6%.

High Hotel Concentration: Hotel properties comprise 27.9% of the
pool, which is greater than the 2013 and first-half 2014 averages
of 14.7% and 13.3%, respectively. Hotels have the highest
probability of default in Fitch's multiborrower model.

Limited Amortization: The pool is scheduled to amortize by 13.5%
of the initial pool balance prior to maturity. Eight loans
(32.1%), including four of the top 10 loans, are full-term
interest only, and 24 loans (23.15%) are partial interest only.
Fitch-rated transactions in the first quarter of 2014 had an
average full-term interest only percentage of 15.8% and a partial
interest only percentage of 37.6%. This transaction has a higher
amount of full-term interest only.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 14.8% below
the most recent net operating income (NOI; for properties for
which a recent NOI was provided, excluding properties that were
stabilizing during this period). Unanticipated further declines in
property-level NCF could result in higher defaults and loss
severities on defaulted loans, and could result in potential
rating actions on the certificates. Fitch evaluated the
sensitivity of the ratings assigned to COMM 2014-CCRE20
certificates and found that the transaction displays slightly
above 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 83 - 84.

The master servicer will be Wells Fargo Bank, N.A, rated 'CMS1-'
by Fitch. The special servicer will be Torchlight Loan Services,
LLC, rated 'CSS2-'.


COVENANT CREDIT II: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating on Class F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to seven classes of
notes issued by Covenant Credit Partners CLO II, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

$4,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2017
(the "Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

$315,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2026
(the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

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

$36,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

$28,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

$25,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2026 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

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

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

Ratings Rationale

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

CCP CLO II is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 92.5% of the portfolio must consist of
first lien senior secured loans and eligible investments and up to
7.5% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
unsecured loans. The portfolio is expected to be approximately 50%
ramped as of the closing date.

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

In addition to the Rated Notes, 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:

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2785

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.80%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2785 to 3203)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -1

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Class F Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2785 to 3621)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -3

The V Score for this transaction is Medium/High. This V Score has
been assigned in a manner similar to the Medium/High V Score
assigned for the global cash flow CLO sector, as described in the
special report titled "V Scores and Parameter Sensitivities in the
Global Cash Flow CLO Sector," dated July 6, 2009 and available on
www.moodys.com.

The score for the "Experience of, Arrangements Among and Oversight
of the Transaction Parties," a sub-category of the "Governance"
portion of the V Score, is Medium, which is higher than that of
the benchmark CLO, which is Low/Medium. The score of Medium
reflects the fact that this transaction is the Manager's second
cash-flow CLO rated by Moody's. This higher score for "Experience
of, Arrangements Among and Oversight of the Transaction Parties"
does not, however, cause this transaction's overall composite V
Score of Medium/High to differ from that of the CLO sector
benchmark.

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.


CSFB MORTGAGE 2002-CKS4: Moody's Cuts Cl. A-X Certs Rating to C
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on three
classes and downgraded the rating on one class in CSFB Mortgage
Securities Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2002-CKS4 as follows:

Cl. G, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2014 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. A-X, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2014 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on three P&I classes were affirmed because the ratings
are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO Class was downgraded due to interest
shortfalls hitting the IO class as well as the credit performance
(or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of its referenced
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 65.3% of
the current balance, compared to 64.1% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 7.9% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 8.1% at the last review.

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

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

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

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

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

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

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 and there were no performing conduit loans. 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 two, as compared to three 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 October 20, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97% to $32 million
from $1.23 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by three mortgage loans ranging in size from 3% to
60% of the pool.

Forty loans have been liquidated at a loss from the pool,
resulting in an aggregate realized loss of $76 million (for an
average loss severity of 29%). Three loans, constituting 100% of
the pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest
specially serviced loan is the Forum at Gateways loan ($19 million
-- 60% of the pool), which is secured by a 258,000 square foot
(SF) retail property located in Sterling Heights, Michigan. The
loan was transferred to special servicing in July 2010 and became
real estate owned (REO) in September 2011.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the Williamsburg
Crossing Loan ($12 million - 38% of the pool), which is secured by
a 150,000 SF retail property located in Williamsburg, Virginia.
The loan transferred to special servicing in March 2011 and has
been REO since July 2012. The property was 65% leased as of June
2014, the same as in December 2012.

Moody's estimates an aggregate $21 million loss for specially
serviced loans (65% expected loss on average).


CSMC TRUST 2014-TIKI: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating on Cl. F Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
CMBS securities, issued by CSMC Trust 2014-TIKI Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-TIKI.

  Cl. A, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

  Cl. B, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

  Cl. C, Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

  Cl. D, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

  Cl. E, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

  Cl. F, Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings are based on the collateral and the structure of the
transaction.

The CMBS securities are collateralized by a single loan backed by
a first lien commercial mortgage related to a fee simple interest
in a full-service resort hotel known as the Four Seasons Resort
Maui at Wailea. The property is located on an approximately 16.2
acre oceanfront site on Wailea Beach in Maui, Hawaii. The Property
is indirectly wholly owned by special purpose entity in turn
controlled and owned by MSD Portfolio, L.P.

The subject hotel contains 380 guestrooms and is the only 5
Diamond and 5-Star luxury resort on Maui. Amenities include three
restaurants, one lounge, a pool bar, 14,181 SF of indoor meeting
space, 20,744 SF of outdoor space, three swimming pools, a spa, a
fitness center and retail shops. Hotel improvements primarily
consist of two connected, rectangular, eight-story towers that are
oriented east-west on the site, toward the Pacific Ocean. Both the
North and South Towers contain guestrooms on levels two through
eight with the majority of the public spaces located on the lobby
and lower lobby levels of both towers. The Property is located
within the upscale master-planned resort community of Wailea on
Maui's southwest coast, offering guests unobstructed access to and
views of the Pacific Ocean and Wailea Beach. Wailea is
characterized by first-class and luxury beachfront resorts,
residential single-family and condominium housing, retail, first
class recreational facilities such as The Wailea Country Club with
three 18-hole championship courses and Wailea Tennis Club (both
approximately 0.25 miles north and available to the Property's
guests) and multiple beaches.

Moody's rating approach for securities backed by a single loan
compares the credit risk inherent in the underlying properties
with the credit protection offered by the structure. The
structure's credit enhancement is quantified by the maximum
deterioration in property value that the securities are able to
withstand under various stress scenarios without causing an
increase in the expected loss for various rating levels. In
assigning single-borrower ratings, Moody's also considers a range
of qualitative issues as well as the transaction's structural and
legal aspects.

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

Moody's Actual DSCR of 3.95X is much higher than other floating-
rate standalone-property loans that have been assigned an bottom-
dollar rating of B3, however, Moody's Stressed DSCR of 0.99X is
in-line with the bottom-dollar rating. Moody's also considers the
effects of additional subordinate debt outside of the Trust in its
analysis. Moody's Total Debt Stressed DSCR (inclusive of mezzanine
financing at a 9.25% constant) is only 0.66X.

Moody's Trust LTV Ratio of 109.4% is higher than other floating-
rate standalone securitizations that have previously been assigned
an underlying rating of B3. Moody's also considers subordinate
financing outside of the Trust when assigning ratings. The loan is
structured with $175 million of additional financing in the form
of mezzanine debt, raising Moody's Total LTV ratio to 164.1%.

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

Other methodologies and factors that may have been considered in
the process of rating this issuer can also be found on Moody's
website.

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.7. 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. These aggregated proceeds are then further
adjusted for any pooling benefits associated with loan level
diversity, other concentrations and correlations. Moody's analysis
also uses the CMBS IO calculator v 1.1 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.

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

The performance of the securities is subject to uncertainty. The
certificates' performance is sensitive to the performance of the
underlying Property, which in turn depends on economic and credit
conditions that may change. The servicing decisions of the master
and special servicer with respect to the collateral and oversight
of the transaction will also affect the performance of the
securities.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: If Moody's value of the
collateral used in determining the initial rating were decreased
by 5%, 14%, or 22%, the model-indicated rating for the currently
rated Aaa classes would be Aa2, A2, or Baa2, 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.


CSMC TRUST 2014-WIN2: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class B-4 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to CSMC
Trust 2014-WIN2's $362.717 million mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2014-WIN2.

The certificate issuance is a residential mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by first-lien, fixed-rate
residential mortgage loans secured by one- to four-family
residential properties to prime borrowers.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

   -- The high-quality collateral included in the pool.
   -- The associated transaction participants considering their
      roles.
   -- The credit enhancement provided and the associated
      structural deal mechanics.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

CSMC Trust 2014-WIN2

  Class         Ratings                   Amount
                                        (mil. $)
  A-1           AAA (sf)                  25.000
  A-2           AAA (sf)                 316.731
  A-3           AAA (sf)                 292.631
  A-4           AAA (sf)                  24.100
  A-5           AAA (sf)                 227.220(i)
  A-6           AAA (sf)                  75.740
  A-7           AAA (sf)               13.771(i)
  A-8           AAA (sf)                  18.261
  A-9           AAA (sf)                  24.452(i)
  A-10          AAA (sf)                  51.288(i)
  A-X-1         AAA (sf)                Notional
  A-X-2         AAA (sf)                Notional(i)
  A-X-3         AAA (sf)                Notional
  B-1           AA (sf)                    6.128
  B-2           A (sf)                     6.129
  B-3           BBB (sf)                   4.272
  B-4           BB (sf)                    4.457
  B-5           NR                         8.730
  A-IO-S        NR                      Notional

(i) Initial exchangeable certificates that may be exchanged for
     various combinations of the class A-2, A-3, A-4, A-6, and A-8
     exchangeable certificates.
NR--Not rated.


FIGUEROA CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. B Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Figueroa CLO 2014-1 Ltd./Figueroa CLO 2014-1 LLC's
$263.50 million floating-rate notes.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Nov. 12,
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 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.

   -- 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 0.2321%-12.7531%.

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

   -- The transaction's interest diversion test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of up to 50% of the
      excess interest proceeds that are available prior to paying
      subordinate collateral manager fees, deferred collateral
      manager fees, uncapped administrative expenses, subordinated
      hedge termination payments, collateral manager incentive
      fees, and subordinated note payments to principal proceeds
      for the purchase of additional collateral assets during the
      reinvestment period.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

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

  Class                 Rating                   Amount
                                                (mil. $)
  A                     AAA (sf)                 256.00
  B                     NR                        40.00
  C (deferrable)        NR                        26.00
  D (deferrable)        NR                        23.50
  E (deferrable)        NR                        24.50
  F (deferrable)        B (sf)                     7.50
  Subordinated notes    NR                        35.52


FREMF 2012-K705: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. X2 Certificate
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed six classes in FREMF 2012-K705
Mortgage Trust, Multifamily Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2012-K705 as follows:

Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 10, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 10, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Jan 10, 2014 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Jan 10, 2014 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. X1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 10, 2014 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. X2, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Jan 10, 2014 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the four investment grade P&I classes, Classes A-1,
A-2, B and C, were affirmed because the transaction's key metrics,
including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV) ratio, Moody's stressed debt
service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the transaction's Herfindahl
Index (Herf), are within acceptable ranges.

The ratings on the two IO classes, X1 and X2, were affirmed based
on the credit performance (or the weighted average rating factor
or WARF) of the referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.5% of the
current balance compared to 2.4% at last review. Moody's base
expected loss plus realized losses is 2.4% of the original pooled
balance, the same as at last review.

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

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

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

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

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in
September 2000.

On October 9, 2014, Moody's issued a "Request for Comment" asking
for market feedback on proposed changes to the methodology it uses
to rate conduit and fusion CMBS transactions. If Moody's adopts
the new methodology as proposed, the changes could affect the
ratings of FREMF 2012-K705.

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 structured credit assessments with the conduit
model credit enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's
incorporates negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the
structured credit assessment level) for loans with similar
structured 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 37 compared to 38 at last review.

Deal Performance

As of the October 27, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 1.0% to $1.198
billion from $1.222 billion at securitization. The certificates
are collateralized by 70 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 10% of the pool. There is one defeased loan, making up
1.1% of the pool, which is secured by U.S. government securities.

There are no loans on the master servicer's watchlist. The
watchlist includes loans which meet certain portfolio review
guidelines established as part of the CRE Finance Council (CREFC)
monthly reporting package. As part of Moody's ongoing monitoring
of a transaction, Moody's reviews the watchlist to assess which
loans have material issues that could impact performance.

No loans have been liquidated from the pool and there are no loans
currently in special servicing.

Moody's received partial year 2014 operating results for 53% of
the pool, 92% for full year 2013 operating results and 94% for
full year 2012 operating results. Moody's weighted average conduit
LTV is 96% compared to 99% at last review. Moody's actual and
stressed DSCRs are 1.56X and 1.01X, respectively, compared to
1.54X and 0.96X at last review.

Moody's conduit component excludes loans with structured credit
assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and specially serviced and
troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted
average haircut of 10% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 8.7%. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on
Moody's NCF and a 9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan
balance.

The top three performing conduit loans represent approximately 18%
of the pool balance. The largest conduit loan is the Enclave Loan
($119.8 million -- 10.0% of the pool), which is secured by a
1,119-unit multi-family property in Silver Spring, Maryland. The
collateral consists of three, 19-story apartment buildings and one
club house. As of March 2014, the property was 96% leased, the
same as at last review. The loan is full term interest-only and
the sponsor is Berkshire Property Advisors. While occupancy
remained unchanged since last review, financial performance
increased. Consequently, Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 88% and
0.98X, respectively, compared to 104% and 0.83X, at last review.

The second largest conduit loan is the Crosswind at Rolling Road
Loan ($56.6 million -- 4.7% of the pool), which is secured by an
803-unit multi-family property in Baltimore, Maryland. The
collateral consists of 80 two-story and three-story townhouse-
style buildings. As of March 2014, the property was 92% leased
compared to only 89% leased at last review. Property financial
performance increased in concert with higher occupancy. The loan
is partial term interest-only and the sponsor is the Harbor Group.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 92% and 1.03X, compared to 95%
and 0.99X at last review.

The third largest conduit loan is the Ramblewood Village Loan
($38.9 million -- 3.3% of the pool), which is secured by a 504-
unit multi-family property in Mount Laurel, New Jersey within the
Philadelphia MSA. The collateral consists of 31, two-story
apartment buildings. As of December 2013, the property was 96%
leased, the same as at last review. The sponsor is Fairfield
Residential. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 86% and 1.07X,
respectively, compared to 90% and 1.02X at last review.


GE COMMERCIAL 2004-C1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class N Notes to D
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on the class
N commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from GE Commercial
Mortgage Corp.'s series 2004-C1, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS) transaction, to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC (sf)'.

"We lowered our rating to 'D (sf)' on the class N certificates
following principal losses detailed in the Nov. 10, 2014, trustee
remittance report.  The principal losses reported totaled $2.5
million, and primarily resulted from the liquidation via a note
sale of the specially serviced Muncie/Eaton Manufactured Home
Community loan.  According to the report, the loan liquidated at a
loss severity of 61.6% of its beginning scheduled trust balance at
the time of liquidation of $4.0 million.  Consequently, class N
experienced a 5.3% loss of its $4.8 million original principal
balance, while the subordinate class O lost 100% of its $2.2
million beginning principal balance.  We previously lowered our
rating on class O to 'D (sf)'," S&P said.

RATINGS LIST

GE Commercial Mortgage Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C1

                                 Rating         Rating
Class         Identifier         To             From
N             36828QED4          D (sf)         CCC (sf)


GOLDENTREE LOAN V: 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 from GoldenTree Loan Opportunities V Ltd., a
U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by GoldenTree
Asset Management L.P.  In addition, S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)'
rating on the class A notes from the same transaction.

GoldenTree Loan Opportunities V Ltd. ended its reinvestment period
in Oct. 2013.  According to the transaction documents, GoldenTree
Loan Opportunities V Ltd. is permitted to reinvest proceeds
received from prepaid, credit improved, and credit risk
obligations.  According to the Oct. 3, 2014, trustee report, which
S&P used in its analysis, the transaction holds approximately
$27.24 million in proceeds eligible for reinvestment.

Since S&P's Nov. 2011 upgrades, the class A notes have paid down
about $156.43 million and are at approximately 69.10% of their
original notional balance.

As a result of the paydowns, the overcollateralization (O/C)
available to support the notes has significantly improved.  The
trustee reported the following O/C ratios in the Oct. 3, 2014,
monthly report compared with the Nov. 2011 O/C ratios:

   -- The class B O/C ratio was 138.60%, up from 131.20%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio was 125.80%, up from 121.90%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio was 118.10%, up from 116.20%.
   -- The class E O/C ratio was 110.60%, up from 110.40%.

The upgrades also reflect the improved credit quality of the
underlying collateral since S&P's Nov. 2011 rating actions.

According to the Oct. 3, 2014, trustee report, the amount of
collateral rated 'CCC+' and below held in the transaction's asset
portfolio has declined to $10.61 million from $68.53 million in
Nov. 2011, when S&P upgraded the ratings.  However, S&P notes that
the transaction holds about $13.65 million in defaulted assets
currently compared with no such assets at the time of S&P's Nov.
2011 rating actions.

The 'AAA (sf)' affirmation on the class A notes reflects
sufficient credit support available at the current rating level.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

GoldenTree Loan Opportunities V Ltd.

                    Cash flow
       Previous     implied     Cash flow      Final
Class  rating       rating      cushion(i)     rating
A      AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    16.04%         AAA (sf)
B      AA (sf)      AAA (sf)    2.21%          AAA (sf)
C      A (sf)       AA+ (sf)    0.41%          AA+ (sf)
D      BBB (sf)     A   (sf)    1.29%          A (sf)
E      BB (sf)      BB+ (sf)    6.64%          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.

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

RATINGS RAISED

GoldenTree Loan Opportunities V Ltd.

                   Rating       Rating
Class              To           From
B                  AAA (sf)     AA (sf)
C                  AA+ (sf)     A (sf)
D                  A (sf)       BBB (sf)
E                  BB+ (sf)     BB (sf)

RATINGS AFFIRMED

GoldenTree Loan Opportunities V Ltd.

Class              Rating
A                  AAA (sf)


ISCHUS CDO I: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class A-1 Notes to Caa3
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
notes issued by Ischus CDO I Ltd.

  $280,000,000 Class A-1 First Priority Senior Secured Floating
  Rate Notes Due 2040 (current outstanding balance of
  $16,721,287.22), Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 14,
  2010 Downgraded to Ca (sf).

Ischus CDO I Ltd., issued in December 2004, is a collateralized
debt obligation issuance backed primarily by a portfolio of CMBS
and RMBS originated in 2004.

Ratings Rationale

The rating action is due primarily to the deleveraging of the
Class A-1 notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios. The Class A notes have paid down by
approximately 37.5%, or $10.0 million since June 2014. Based on
Moody's calculation, the par coverage on the Class A-1 notes has
increased to approximately 117.9%. In addition to interest and
principal proceeds from performing assets, the Class A notes have
been redeemed with proceeds originating from the assets treated as
defaulted by the trustee. Accordingly, Moody's have assumed the
deal will continue to benefit from those proceeds.

An Event of Default under Section 5.01(i) of the Indenture was
declared by the Trustee on July 31, 2009 due to the ratio of the
Net Outstanding Portfolio Collateral Balance to the Aggregate
Outstanding Amount of the Class A notes being less than 100%. As
provided in Article V of the Indenture during the occurrence and
continuance of an Event of Default, certain parties to the
transaction may be entitled to direct the Trustee to take
particular actions with respect to the collateral and the notes,
including the sale and liquidation of the assets. The severity of
losses of certain tranches may be different depending on the
timing and outcome of a liquidation.

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 residential real
estate property markets. 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 limited recoveries, and therefore,
realization of any recoveries exceeding Moody's expectation in the
future would positively impact the notes' ratings.

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 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:

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: 0

Class C-1: 0

Class C-2: 0

Caa ratings notched down by two notches:

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: 0

Class C-1: 0

Class C-2: 0


JAMESTOWN CLO V: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating on $8MM Cl. F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service assigned the following provisional
ratings to notes to be issued by Jamestown CLO V Ltd.:

$256,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2027
(the "Class A Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

$28,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

$24,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2027
(the "Class B-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

$19,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

$21,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

$20,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

$8,000,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2027 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

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 are referred to herein, collectively, as the "Rated
Notes."

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

Ratings Rationale

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

Jamestown V is a managed cash-flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first-lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, cash and eligible investments,
and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans
and unsecured loans. The underlying portfolio is expected to be
approximately 75% ramped as of the closing date.

3i Debt Management U.S. LLC (the "Manager") will direct the
selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral on behalf of
the Issuer, and it may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's four year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
collateral principal collections constituting unscheduled
principal payments or the sale proceeds of credit risk obligations
in additional collateral debt obligations, subject to certain
conditions.

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

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

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

Par amount: $400,000,000

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2475

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.85%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2475 to 2846)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: 0

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Class F Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2475 to 3218)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -4

Class B-2 Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -3

The V Score for this transaction is Medium/High. Moody's assigned
this V Score in a manner similar to the Medium/High V Score
assigned for the global cash-flow CLO sector, as described in the
special report titled "V Scores and Parameter Sensitivities in the
Global Cash Flow CLO Sector," dated July 6, 2009, available on
www.moodys.com.

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.


JP MORGAN 2014-CBM: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-CBM's
$415.0 million commercial mortgage-backed securities series
2014-CBM.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by one two-year, floating-rate
commercial mortgage loan totaling $415.0 million, with three one-
year extension options, secured by cross-collateralized and cross-
defaulted mortgages on the borrowers' fee and leasehold interests
in 40 limited-service hotels and by a first-lien mortgage
encumbering all of the operating lessee's rights in the
properties.

Since S&P assigned its preliminary ratings to the transaction on
Oct. 23, 2014, the special servicer has been changed to Strategic
Asset Services LLC from KeyBank N.A.  The ratings reflect S&P's
view of the collateral's historic and projected performance, the
sponsor's and manager's experience, the trustee-provided
liquidity, the loan's terms, and the transaction's structure.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

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

Class         Rating(i)               Amount ($)
A             AAA (sf)               133,600,000
X-CP          B- (sf)            415,000,000(ii)
X-EXT         B- (sf)            415,000,000(ii)
B             AA- (sf)                48,700,000
C             A- (sf)                 36,200,000
D             BBB- (sf)               52,100,000
E             BB- (sf)                75,400,000
F             B- (sf)                 69,000,000

(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 notional amount of the class X-CP and
     X-EXT certificates will be reduced by the aggregate amount of
     principal distributions and realized losses allocated to the
     class A, B, C, D, E, and F certificates.


LB-UBS COMMERCIAL 2008-C1: S&P Cuts Rating on 3 Notes to D
----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on five
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from LB-
UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2008-C1, a U.S. commercial mortgage-
backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In addition, S&P affirmed
its 'AAA (sf)' ratings on four other classes 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 the
current and future performance of the remaining assets in the
pool, the transaction's structure, and the liquidity available to
the trust.

S&P lowered its ratings on classes A-M and A-J to reflect credit
support erosion that S&P anticipates will occur upon the eventual
resolution of five ($152.8 million, 17.3% of the total pool) of
the six ($172.7 million, 19.5%) assets with the special servicer.
The downgrade on class A-J also considers that the bond is
currently experiencing interest shortfalls; S&P may further lower
its rating to 'D (sf)' if class A-J continues to experience
interest shortfalls for an extended period.

The downgrades of classes B, C, and D to 'D (sf)' reflect
accumulated interest shortfalls that we expect to remain
outstanding.  Classes B and C have carried accumulated interest
shortfalls for the past month, while class D has carried
accumulated interest shortfalls for the past 11 consecutive
months.  As of the Oct. 20, 2014, trustee remittance report, the
net monthly interest shortfalls totaled $497,223, and primarily
reflected:

   -- $391,538 in appraisal subordination entitlement reduction
      (ASER) amounts;

   -- $80,116 in interest deferred on modified loans; and

   -- $35,233 in special servicing and workout fees.

The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates also reflect S&P's expectation that the available
credit enhancement for these classes will be within S&P's estimate
of the necessary credit enhancement required for the current
ratings.

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

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Oct. 20, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $883.6 million, which is 87.7% of the pool
balance at issuance.  The pool currently includes 48 loans and
four real estate-owned (REO) assets (reflecting cross-
collateralized and cross-defaulted loans), down from 57 loans at
issuance; six are with the special servicer, two ($5.6 million,
0.6%)are defeased, and nine ($129.3 million, 14.6%) were reported
on the master servicer's watchlist.  The master servicer, Wells
Fargo Bank N.A., reported financial information for 94.8% of the
nondefeased loans in the pool, of which 89.3% was year-end 2013
data, and the remainder was partial-year 2013 or year-end 2012
data.

S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average debt service
coverage (DSC)of 1.30x and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 81.8%
using a Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate of
7.67%.  The DSC, LTV, and capitalization rate calculations exclude
five ($152.8 million, 17.3%) of the six specially serviced assets,
two defeased loans, and two subordinate hope notes ($4.1 million,
0.5%).  The top 10 assets have a $585.8 million (66.3%) aggregate
balance.  Using servicer-reported numbers, S&P calculated a
Standard &Poor's weighted average DSC and LTV ratio of 1.35x and
74.7%, respectively, for seven of the top 10 assets.  The
remaining three assets are specially serviced and discussed.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the Chicago-Naperville-Elgin and Washington-Arlington-
Alexandria metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs).  Standard &
Poor's U.S. Public Finance Group provides credit ratings on Lake
County and Montgomery County, which participate within those MSAs.

   -- Lake County in the Chicago-Naperville-Elgin MSA: S&P
      considers Lake County's (A-/Stable, general obligation debt
      rating) economy to be adequate, with projected per capita
      effective buying income at 81% of the U.S.  The total market
      value of all real estate within the county reached $34
      billion for 2013.  The county's per capita real estate
      market value was $68,290 for 2013.  With a population of 0.5
      million, the county participates in the Chicago-Naperville-
      Elgin MSA in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, which S&P
      considers to be strong.  The largest loan secured by
      properties located in Lake County is the Westfield Southlake
      loan.

   -- Montgomery County in the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria
      MSA: S&P considers Montgomery County's (AAA/Stable, general
      obligation debt rating) economy to be very strong, with
      projected per capita effective buying income at 182% of the
      U.S.  The total market value of all real estate within the
      county reached $174 billion for 2013, down 2% from the prior
      year.  The county's per capita real estate market value was
      $172,089 for 2013.  With a population of 1 million, the
      county participates in the Washington-Arlington-Alexandria
      MSA in District of Columbia, Virginia and West Virginia,
      which S&P considers to be strong.  The county's unemployment
      rate for calendar year 2013 was 5%.  The largest loan
      secured by properties located in Montgomery County is the
      Chevy Chase Center loan.

To date, the transaction has experienced $45.7 million in
principal losses, or 4.5% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P
expects losses to reach approximately 13.1% of the original pool
trust balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date
and additional losses we expect upon the eventual resolution of
five of the six specially serviced assets.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Oct. 20, 2014, trustee remittance report, six assets in
the pool were with the special servicer, CWCapital Asset
Management LLC (CWCapital).  Details of the three largest
specially serviced assets, all of which are top 10 assets, are:

The Computer Sciences Building REO asset ($68.4 million, 7.8%),
which has $69.6 million reported total exposure, is a 325,000-sq.-
ft. office in Lanham, Md.  The loan was transferred to CWCapital
on Jan. 17, 2014, because the sole tenant had vacated the property
upon the lease's Dec. 31, 2013, expiration.  The property remains
vacant and foreclosure occured on June 24, 2014.  A $46.4 million
appraisal reduction amount (ARA) is in effect against the asset
and S&P expects a significant loss upon its eventual resolution.

The Sutton Plaza REO asset ($26.6 million, 3.0%), which has $28.8
million reported total exposure, is a 167,164-sq.-ft. retail
property in Mt. Olive Township, N.J.  The loan was initially
transferred to CWCapital on Jan. 20, 2011, due to monetary
default.  A modification involving a $5.6 million hope note was
completed on Feb. 22, 2013, however the borrower did not comply
with post-closing requirements and the loan defaulted again.
Foreclosure occurred on May 1, 2014, and the property became REO
on June 17, 2014.  A $1.8 million ARA is in effect against this
asset and S&P expects a moderate loss upon its eventual
resolution.

The Memphis Retail Portfolio REO asset ($24.5 million, 2.8%),
which has $27.0 million reported total exposure, currently
consists of three retail properties totaling 134,779 sq. ft. in
Collierville, Tenn. (two properties) and Memphis, Tenn. (one
property).  The loan, originally secured by five properties, was
transferred to CWCapital on April 14, 2011, due to monetary
default.  Foreclosure occurred on Aug. 31, 2012, and two of the
five properties were sold on April 1, 2013.  A $12.7 million ARA
is in effect against this asset and S&P expects a moderate loss
upon its eventual resolution.

S&P estimated losses for five of the six specially serviced
assets, deriving a 53.2% weighted average loss severity.

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

RATINGS LIST

LB-UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2008-C1
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2008-C1

                               Rating           Rating
Class        Identifier        To               From
A-AB         50180LAB6         AAA (sf)         AAA (sf)
A-2          50180LAC4         AAA (sf)         AAA (sf)
A-2FL        50180LAF7         AAA (sf)         AAA (sf)
A-M          50180LAD2         BB (sf)          BBB- (sf)
A-J          50180LAE0         CCC- (sf)        B (sf)
B            50180LAP5         D (sf)           CCC+ (sf)
C            50180LAR1         D (sf)           CCC (sf)
D            50180LAT7         D (sf)           CCC- (sf)
X            50180LAM2         AAA (sf)         AAA (sf)


LEASE INVESTMENT: Moody's Cuts Rating on 2 Note Classes to Caa3
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of the Class
A-1 and Class A-2 Notes issued by Lease Investment Flight Trust.

The complete rating action is as follows:

Issuer: Lease Investment Flight Trust (LIFT), Series 2001-1

  Class A-1, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2011
  Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

  Class A-2, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 11, 2011
  Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The downgrade reflects the continued increase in loss percentage
expectation for the Class A-1 and A-2 Notes, measured as a
percentage of the outstanding note balance, and Moody's
expectation about the pace of future note amortization. Using the
most recent appraisal values (assuming 10% per annum depreciation
since the April 2014 appraisal) plus the reserve account as a
rough proxy for expected Class A Note principal paydown,
noteholder recovery would be in the mid-70% area. Currently, there
are eighteen aircraft and six engines in the deal.

The portfolio consists of eighteen aircraft with a weighted
average age of about 16 years, with a 36% concentration in Boeing
767s, 31% in B737s, 22% in Airbus 320s, and 11% in B747s, weighted
by aircraft value. In addition to the aircraft, there are six
engines in the portfolio. 94% of the aircraft in the portfolio
were manufactured between 1997 and 2000, and about 7% of the
portfolio are currently on the ground.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach To Pooled Aircraft-Backed Securitization" published in
March 1999.

Primary sources of uncertainty include the global economic
environment, aircraft lease income generating ability, aircraft
maintenance and other expenses to the trust, and valuation for the
aircraft backing the transaction.

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

Changes to lease rates or aircraft values that differ from
historical and current trends.


MERRILL LYNCH 2006-CANADA: Moody's Affirms Caa2 Rating on L Debt
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on five classes
and affirmed the ratings on eight classes in Merrill Lynch
Financial Assets Inc., Commercial Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2006-Canada 20 as follows:

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed
Aa1 (sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed A1
(sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. E, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed
Baa3 (sf)

Cl. F, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. XC, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Dec 5, 2013 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes, B, C, D, E and F, were upgraded
based primarily on an increase in credit support resulting from
loan paydowns and amortization as well as an increase in
defeasance. The deal has paid down 4.5% and defeasance has
increased to 12% from 5.6% since Moody's last review.

The ratings on the P&I classes, A-2 and A-3, were affirmed because
the transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value
(LTV) ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR)
and the transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within
acceptable ranges.

The ratings on the P&I classes, G, H, J, K and L, were affirmed
because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

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

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 1.8% of the
current balance, compared to 2.3% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.1% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 1.5% at the last review.

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

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

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

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

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

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

On October 9, 2014, Moody's issued a "Request for Comment" asking
for market feedback on proposed changes to the methodology it uses
to rate conduit and fusion CMBS transactions. If Moody's adopts
the new methodology as proposed, the changes could affect the
ratings of MLFA 2006- Canada 20.

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 structured credit assessments with the conduit
model credit enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's
incorporates negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the
structured credit assessment level) for loans with similar
structured 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 18, compared to 19 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 November 12, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 37.5% to $371.7
million from $595.3 million at securitization. The certificates
are collateralized by 45 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 10% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting
58% of the pool. One loan, constituting 7% of the pool, has an
investment-grade structured credit assessment. Six loans,
constituting 12% of the pool, have defeased and are secured by
Canadian Government securities.

Six loans, constituting 13.5% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

No loans have been liquidated from the pool and the trust has
experienced no principal losses to date. There are also no
specially serviced loans. Moody's has assumed a 50% default
probability for two poorly performing loans, constituting 1.5% of
the pool, and has estimated a small loss for these loans.

Moody's received full or partial year 2012 operating results for
95% of the pool, and full or partial year 2013 operating results
for 82%. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 80%, compared to
76% at Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans,
and specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow
(NCF) reflects a weighted average haircut of 14.5% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.1%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.49X and 1.30X,
respectively, compared to 1.62X and 1.40X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The loan with a structured credit assessment is the Westview
Village Manufactured Home Community Loan ($25.4 million -- 6.8% of
the pool), which is secured by a 1,060 pad manufactured housing
community located in Edmonton, Alberta. The property was 99%
occupied as of December 2013, unchanged since last review.
Property performance has been stable in recent years and the loan
benefits from amortization. In addition, the loan is full recourse
to the borrower. Moody's structured credit assessment and stressed
DSCR are aaa (sca.pd) and 2.07X, respectively, compared to aa3
(sca.pd) and 2.06X at the last review.

The top three conduit loans represent 25.7% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the Station Tower Loan ($36.2 million -- 9.7%
of the pool), which is secured by a 218,000 square foot (SF)
office building located in Surrey, a suburb of Vancouver, British
Columbia. As of December 2013, the property was 92% leased,
compared to 93% at last review. The largest tenant, South Coast
British Columbia Transportation Authority, occupies over 81,000 SF
and lease expires in July 2019. The property is accessible with
the Gateway SkyTrain, Vancouver's regional transit system attached
the property. Property performance has been stable in recent years
and the loan benefits from amortization. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 65% and 1.41X, respectively, compared to 57% and 1.60X at
the last review.

The second largest loan is the Heritage Square Loan ($34.2 million
-- 9.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 316,000 SF office
building located in the Acadia suburb of Calgary, Alberta. As of
December 2013, the property was 98% occupied. This loan is full
recourse to the borrower. Although property performance has been
stable, the largest tenant, AMEC, lease expires in August of 2015.
The borrower is currently in negotiations with the tenant on a
lease extension, with a reduction in its leased space. Moody's
value accounted for the potential increase in vacancy. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 60% and 1.77X, respectively, compared to 52%
and 2.01X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Conundrum Commerce City Portfolio
Loan ($25.1 million -- 6.7% of the pool), which is secured by a
portfolio of five industrial buildings and one office property in
Ottawa, Ontario. The collateral consists of approximately 380,000
SF. This loan is full recourse to the borrower. As of April 2014,
the portfolio was 90% leased compared to 93% at year-end 2012.
Property performance has increased since Moody's last review.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 81% and 1.21X, respectively,
compared to 91% and 1.06X at the last review.


ML-CFC COMMERCIAL 2007-7: Moody's Hikes Cl. X Certs Rating to B3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of ten,
upgraded the ratings of one class of ML-CFC Commercial Mortgage
Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-
7 as follows:

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-4FL, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Affirmed
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. AM, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Downgraded to
B2 (sf)

Cl. AM-FL, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Downgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. AJ, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Downgraded to
Ca (sf)

Cl. AJ-FL, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Ca (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Nov 14, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on P&I Classes A-SB, A-4, A-4FL, A-1A, AM and AM-FL
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 P&I Classes AJ, AJ-FL, B and C were affirmed
because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The upgrade of ML-CFC Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-7 Class X (CUSIP:
55313KBC4) to B3(sf) from Caa1(sf) is due to correction of a prior
error. In the rating action announced on November 14, 2013,
Moody's mistakenly deemed the bond to have experienced an interest
shortfall when in fact no interest was due. The error has now been
corrected, and the rating action reflects that change.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 11.8% of
the current balance, compared to 12.9% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 17.9% of
the original pooled balance, compared to 18.9% at the last review.

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

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

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

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

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating U.S. CMBS Conduit Transactions" published in
September 2000.

On October 9, 2014, Moody's issued a "Request for Comment" asking
for market feedback on proposed changes to the methodology it uses
to rate conduit and fusion CMBS transactions. If Moody's adopts
the new methodology as proposed, the changes could affect the
ratings of ML-CFC 2007-7.

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 structured credit assessments with the conduit
model credit enhancement for an overall model result. Moody's
incorporates negative pooling (adding credit enhancement at the
structured credit assessment level) for loans with similar
structured 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 105, compared to 108 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the October 15, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 30% to $2.0 billion
from $2.8 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 266 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 5% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 21%
of the pool. Six loans, constituting 3% of the pool, have defeased
and are secured by US government securities.

Fifty-six loans, constituting 20% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews
the watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that
could affect performance.

Fifty loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $266 million (for an average loss
severity of 57%). Thirty-four loans, constituting 14% of the pool,
are currently in special servicing.

The specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of property
types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $115.4 million loss for the
specially serviced loans (42% expected loss on average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for forty-six
poorly performing loans, constituting 19% of the pool, and has
estimated an aggregate loss of $80.2 million (a 21% expected loss
based on a 57% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2012 operating results for 95% of the
pool, and full year 2013 operating results for 95%. Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 102%, compared to 107% at Moody's
last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 11% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.6%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.39X and 1.10X,
respectively, compared to 1.33X and 1.02X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 10.2% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the Commons at Calabasas Loan ($101.5
million -- 5.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 171,000 square
foot (SF) grocery anchored retail center located in Calabasas,
California. As of March 2014 the property was 99% leased, compared
to 97% at Moody's prior review. Tenants include Ralphs Grocery Co.
(31% of the net rentable area (NRA); lease expiration November
2023) and Edwards Theaters (20% of the NRA; lease expiration
December 2023). The loan is interest-only throughout the entire
term and matures in June 2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
116% and 0.77X, respectively, compared to 123% and 0.73X at last
review.

The second largest loan is the 10 Milk Street Loan ($58.0 million
-- 3.0% of the pool), which is secured by an 230,000 SF office
building in Boston's Financial District. The property was 78%
leased as of July 2014, compared to 65% at last review. The loan
was previously in special servicing in 2010 and was modified
(including an interest rate reduction). Moody's identified this
loan as a troubled loan with a high default probability.

The third largest loan is the Millbridge Apartments Loan ($40.0
million -- 2.0% of the pool), which is secured by an 848-unit
garden style apartment complex located in Clemonton, New Jersey.
The property was 89% leased as of December 2013. Property
performance has improved slightly for this interest-only loan.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 109% and 0.84X, respectively,
compared to 117% and 0.79X at last review.


MORGAN STANLEY 2004-IQ7: S&P Affirms BB+ Rating on Class H Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on four
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2004-IQ7, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In addition, S&P
affirmed its ratings on seven other 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, 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.

S&P raised its ratings on classes C, D, E, and F to reflect its
expectation of the available credit enhancement for these classes,
which S&P believes is greater than its most recent estimates of
necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels.
The upgrades also follow S&P's views regarding the current and
future performance of the transaction's collateral, available
liquidity support, and the trust balance's significant reduction.

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 views regarding the
current and future performance of the transaction's collateral,
the transaction structure, and liquidity support available to the
classes.

While available credit enhancement levels suggest further positive
rating movement on classes C, D, E, and F and positive rating
movement on classes G, H, J, K, L, M, and N, S&P's analysis also
considered the susceptibility to reduced liquidity support from
the two specially serviced loans ($2.9 million, 5.4%) and the loan
($729,879, 1.4%) on the master servicers' combined watchlist.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Oct. 15, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $53.8 million, which is 6.2% of the pool balance
at issuance.  The pool currently includes 21 loans, down from 128
loans at issuance.  Two loans are with the special servicer, two
loans ($11.7 million, 21.8%) are defeased, 11 nondefeased
performing loans ($8.9 million, 16.6%) are residential cooperative
(co-op) loans, and one loan is on the master servicers' combined
watchlist.  The master servicers, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. and NCB
FSB, reported financial information for 95.8% of the nondefeased
loans in the pool, of which 91.0% was partial- or year-end 2013
data and the remainder was partial-year 2014 data.

S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average debt service
coverage (DSC)of 1.44x and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 60.1%
using a Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate of
7.90%.  The DSC, LTV, and capitalization rate calculations exclude
the two specially serviced loans, two defeased loans, and 11
nondefeased performing co-op loans.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the Omaha-Council Bluffs and New York-Newark-Jersey City
metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). Standard & Poor's U.S.
Public Finance group provides credit ratings on Douglas County and
New York City, which participate within these MSAs.

   -- Douglas County in the Omaha-Council Bluffs MSA: S&P
      considers Douglas County's ('AAA/Stable', general obligation
      debt rating) economy to be strong, with projected per capita
      effective buying income at 98% of the U.S.  The total market
      value of all real estate within the county reached $37
      billion for 2014, up 1% from the prior year.  The county's
      per capita real estate market value was $69,464 for 2014.
      With a population of 0.5 million, the county participates in
      the Omaha-Council Bluffs MSA in Nebraska, which S&P
      considers to be strong.  The county's unemployment rate for
      calendar year 2013 was 5%.  The largest loan secured by
      properties located in Douglas County is the Linden Place
      Office Building loan.

   -- New York City in the New York-Newark-Jersey City MSA: S&P
      considers New York City's ('AA/Stable', general obligation
      debt rating) economy to be strong, with projected per capita
      effective buying income at 106% of the U.S.  The total
      market value of all real estate within the city reached $929
      billion for 2015, up 11% from the prior year.  The city's
      per capita real estate market value was $111,609 for 2015.
      With a population of 8.3 million, the city participates in
      the New York-Newark-Jersey City MSA (comprising New York,
      New Jersey, and Pennsylvania), which S&P considers to be
      strong.  The city's unemployment rate for calendar year 2013
      was 9%.  Some of the loans secured by properties located in
      New York City include the 320 Riverside Apartments Corp.,
      111-117 West 96th Street Owners Inc., and Belvedere Houses
      Inc. loans.

To date, the transaction has experienced $1.9 million in principal
losses, or 0.2% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P expects
losses to reach approximately 0.3% of the original pool trust
balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date and
additional losses S&P expects upon the eventual resolution of the
two specially serviced loans.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Oct. 15, 2014, trustee remittance report, two loans in
the pool were with the special servicer, NCB FSB.

The Tudor Oaks Owners Corp. loan ($1.7 million, 3.2%), the sixth-
largest nondefeased loan in the pool, is the largest specially
serviced loan.  The loan has a reported total exposure of $3.2
million and is secured by a 105-unit co-op multifamily apartment
complex in Middle Island, N.Y.  The loan, which has a reported 90-
plus-days delinquent payment status, was transferred to the
special servicer on Aug. 6, 2007, and the borrower filed for
bankruptcy on May 18, 2011.  NCB FSB stated that the property was
sold in an auction.  However, the shareholders appealed the
confirmation of sale and a hearing has been scheduled for later
this month.  NCB FSB deemed this loan nonrecoverable, and S&P
expects a minimal loss (less than 25%) upon its eventual
resolution.

The Parklane Townhouses Cooperative Inc. loan ($1.2 million, 2.2%)
is the smallest specially serviced loan.  The loan is secured by
an 89-unit co-op multifamily apartment complex in Inkster, Mich.
and has a total reported exposure of $1.4 million.  The loan,
which has a nonperforming matured balloon payment status, was
transferred to the special servicer on Aug. 22, 2013, because of
imminent default.  The loan matured on April 1, 2014.  NCB FSB
stated that it is pursuing various work-out strategies, including
modifying the loan, selling the notes, and foreclosing the
property.  NCB FSB deemed this loan nonrecoverable, and S&P
expects a moderate loss (26%-59%) upon its eventual resolution.

RATINGS LIST

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2004-IQ7
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-IQ7

                               Rating           Rating
Class        Identifier        To               From
C            61745MZC0         AA (sf)          A (sf)
D            61745MZD8         A+ (sf)          A- (sf)
E            61745MZE6         A- (sf)          BBB+ (sf)
F            61745MZF3         BBB+ (sf)        BBB (sf)
G            61745MZG1         BBB- (sf)        BBB- (sf)
H            61745MZH9         BB+ (sf)         BB+ (sf)
J            61745MZJ5         BB (sf)          BB (sf)
K            61745MZK2         BB- (sf)         BB- (sf)
L            61745MZL0         B+ (sf)          B+ (sf)
M            61745MZM8         CCC+ (sf)        CCC+ (sf)
N            61745MZN6         CCC (sf)         CCC (sf)


NORTHWOODS CAPITAL XIV: S&P Gives Prelim BB Rating on Cl. E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Northwoods Capital XIV Ltd./Northwoods Capital XIV
LLC's $462.50 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 Nov. 11,
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 subordinated notes.

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (excluding 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 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 0.2316%-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.

   -- The transaction's interest reinvestment test, a failure of
      which will lead to the reclassification of up to 50.00% of
      available excess interest proceeds (before paying uncapped
      administrative expenses and fees, collateral manager
      subordinated and incentive management fees, and subordinated
      note payments) as principal proceeds to purchase additional
      collateral assets during the reinvestment period.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Northwoods Capital XIV Ltd./Northwoods Capital XIV LLC

Class                Rating                  Amount
                                           (mil. $)
A                    AAA (sf)                316.00
B                    AA (sf)                  58.00
C (deferrable)       A (sf)                   41.00
D (deferrable)       BBB (sf)                 23.50
E (deferrable)       BB (sf)                  24.00
Subordinated notes   NR                       50.00

NR--Not rated.


OHA LOAN 2014-1: Fitch to Rate $50.5MM Class E Notes 'BBsf'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects to assign these ratings and Rating Outlooks
to OHA Loan Funding 2014-1, LLC:

   -- $507,000,000 class A-1 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $25,000,000 class A-2 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $52,000,000 class B-1 notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $29,800,000 class B-2 notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $34,000,000 class C notes 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $38,500,000 class D notes 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $50,500,000 class E notes 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not expect to rate the subordinated notes.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

OHA Loan Funding 2014-1, LLC (the issuer) comprise an arbitrage
cash flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be
managed by Oak Hill Advisors, L.P. (Oak Hill).  Net proceeds from
the issuance of the secured and subordinated notes will be used to
purchase a portfolio of approximately $854.50 million of primarily
senior-secured leveraged loans.  The CLO will have a four-year
reinvestment period and a two-year noncall period.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Sufficient Credit Enhancement: Credit enhancement (CE) available
to the notes, in addition to excess spread, is sufficient to
protect against portfolio default and recovery rate projections in
the respective rating stress scenarios.  The level of CE for each
class of notes is in line with the average CE for notes in the
same respective rating categories in recent CLO issuances.

'B/B-' Asset Quality: The average credit quality of the indicative
portfolio is approximately 'B/B-', which is comparable to recent
CLOs.  Issuers rated in the 'B' rating category denote highly
speculative credit quality; however, in Fitch's opinion, each
class of rated notes is projected to perform with sufficient
robustness against default rates commensurate with its applicable
rating stress.

Strong Recovery Expectations: The indicative portfolio consists of
93% first lien senior-secured loans.  Approximately 86.8% of the
indicative portfolio has either strong recovery prospects or a
Fitch-assigned Recovery Rating of 'RR2' or higher, resulting in a
base case recovery assumption of 71.3%.  In determining the notes'
ratings, Fitch stressed the indicative portfolio by assuming a
higher portfolio concentration of assets with lower recovery
prospects and further reduced recovery assumptions for higher
rating stress assumptions.  For example, the analysis of the class
A-1 notes assumed a 35.3% recovery rate in Fitch's 'AAAsf'
scenario.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch evaluated the structure's sensitivity to the potential
variability of key model assumptions, including decreases in
recovery rates and increases in default rates or correlation.
Fitch expects the class A-1 and A-2 notes to remain investment
grade, while classes B-1, B-2, C, D, and E are generally expected
to remain within two rating categories, even under the most
extreme sensitivity scenarios.  Results under these sensitivity
scenarios ranged between 'A+sf' and 'AAAsf' for the class A-1 and
A-2 notes, between 'BB+sf' and 'AAsf' for the class B-1 and B-2
notes, between 'BB+sf' and 'A+sf' for the class C notes, between
'B+sf' and 'BBB+sf' for the class D notes, and between a level
below 'CCCsf' and 'BBsf' for the class E notes.  The results of
these scenarios remain consistent with the assigned ratings.

The expected ratings are based on information provided to Fitch as
of Nov. 11, 2014.  Sources of information used to assess these
ratings were provided by the arranger, Guggenheim Securities LLC,
and the public domain.  Key Rating Drivers and Rating
Sensitivities are further described in the accompanying presale
report.


PANTHER TRAILS: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Series 2005 Bonds
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said it revised its outlook to
positive from stable and affirmed its 'BB' long-term rating on
Panther Trails Community Development District, Fla.'s series 2005
bonds.

"The revision isbased on an improving value-to-lien ratio due to a
slight pickup in the local housing market," said Standard & Poor's
credit analyst Ruth Ducret.

Factors supporting the underlying credit quality of the district
and positive outlook include what S&P considers its:

   -- Improved, albeit still low, overall value-to-lien ratio of
      7:1, compared with 5:1 the previous year;

   -- Third consecutive decrease in the delinquency rate in as
      many years, bringing the fiscal 2013 delinquency rate to 4%;
      and Fully developed residential assessment base.

Factors hampering the credit strength of the bonds, in S&P's view,
include:

   -- A more-than 50% decrease in the district's total assessed
      value since 2008;

   -- A recent history of 54% of individual assessable lots with a
      value-to-lien ratio less than or equal to 5:1, when
      including the district's series 2011 bonds;

   -- A relatively high proportion of bank- or builder-owned
      properties, with about 45 such lots accounting for nearly
      11.5% of assessments.

Non-ad valorem special assessments imposed and levied on specific
land parcels within the community development district and
collected by Hillsborough County secure the 2005 bonds.

The district, located in Hillsborough County, is fully developed
with more than 377 single-family units.


PREFERRED TERM IX: S&P Raises Rating on 2 Note Classes From BB+
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2, and A-3 notes from Preferred Term Securities IX Ltd., a
U.S. cash flow trust-preferred collateralized debt obligation
(CDO) transaction, and removed them from CreditWatch with positive
implications.

The upgrades reflect improved coverage ratios due to paydowns on
the senior tranche and a decrease in the amount of bank trust-
preferred securities eferring payments.  The paydowns have
generally accelerated over the past year because more underlying
trust-preferred securities have been redeemed.

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

The transaction is current on its interest payments on all of the
tranches and is continuing to divert excess interest proceeds to
pay down the rated notes in order to cover losses to the
underlying collateral from defaults and deferrals of the
underlying bank trust-preferred securities.

Since S&P's Jan. 2014 rating actions, the aggregate balances of
defaulted and deferred obligations decreased by $7.50 million to
$93.58 million, primarily because some of the bank trust-preferred
securities in the collateral portfolio that were deferring
payments cured their deferrals to become current.

The underlying collateral's principal amortization combined with
the diversion of excess interest proceeds has resulted in $15.44
million in paydowns to the class A-1 notes (to 8.55% of its
original balance) since Jan.  Consequently, the transaction's
senior principal coverage test has improved by 56.00% to 238.37%,
compared with 182.37% reported in the Dec. 2013 trustee report,
which S&P used for its Jan. 2014 rating actions.

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

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.

CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND KEY METRICS COMPARISON

Preferred Term Securities IX Ltd.

                             Notional balance (mil. $)
Class                    December 2013(i)   October 2014(ii)
A-1                             36.39              20.94
A-2                             42.00              42.00
A-3                             33.00              33.00
B-1                             86.00              86.00
B-2                             16.25              16.25
B-3                             66.25              66.25

Coverage test (%)
Senior                         182.37             238.37

(i) Based on the trustee report used for our January 2014 rating
     actions.
(ii) Following the October 2014 distribution date.

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

Preferred Term Securities IX Ltd.

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


SDART 2013-5: Fitch Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------
As part of its ongoing surveillance, Fitch Ratings has taken the
following rating actions on the Santander Drive Auto Receivables
Trust 2013-5 transaction:

   -- Class A-2-A affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- Class A-2-B affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- Class A-3 affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- Class B 'AAsf' placed on Rating Watch Positive;
   -- Class C affirmed at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- Class D affirmed at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- Class E affirmed at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The rating actions are based on available credit enhancement and
loss performance.  The collateral pool continues to perform within
Fitch's expectations.  Under the credit enhancement structure, the
securities are able to withstand stress scenarios consistent with
the current rating and make full payments to investors in
accordance with the terms of the documents.

Fitch's review is based on the initial base case cumulative net
loss (CNL) estimate of 16.60%.  However, based on current loss
trends, Fitch projects CNL for this pool to be in the 14%-15%
range.

Placing class B on Rating Watch Positive reflects Fitch's
expectation that this note will likely be eligible for a single-
category upgrade given additional amortization.  Further, Fitch
will continue to monitor the transaction and may take additional
rating actions within this timeframe.

The ratings reflect the quality of Santander Consumer USA, Inc.'s
retail auto loan originations, the adequacy of its servicing
capabilities, and the sound financial and legal structure of the
transaction.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Unanticipated increases in the frequency of defaults and loss
severity could produce loss levels higher than the current
projected base case loss proxy and impact available loss coverage
and multiples levels for the transaction.  Lower loss coverage
could impact ratings and Rating Outlooks, depending on the extent
of the decline in coverage.

In this review of the transaction, class A, B and C demonstrate
limited sensitivity to various loss-timing scenarios.  Classes D
and E show muted growth in their respective rating loss multiples
under a back-ended loss timing scenario.

To date, the transaction has exhibited strong performance with
losses within Fitch's initial expectations, with rising loss
coverage and multiple levels consistent with the current ratings.
A material deterioration in performance would have to occur within
the asset pool to have potential negative impact on the
outstanding ratings.


STRUCTURED ASSET 2005-8: Moody's Ups Cl. M1 Debt Rating to Ca
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of seven
tranches from four transactions issued by various issuers, backed
by Subprime mortgage loans.

Issuer: Fremont Home Loan Trust 2005-2

  Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Dec 19, 2013
  Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)

  Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 26, 2013
  Affirmed C (sf)

Issuer: New Century Asset-Backed Floating Rate Certificates Series
1998-NC6

  M-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 15, 2012 Downgraded
  to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Fremont Home Loan Trust 1999-3

  Cl. A-1, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 18, 2012
  Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

  Financial Guarantor: Ambac Assurance Corporation (Segregated
  Account - Unrated)

  Cl. A-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 18, 2012
  Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

  Financial Guarantor: Ambac Assurance Corporation (Segregated
  Account - Unrated)

Issuer: Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust 2005-8

  Cl. A4, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 2, 2013
  Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

  Cl. M1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jan 18, 2013
  Affirmed C (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 principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 5.8% in October 2014 from 7.2%
in October 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.


UCAT 2005-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on Cl. B-1-B Notes to Caa3
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's has downgraded the rating of the Class B-1-B Notes issued
by UCAT 2005-1. The complete rating action is as follows:

Issuer: UCAT 2005-1

Cl. B-1-B, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 13, 2011
Confirmed at Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The assets of the trust consist of about $98 million of Lease
Investment Flight Trust (LIFT) Class A-1 and A-2 Notes (the
underlying LIFT Notes). The downgrade reflects Moody's loss
percentage expectation on the underlying LIFT Notes, measured as a
percentage of the outstanding the underlying LIFT Notes' combined
balance. The underlying LIFT Notes' expected recovery is in the
mid-70% area using the most recent appraisal value (assuming 10%
per annum depreciation since the April 2014 appraisal) and the
reserve account as a rough proxy for principal paydown.

Interest and principal payments on the underlying LIFT Notes are
allocated to pay UCAT's Class A-1 Interest, Class A-1 principal,
Class B-1-A principal and Class B-1-B principal, sequentially.
Interest payments on the underlying LIFT Notes are greater than
interest payments due to the UCAT Notes, and the resulting excess
spread is applied as principal to pay down the UCAT Notes.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach To Pooled Aircraft-Backed Securitization" published in
March 1999.

Primary sources of uncertainty include the global economic
environment, aircraft lease income generating ability, aircraft
maintenance and other expenses to the trust, and valuation for the
aircraft backing the underlying LIFT transaction.

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

Changes to lease rates or aircraft values that differ from
historical and current trends for the aircraft in underlying LIFT
transaction.


* Fitch Cuts Rating on Various Distressed U.S. RMBS Bonds to 'Dsf'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings, on Nov. 11, 2014, downgraded 144 distressed bonds
in 75 U.S. RMBS transactions to 'Dsf'.  The downgrades indicate
that the bonds have incurred a principal write-down.  Of the bonds
downgraded to 'Dsf', 137 classes were previously rated 'Csf', and
seven classes were rated 'CCsf'.  All ratings below 'CCCsf'
indicate a default is likely.

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 144 classes affected by these downgrades, 101 are Prime, 26
are Alt-A, and 10 are Subprime.  The remaining transaction types
are other sectors.  Approximately, 63% of the bonds have an RE of
50%-100%, which indicates that the bonds will recover 50%-100% of
the current outstanding balance, while 16% 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.

The spreadsheet also details Fitch's assignment of REs to the
transactions.  The Recovery Estimate scale is based upon the
expected relative recovery characteristics of an obligation.  For
structured finance, REs are designed to estimate recoveries on a
forward-looking basis.


                             *********

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, Psyche A. Castillon, 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 202-362-8552.


                  *** End of Transmission ***