TCR_Public/141228.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, December 28, 2014, Vol. 18, No. 359

                            Headlines

1776 CLO I: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class E Notes
5180 CLO: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
AMERICA COMMERCIAL 2008-1: Moody's Cuts Cl. G Certs Rating to C
AMMC CLO 15: Moody's Assigns 'Ba3' Rating on $29MM Class E Notes
AMORTIZING RESIDENTIAL: Moody's Cuts A-SIO Debt Rating to Caa1

APHEX CAPITAL 2007-4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. A-1 Notes
AVENUE CLO III: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Class B2L Notes
BABSON CLO 2011-I: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB+'
BAMLL COMMERCIAL 2014-FL1: S&P Assigns 'BB-' Rating on 3 Notes
BAMLL COMMERCIAL 2014-INLD: S&P Rates Prelim. B- Rating on 3 Notes

BEAR STEARNS 2006-TOP 24: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on A-J Certs
BEAR STEARNS 2007-PWR16: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on 9 Notes
BOMBARDIER CAPITAL 1999-A: S&P Puts CC Certs Rating on Watch Neg.
BOWMAN PARK: S&P Assigns Preliminary B Rating on Class F Notes
CANNINGTON FUNDING: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes

CARLYLE GLOBAL 2011-1: S&P Affirms 'B' Rating on Class F Notes
CD MORTGAGE 2007-CD5: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Certificates
CENT CLO 21: S&P Affirms 'B' Rating on Class E Notes
CENTRAL PARK: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class F Notes
CG-CCRE COMMERCIAL 2014-FL2: S&P Assigns 'BB-' Rating on 4 Notes

CMLS ISSUER 2014-1: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Notes
COMM 2014-UBS6: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class F Notes
CPS AUTO 2014-D: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating on $8.7MM Cl. E Notes
CREDIT SUISSE 2004-C5: S&P Cuts Rating on 2 Note Classes to 'D'
CSFB MORTGAGE 2005-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Note Classes

CSMC SERIES 2009-RR1: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Cl. A-3C Certs
CUTWATER 2014-II: Moody's Rates $22.8-Mil. Class D Notes '(P)Ba3'
CWABS 2005-IM1: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. A-4M Debt to Ca
DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE 2007-RS4: Moody's Cuts A-X Certs Rating to Ca
DLJ COMMERCIAL 2000-CF1: S&P Withdraws Dsf Rating on Cl. B-5 Notes

DRYDEN 36: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
DUTCH HILL II: Fitch Lowers Rating on Class B Notes to 'Dsf'
ELM CLO 2014-1: S&P Rates Prelim. 'BB-' Rating on Class E Notes
EMBLEM FINANCE 2: S&P Withdraws 'BB' Rating on Series 5 Notes
FAIRFIELD STREET 2004-1: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on 2 Secs.

FIGUEROA CLO 2014-1: Moody's Rates $22.5MM Class E Notes 'Ba3'
FIGUEROA CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns 'B' Rating on Class F Notes
FOUR CENT 12: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
FRANKLIN CLO V: S&P Lowers Rating on Class E Notes to CCC+
FREMF MORTGAGE 2011-K12: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on X-2 Certs

G-FORCE 2005-RR: Fitch Raises Rating on Class B Notes to 'BBsf'
G-FORCE CDO 2006-1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 3 Note Classes
GALLERIA CDO V: Moody's Hikes Cl. A-1 Sr. Notes Rating to Caa3
GCA2014 HOLDINGS: S&P Assigns Prelim. B Rating on Class D Notes
GOLD KEY RESORTS 2014-A: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class C Notes

GREENWICH CAPITAL 2007-GG11: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on B Certs
GREYWOLF CLO IV: S&P Assigns 'B' Rating on Class E Notes
GS MORTGAGE 2007-GG10: Moody's Lowers Rating on Cl. B Certs to C
HARBOR SERIES 2006-2: Moody's Affirms 'Caa3' Rating on 4 Notes
HEMPSTEAD CLO: Fitch Affirms 'BBsf' Rating on Class D Notes

HESPERIA REDEVELOPMENT: S&P Raises Rating on 2005A TABs From BB+
HIGHBRIDGE LOAN 5-2015: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on E Notes
HILLMARK FUNDING: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class D Notes
HSI ASSET 2006-OPT2: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. M-2 Debt to B2
ICONS LTD: S&P Raises Ratings on 3 Note Classes to 'BB+'

JAMESTOWN CLO V: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating on $8MM Cl. F Notes
JP MORGAN 2001-CIBC1: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on 5 Notes
JP MORGAN 2005-LDP4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Class D Certs
JP MORGAN 2006-A4: Moody's Cuts Rating on Cl. 4-A-4 Debt to Caa2
JP MORGAN 2006-CIBC15: Moody's Cuts Rating on Cl. A-J Certs to C

JP MORGAN 2007-CIBC20: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 4 Certificates
JP MORGAN 2007-LDP12: Fitch Lowers Rating on Class C Notes to CC
JP MORGAN 2010-C1: Fitch Cuts Rating on Class F Certs to 'Bsf'
JP MORGAN 2014-1: Fitch Expects to Rate Class B-4 Certs 'BBsf'
JP MORGAN 2014-FL6: S&P Assigns 'B-' Rating on 4 Note Classes

JP MORGAN 2014-IVR6: Fitch Rates Class B-4 Certificates 'BBsf'
KKR CLO 10: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
LB MULTIFAMILY 1991-4: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on A-1 Debt
LIBERTY CLO: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on $52MM Class C Notes
LOUISIANA HOUSING: S&P Raises Rating on 2009B Bonds From BB

MADISON PARK XV: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes
MCAP CMBS 2014-1: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Notes
ML-CFC 2007-9: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on 4 Note Classes
MORGAN STANLEY 2004-TOP15: S&P Cuts Rating on Class J Notes to B-
MORGAN STANLEY 2005-IQ9: S&P Affirms CCC Rating on Class J Notes

MORGAN STANLEY 2005-TOP17: S&P Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to D
MORGAN STANLEY 2008-TOP29: Fitch Cuts Rating on Cl. F Debt to CCC
MOUNTAIN VIEW III: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class E Notes
NEUBERGER BERMAN XVIII: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class D Notes
NEW RESIDENTIAL 2014-3: S&P Assigns Prelim. B Rating on B-5 Notes

NORTHWOODS CAPITAL XIV: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class E Notes
OCEAN TRAILS V: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
OHA LOAN 2014-1: Fitch Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
OMI TRUST 2000-B: S&P Lowers Rating on Class A-1 Notes to D
PACIFIC BEACON: S&P Raises Rating on 2006A Revenue Bonds to 'BB+'

PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2001-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Notes to Ca
RESOURCE CAPITAL: DBRS Confirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
SALOMON BROTHERS 1999-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X Secs.
SEAWALL 2007-2: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on Class B Notes
TICP CLO III: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating on $8.75MM Cl. F Notes

WACHOVIA BANK 2006-C25: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on Cl. D Certs
WACHOVIA BANK 2007-C32: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 9 Certs
WASATCH CLO: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on $29MM Cl. C Sr. Notes
WESTBROOK CLO: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on $14MM Cl. E Notes
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2013-C18: Fitch Affirms BB Rating on Cl. E Certs

YORK CLO-1: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating on $23 Class E Notes

* Moody's Takes Action on $1.35 Billion of Subprime RMBS
* Moody's Takes Action on $273MM of Alt-A RMBS Issued 2003-2004
* Moody's Takes Action on $51.2MM of Alt-A RMBS Issued 2003-2004
* Moody's Raises Ratings on $403 Million of Subprime RMBS
* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 67 Classes From 27 CDO Deals


                             *********

1776 CLO I: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B, C, and D notes and affirmed its ratings on the class A1, A2,
and E notes from 1776 CLO I Ltd.  At the same time, S&P removed
its ratings on the class B, C, D, and E notes from CreditWatch,
where S&P had placed them with positive implications on Nov. 17,
2014.  1776 CLO I Ltd. is a collateralized loan obligation (CLO)
transaction that closed in April 2006 and comprises broadly
syndicated loans and corporate bonds.

The transaction exited its reinvestment period in February 2013
and has since paid more than $175 million, pro rata, to the class
A1 and A2 notes, leaving 49.39% of their original par value
remaining.  The Dec. 1, 2014, trustee report, which S&P referenced
for the rating actions, indicated these overcollateralization
(O/C) increases from the Nov. 1, 2013, trustee report used in
S&P's December 2013 rating actions:

   -- The class A/B O/C ratio increased to 157.65% from 144.10% in
      November 2013.

   -- The class B O/C ratio increased to 139.27% from 130.75% in
      November 2013.

   -- The class C O/C ratio increased to 120.76% from 116.55% in
      November 2013.

   -- The class D O/C ratio increased to 113.74% from 110.95% in
      November 2013.

The transaction currently holds $45.48 million, or 14.39% of the
aggregate collateral obligations, in assets with a maturity date
after the notes' stated maturity date.  S&P's analysis included an
additional set of cash flows incorporating market value haircuts
to these long-dated obligations to evaluate the sensitivity of the
tranches to liquidation risk arising from these long-dated
securities.  Given this additional set of cash flows, S&P only
raised its rating on class D to 'BBB (sf)' although its initial
cash flow runs indicated a higher rating.

S&P affirmed its rating on the class E notes based on the
application of its top obligor test, a supplemental test
introduced as part of S&P's 2009 criteria update to address
concentration risk that might be present within a portfolio.
Currently over 30% of the aggregate collateral balance is
concentrated in 10 obligors.

The affirmations reflect S&P's belief that the credit support
available to the class A1, A2, and E notes remains commensurate
with their current rating levels.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

1776 CLO I Ltd.

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)   rating
A1     AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    28.20%       AAA (sf)
A2     AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    28.20%       AAA (sf)
B      AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)    11.78%       AAA (sf)
C      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)    9.45%        AA+ (sf)
D      BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB+ (sf)   6.09%        BBB (sf)
E      B+ (sf)/Watch Pos    BB+ (sf)     1.59%        B+ (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 scenarios in
which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the current
collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each tranche's
weighted average recovery rate.

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

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


                  Recovery   Correlation Correlation
       Cash flow  decrease   increase    decrease
       implied    implied    implied     implied     Final
Class  rating     rating     rating      rating      rating
A1     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A2     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
C      AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
D      BBB+ (sf)  BBB+ (sf)  BBB+ (sf)   A- (sf)     BBB (sf)
E      BB+ (sf)   BB- (sf)   BB+ (sf)    BB+ (sf)    B+ (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
A1     AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A2     AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B      AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
C      AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AA- (sf)      AA+ (sf)
D      BBB+ (sf)    BBB+ (sf)     BB- (sf)      BBB (sf)
E      BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)      CC (sf)       B+ (sf)

RATING AND CREDITWATCH ACTIONS

1776 CLO I Ltd.

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

RATINGS AFFIRMED

1776 CLO I Ltd.

Class                      Rating
A1                         AAA (sf)
A2                         AAA (sf)


5180 CLO: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
--------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-2, B, C, and combination notes and affirmed its ratings on the
class A-1 and D notes from 5180 CLO L.P..  5180 CLO L.P. is a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction that closed in
Nov. 2011 and is primarily composed of broadly syndicated loans.

The transaction is still in its reinvestment period, which will
end in Nov. 2015.  The Nov. 14, 2014, trustee report, which S&P
referenced in its rating actions, indicated these
overcollateralization (O/C) increases from the Dec. 21, 2011,
effective date report:

   -- The class A O/C increased to 160.08% from 158.00% in
      Dec. 2011.

   -- The class B O/C increased to 136.20% from 134.43% in
      Dec. 2011.

   -- The class C O/C increased to 125.84% from 124.20% in
      Dec. 2011.

   -- The class D O/C increased to 119.05% from 117.50% in
      Dec. 2011.

In addition, the transaction holds only 0.9% 'CCC' category-rated
collateral, down from 3.3% at the effective date, and no defaulted
positions.

Since the transaction is still in its reinvestment period, S&P
assessed cash flow runs generated at the covenanted minimum
spread, coupon, and recoveries in S&P's evaluation to determine
whether to upgrade the notes above their original rating.

The combination notes originally comprised the class B, C, and D
notes, a portion of the income notes, and a treasury strip with a
$50 million notional balance maturing in 2030.  Since closing,
there have been large equity distributions and the treasury strip
was sold, leaving the combination notes with a $224.58 million
current balance, which is 68.26% of their original notional value.
These large paydowns are the primary reason for the two notch
upgrade on the class to 'BBB+p (sf)'.

The affirmations reflect S&P's belief that the credit support
available to the notes remains commensurate with their current
rating levels.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

5180 CLO L.P.

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)   rating
A-1    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    5.51%        AAA (sf)
A-2    AA (sf)              AA+ (sf)    11.98%       AA+ (sf)
B      A (sf)               A+ (sf)     3.15%        A+ (sf)
C      BBB (sf)             BBB+ (sf)   0.84%        BBB+ (sf)
D      BB (sf)              BB (sf)     1.64%        BB (sf)
Combo  BBB-p (sf)           BBB+p (sf)  7.15%        BBB+p (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.

Combo--Combination notes; the 'p' subscript indicates that the
     rating addresses only the principal portion of the
     obligation.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, it generated 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-1    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-2    AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)
B      A+ (sf)    A (sf)     A (sf)      AA- (sf)   A+ (sf)
C      BBB+ (sf)  BBB- (sf)  BBB- (sf)   BBB+ (sf)  BBB+ (sf)
D      BB (sf)    B+ (sf)    BB (sf)     BB+ (sf)   BB (sf)
Combo  BBB+p (sf) BBB+p (sf) BBB+p (sf)  Ap (sf)    BBB+p (sf)
Combo--Combination notes; the 'p' subscript indicates that the
rating addresses only the principal portion of the obligation.

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

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

                    Spread        Recovery
       Cash flow    compression   compression
       implied      implied       implied       Final
Class  rating       rating        rating        rating
A-1    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2    AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)
B      A+ (sf)      A (sf)        A- (sf)       A+ (sf)
C      BBB+ (sf)    BBB- (sf)     BB+ (sf)      BBB+ (sf)
D      BB (sf)      B+ (sf)       B+ (sf)       BB (sf)
Combo  BBB+p (sf)   BBB+p (sf)    BBB+p (sf)    BBB+p (sf)
Combo--Combination notes; the 'p' subscript indicates that the
rating addresses only the principal portion of the obligation.

RATINGS RAISED

5180 CLO L.P.

                           Rating       Rating
Class                      To           From

A-2                        AA+ (sf)     AA (sf)
B                          A+ (sf)      A (sf)
C                          BBB+ (sf)    BBB (sf)
Combination notes(i)       BBB+p (sf)   BBB-p (sf)

(i) The 'p' subscript indicates that the rating addresses only
     the principal portion of the obligation.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

5180 CLO L.P.

Class                      Rating
A-1                        AAA (sf)
D                          BB (sf)


AMERICA COMMERCIAL 2008-1: Moody's Cuts Cl. G Certs Rating to C
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on seven
classes and downgraded the ratings on seven classes of Banc of
America Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2008-1 as follows:

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-M, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014
Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. C, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Cl. D, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed
B1 (sf)

Cl. E, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. F, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014
Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. G, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. XW, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2014 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on P&I classes A-1A through A-M 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 rating on P&I class H was affirmed because
the rating is consistent with Moody's expected loss.

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

The ratings on seven P&I classes were downgraded due to higher
than anticipated realized losses, expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans, and the treatment of loans that
constitute 10% or more of the pool balance.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 7.4% of the
current balance compared to 9.4% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 12.4% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 11.8% 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 "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 23, compared to 26 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the November 10, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 24% to $963.7
million from $1.30 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 92 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 50% of
the pool. Two loans, constituting less than 2% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Twenty loans, constituting 15% 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.

Twelve loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $86.6 million (for an average loss
severity of 69%). Six loans, constituting 14% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the IBP Loan ($73.3 million -- 8% of the pool). The loan
is secured by seven office buildings located in Carrollton and
Plano, Texas. The loan represents a 73% pari passu interest in a
$100.3 million loan. The property was 94% leased as of October
2014 compared to 94% at Moody's prior review. The loan was
previously transferred to special servicing in February 2013 with
the borrower expressing interest in a modification. The loan was
returned to the master servicer and subsequently transferred back
to special servicing in June 2014. The special servicer indicated
they are working on returning the loan back to the master
servicer.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the Galleria at
Sugarloaf Loan ($18.5 million -- 2% of the pool). The loan is
secured by a grocery anchored retail center located 30 miles
northeast of Atlanta in Duluth, Georgia. The loan transferred to
special servicing in June 2013 due to imminent default. The
property was 74% leased as of June 2014. The special servicer
indicated they intend to modify the loan.

The third largest specially serviced loan is the 357 South Gulph
and 444 Oxford Valley Loan ($17.6 million -- 2% of the pool). The
loan is secured by a 48,000 square foot (SF) office building
located in King of Prussia Pennsylvania and a 58,000 SF office
building located in Langhorne, Pennsylvania. The loan transferred
to special servicing in June 2012 for imminent default. The 357 S.
Gulph Road property was foreclosed on January 29, 2014 and the 444
Oxford Valley property was foreclosed on October 10, 2014. SS will
continue with management/leasing efforts on both properties in
order to stabilize the assets and position them for a future
disposition.

The remaining three specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $40.2 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (29% expected loss on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for twelve poorly
performing loans, constituting 7% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $13.6 million (a 22% expected loss based on a
54% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2013 operating results for 68% of the
pool, and partial year 2013 operating results for 17% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 99% compared to 101% 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 9.7%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.43X and 1.11X,
respectively, compared to 1.41X and 1.10X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 29% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Apple Hotel Portfolio Loan ($109.3 million --
11% of the pool), which is secured by a portfolio of 27 limited
service and extended stay hotels located across 14 states. The
loan represents a 32% pari-passu interest in a $341.6 million
loan. Performance has improved since last review due to an
increase in revenue per available room (RevPar). For the trailing
twelve month period as of September 2013, the portfolio's RevPAR
was $86.84 compared to $82.77 for all of 2012. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 110% and 1.11X, respectively, the same as at
last review.

The second largest loan is the 550 West Jackson Loan ($97.5
million -- 10% of the pool), which is secured by a 402,000 SF
office building located in Chicago, Illinois. The property was 89%
leased as of October 2014 compared to 92% in January 2014. Moody's
LTV and stressed DSCR are 117% and 0.81X, respectively, the same
as at last review.

The third largest loan is the Village at Cascade Station Loan ($69
million -- 7% of the pool), which is secured by a 393,000 SF
retail center located in Portland, Oregon. The property was 99%
leased as of October 2014 compared to 99% in December 2013.
Moody's current LTV and stressed DSCR are 91% and 1.13X,
respectively, the same as at last review.


AMMC CLO 15: Moody's Assigns 'Ba3' Rating on $29MM Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to eight classes of
notes issued by AMMC CLO 15, Limited (the "Issuer" or "AMMC 15").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

  $6,000,000 Class AX Amortizing Senior Secured Floating Rate
  Notes due 2026 (the "Class AX Notes"), Definitive Rating
  Assigned Aaa (sf)

  $320,000,000 Class A1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class A1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa
  (sf)

  $43,000,000 Class B1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class B1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2
  (sf)

  $10,000,000 Class B-F Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2026
  (the "Class B-F Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

  $10,500,000 Class C1 Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class C1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

  $18,500,000 Class C-F Secured Deferrable Fixed Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class C-F Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2
  (sf)

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

  $29,000,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Class AX Notes, the Class A1 Notes, the Class B1 Notes, the
Class B-F Notes, the Class C1 Notes, the Class C-F Notes, the
Class D Notes and the Class E 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.

AMMC 15 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 95.0% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 5.0% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans
and unsecured loans. The portfolio is approximately 87% ramped as
of the closing date.

American Money Management Corporation (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 will issue subordinated
notes. The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage
tests which, if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds
to pay down the notes in order of seniority.

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

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

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2700

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.0 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 2700 to 3105)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class AX Notes: 0

Class A1 Notes: 0

Class B1 Notes: -1

Class B-F Notes: -1

Class C1 Notes: -1

Class C-F Notes: -1

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2700 to 3510)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class AX Notes: 0

Class A1 Notes: -1

Class B1 Notes: -2

Class B-F Notes: -2

Class C1 Notes: -3

Class C-F Notes: -3

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

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.


AMORTIZING RESIDENTIAL: Moody's Cuts A-SIO Debt Rating to Caa1
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of Class A-SIO
from Amortizing Residential Collateral Trust 2002-BC8, backed by
Subprime mortgage loans.

Issuer: Amortizing Residential Collateral Trust 2002-BC8

  Cl. A-SIO, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012
  Confirmed at Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of Class A-SIO
from Amortizing Residential Collateral Trust 2002-BC8 to Caa1 from
Ba3. Class A-SIO is an interest only tranche linked to collateral
pools 1 and 2. However, in prior ratings action, Class A-SIO was
incorrectly linked to tranches A1, A2 and A3.

The error has now been corrected, and the action reflects this
change.

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

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

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 November 2014 from
7.0% in November 2013 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6% to 7% 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.


APHEX CAPITAL 2007-4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. A-1 Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating on the following
notes issued by Aphex Capital NSCR 2007-4, Ltd.:

Cl. A-1, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jan 8, 2014 Affirmed C
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the rating on the transaction because its key
transaction metrics are commensurate with existing ratings. The
rating action is the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of
commercial real estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO
Synthetic) transactions.

Aphex Capital NSCR 2007-4, Ltd. is a static synthetic transaction
backed by a portfolio of credit default swaps referencing 100%
commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS). The CMBS reference
obligations were securitized in 2005 (40.5%) and 2006 (59.5%).
Currently, 76.6% of the reference obligations are rated by
Moody's.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the reference obligations
it does not rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF
of 6771, compared to 6720 at last review. The current ratings on
the Moody's-rated reference obligations and the assessments of the
non-Moody's rated reference obligations follow: Baa1-Baa3 and 7.8%
compared to 7.1% at last review; Ba1-Ba3 and 11.7% compared to
9.0% at last review; B1-B3 and 7.8% compared to 9.0% at last
review; Caa1-Ca/C and 72.7% compared to 74.9% at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 1.4 years, compared to 2.7 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying reference obligations.

Moody's modeled a variable WARR with a mean of 0.0%, compared to a
mean of 2.8% at last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 17.5%, compared to 0.0% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in March 2014.

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

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the
rated notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption
could be offset by a change in one or more of the other key
parameter assumptions. The rated notes are particularly sensitive
to changes in the ratings of the reference obligations and credit
estimates. However, in light of the performance indicators noted
above, Moody's believes that it is unlikely that the ratings
announced are sensitive to any further changes.

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


AVENUE CLO III: S&P Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Class B2L Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its rating on the class
A3L notes and affirmed its ratings on the class A2L, B1L, and B2L
notes from Avenue CLO III Ltd., a U.S. cash flow collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) transaction.  At the same time, S&P removed
the ratings on the class A3L, B1L, and B2L notes from CreditWatch,
where S&P placed them with positive implications on Nov. 17, 2014.

The upgrade of the class A3L notes mainly reflects an increase in
credit support following the senior notes' paydowns since S&P's
October 2013 rating actions.  In July 2014, the transaction paid
down the class A1L notes completely and has commenced paying down
the class A2L notes.  On the most recent payment date on Oct. 20,
2014, class A2L was paid down by $25.2 million, which reduced the
outstanding balance to 35% of its original balance.

Although the paydowns have increased all of the
overcollateralization ratios, the obligor concentration in the
pool has increased.  According to the November 2014 trustee
report, the collateral pool consisted of less than 30 performing
obligors, which increased the risk of higher losses if one of the
largest obligors defaults.

The ratings on the class B1L and B2L notes are limited by S&P's
largest obligor default test, a supplemental stress test that
intends to address the potential concentration of exposure to
obligors in the transaction's portfolio by assessing the effect of
several of the largest obligors defaulting simultaneously.  The
class B1L and B2L notes can only pass the largest obligor default
test at the 'A' and 'BB' rating categories respectively.
Therefore, S&P affirmed its ratings on the class B1L and B2L notes
at the current respective rating levels, 'A+ (sf)' and 'BB+ (sf)',
to reflect the availability of sufficient credit support.

The affirmation on the class A2L notes reflects adequate credit
support available to the notes at the 'AAA' level.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Avenue CLO III Ltd.
                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)   rating
A2L    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    23.06%       AAA (sf)
A3L    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)    23.06%       AAA (sf)
B1L    A+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AAA (sf)    15.46%       A+ (sf)
B2L    BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AA- (sf)    1.89%        BB+ (sf)

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

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

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

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

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

                  Recovery   Correlation Correlation
       Cash flow  decrease   increase    decrease
       implied    implied    implied     implied     Final
Class  rating     rating     rating      rating      rating
A2L    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A3L    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B1L    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    A+ (sf)
B2L    AA- (sf)   AA- (sf)   A+ (sf)     AA- (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
A2L    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A3L    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B1L    AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      A+ (sf)
B2L    AA- (sf)     AA- (sf)      AA- (sf)      BB+ (sf)

RATING ACTIONS

Avenue CLO III Ltd.

         Rating       Rating
Class    To           From
A2L      AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
A3L      AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch POS
B1L      A+ (sf)      A+ (sf)/Watch POS
B2L      BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)/Watch POS


BABSON CLO 2011-I: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB+'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-2, B, C, and D notes from Babson CLO Ltd. 2011-I.  At the same
time, S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class A-1 notes
from the same transaction.  Babson CLO Ltd. 2011-I is a CLO
transaction that closed in August 2011 and is managed by Babson
Capital Management LLC.

The transaction's reinvestment period ended in September 2014, and
it is currently in its amortization period.  According to the
Nov. 17, 2014, trustee report, the transaction had about $32.6
million in the principal collection account.  The transaction's
next payment date is Dec. 28, 2014, when S&P expects the amount
available in the principal collection account to be used to pay
down the class A-1 notes.  The class A-1 notes' lower balance will
likely increase the credit support to the notes.  The upgrades
reflect the expected increase in the credit support to the notes
primarily due to the expected paydowns.

In addition, the transaction has no defaults, and the credit
quality of the underlying assets that support the notes has
improved since S&P's effective date analysis in December 2011.

As of the Nov. 17, 2014, trustee report, the transaction does not
currently contain any assets that mature after the legal final
maturity or any defaulted assets.

The 'AAA (sf)' affirmation on the class A-1 notes reflects the
sufficient credit support available to the class at its current
rating level.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Babson CLO Ltd. 2011-I

                   Cash flow
        Previous   implied      Cash flow     Final
Class   rating     rating       cushion(i)    rating
A-1     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     11.09%        AAA (sf)
A-2     AA (sf)    AAA (sf)     0.63%         AAA (sf)
B       A (sf)     AA- (sf)     0.88%         AA- (sf)
C       BBB (sf)   BBB+ (sf)    6.29%         BBB+ (sf)
D       BB (sf)    BB+ (sf)     5.26%         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 equals rating     20.0                    7.5
Above base case             25.0                    10.0

                    10% Recovery   Correlation   Correlation
        Cash flow   decrease       increase      decrease
        implied     implied        implied       implied    Final
Class   rating      rating         rating        rating     rating
A-1     AAA (sf)    AAA         AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-2     AAA (sf)    AA+         AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
B       AA- (sf)    A+          A+ (sf)       AA (sf)    AA- (sf)
C       BBB+ (sf)   BBB         BBB+ (sf)     A- (sf)    BBB+ (sf)
D       BB+ (sf)    BB-         BB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)

RATINGS LIST

Babson CLO Ltd. 2011-I

                     Rating      Rating
Class   Identifier   To          From
A-1     05617GAA6    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2     05617GAB4    AAA (sf)    AA (sf)
B       05617GAC2    AA- (sf)    A (sf)
C       05617GAD0    BBB+ (sf)   BBB (sf)
D       05617HAA4    BB+ (sf)    BB (sf)


BAMLL COMMERCIAL 2014-FL1: S&P Assigns 'BB-' Rating on 3 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to BAMLL
Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL1's $432.6 million
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by four floating-rate loans secured
by the fee or leasehold interests in four properties: Lynnhaven
Mall in Virginia Beach, Va., PGA National Resort & Spa in Palm
Beach Gardens, Fla., the Warner Center Marriott in Los Angeles,
and Estancia La Jolla Hotel & Spa in San Diego, Calif.

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

BAMLL Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL1

Class         Rating(i)               Amount ($)
A             AAA (sf)               197,147,000
X-CP          BB- (sf)           418,953,000(ii)
X-EXT         BB- (sf)           418,953,000(ii)
B             AA- (sf)                55,223,000
C             A- (sf)                 38,875,000
D             BBB- (sf)               54,845,000
E             BB- (sf)                72,863,000
ELJ(iii)      B- (sf)                  8,285,000
PGA(iii)      B+ (sf)                  5,397,000

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


BAMLL COMMERCIAL 2014-INLD: S&P Rates Prelim. B- Rating on 3 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to BAMLL Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-INLD's
$615 million commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series
2014-INLD.

The note issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by one two-year, floating-rate commercial
mortgage loan totaling $615.0 million, with three one-year
extension options, secured by the fee simple interest in 28
limited-service and 18 extended-stay hotels and leasehold
interests in one limited-service and one extended-stay hotel
property.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 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 view of the collateral's
historical and projected performance, the sponsors' and managers'
experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and
the transaction's structure.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

BAMLL Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-INLD

Class       Rating(i)           Amount ($)
A           AAA (sf)           201,800,000
X-CP        B- (sf)        492,000,000(ii)
X-EXT       B- (sf)        615,000,000(ii)
B           AA- (sf)            73,600,000
C           A- (sf)             54,700,000
D           BBB- (sf)           78,800,000
E           BB- (sf)           113,900,000
F           B- (sf)             92,200,000

(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.


BEAR STEARNS 2006-TOP 24: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on A-J Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 16 classes of Bear Stearns Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2006-TOP24 (BSCMT 2006-TOP24).

Key Rating Drivers

Fitch modeled losses of 9.4% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 13.3%, including $112.8
million (7.4% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date. Fitch has designated 35 loans (18.9%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes three specially serviced assets (2.1%).

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 36.4% to $976.2 million from
$1.53 billion at issuance. Per the servicer reporting, two loans
(0.9% of the pool) are defeased. Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes B through P.

The largest contributor to expected losses is a 1.1 million sf 42-
story class A office tower (19.1%) located in Portland, OR. As of
October 2014, the property was 94.1% occupied compared to 88.1% at
year-end 2013. The largest tenant, U.S Bancorp (rated 'AA-
'/'F1+'/Outlook Stable by Fitch )(24.6%), has multiple leases
expiring 6/30/15 . Per the master servicer, the majority of the
space will be released under new 10-year leases expiring June 30,
2025. However rental rates under the new leases are expected to be
lower than current rental rates.

The next largest contributor to expected losses is 379,596 sf
class A office property (7.0%) located in Herndon, VA
(approximately 25 miles west of Washington D.C). Per the June 2014
rent roll, the property was 83.0% occupied primarily by one
tenant, Lockheed Martin (rated 'A-'/Outlook Stable). The tenant
(82.8%) has two leases due to expire in May 2016 and February
2018, after terminating one lease (8.7% of total space) prior to
its 2018 expiration date.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is an REO asset
(1.2% of the pool), which is an 116,660 sf retail property located
in Murfreesboro, TN. As of August 2014, the property was 95.9%
occupied. The anchor space (30% of total sf) was occupied by a
temporary Halloween store whose lease expired in mid-November. A
replacement tenant is expected to fully occupy the space in
January 2015. However, occupancy is expected to decline to 74.7%
primarily due to the vacating of the second largest tenant,
Officemax, upon its 12/31/14 lease expiration. The Special
Servicer plans to market property.

Rating Sensitivities

The Stable Rating Outlook on classes A-4 and A-M reflect
increasing credit enhancement as a result of continued paydown.
Downgrades to class A-J are possible as realized losses increase
on the subordinate classes.

Fitch affirms the following classes as indicated:

-- $674.6 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $153.5 million class A-M at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable from
    Negative;
-- $101.7 million class A-J at 'CCCsf'; RE 65%;
-- $28.8 million class B at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $13.4 million class C at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $4.2 million 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 does not rate the class P certificates. Fitch previously
withdrew the ratings on the interest-only class X-1 and X-2
certificates.


BEAR STEARNS 2007-PWR16: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on 9 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of Bear Stearns Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust (BSCMSI) commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates series 2007-PWR16.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch modeled losses of 13.3% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 15%, including $196.5
million (5.9% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date.  Fitch has designated 65 loans (47.9%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes 10 specially serviced assets (5.1%).

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 31.8% to $2.26 billion from
$3.31 billion at issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, one loan
(0.2% of the pool) is defeased.  Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes D through S.

Expected losses are higher than at Fitch's last rating action due
to an increase in number of specially serviced assets.
Additionally many performing loans exhibited lower debt service
coverage ratios (DSCRs) due to full-year financial reporting on
loans converting from interest-only status in 2012.  The three
largest contributors to losses are the same as at Fitch's last
rating action in March 2014.

The largest contributor to expected losses remains the Beacon
Seattle & DC portfolio (9.1% of the pool).  The loan was initially
secured by a portfolio consisting of 16 office properties, the
pledge of the mortgage and the borrower's ownership interest in
one office property, and the pledge of cash flows from three
office properties.  In aggregate, the initial portfolio of 20
properties comprised approximately 9.8 million square feet (sf) of
office space.  The loan was transferred to special servicing in
April 2010 for imminent default and was modified in December 2010.
Key modification terms included a five-year extension of the loan
to May 2017, a deleveraging structure that provided for the
release of properties over time, and an interest rate reduction.
The loan was returned to the master servicer in May 2012 and is
performing under the modified terms.

Under the modification, 11 properties have been released to date,
including Market Square (Washington, D.C.); Key Center (Bellevue,
WA); City Center Bellevue (Bellevue, WA); 1616 North Fort Myer
Drive (Arlington, VA); Liberty Place (Washington, D.C.); Army and
Navy Building (Washington, D.C.); 1300 North Seventeenth Street
(Arlington, VA); Reston Town Center (Reston, VA); Washington
Mutual Tower (Seattle, WA); Wells Fargo Center (Seattle, WA); and
Plaza Center (Bellevue, WA).  Nine properties remain as collateral
as of November 2014.

As reported by the servicer as of November 2014, the loan has paid
down by $1.57 billion (58% of the original overall loan balance).
As of year-end (YE) 2013, the portfolio occupancy of the remaining
nine properties has fallen to 77%, down significantly from the 97%
occupancy reported at issuance for the same properties.  Cash flow
at the remaining properties continues to decrease, with the
servicer reported net operating income as of year-end 2013 at
$66.9 million for the remaining nine properties, down 8% from
year-end 2012 and down 16% from year-end 2011.  The portfolio
continues to be subject to tenant lease rollover risk.

The second largest contributor to expected losses is the specially
serviced North Grand Mall loan (1.4%), which is secured by a
297,008 sf regional mall located in Ames, IA.  The loan was
transferred to the special servicer in June 2014 for imminent
default.  Anchor tenants at the mall include JCPenney (31.6% NRA),
which extended their lease for an additional 7 years through March
2020, and Younkers (16.8% NRA), which expires in 2022.  The third
largest tenant, a movie theatre, closed since last transaction
review.  Sears closed its location at the mall in 2008, after
which its store was demolished and replaced with Kohl's, TJ Maxx,
and Shoe Carnival.  The servicer-reported occupancy at the
property as of March 2014 is 91%, a decline from the 92.7%
reported at year-end 2013.  Fitch's analysis of the property's
tenant sales report indicates reported sales at the property are
below the industry average and calculated in-line tenant sales at
approximately $228/sf for the trailing 12 months ending September
2014 and total mall sales of $37 million.  The loan commenced
principal payments in July 2012, which caused the DSCR to drop to
0.92x at year-end 2012, and a further decline to 0.80x was
reported as of year-end 2013.  Fitch expects significant losses on
the loan.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is also the third
largest loan in the pool, The Mall at Prince Georges (6.6%), which
is secured by a 920,801 sf regional mall located in Hyattsville,
MD.  The mall was built in 1959 and renovated in 2004.  As of June
2014, the servicer-reported occupancy is 97.4%, compared with the
97% at issuance.  Anchor tenants at the mall are Macy's (21.3%
NRA), which expires in October 2018; JCPenney (16.12% NRA), which
expires July 2016, and Target (15.4% NRA), which expires January
2019.  Box tenants include Marshalls (3.8% NRA), expiring
September 2016, Ross (3.3% NRA), expiring January 2018, and Old
Navy (2.7%), which expires January 2015.  The property's June 2014
tenant sales report indicates in-line sales of approximately
$375/sf, a decline from the non-anchor reported sales of $427/sf
at issuance.  Approximately 38% of the leases are scheduled to
expire prior to year-end 2018, presenting refinance risk given the
potential tenant roll as well as the low tenant sales.  The
interest-only loan has a servicer-reported DSCR of 1.42x as of
year-end 2013.

RATING SENSITIVITY

Rating Outlooks on classes A-2 through A-M remain Stable due to
increasing credit enhancement and continued paydown.  Downgrades
are not expected unless there is a material decline in loan
performance or if losses on the specially serviced loans exceed
current expectations.

Fitch affirms these classes:

   -- $64.6 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $58.2 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $68.5 million class A-AB at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $954.4 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $317.2 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $331.4 million class A-M at 'Asf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $273.4 million class A-J at 'CCCsf', RE 50%;
   -- $33.1 million class B at 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
   -- $33.1 million class C at 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
   -- $33.1 million class D at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
   -- $20.7 million class E at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
   -- $24.9 million class F at 'Csf', RE 0%;
   -- $29 million class G at 'Csf', RE 0%;
   -- $18.9 million 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%;
   -- $0 class P at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class Q at 'Dsf', RE 0%.

The A-1 class is paid in full.  Fitch does not rate the class S
certificates.  Fitch previously withdrew the rating on the
interest-only class X certificates.


BOMBARDIER CAPITAL 1999-A: S&P Puts CC Certs Rating on Watch Neg.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services placed its 'CC (sf)' rating on
the class A-2 certificates from Bombardier Capital Mortgage
Securitization Corp. series 1999-A on CreditWatch with negative
implications.  The negative CreditWatch placement reflects S&P's
expectation that it will lower the rating to 'D (sf)' shortly
after the Feb. 15, 2015, final scheduled distribution date, when
the class is likely to default.

The transaction has not been generating sufficient collections to
pay the scheduled principal distribution to the classes A-2
through A-5 (the class A certificates) because of the high
cumulative net losses, which have caused the class A certificates
to accumulate an unpaid principal shortfall amount.  Based on the
transaction's payment waterfall, the unpaid principal shortfall is
allocated pro rata to the class A certificates.  Given the impact
of net losses, the principal pay down speed, and the expectation
that the pro rata principal payments will continue, S&P believes
the class A-2 certificates are highly unlikely to pay out by the
legal final maturity in February 2015, which would result in a
principal default.

Standard & Poor's will continue to monitor the affected rating,
and S&P expects to resolve the negative CreditWatch placement by
lowering the rating to 'D (sf)' at the final scheduled
distribution date.

RATING PLACED ON CREDITWATCH NEGATIVE

Bombardier Capital Mortgage Securitization Corp.
Series 1999-A
                Rating               Rating
Class           To                   From
A-2             CC (sf)/Watch Neg    CC (sf)


BOWMAN PARK: S&P Assigns Preliminary B Rating on Class F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Bowman Park CLO Ltd./Bowman Park CLO LLC's $465.7
million fixed- and 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 Dec. 9,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

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

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

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not counting excess spread), and cash flow structure, which
      can withstand the default rate projected by Standard &
      Poor's CDO Evaluator model, as assessed by Standard & Poor's
      using the assumptions and methods outlined in its corporate
      collateralized debt obligation (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 0.26%-11.67%.

   -- 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 before paying
      uncapped administrative expenses and fees, subordinated
      hedge termination payments, collateral manager subordinated
      and incentive fees, and subordinated note payments to
      principal proceeds during the reinvestment period to
      purchase additional collateral assets and, after the
      reinvestment period, up to 100% of the excess interest
      proceeds to pay down the notes according to the note payment
      sequence.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Bowman Park CLO Ltd./Bowman Park CLO LLC

Class                  Rating             Amount
                                        (mil. $)
A                      AAA (sf)           304.60
B-1                    AA (sf)             43.00
B-2                    AA (sf)             25.00
C (deferrable)         A (sf)              31.50
D (deferrable)         BBB- (sf)           32.80
E (deferrable)         BB- (sf)            20.40
F (deferrable)         B (sf)               8.40
Subordinated notes     NR                  44.15

NR--Not rated.


CANNINGTON FUNDING: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Cannington Funding Ltd.:

$26,000,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Senior Notes Due 2020,
Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on September 9, 2013 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

$26,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Deferrable Senior Subordinate
Notes Due 2020, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on September 9,
2013 Upgraded to A2 (sf)

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

$337,500,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Senior Notes Due 2020
(current outstanding balance of $185,622,118), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on September 9, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

$20,000,000 Class C Floating Rate Deferrable Senior Subordinate
Notes Due 2020, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on September 9,
2013 Affirmed Baa3 (sf)

$14,000,000 Class D Floating Rate Deferrable Subordinate Notes
Due 2020 (current outstanding balance of $13,729,460), Affirmed
Ba3 (sf); previously on September 9, 2013 Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

Cannington Funding Ltd., issued in November 2006, is a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a
portfolio of senior secured loans. The transaction's reinvestment
period ended in November 2013.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization (OC) ratios since February 2014. The Class A-1
notes have been paid down by approximately 40.8% or $128.1 million
since then. Based on the trustee's November 2014 report, the OC
ratios for the Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D notes are
reported at 135.4%, 121.2%, 112.1% and 106.6%, respectively,
versus February 2014 levels of 122.8%, 114.1%, 108.2% and 104.5%,
respectively.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes 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):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (1886)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: +3

Class C: +2

Class D: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (2828)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: -1

Class B: -2

Class C: -1

Class D: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations," published in February 2014. The key model inputs
Moody's used in its analysis, such as par, weighted average rating
factor, diversity score and the weighted average recovery rate,
are based on its published methodology and could differ from the
trustee's reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the
collateral pool as having a performing par and principal proceeds
balance of $291.1 million, defaulted par of $0.8 million, a
weighted average default probability of 13.7% (implying a WARF of
2357), a weighted average recovery rate upon default of 47.6%, a
diversity score of 36 and a weighted average spread of 2.7%.

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. Moody's generally applies
recovery rates for CLO securities as published in "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs". In some cases, alternative recovery
assumptions may be considered based on the specifics of the
analysis of the CLO transaction. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.


CARLYLE GLOBAL 2011-1: S&P Affirms 'B' Rating on Class F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B, C, and D notes from Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2011-1
Ltd.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the class A,
E, and F notes from the same transaction.  Carlyle Global Market
Strategies CLO 2011-1 Ltd is a CLO transaction that closed in July
2011 and is managed by Carlyle Investment Management LLC.

The transaction's reinvestment period is scheduled to end in
Aug. 2015.  The upgrades mainly reflect the additional par that
the transaction has built up over time and credit enhancement this
provides to the notes.  The improvements are also evident in the
increased class A/B, C, D, and E overcollateralization ratios when
compared to the effective date report from Oct. 2011.  Since the
transaction is still in its reinvestment period, S&P assessed cash
flow runs generated at the covenanted minimum spread, coupon, and
recoveries in S&P's evaluation to determine whether to upgrade the
notes above their original rating.

As of the Nov. 3, 2014, trustee report, the transaction does not
currently contain any defaulted assets, and there is only one
asset that matures after the legal final maturity.

The affirmations on the class A, E, and F notes reflects the
sufficient credit support available to the classes at the current
rating levels.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2011-1 Ltd. 2011-1

                        Cash flow
          Previous      implied       Cash flow        Final
Class     rating        rating        cushion(i)       rating
A         AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      16.10%           AAA (sf)
B         AA (sf)       AAA (sf)      8.00%            AAA (sf)
C         A (sf)        AA+ (sf)      1.63%            A+ (sf)
D         BBB (sf)      A+ (sf)       0.52%            BBB+ (sf)
E         BB (sf)       BB+ (sf)      4.91%            BB (sf)
F         B (sf)        B+ (sf)       5.07%            B (sf)

(i) The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
     default rate (BDR) above the scenario default rate (SDR) at
     the assigned rating for a given class of rated notes using
     the actual spread, coupon, and recovery.

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 equals rating     20.0                    7.5
Above base case             25.0                    10.0

                    10% Recovery   Correlation   Correlation
        Cash flow   decrease       increase      decrease
        mplied      implied        implied       implied   Final
Class   rating      rating         rating        rating
rating
A       AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
B       AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
C       AA+ (sf)    AA+ (sf)       AA- (sf)    AA+ (sf)   A+ (sf)
D       A+ (sf)     A+ (sf)        A- (sf)     A+ (sf)   BBB+ (sf)
E       BB+ (sf)    BBB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)    BB+ (sf)   BB (sf)
F       B+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)       B+ (sf)     B- (sf)     B (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)           A+ (sf)
D       A+ (sf)     A- (sf)           BBB- (sf)         BBB+ (sf)
E       BB+ (sf)    BB+ (sf)          B- (sf)           BB (sf)
F       B+ (sf)     B+ (sf)           CC (sf)           B (sf)

RATINGS LIST

Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2011-1 Ltd.

                         Rating        Rating
Class     Identifier     To            From
A         143082AA3      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B         143082AB1      AAA (sf)      AA (sf)
C         143082AC9      A+ (sf)       A (sf)
D         143082AD7      BBB+ (sf)     BBB (sf)
E         143082AE5      BB (sf)       BB (sf)
F         14309HAA9      B (sf)        B (sf)


CD MORTGAGE 2007-CD5: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Certificates
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings on five
classes, and affirmed the ratings on 11 classes in CD 2007-CD5
Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2007-CD5 as follows:

CL. A-4 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

CL. A-1A Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

CL. AM Notes, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Aa2 (sf)

CL. A-MA Notes, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Aa2 (sf)

CL. AJ Notes, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

CL. A-JA Notes, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 29,
2013 Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

CL. B Notes, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Ba1 (sf)

CL. C Notes, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

CL. D Notes, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed B1 (sf)

CL. E Notes, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013 Affirmed
B3 (sf)

CL. F Notes, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Caa1 (sf)

CL. G Notes, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Caa2 (sf)

CL. H Notes, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

CL. J Notes, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013 Affirmed
C (sf)

CL. K Notes, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013 Affirmed
C (sf)

CL. XS Notes, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2013
Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on P&I classes A-4, A-1A, AM, A-MA and E 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 F through K were affirmed because the
ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

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

The downgrades on P&I classes AJ, A-JA, B, C and D were due to
higher than anticipated realized losses, expected losses from
specially serviced and troubled loans, and the treatment of loans
that constitute 10% or more of the pool balance.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 9.4% of the
current balance compared to 7.1% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 10.5% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 9.7% 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 "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 31, compared to 29 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the November 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 30% to $1.5 billion
from $2.1 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 128 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting
41% of the pool. One loan, constituting less than 1% of the pool,
has an investment-grade structured credit assessment. The pool
does not contain any defeased loans.

Thirty-six loans, constituting 19% 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.

Twenty-three loans have been liquidated at a loss from the pool,
resulting in an aggregate realized loss of $82 million (for an
average loss severity of 47%). Fourteen loans, constituting 9% of
the pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest
specially serviced loan is the Versar Center Office Building Loan
($27 million -- 1.8% of the pool), which is secured by a 217,000
square foot (SF) office building located in Springfield, Virginia.
The loan transferred to special servicing in October 2014 due to
imminent default. The borrower is unable to fund future debt
service coverage shortfalls. The property was 78% leased as of
June 2014. The special servicer is currently evaluating resolution
strategies since the loan was a recent special servicing transfer.

The remaining 13 specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of
property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $57 million loss
for the specially serviced loans (43% expected loss on average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for ten poorly
performing loans, constituting 5% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $16 million (a 20% expected loss based on a
50% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2013 operating results for 95% of the
pool, and partial year 2014 operating results for 91% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 105% compared to 111% 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 1.42X and 1.09X,
respectively, compared to 1.33X and 1.0X 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 14144 Ventura
Office Building Loan ($4.5 million -- 0.3% of the pool), which is
secured by a 50,000 SF office located in Sherman Oaks, California.
The property was fully leased as of November 2014 compared to 94%
as of March 2014. Loan repayment is interest-only for the entire
term. Moody's structured credit assessment and stressed DSCR are
baa3 (sca.pd) and 1.73X, respectively, compared to baa3 (sca.pd)
and 1.69X at the last review.

The top three conduit loans represent 26% of the pool. The largest
loan is the USFS Industrial Distribution Portfolio Loan ($157
million -- 10.7% of the pool), which is secured by 37 cross-
collateralized and cross-defaulted warehouse properties and an
office property located in 25 states. The loan represents a pari
passu interest in a $472 million first mortgage. The properties
are fully leased to the US Foodservice, Inc. through July 2027.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 105% and 1.01X, respectively,
compared to 105% and 1.0X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Charles River Plaza North Loan
($145 million -- 9.9% of the pool), which is secured by a 355,000
SF medical office and laboratory building located in Boston,
Massachusetts. The loan represents a pari passu interest in a $290
million loan. The collateral is also encumbered by a $20 million
B-Note. The property is 100% leased to Massachusetts General
Hospital through May 2029. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 136%
and 0.69X, respectively, the same as at last review.

The third largest loan is the 85 Tenth Avenue Loan ($76 million
-- 5.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 602,000 SF office
building located in the Chelsea submarket of Manhattan. The loan
represents a pari passu interest in a $270 million first mortgage.
The property was 81% leased as of June 2014 compared to 91% as of
December 2013. Google signed a lease after the June 2014 rent roll
for almost all of the property's vacant space. Google's lease
terms were unavailable during Moody's review. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 112% and 0.84X, respectively, compared to 118%
and 0.80X at last review.


CENT CLO 21: S&P Affirms 'B' Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services affirmed its ratings on Cent
CLO 21 Ltd./Cent CLO 21 Corp.'s $567.00 million fixed- and
floating-rate notes following the transaction's effective date as
of Sept. 4, 2014.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Cent CLO 21 Ltd./Cent CLO 21 Corp.

Class                      Rating                       Amount
                                                      (mil. $)
A-1A                       AAA (sf)                     137.00
A-1B                       AAA (sf)                     250.00
A-2A                       AA (sf)                       62.00
A-2B                       AA (sf)                       10.00
B (deferrable)             A (sf)                        39.00
C (deferrable)             BBB (sf)                      33.00
D (deferrable)             BB (sf)                       24.00
E (deferrable)             B (sf)                        12.00


CENTRAL PARK: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B and C notes from Central Park CLO Ltd.  At the same time, S&P
affirmed its ratings on the class A, D, E, and F notes from the
same transaction.  Central Park CLO Ltd. is a CLO transaction that
closed in July 2011 and is managed by GSO/Blackstone Debt Funds
Management.

The transaction's reinvestment period is scheduled to end in
January 2015.  As of the Nov. 13, 2014, trustee report, the
transaction does not currently contain any assets that mature
after the legal final maturity or any defaulted assets.

The upgrades mainly reflect the low default environment that has
resulted in stable portfolio performance from the time S&P
affirmed its ratings on the transaction its December 2011
effective date analysis.  Three years of portfolio seasoning have
also helped in lowering the expected portfolio defaults S&P uses
in its analysis, which in turn increased the credit cushion
available to the notes.

Since the transaction is still in its reinvestment period, S&P
assessed cash flow runs generated at the covenanted minimum
spread, coupon, and recoveries in S&P's evaluation to determine
whether to upgrade the notes above their original rating.

The affirmations on the class A, D, E, and F notes reflect the
sufficient credit support available to the class at its current
rating level.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Central Park CLO Ltd.

                      Cash flow
         Previous     implied     Cash flow    Final
Class    rating       rating      cushion(i)   rating
A        AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)    16.45%       AAA (sf)
B        AA (sf)      AA+ (sf)    14.90%       AA+ (sf)
C        A (sf)       AA+ (sf)    1.10%        A+ (sf)
D        BBB (sf)     A (sf)      0.56%        BBB (sf)
E        BB (sf)      BB+ (sf)    1.76%        BB (sf)
F        B+ (sf)      B+ (sf)     4.79%        B+ (sf)

(i) The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
     default rate (BDR) above the scenario default rate SDR at the
     assigned rating for a given class of rated notes using the
     actual spread, coupon, and recovery.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

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

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

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

                   10% 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       AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
C       AA+ (sf)   AA- (sf)     AA- (sf)      AA+ (sf)    A+ (sf)
D       A (sf)     BBB+ (sf)    A- (sf)       A+ (sf)     BBB (sf)
E       BB+ (sf)   BB- (sf)     BB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)    BB (sf)
F       B+ (sf)    B (sf)       B+ (sf)       B+ (sf)     B+ (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        AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AA (sf)       AA+ (sf)
C        AA+ (sf)      AA (sf)       A- (sf)       A+ (sf)
D        A (sf)        A- (sf)       BB+ (sf)      BBB (sf)
E        BB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)      CCC+ (sf)     BB (sf)
F        B+ (sf)       B+ (sf)       CCC- (sf)     B+ (sf)

RATINGS LIST

Central Park CLO Ltd.

                     Rating     Rating
Class   Identifier   To         From
A       154781AA6    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
B       154781AC2    AA+ (sf)   AA (sf)
C       154781AE8    A+ (sf)    A (sf)
D       154781AG3    BBB (sf)   BBB (sf)
E       15478RAA9    BB (sf)    BB (sf)
F       15478RAC5    B+ (sf)    B+ (sf)


CG-CCRE COMMERCIAL 2014-FL2: S&P Assigns 'BB-' Rating on 4 Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to CG-CCRE
Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-FL2's $512.0 million commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates.  Since the presale report, the
preliminary class SSS1 and SS2 notes have combined into class SSS
for the same total balance.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by six floating-rate loans secured
by the fee interest in a regional mall and power center known as
South Towne Center in Sandy, Utah, the fee interest in the Curtis
Center office building in Philadelphia, the fee interest in the
Colonie Center regional mall in Albany, N.Y., the fee interest in
the Hotel Martha Washington in New York City, the fee interest in
the Regions Tower office building in Indianapolis, and the fee
interest in the Sheraton Station Square in Pittsburgh.

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

RATINGS ASSIGNED

CG-CCRE Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-FL2

Class            Rating(i)          Amount ($)
A                AAA (sf)          282,486,000
X-CP             BBB- (sf)     410,203,000(ii)
X-EXT            BBB- (sf)     410,203,000(ii)
B                AA- (sf)           52,159,000
C                A (sf)             34,594,000
D                A- (sf)            15,511,000
E                BBB- (sf)          25,453,000
STC1(iii)        BBB- (sf)          17,674,000
STC2(iii)        BB (sf)            15,519,000
STC3(iii)        BB- (sf)              221,000
CURT(iii)        BBB- (sf)          11,789,000
COL1(iii)        BBB- (sf)           5,669,000
COL2(iii)        BB- (sf)           13,834,000
COL3(iii)        B- (sf)            13,391,000
COL4(iii)        NR                  3,422,000
RGN1(iii)        BBB- (sf)           3,787,000
RGN2(iii)        BB- (sf)            6,586,000
SSS(iii)(iv)     BB- (sf)            9,905,000

   (i) The certificates will be issued to qualified institutional
       buyers according to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of
       1933.
  (ii) Notional balance.
(iii) Loan-specific class.
  (iv) The preliminary class SSS1 and SS2 notes have since
       combined into class SSS for the same total balance.


CMLS ISSUER 2014-1: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following final ratings and Rating
Outlooks to CMLS Issuer Corp.'s (CMLSI) commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates series 2014-1.

   -- $136,155,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $109,629,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $6,029,000 class B 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $8,866,000 class C 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $8,512,000 class D 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $3,547,000 class E 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $2,837,000 class F 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $2,837,000 class G 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

All currencies are in Canadian dollars (CAD).

Fitch does not rate the $283,734,078 (notional balance) interest-
only class X, or the $5,322,078 non-offered class H.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership in the trust,
primary assets of which are 37 Canadian loans secured by 41
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
approximately $283.7 million as of the cutoff date.  The loans
were originated or acquired by CMLS Financial Assets LP, CMLS
Financial Ltd., and First National Financial LP.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 75.2% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 100%, and asset summary reviews
on 100% of the pool.

The transaction has a Fitch stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) of 1.16x, a Fitch stressed loan-to-value (LTV) of 102.2%,
and a Fitch debt yield of 9.4%.  Fitch's aggregate net cash flow
represents a variance of 4.8% to issuer cash flows.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Canadian Loan Attributes and Historical Performance: The ratings
reflect strong historical Canadian commercial real estate loan
performance, including a low delinquency rate and low historical
losses of less than 0.1%, as well as positive loan attributes,
such as short amortization schedules, recourse to the borrower,
and additional guarantors.

Fitch Leverage: The pool has a Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.16x and
102.2%, respectively, which represents slightly lower leverage
than recent Canadian multiborrower deals.  The Real-T 2014-1 deal
had a Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.15x and 110.2%, respectively, and
the IMSCI 2014-5 deal had a Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.16x and 98.2%.
The leverage is also slightly lower than the third-quarter 2014
year-to-date average for U.S. CMBS, which had an LTV of 106.9%.

Significant Amortization: The pool has a weighted average
amortization term of 24.8 years, which represents faster
amortization than U.S. conduit loans.  There are no partial or
full interest-only loans. The pool's maturity balance represents a
paydown of 24.1% of the closing balance and 25.7% from the
original loan balance.

Loans with Recourse: Of the pool, 82.6% of the loans feature full
or partial recourse to the borrowers and/or sponsors.  This
represents slightly less recourse than the Real-T 2014-1 (91.2%)
and the IMSCI 2014-5 (84.9%) transactions.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch performed two model-based break-even analyses to determine
the level of cash flow and value deterioration the pool could
withstand prior to $1 of loss being experienced by the 'BBB-sf'
and 'AAAsf' rated classes.  Fitch found that the CMLSI 2014-1 pool
could withstand a 46.6% decline in value (based on appraised
values at issuance) and an approximately 18.3% decrease to the
most recent actual cash flow prior to experiencing a $1 of loss to
the 'BBB-sf' rated class.  Additionally, Fitch found that the pool
could withstand a 51.9% decline in value and an approximately
26.3% decrease in the most recent actual cash flow prior to
experiencing $1 of loss to any 'AAAsf' rated class.

Key Rating Drivers and Rating Sensitivities are further described
in the accompanying presale report.

The master and special servicer is CMLS Financial Limited, which
has a master servicer rating of 'CMS3-'.  CMLS Financial Limited
has a loan-level special servicing rating of 'CLLSS3' by Fitch and
was deemed acceptable as the special servicer for this
transaction.


COMM 2014-UBS6: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class F Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned these ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Deutsche Bank Securities, Inc.'s COMM 2014-UBS6 Mortgage Trust
commercial pass-through certificates:

   -- $57,028,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $102,973,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $ 22,897,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $ 97,350,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $275,000,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $337,653,000 class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $990,164,000* class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $97,263,000b class A-M 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $57,400,000b class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $220,037,000b class PEZ 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $65,374,000b class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $122,774,000*a class X-B 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $60,589,000*a class X-C 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $33,484,000*a class X-D 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $60,589,000a class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $12,756,000a class E 'BB+sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $20,728,000a class F 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.

* Notional amount and interest-only.
a Privately placed pursuant to Rule 144A.
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.

Fitch does not rate the $68,562,796 interest-only class X-E,
$28,701,000 class G, or the $39,861,796 class H.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership in the trust,
primary assets of which are 89 loans secured by 267 commercial
properties having an aggregate principal balance of approximately
$1.3 billion as of the cutoff date.  The loans were contributed to
the trust by UBS Real Estate Securities Inc., German American
Capital Corporation, Jefferies LoanCore LLC, Cantor Commercial
Real Estate Lending, L.P., KeyBank, N.A., and Pillar Funding LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 64.4% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 76.2%, and asset summary reviews
on 76.2% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch Leverage: This transaction has slightly lower leverage than
other recent Fitch-rated fixed-rate deals.  The pool's Fitch DSCR
of 1.23x is higher than the average of the first three quarters of
2014 Fitch DSCR of 1.19x, and the pool's Fitch LTV of 105.9% is in
line with the average of the first three quarters of 2014 Fitch
LTV of 105.6%.

Low Pool Concentration: The pool is less concentrated compared to
recently rated deals, with the top 10 loan exposures representing
37.4% of the total pool balance, which is below the average of the
first three quarters of 2014 top 10 concentration of 52.5%.
Additionally, 11 loans representing 27.1% of the total pool
balance are secured by multiple assets.

Non-Traditional Properties: The fourth largest loan in the pool
(3.7% of the pool by balance) is secured by a portfolio of
convenience stores and gas stations.  Additionally, two loans
totaling 0.7% of the pool are secured by airport parking lots.
Fitch applied higher asset volatility scores and additional
severity stresses to the non-traditional properties.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 20.2% below
the most recent NOI (for properties that 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-UBS6 certificates and found that the
transaction displays average sensitivity to further declines in
NCF.  In a scenario in which NCF declined a further 20% from
Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'A-
sf' could result.  In a more severe scenario, in which NCF
declined a further 30% from Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of the junior
'AAAsf' certificates to 'BBB-sf' could result.  The presale report
includes a detailed explanation of additional stresses and
sensitivities on pages 89 - 90.

The master servicer is KeyBank, N.A., rated 'CMS1' by Fitch.  The
special servicer is Midland Loan Services, Inc., rated 'CSS1' by
Fitch.


CPS AUTO 2014-D: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating on $8.7MM Cl. E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive ratings to the
notes issued by CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2014-D. This is the
fourth senior/subordinated transaction of the year for Consumer
Portfolio Services, Inc. (CPS).

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2014-D

$178,550,000 Class A Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

$40,130,000 Class B Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

$28,080,000 Class C Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

$12,040,000 Class D Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

$8,700,000 Class E Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

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

Moody's median cumulative net loss expectation for the underlying
pool is 14.50%. The loss expectation was based on an analysis of
CPS' portfolio vintage performance as well as performance of past
securitizations, and current expectations for future economic
conditions.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Auto Loan-Backed ABS" published in May 2013.
Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the rating:

UP

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

DOWN

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


CREDIT SUISSE 2004-C5: S&P Cuts Rating on 2 Note Classes to 'D'
---------------------------------------------------------------
Various Rating Actions Taken On Credit Suisse First Boston
Mortgage Securities Corp. Series 2004-C5
NEW YORK (Standard & Poor's) Dec. 10, 2014

Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on five
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.'s series
2004-C5, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)
transaction.  At the same time, S&P lowered its ratings on two
other classes and affirmed its rating on one other class 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 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 raised its ratings on classes B, 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 estimate of
necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels.
The upgrades also follow S&P's views regarding the significantly
reduced trust balance.

S&P lowered the ratings on classes H and J to 'D (sf)' due to
accumulated interest shortfalls that S&P believes will remain
outstanding for the foreseeable future, as well as credit support
erosion that S&P anticipates will occur upon the eventual
resolution of the five assets with the special servicer.

S&P affirmed the rating on the class G certificates to reflect its
expectation that the available credit enhancement for this class
will be within its estimate of the necessary credit enhancement
required for the current rating.

While available credit enhancement levels suggest positive rating
movements on the class G certificates as well as further upgrades
to the class E and F certificates, S&P's analysis considered,
relative to the pool, the amount of specially serviced assets in
the transaction ($73.4 million; 36.1% of the total collateral
pool) and the magnitude of nondefeased performing loans maturing
in 2014 and 2015 ($100.2 million; 49.3%).

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Nov. 18, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $203.1 million, which is 10.9% of the pool
balance at issuance.  The pool currently includes 31 loans and two
real estate owned (REO) assets (including cross-collateralized and
cross-defaulted loans), down from 225 loans at issuance; five
($73.4 million, 36.1%) are with the special servicer, six ($21.2
million, 10.4%) are defeased, and 14 ($75.2 million, 37.0%) are on
the master servicer's watchlist.  The master servicer, KeyBank
Real Estate Capital, reported financial information for 96.7% of
the nondefeased loans in the pool, of which 96.0% was year-end
2013 data, 1.4% was year-end 2012 data, and the remainder was
partial-year 2013 or 2014 data.

S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average debt service
coverage (DSC)of 1.37x and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 67.8%
using a Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate of
7.36%.  The DSC, LTV, and capitalization rate calculations exclude
the five specially serviced assets, six defeased loans, and five
residential cooperative loans ($1.6 million, 0.8%).  The top 10
nondefeased assets have a $152.2 million (74.9%) aggregate
outstanding pool trust balance. Using servicer-reported numbers,
S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average DSC and LTV of
1.40x and 68.9%, respectively, for seven of the top 10 nondefeased
assets.  The remaining three assets are specially serviced and
discussed.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the New York-Newark-Jersey City, Dallas-Fort Worth-
Arlington, and Las Vegas-Henderson-Paradise metropolitan
statistical area (MSAs).  Standard & Poor's U.S. Public Finance
Group provides credit ratings on Morris County, Dallas County, and
Clark County, that participate within these MSAs.

To date, the transaction has experienced $41.4 million in
principal losses, or 2.2% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P
expects losses to reach approximately 4.3% 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 five specially serviced assets.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Nov. 18, 2014, trustee remittance report, five assets in
the pool were with the special servicer, LNR Partners LLC (LNR).
Three of the five assets ($64.5 million, 31.7%) have appraisal
reduction amounts (ARAs) totaling $38.2 million. According to the
master servicer, the Valwood Crossed loans, together the largest
porfoming loan consisting of two cross-collateralized and cross-
defaulted loans ($21.0 million, 10.4%), were transferred to the
special servicer subsequent to the Nov. 2014 trustee report.
Details of the two largest specially serviced assets, both of
which are within the top 10 assets, as well as the Valwood Crossed
loans are:

The AT&T Consumer Services Headquarters loan ($42.7 million,
21.0%), with a $43.4 million reported exposure, is both the
largest asset with the special servicer and in the pool.  The loan
is secured by a 387,000-sq.-ft. suburban office property located
in Morris Township, N.J.  The loan was transferred to LNR on
March 25, 2014, for imminent default because the sole tenant, AT&T
(100% of gross leaseable area), left the premises at lease
expiration on Aug. 31, 2014.  LNR stated that foreclosure was
filed on Sept. 17, 2014. A $31.3 million ARA is in effect against
this loan and S&P expects a significant loss upon its eventual
resolution.

The City Centre Place REO asset ($17.9 million, 8.8%), with $20.2
million in total reported exposure, is a multi-story office
property totaling 103,199-sq.-ft. located in Las Vegas.  The loan
was transferred to LNR on Aug. 17, 2012, and the property became
REO on June 27, 2013. A $4.4 million ARA is in effect against this
asset and S&P expects a minimal loss upon its eventual resolution.

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

The Valwood Industrial Portfolio ($15.0 million, 7.4%) and Valwood
Building 37 ($6.0 million, 3.0%) loans were transferred to the
special servicer on Nov. 21, 2014, because the borrowers were
unable to repay the loans on their Nov. 11, 2014, maturity.  The
loans are secured by four industrial properties totaling 353,111
sq. ft. in Carrollton, Texas.  The reported DSC for the Valwood
Industrial portfolio and Valwood Building 37 loans for the six
months ended June 30, 2014, were 1.14x and 1.71x, respectively,
and their reported occupancy rates as of June 2014 were 91.0% and
100%, respectively.

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

RATINGS LIST

Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp.
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004-C5

                               Rating           Rating
Class        Identifier        To               From
B            22541S2V9         AAA (sf)         A- (sf)
C            22541S2W7         AAA (sf)         BBB+ (sf)
D            22541S2X5         AAA (sf)         BBB- (sf)
E            22541S3M8         AA (sf)          BB+ (sf)
F            22541S3N6         BBB- (sf)        BB- (sf)
G            22541S3P1         B+ (sf)          B+ (sf)
H            22541S3Q9         D (sf)           B (sf)
J            22541S3R7         D (sf)           B- (sf)


CSFB MORTGAGE 2005-C1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 2 Note Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on four
classes, affirmed the ratings on six classes and downgraded the
rating on one class in CSFB Mortgage Securities Corp. Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates 2005-C1 as follows:

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-J, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Upgraded to
A1 (sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Upgraded to
A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed
Ba1 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Downgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. A-X, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 7, 2014 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on P&I classes A-J through D were upgraded based
primarily on an increase in credit support resulting from loan
paydowns and amortization. The deal has paid down 58% since
Moody's last review.

The ratings on P&I classes A-4 and E 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 F through J were affirmed because the
ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

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

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 11.0% of
the current balance compared to 5.5% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 6.1% of the
original pooled balance compared to 6.6% 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 "Approach to Rating US
and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December 2014 and
"Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 14 as compared to a Herf of 33 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 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 76% to $357 million
from $1.51 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 51 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 40% of
the pool. Eleven loans, constituting 35% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Twenty-five loans, constituting 44% 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.

Twenty-seven loans have been liquidated from the pool with a loss
to the trust, resulting in an aggregate realized loss of $53
million (for an average loss severity of 29%). Nine loans,
constituting 15% of the pool, are currently in special servicing.
The largest specially serviced loan is the The Mall at Yuba City
Loan (for $32 million -- 9% of the pool), which is secured by a
306,000 square foot (SF) mall located approximately 40 miles north
of Sacramento in Yuba City, California. The loan transferred to
special servicing in March 2011 due to imminent default. The loan
became real estate owned (REO) on January 10, 2014. The remaining
specially serviced loans are secured by retail, industrial, office
and multifamily properties. Moody's has estimated a $29 million
loss (54% average loss severity) for the specially serviced loans.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for three poorly
performing loans, constituting 5% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $7 million (a 43% expected loss based on a
90% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2013 operating results for 100% of the
pool and partial year 2014 operating results for 55% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 79% compared to 90% 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 12% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.54X and 1.39X,
respectively, compared to 1.45X and 1.22X 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 largest performing loans represent 17% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the Shoppes at Brinton Lake Loan ($41
million -- 11% of the pool), which is secured by an approximately
193,000 SF retail property located in Concord Township, PA. This
loan paid off in full after the most recent remittance statement
on November 25, 2014.

The second largest loan is the Hotel Giraffe Loan ($10 million --
3% of the pool), which is secured by a 73-unit boutique luxury
hotel in New York, NY. This loan paid off in full on December 11,
2014.

The third largest loan is the Howard and Western Retail Loan ($8
million -- 2% of the pool), which is secured by an approximately
88,000 SF retail property located in Chicago, Illinois. The
property was 76% occupied as of September 2014. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 89% and 1.03X, respectively, compared to 77% and
1.19X at the last review.


CSMC SERIES 2009-RR1: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Cl. A-3C Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following certificates issued by CSMC Series 2009-RR1:

Cl. A-3A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 22, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on Jan 22, 2014 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. A-3C, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Jan 22, 2014 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its
key transaction metrics are commensurate with existing ratings.
The affirmation is the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of
commercial real estate resecuritization (CRE Non-Pooled Re-Remic)
transactions.

CSMC 2009-RR1 is a non-pooled Re-Remic pass through trust
("resecuritization") backed by one ring-fenced commercial mortgage
backed security (CMBS) certificates; 21.1% of the Class A-3 issued
by Credit Suisse Commercial Mortgage Trust 2007-C1 ("CSMC 2007-
C1"). The certificates are backed by fixed-rate mortgage loans
secured by first liens on commercial and multifamily properties.

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the certificates. The
affirmation reflected a cumulative base expected loss of 14.7% of
CSMC 2007-C1.

Updates to key parameters, including the constant default rate
(CDR), the constant prepayment rate (CPR), the weighted average
life (WAL), and the weighted average recovery rate (WARR), did not
materially change the expected loss estimate of the resecuritized
classes.

CSMC 2007-C1 has a WAL of 2.0 years; assuming a CDR of 0% and CPR
of 0%. For delinquent loans (30+ days, REO, foreclosure,
bankrupt), Moody's assumes a fixed WARR of 40% while a fixed WARR
of 50% for current loans. Moody's also ran a sensitivity analysis
on the classes assuming a WARR of 40% for current loans. This
impacts the modeled rating of the certificates by 0 to 3 notches
downward.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Resecuritizations" published in February 2014.

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

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

Because the credit quality of the resecuritization depends on that
of the underlying CMBS certificates, whose credit quality in turn
depends on the performance of the underlying commercial mortgage
pool, any change to the ratings on the underlying certificates
could lead to a review of the ratings of the certificate.

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


CUTWATER 2014-II: Moody's Rates $22.8-Mil. Class D Notes '(P)Ba3'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to five
classes of notes to be issued by Cutwater 2014-II, Ltd.:

Moody's rating action is as follows:

  $258,100,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2027 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

  $38,800,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2027 (the "Class A-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

  $25,600,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class B Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

  $23,300,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

  $22,800,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2027 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

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

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

Ratings Rationale

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

Cutwater CLO 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 and eligible investments, and up
to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
unsecured loans. Moody's expect the portfolio to be approximately
75% ramped as of the closing date.

Cutwater Investor Services Corp. (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 up to
50% of unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of
credit risk assets and credit improved assets, subject to certain
restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue two classes
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: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2750

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 4.0%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.5%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.0%

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 increased default
probability relative to the base case.

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

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2750 to 3163)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: 0

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

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

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 V Score, is one
notch higher than that of the benchmark CLO, which is Low/Medium.
The score of Medium reflects the fact that this transaction will
be the Manager's second CLO. 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.


CWABS 2005-IM1: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. A-4M Debt to Ca
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of six
tranches, backed by Alt-A RMBS loans, issued from CWABS 2005-IM1
and Soundview 2006-WF1 trusts.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: CWABS Asset-Backed Certificates Trust 2005-IM1

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 23, 2013 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. A-3M, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Aug 27, 2012
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 23, 2013 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. A-4M, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 11, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Soundview Home Loan Trust 2006-WF1

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Sep 17, 2014
Upgraded to B3 (sf) and Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 17, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectation on
the pools.

The rating upgrades on tranches issued from Soundview 2006-WF1 are
based on the confirmation from Deutsche Bank, the trustee that
principal allocation to the senior tranches will be distributed
sequentially starting from the November 2014 remittance period.
The rating of class A-2 was placed on review for upgrade on 17th
September, 2014 pending clarification from the trustee regarding
the principal waterfall for the senior tranches. The trustee was
paying the senior certificates pro-rata even though the mezzanine
certificates were written up by $54.5 million following a
representations and warranties settlement received by the trust in
June 2014. The Pooling and Servicing Agreement states that the
senior certificates will be paid pro-rata on any distribution date
when the mezzanine certificates are equal to zero, but
sequentially otherwise. Deutsche Bank has confirmed that they will
not be restating prior remittance reports.

The rating actions on the senior tranches issued from CWABS 2005-
IM1 are based on the stable collateral performance and the change
in cash flow waterfall for the Classes A-4 and A-4M. The Class A-4
and Class A-4M are now being allocated principal sequentially;
first to the class A-4 then the class A-4M. These bonds were
initially allocated principal pro-rata even though a sequential
trigger was in effect.

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 November 2014 from 7%
in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range
of 5% to 6% for the 2015 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 2015. 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.


DEUTSCHE MORTGAGE 2007-RS4: Moody's Cuts A-X Certs Rating to Ca
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of two
certificates issued by Deutsche Mortgage Securities, Inc. Re-REMIC
Trust Certificates, Series 2007-RS4. The resecuritizations are
backed by various residential mortgage-backed securities backed by
residential mortgage loans.

Issuer: Deutsche Mortgage Securities, Inc. Re-REMIC Trust
Certificates, Series 2007-RS4

  Cl. A-1, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 12, 2011
  Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

  Cl. A-X, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 12, 2011
  Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating downgrade of the Class A-1 is due to erosion of the
credit enhancement available to the bond and reflects the recent
performance of the underlying pools and Moody's updated loss
expectations on the underlying RMBS bonds. The rating of the Class
A-X interest-only was downgraded since that rating is based on the
ratings of the Class A-1 and Class A-2 certificates.

The methodologies used in this rating were "US RMBS Surveillance
Methodology" published in November 2013 and "Moody's Approach to
Rating Resecuritizations" published in February 2014.

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 November 2014 from 7.0
% in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6% to 7% 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.


DLJ COMMERCIAL 2000-CF1: S&P Withdraws Dsf Rating on Cl. B-5 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on the class
B-5 commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from DLJ
Commercial Mortgage Trust 2000-CF1, a U.S. commercial mortgage-
backed securities (CMBS) transaction, to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC-
(sf)', and subsequently withdrew its rating.  In addition, S&P
withdrew its ratings on four other classes from the same
transaction.

S&P lowered its rating on class B-5 to 'D (sf)' following
principal losses detailed in the Dec. 10, 2014, trustee remittance
report.  In addition, S&P withdrew its ratings on classes B-4, B-
5, B-6, B-7, and B-8 following the reduction of the classes'
principal balances to zero resulting from the liquidation of the
sole remaining asset in the trust.

The reported principal losses totaled $10.6 million, which
resulted from the liquidation of the sole remaining asset in the
trust, the specially serviced Paradyne Corporate real estate owned
asset.  According to the December 2014 trustee remittance report,
the asset liquidated at a loss severity of 81.6% of its $13.0
million beginning scheduled balance at the time of liquidation.
Consequently, class B-4 was repaid in full, and class B-5
experienced a 32.8% loss of its $2.2 million original principal
balance, while the subordinate classes B-6 and B-7 lost 100.0% of
their respective opening balances.  S&P previously lowered its
ratings on classes B-6, B-7, and B-8 to 'D (sf)'.

RATING LOWERED AND WITHDRAWN

DLJ Commercial Mortgage Trust 2000-CF1
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

                 Rating       Rating
Class      To    Interim      From
B-5        NR    D (sf)       CCC- (sf)

NR--Not rated.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

DLJ Commercial Mortgage Trust 2000-CF1
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                   Rating
           To                 From
B-4        NR                 CCC+ (sf)
B-6        NR                 D (sf)
B-7        NR                 D (sf)
B-8        NR                 D (sf)

NR--Not rated.


DRYDEN 36: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to Dryden
36 Senior Loan Fund/Dryden 36 Senior Loan Fund LLC's $552.60
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 ratings reflect:

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

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (not including excess spread).

   -- The cash flow structure, which can withstand the default
      rate projected by Standard & Poor's CDO Evaluator model,
      assessed 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 senior secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and
      ultimate principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned ratings under various
      interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from
      0.2281%-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
      rated notes' outstanding balance.

   -- The transaction's interest diversion test, a failure of
      which, during the reinvestment period, will lead to the
      reclassification of up to 50.0% of available excess interest
      proceeds (before paying certain uncapped administrative
      expenses, subordinate and incentive management fees, hedge
      amounts, supplemental reserve account deposits, and
      subordinated note payments) into principal proceeds to
      purchase additional collateral assets; or, after the end of
      the non-call period, to pay principal on the notes
      sequentially, at the collateral manager's option.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Dryden 36 Senior Loan Fund/Dryden 36 Senior Loan Fund LLC

Class                  Rating             Amount
                                        (mil. $)
A                      AAA (sf)           375.00
B                      AA (sf)             70.20
C                      A (sf)              51.60
D                      BBB (sf)            31.20
E                      BB (sf)             24.60
Subordinated notes     NR                  56.70

NR--Not rated.


DUTCH HILL II: Fitch Lowers Rating on Class B Notes to 'Dsf'
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has taken these actions on five classes of Dutch
Hill Funding II Ltd./Corp.:

   -- $31,944,385 Class B notes downgraded to 'Dsf' from 'Csf' and
      withdrawn;
   -- $35,118,251 Class C notes affirmed at 'Csf' and withdrawn;
   -- $22,304,338 Class D-1 notes affirmed at 'Csf' and withdrawn;
   -- $20,388,529 Class D-2 notes affirmed at 'Csf' and withdrawn;
   -- $23,983,765 Class D-3 notes affirmed at 'Csf' and withdrawn;

Fitch does not rate the subordinated notes.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch's rating action follows the default of the class B notes
after they failed to receive their timely interest payment with
respect to the Nov. 17, 2014 payment date.  Dutch Hill Funding has
one remaining asset in its portfolio and the assets par amount
will not provide enough principal for any of the notes to pay in
full.  Although the notes will remain outstanding until the deal's
legal maturity or liquidation in accordance with the Indenture,
the ratings are withdrawn as they are no longer considered
analytically meaningful.

Dutch Hill II is a structured finance (SF) collateralized debt
obligation (CDO) that closed on May 2, 2007 and is managed by TCW
Investment Management Company.


ELM CLO 2014-1: S&P Rates Prelim. 'BB-' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to ELM CLO 2014-1 Ltd./ELM CLO 2014-1 LLC's $458.75
million fixed- and floating-rate notes.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 11,
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 including excess spread).

   -- The cash flow structure, which can withstand the default
      rate projected by Standard & Poor's CDO Evaluator model,
      assessed 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 senior secured term loans.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and
      ultimate principal payments on the preliminary rated notes,
      which S&P assessed using its cash flow analysis and
      assumptions commensurate with the assigned preliminary
      ratings under various interest-rate scenarios, including
      LIBOR ranging from 0.2336%-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
      secured notes' outstanding balance.

RATINGS LIST

ELM CLO 2014-1 Ltd./ELM CLO 2014-1 LLC
Class           Preliminary rating   Preliminary amount (mil. $)
A               AAA (sf)                                  331.00
B-1             AA (sf)                                    38.25
B-2             AA (sf)                                    17.00
C               A (sf)                                     26.25
D               BBB (sf)                                   25.25
E               BB- (sf)                                   21.00
Subordinated notes       NR                                43.25

NR -- Not rated.


EMBLEM FINANCE 2: S&P Withdraws 'BB' Rating on Series 5 Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its rating on Emblem
Finance Co. No. 2 Ltd.'s series 5 notes.  The certificate issuance
was an emerging markets synthetic structured financing with a
first-to-default structure credit-linked to Caja de Ahorros y
Pensiones de Barcelona S.A. (La Caixa), the reference entity.  In
addition, the transaction was backed by peso-denominated and
inflation-adjusted Chilean sovereign bonds and a swap guaranteed
by JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.

The rating withdrawal follows the early termination of the notes.

RATING WITHDRAWN

Emblem Finance Co. No. 2 Ltd.
CLP 5,660,085,600 Series 5 inflation-adjusted CLN
Linked Caixa due 2028

        Rating        Rating
        To            From
        NR            BB (sf)

NR--Not rated.


FAIRFIELD STREET 2004-1: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on 2 Secs.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of the
following notes issued by Fairfield Street Solar 2004-1 Ltd.
Collateralized Debt Obligations:

Cl. A, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. A-2a, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-2b, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed
Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Cl. B-2, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. C-2, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D-2, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. E-2, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Dec 18, 2013 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings of eleven classes of notes
because the key transaction metrics are commensurate with the
existing ratings. The rating actions are the result of Moody's on-
going surveillance of commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligation (CRE CDO Re-Remic) transactions.

Fairfield 2004-1 is a currently static cash transaction
(reinvestment period ended November 2009) backed by a portfolio
of: i) commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (82.0% of the
pool balance); ii) commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligations (CRE CDO) (15.8%); iii) grantor trust loans (1.3%);
and iv) REIT debt (0.9%). As of the November 21, 2014 trustee
report, the aggregate note balance of the transaction has
decreased to $302.6 million from $512 million at issuance, as a
result of regular amortization of the underlying collateral and
the failure of certain par value tests, with the paydown directed
to the senior most outstanding class of notes.

The pool contains 27 assets with a par balance of $116.6 million
(31.7% of the collateral pool balance) that are considered
impaired securities as of the November 21, 2014 trustee report. 21
of these assets are CMBS (83.4% of the impaired balance) and 6
assets are CRE CDO (16.6%). Moody's does expect significant losses
to occur on the defaulted securities.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 4950,
compared to 4257 at last review. The current distribution of
Moody's rated collateral and assessments for non-Moody's rated
collateral is as follows: Aaa-Aa3 and 7.3% compared to 7.2% at
last review, A1-A3 and 6.3% compared to 8.7% at last review, Baa1-
Baa3 and 16.3% compared to 16.0% at last review, Ba1-Ba3 and 8.1%
compared to 12.7% at last review, B1-B3 and 10.2% compared to
14.3% at last review, Caa1-Ca/C and 51.7% compared to 41.2% at
last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.8 years, compared to 3.4 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying exposures.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 12.5%, compared to 19.8% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 8.3% compared to 5.4% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in March 2014.

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

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the
rated notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption
could be offset by a change in one or more of the other key
parameter assumptions. The rated notes are particularly sensitive
to changes in the recovery rates of the underlying collateral and
credit assessments. Increasing the recovery rates by 10% would
result in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of
zero to four notches (e.g., one notch up implies a ratings
movement of Ba1 to Baa3). Decreasing the recovery rates by 10%
would result in an average modeled rating movement on the rated
notes of zero to three notches (e.g., one notch down implies a
ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1).

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


FIGUEROA CLO 2014-1: Moody's Rates $22.5MM Class E Notes 'Ba3'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to five classes of
notes issued by Figueroa CLO 2014-1, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

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

  $40,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2027
  (the "Class B Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

  $26,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

  $23,500,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

  $22,500,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2027 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class C Notes, the Class
D Notes, and the Class E 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.

Figueroa 2014-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will
be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien
senior secured corporate loans. At least 90.0% of the portfolio
must consist of senior secured loans and eligible investments, and
up to 10.0% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
unsecured loans. The portfolio is expected to be at least 70%
ramped as of the closing date.

TCW Asset Management Company (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 will issue one
additional tranche as well as 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: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2800

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.75%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

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 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 2800 to 3220)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -1

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2800 to 3640)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

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.


FIGUEROA CLO 2014-1: S&P Assigns 'B' Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
Figueroa CLO 2014-1 Ltd./Figueroa CLO 2014-1 LLC's $264.00 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 ratings reflect:

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

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

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

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

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- The timely interest and ultimate principal payments on the
      rated notes, which S&P assessed using its cash flow analysis
      and assumptions commensurate with the assigned ratings under
      various interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging
      from 0.2336%-12.8177%.

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

   -- The transaction's 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.

RATINGS LIST

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

Class                 Rating       Amount (mil. $)
A                     AAA (sf)              256.00
B                     NR                     40.00
C                     NR                     26.00
D                     NR                     23.50
E                     NR                     22.50
F                     B (sf)                  8.00
Subordinated notes    NR                    37.057

NR--Not rated.


FOUR CENT 12: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A, B, C, and D notes from Cent CDO 12 Ltd., a U.S. collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) managed by RiverSource Investments LLC.  In
addition, S&P affirmed its rating on the class E notes, and it
removed its ratings on all classes of notes from CreditWatch with
positive implications.

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

The upgrades reflect a $17.75 million paydown to the class A
notes, as well as general improvement in the underlying
collateral's credit quality since S&P's Feb. 2013 rating actions.
The affirmation reflects S&P's belief that the credit support
available is commensurate with the current rating level.

The amount of 'CCC' rated collateral held in the transaction's
asset portfolio has significantly decreased since S&P's February
2013 rating actions.  According to the November 2014 trustee
report, the transaction held $3.48 million in assets rated in the
'CCC' range compared with $32.03 million noted in the January 2013
trustee report, which S&P used for its February 2013 rating
actions.

In addition, the transaction has seen notable credit improvement
in the underlying collateral, with large increases in the
cumulative balance of assets rated 'BB-' and above and comparable
decreases in the cumulative balance of assets rated 'B+' and
below.

Although the transaction exited its reinvestment period in
November 2013, the collateral manager has continued to reinvest
post-reinvestment period principal proceeds they received from
credit risk, credit-improved, or prepaid collateral obligations,
in line with the transaction documents.  On the Nov. 18, 2014,
distribution date, the collateral manager reinvested $16.65
million of the available $18.71 million, while the remaining $2.06
million was used to pay down the class A notes.  Since January
2013, post-reinvestment period principal amortization has resulted
in a $17.75 million paydown to the class A notes, leaving them
with approximately 96.14% of their original face value at
issuance.

The transaction's overcollateralization and interest coverage
ratios have remained relatively stable since January 2013.

S&P noted that the transaction has significant exposure to long-
dated assets, (i.e. assets maturing after the CLO's stated
maturity).  According to the November 2014 trustee report, these
long-dated assets represent $26.60 million, or 4.55% of the
portfolio.  A CLO concentrated in long-dated assets could be
exposed to market value risk at maturity because the collateral
manager may have to sell long-dated assets for less than par to
repay the CLO's subordinate rated notes when they mature.  S&P's
analysis accounted for the potential market value and/or
settlement-related risk arising from the potential liquidation of
the remaining securities on the transaction's legal final maturity
date.

On a standalone basis, the results of the cash flow analysis
pointed to a lower rating on the class E notes than the rating
action suggests.  However, S&P believes that because the
transaction is currently in its amortization period, it will
continue to pay down the rated notes, which, all else held equal,
will continue to increase the overcollateralization levels.  In
addition, because the transaction currently has minimal exposure
to 'CCC' rated collateral obligations, S&P believes it is not
currently exposed to large risks that would impair the notes at
their current rating level.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, its cash flow scenarios applied forward-
looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis
considered the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or
ultimate principal to each of the rated tranches.  The 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.

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

CAPITAL STRUCTURE AND KEY METRICS COMPARISON

                            Jan. 2013                 Nov. 2014
Class                       Notional balance (mil $)
A                           459.60                    441.85 (i)
B                           28.80                     28.80
C                           32.40                     32.40
D                           22.80                     22.80
E                           22.80                     22.80

Coverage tests and WAS (%)
A/B senior O/C              123.92                    124.31
C O/C                       116.21                    116.33
D O/C                       111.34                    111.31
E O/C                       106.85                    106.70
A/B senior I/C              915.02                    979.87
C I/C                       813.12                    859.91
D I/C                       721.88                    752.19
WAS                         3.68                      3.09

WAS -- Weighted average spread.
O/C -- Overcollateralization test.
I/C -- Interest coverage test.
(i) Notional balance adjusted to reflect the payment on the
    November 2014 distribution date.

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Cent CDO 12 Ltd.                 Cash        Cash
                                 flow        flow
          Previous               implied     cushion   Final
Class     rating                 rating      (i)       rating
A         AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos     AAA (sf)    3.18%     AAA (sf)
B         AA (sf)/Watch Pos      AA+ (sf)    6.94%     AA+ (sf)
C         A (sf)/Watch Pos       A+ (sf)     5.50%     A+ (sf)
D         BBB (sf)/Watch Pos     BBB+ (sf)   2.34%     BBB+ (sf)
E         BB (sf)/Watch Pos      B+ (sf)     3.76%     BB (sf)

(i) The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
    default rate above the scenario default rate at the assigned
    rating for a given class of rated notes using the actual
    spread, coupon, and recovery.

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   Corr.      Corr.
             Cash flow   decrease   increase   decrease
             implied     implied    implied    implied    Final
Class        rating      rating     rating     rating     rating
A            AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
B            AA+ (sf)    AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)
C            A+ (sf)     A (sf)     A+ (sf)    AA (sf)    A+ (sf)
D          BBB+ (sf)   BBB- (sf)   BBB (sf)   BBB+ (sf)  BBB+ (sf)
E            B+ (sf)     CCC+ (sf)   B+ (sf)    B+ (sf)    BB (sf)

Corr.--Correlation.

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

RATINGS LIST

Cent CDO 12 Ltd.
                     Rating      Rating
Class   Identifier   To          From
A       15135AAA1    AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B       15135AAB9    AA+ (sf)    AA (sf)/Watch Pos
C       15135AAC7    A+ (sf)     A (sf)/Watch Pos
D       15135AAD5    BBB+ (sf)   BBB (sf)/Watch Pos
E       15135AAE3    BB (sf)     BB (sf)/Watch Pos


FRANKLIN CLO V: S&P Lowers Rating on Class E Notes to CCC+
----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
B and C notes, lowered its rating on the class E notes, and
affirmed its ratings on the class A-1, A-2, and D notes from
Franklin CLO V Ltd., a U.S. cash flow collateralized loan
obligation transaction managed by Franklin Advisers Inc.  At the
same time, S&P removed its ratings on the class D and E notes from
CreditWatch, where it had placed them with negative implications
on Nov. 17, 2014.

The upgrades on the class B and C notes reflect increased credit
support following paydowns to the class A-1 and A-2 notes, which
provided them with additional credit support.  On the most recent
payment date on Sept. 15, 2014, the class A-1 and A-2 notes paid
down $34.6 million in total, reducing their outstanding balance to
24.2% of the original balance.

S&P's analysis included a sensitivity test that evaluated the
impact of market value risk on the long-dated securities (those
scheduled to mature after the transaction's maturity date) in the
portfolio.  The sensitivity test accounted for the potential
market value and/or settlement-related risk arising from the
potential liquidation of those remaining securities on the
transaction's legal final maturity date.  According to the
November 2014 trustee report, long-dated assets were about 42.58%
($92.7 million) of the collateral pool.  The results of this
sensitivity analysis affected the ratings on the class C, D, and E
notes.  Although S&P's cash flow analysis indicated an 'AA+ (sf)'
rating on the class C notes, it raised the rating to 'A+ (sf)'
because the notes are exposed to long-dated securities.

The downgrade on class E to 'CCC (sf)' reflects its vulnerability
to the risk from significantly increased exposure to long-dated
securities.  Even though S&P's cash flow analysis indicated a
rating lower than the 'CCC' category for the class E, S&P believes
the notes are not at imminent risk for default.  The class E notes
continued to receive current interest payments and their
overcollateralization ratio was 108.8% according to the November
2014 trustee report.

S&P affirmed the rating on the class D notes at 'BB+ (sf)' and
removed it from CreditWatch to reflect S&P's belief that the
credit support available to the notes remains commensurate with
the current rating level after accounting for the exposure to the
long-dated assets.  The affirmations of S&P's ratings on the class
A-1 and A-2 notes reflect its belief that the credit support
available to the notes is commensurate with 'AAA (sf)' rating.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Franklin CLO V Ltd.

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)   rating
A-1    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    34.78%       AAA (sf)
A-2    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    34.78%       AAA (sf)
B      AA- (sf)             AAA (sf)    14.98%       AAA (sf)
C      BBB+ (sf)            AA+ (sf)    5.28%        A+ (sf)
D      BB+ (sf)/Watch Neg   BBB- (sf)   2.40%        BB+ (sf)
E      B- (sf)/Watch Neg    CC (sf)     N/A          CCC+ (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.
N/A -- Not applicable.

RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

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

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

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

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

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

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

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

RATING ACTIONS

Franklin CLO V Ltd.

              Rating       Rating
Class         To           From
A-1           AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
A-2           AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
B             AAA (sf)     AA- (sf)
C             A+ (sf)      BBB+ (sf)
D             BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)/Watch Neg
E             CCC+ (sf)    B- (sf)/Watch Neg


FREMF MORTGAGE 2011-K12: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on X-2 Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of two classes
in FREMF Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2011-K12 as follows:

Cl. B, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Feb 26, 2014 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. X-2, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 26, 2014 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

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

The rating on the IO class, Class X-2, was 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 2.0% of the
current balance, the same as at Moody's prior review. Moody's base
expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.9% of the original
pooled balance, the same as at the prior 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 "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 33, the same as at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the November 25, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 5% to $1.15 billion
from $1.2 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 69 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 9% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) representing 41% of the pool.

Two loans, representing 10% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans which meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
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.

Two loans, representing 4% of the pool, are in special servicing.
The largest specially serviced loan is the MetroPlace at
Towncenter Loan ($44 million -- 3.8% of the pool), which is
secured by a 397-unit multifamily property consisting of eight
interconnected four-story buildings located in Camp Springs,
Maryland. The buildings surround a five-story parking garage and a
two-story leasing office with a clubhouse. The property was 46%
leased as of September 2013 compared to 87% at securitization. The
drop in vacancy is due to units being off-line due to repairs to
the property from burst pipes from the earthquake of August 2011
as well as additional repairs and remediation from the discovery
of defective construction. Moody's is not anticipating a loss from
this loan.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the University
Courtyard Apartments Loan ($5.4 million -- 0.5% of the pool),
which is secured by a 384-unit multifamily property in
Tallahassee, Florida. The loan transferred to special servicing in
July 2014 due to the Borrower stating that they would no longer
make payments on the loan. Moody's estimates a minimal loss from
this specially serviced loan.

Moody's received full year 2013 operating results for 92% of the
pool and full or partial year 2014 operating results for 60% of
the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 86% compared to
91% 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 9% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.60X and 1.11X,
respectively, compared to 1.51X and 1.04X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's net cash flow (NCF) and
the loan's actual debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on
Moody's NCF and a 9.25% stressed rate applied to the loan balance.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 22% of the pool
balance. The largest loan is the 200 Water Street Loan ($103
million -- 9% of the pool), which is secured by a 576-unit
multifamily high-rise located in the Financial District of Lower
Manhattan, New York City. The property was 96% leased as of April
2014 compared to 98% at last review. This property was damaged
during Hurricane Sandy, but is now fully operational. Moody's LTV
and stressed DSCR are 73% and 1.11X, respectively, compared to 79%
and 1.02X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the Mid-America Portfolio Loan ($83
million -- 7% of the pool), which is secured by four cross-
collateralized and cross-defaulted multifamily loans located in
Tennessee (2), Florida and South Carolina. The portfolio contains
1,312 units in the aggregate, represented by one, two and three-
bedroom floor plans. The portfolio was 96% leased as of June 2013.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 75% and 1.25X, respectively,
compared to 81% and 1.14X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Summer House Apartments Loan ($68
million -- 6% of the pool), which is secured by a 615-unit garden-
style multifamily property located in Alameda, California. The
property was 95% leased as of June 2014, the same as at last
review. The loan has a 24-month interest only period and,
thereafter, amortizes on a 30-year schedule. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 84% and 1.09X, respectively, compared to 100%
and 0.92X at the last review.


G-FORCE 2005-RR: Fitch Raises Rating on Class B Notes to 'BBsf'
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded two and affirmed 10 classes issued by
G-Force 2005-RR, LLC (G-Force 2005-RR).

Key Rating Drivers

The upgrades and affirmations are a result of paydowns to the
senior notes.  Since the last rating action in January 2014,
approximately 37.7% of the collateral has been upgraded and none
downgraded.  Currently, 69% of the portfolio has a Fitch derived
rating below investment grade and 39.7% has a rating in the 'CCC'
category and below, compared to 73.5% and 38.1%, respectively, at
the last rating action.  Over this period, the transaction has
received $19.4 million in paydowns which has resulted in the full
repayment of the class A-2 notes and $4.6 million in paydowns to
the class B notes.

This transaction was analyzed under the framework described in the
report 'Global Rating Criteria for Structured Finance CDOs' using
the Portfolio Credit Model (PCM) for projecting future default
levels for the underlying portfolio.  Fitch also analyzed the
structure's sensitivity to the assets that are distressed,
experiencing interest shortfalls, and those with near-term
maturities.  Additionally, a deterministic analysis was performed
where the recovery estimate on the distressed collateral was
modeled in accordance with the principal waterfall.  An asset by
asset analysis was then performed for the remaining assets to
determine the collateral coverage for the remaining liabilities.
Based on this analysis, the credit enhancement levels for the
class B notes are consistent with the ratings indicated below.

For the class C and D notes, Fitch analyzed each class'
sensitivity to the default of the distressed assets ('CCC' and
below).  Given the high probability of default of the underlying
assets and the expected recovery prospects upon default, the class
C notes have been upgraded to 'CCCsf', indicating that default is
possible, but no longer inevitable.  Similarly, the class D notes,
due to their subordinate position, have been affirmed at 'Csf',
indicating that default is inevitable.

The class E notes have realized principal losses of approximately
36.5% of their original principal balance while the class F
through N notes have experienced full principal losses.  The class
E through N notes have been affirmed at 'Dsf'.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Stable Outlook on the class B notes reflects Fitch's view that
the notes will continue to delever.  Further losses may cause
downgrades to the class C and D notes.  G-FORCE 2005-RR is backed
by 16 tranches from 8 commercial mortgage backed security (CMBS)
transactions and is considered a CMBS B-piece resecuritization
(also referred to as a first-loss commercial real estate
collateralized debt obligation [CRE CDO]/ReREMIC) as it includes
the most junior bonds of CMBS transactions.  The transaction
closed Feb. 22, 2005.

Fitch has taken these actions as indicated:

   -- $35,601,698 class B notes upgraded to 'BBsf' from 'CCCsf';
      assigned Outlook Stable;
   -- $25,144,000 class C notes upgraded to 'CCCsf' from 'Csf';
   -- $5,029,000 class D notes affirmed at 'Csf';
   -- $10,781,360 class E notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class F notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class G notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class H notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class J notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class K notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class L notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class M notes affirmed at 'Dsf';
   -- $0 class N notes affirmed at 'Dsf'.

Classes O-1 through O-6 are not rated by Fitch.


G-FORCE CDO 2006-1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 3 Note Classes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
notes issued by G-Force CDO 2006-1:

  Cl. SSFL Notes, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Mar 5,
  2014 Affirmed Baa3 (sf)

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

  Cl. A-3 Notes, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 5, 2014
  Affirmed Caa2 (sf)

  Cl. B Notes, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 5, 2014
  Affirmed C (sf)

  Cl. C Notes, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 5, 2014
  Affirmed C (sf)

  Cl. D Notes, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 5, 2014
  Affirmed C (sf)

  Cl. JRFL Notes, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 5, 2014
  Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has upgraded the ratings on the transaction due to rapid
amortization resulting from higher than anticipated recoveries on
high credit-risk assets. The affirmations are the result of
Moody's on-going surveillance of commercial real estate
collateralized debt obligation CRE CDO & Re-Remic transactions.

G-Force CDO 2006-1 is a statis cash transaction that is wholly
backed by a portfolio of commercial mortgage backed securities
(CMBS) (100% of the collateral pool balance). As of the trustee's
November 25, 2014 report, the aggregate note balance of the
transaction, including preferred shares, is $580.6 million,
compared to $647.4 million at last review; with paydowns directed
at the senior-most outstanding notes.

The pool contains thirty six assets totaling $201.6 million (82.2%
of the collateral pool balance) that are listed as impaired
interest securities as of the trustee's November 25, 2014 report.
Thirty six of these assets (100.0% of the defaulted balance) are
CMBS securities. Moody's does expect moderate/high losses to occur
on the impaired interest securities when they are realized.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO & Re-
Remic pool. Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral
it does not rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF
of 3434, compared to 3634 at last review. The current ratings on
the Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-
Moody's rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (19.7%, compared to 12.4%
at last review); A1-A3 (12.6%, compared to 10.6% at last review);
Baa1-Baa3 (9.2%, compared to 7.8% at last review); Ba1-Ba3 (14.6%,
compared to 18.6% at last review); B1-B3 (10.7%, compared to 14.9%
at last review); and Caa1-Ca/C (33.3%, compared to 35.6% at last
review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.2 years, compared to 2.6 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on loans
in the underlying CMBS securities.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 9.3%, compared to 18.8% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 6.5%, compared to 9.1% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in March 2014.

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

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the
rated notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption
could be offset by a change in one or more of the other key
parameter assumptions. The rated notes are particularly sensitive
to changes in the recovery rates of the underlying collateral and
credit assessments. Reducing the recovery rates of 100% of the
collateral pool by 9.3% would result in an average modeled rating
movement on the rated notes of zero to one notch downward (e.g.,
one notch down implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1).
Increasing the recovery rate of 100% of the collateral pool by
10.0% would result in an average modeled rating movement on the
rated notes of zero to two notches upward (e.g., one notches
upward implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Baa2).

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


GALLERIA CDO V: Moody's Hikes Cl. A-1 Sr. Notes Rating to Caa3
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on notes issued
by Galleria CDO V, Ltd.:

  Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Term Notes, due 2037
  (current balance of $24,693,500), Upgraded to Caa3 (sf);
  previously on October 8, 2010 Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Galleria CDO V, Ltd., issued in August 2002, is a collateralized
debt obligation (CDO) issuance backed by a portfolio of
Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities (RMBS) and CDOs originated
between 2001 and 2005.

Ratings Rationale

The rating action is due primarily to the deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratio. The Class A-1 notes have paid down by
approximately 43.9%, or $19.3 million since December 2013. Based
on the trustee's November 2014 report, the over-collateralization
ratio of the Class A notes is reported at 118.6%, versus 94.0% in
December 2013. The paydown of the Class A-1 notes is partially the
result of cash collections from certain assets treated as
defaulted by the trustee in amounts materially exceeding
expectations. Accordingly, Moody's have assumed the deal will
continue to benefit from potential recoveries on defaulted
securities, some of which have experienced significant price
increases in the last two years.

The trustee reported that, on June 18, 2008, the transaction
experienced an "Event of Default" as set forth in Section 5.1 (i)
of the indenture dated August 7, 2002. The Event of Default
continues. On November 18, 2008, holders of at least 50% of the
controlling class have directed the trustee to declare the notes
immediately due and payable. As a result of acceleration, the
Class A notes will receive all interest and principal proceeds
until they are paid in full. On the transaction's September 2014
payment date, $632,785 of excess interest proceeds were used to
pay down Class A-1 notes.

Under Article V of the indenture, during an Event of Default
following failure of the over-collateralization test, if
liquidation proceeds will not equal the aggregate par of the
portfolio sold, the noteholders, by unanimous consent, can direct
the trustee to proceed with the sale and liquidation of the
collateral. In that event, the severity of losses will depend on
the timing and choice of remedy pursued. Moody's believes the
likelihood of liquidation is low because of the unanimous voting
requirement to liquidate.

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 typically applies a Monte Carlo simulation framework in
Moody's CDOROM 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 a CDOEdge cash flow
model to calculate expected losses on the rated notes. Moody's
supplemented its analysis on this deal by estimating that the
expected losses of the notes could be reduced by excess interest
proceeds applied to pay down the senior notes, as well as by
potential recoveries realized from defaulted assets (based on a
range of assumed market values). Moody's determined the current
ratings in part based on these adjusted expected losses.

The deal's ratings are not expected to be sensitive to the typical
range of changes (plus or minus two rating notches on Caa-rated
assets) in the rating quality of the collateral that Moody's
tests, and no sensitivity analysis was performed.


GCA2014 HOLDINGS: S&P Assigns Prelim. B Rating on Class D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to GCA2014 Holdings Ltd.'s $75 million fixed-rate secured
container equipment notes.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by all outstanding class A shares ($163 million) of Global
Container Assets 2014 Ltd. (AssetCo), which includes the rights to
receive cash flow from available payments at the bottom of the
payment waterfalls in AssetCo.  AssetCo. is a container
securitization transaction backed by $429,432,399 (NBV) portfolio
containing 192,816 containers.  AssetCo has the right to net
operating income from the portfolio and any net residual cash
flows from the sale of containers.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 17,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

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

   -- The likelihood that timely interest and ultimate principal
      payments will be made on or before the legal final maturity
      date.

   -- The initial and future lessees' estimated credit quality in
      the AssetCo portfolio.

   -- The AssetCo portfolio characteristics, including the asset
      quality and lease terms.

   -- The transaction's structure.

   -- The servicer's experience in managing the AssetCo container
      portfolio through multiple managers.

   -- The eleven managers' (Textainer Equipment Management Ltd.,
      Raffles Lease Pte. Ltd., Cronos Containers [Cayman] Ltd.,
      SeaCo SRL, Florens Management Services [Macao Commercial
      Offshore] Ltd., TAL International Container Corp., Container
      Applications International Ltd., Dong Fang International
      Asset Management Ltd., Seacube Container Leasing Ltd.,
      Taylor Minster Leasing Ltd., and UES International [HK]
      Holdings Ltd.'s) experience in the container leasing market.

   -- Certain compliance tests, concentration limitations, and
      early amortization events included in the transaction
      documents.

   -- The primary component of the issuer's cash flow are funds
      that are payable to AssetCo at the bottom of the AssetCo
      payment waterfalls; interest and principal payment on class
      C and D notes may be deferred for an extended period of time
      under certain stress scenarios.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

GCA2014 Holdings Ltd.

Class                  Rating             Amount
                                         (mil. $)
C (deferrable)         BB (sf)                55
D (deferrable)         B (sf)                 20
E                      NR                     88

NR--Not rated.


GOLD KEY RESORTS 2014-A: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class C Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its  ratings to Gold
Key Resorts 2014-A LLC's $144.912 million timeshare loan-backed
notes series 2014-A.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by vacation ownership interval (timeshare) loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the credit enhancement available
in the form of subordination (for the class A and B notes only),
overcollateralization, a reserve account that increases to 5% of
the aggregate loan balance if certain events occur, and available
excess spread.  The ratings also reflect S&P's view of Ocean Beach
Club's 24 years of experience in the timeshare market and its
demonstrated servicing ability.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Gold Key Resorts 2014-A LLC

Class       Rating              Amount
                               (mil. $)
A           A (sf)             107.552
B           BBB- (sf)           28.303
C           BB (sf)              9.057


GREENWICH CAPITAL 2007-GG11: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on B Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 20 classes of Greenwich Capital
Commercial Funding Corporation commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2007-GG11 due to stable performance

Key Rating Drivers

Fitch modeled losses of 11.5% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 13%, including $129.5
million (4.8% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date. Fitch has designated 36 loans (28.3%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes 11 specially serviced assets (5.1%).

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 29.5% to $1.89 billion from
$2.69 billion at issuance. Per the servicer reporting, four loans
(3.6% of the pool) are defeased. Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes B through S.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the specially-
serviced Bush Terminal loan (12.9% of the pool), which is secured
by a portfolio of 16 buildings totaling six million square feet
(sf) of industrial/flex/office space located in Brooklyn, NY. At
origination the loan was underwritten by the lender on pro forma
basis with the expectation that the redevelopment of the property
and conversion of a portion of the space from industrial to office
(690,000 sf) and loft/showroom space (2.5 million sf) would
achieve higher rents. Occupancy at the property has been gradually
declining to 59.7% as of September 2014 from 87.2% at issuance,
which partly reflects space being kept vacant for conversion.

The loan transferred to the special servicer in January 2011 due
to payment default. The loan was subsequently modified in April
2012 and split into an A-Note of $190 million and a B-Note of $110
million.

The collateral sustained significant damage from Superstorm Sandy
and was transferred back to the special servicer where it was
again modified and the reduced interest rate of 4.68% extended
through September 2015. A new equity partner has been brought in
which is expected to finally execute on the conversion plans. Due
to the size of the loan, upgrades to the pool will be limited
until the ultimate success or failure of the redevelopment efforts
become more apparent.

The next largest contributor to expected losses is the specially-
serviced Eola Park Center loan (1.5%), which is secured by a
166,497-sf 14-story office building located in Orlando, FL.
Occupancy and rental rates have gradually declined since issuance
due to a soft Orlando office market. The special servicer is dual-
tracking foreclosure, while modification negotiations with the
borrower are ongoing. The loan is over 90 days past due.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is the specially
serviced East West Shops. The property is an 85,610 sf
neighborhood retail center comprised of five single-story
buildings in Austell, GA, 14 miles northwest of Atlanta. The
property has struggled with a decline in occupancy during the
economic downturn from which it never recovered. The asset is now
real estate owned (REO).

Rating Sensitivities

Rating Outlooks on the senior classes remain Stable due to
increasing credit enhancement and continued paydown. Should cash
flows deteriorate further on the performing loans, or if realized
losses exceed current expectations on the specially serviced
loans, downgrades of subordinate classes are possible. Upgrades to
class AM are likely if the Bush Terminal loan shows a sustained
performance turn around.

Fitch affirms the following class and revises the Rating Outlook
as indicated:

-- $268.7 million class A-M at 'BBBsf', Outlook to Positive from
   Stable.

Fitch affirms the following classes:

-- $20.2 million class A-AB at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $995.6 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $201.8 million class A-1-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $211.6 million class A-J at 'CCCsf', RE 85%;
-- $20.2 million class B at 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
-- $26.9 million class C at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
-- $20.2 million class D at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
-- $33.6 million class E at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
-- $13.4 million class F at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $33.6 million class G at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $23.5 million class H at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $25.2 million 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%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
-- $0 class Q at 'Dsf', RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2 and A-3 certificates have paid in full. Fitch
does not rate the class S certificates. Fitch withdrew the ratings
on the class XP and XC Certificates.


GREYWOLF CLO IV: S&P Assigns 'B' Rating on Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
Greywolf CLO IV Ltd./Greywolf CLO IV LLC's $402.80 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 ratings reflect:

   -- The credit enhancement provided to the rated notes through
      overcollateralization, excess spread, and 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.

   -- The transaction's ability to pay timely interest and
      ultimate principal on the rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned  ratings under various interest rate
      scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from 0.2356%-12.8385%.

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

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Greywolf CLO IV Ltd./Greywolf CLO IV LLC

Class                 Rating                 Amount
                                           (mil. $)
A-1                   AAA (sf)               269.18
A-2                   AA (sf)                 54.24
B (deferrable)        A (sf)                  31.78
C (deferrable)        BBB (sf)                21.00
D (deferrable)        BB (sf)                 16.40
E (deferrable)        B (sf)                  10.20
Subordinated notes    NR                      34.55

NR--Not rated.


GS MORTGAGE 2007-GG10: Moody's Lowers Rating on Cl. B Certs to C
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on four classes
and downgraded the ratings on two classes in GS Mortgage
Securities Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2007-GG10 as follows:

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2014 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2014 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. A-M, Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2014
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2014 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2014 Downgraded
to Ca (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2014 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

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

The ratings on two below-investment-grade P&I classes were
affirmed because the ratings are consistent with both realized
losses and Moody's expected loss.

The rating on P&I classes A-M and B were downgraded due to higher
than anticipated realized losses, expected losses from specially
serviced and troubled loans, and the treatment of loans that
constitute 10% or more of the pool balance.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 16.1% of
the current balance compared to 13.7% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 22.4% of
the original pooled balance, compared to 20.7% 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 "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description Of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 20, as compared to 23 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the November 13, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 33% to $5.03
billion from $7.56 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 146 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 14% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting
53% of the pool. Two loans, constituting 4% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Twenty-nine loans, constituting 43% 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.

Forty-six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $886 million (for an average loss
severity of 50%). Twelve loans, constituting 9% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the 400 Atlantic Street Loan ($265 million -- 5% of the
pool), which is secured by an approximately 527,000 square foot
(SF) office property in Stamford, CT. The top three tenants have
lease expirations in the next four years. UBS occupies 51% of the
net rentable area (NRA) and has a lease expiration in September
2018. International Paper occupies 25% of the NRA and has informed
the borrower that it will depart in December 2015 upon lease
expiration and American Express occupied 7% of the NRA and
departed in September 2014. The loan transferred in October 2014
due to imminent default.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the Penn Center East
Loan ($57 million -- 1% of the pool), which is secured by an
approximately 963,000 SF mixed-use property in suburban
Pittsburgh, PA. The property was previously in special servicing
in 2010 after two major tenants departed in 2009, and was returned
to the master servicer in 2011. Occupancy at the property is 58%
as of October 2014, as compared to 57% in March 2013.

The third largest specially serviced loan is the Wharf at
Rivertown Loan ($55 million -- 1% of the pool), which is secured
by an approximately 394,000 SF office property located in Chester,
PA. The property was a former coal-fired power plant that was
redeveloped into office space in 2005. The property had a tax
abatement that expired in 2013. The largest tenant, Wells Fargo
(52% of NRA), is in the process of departing after its lease
expiration in August 2014, which will reduce occupancy from 93% to
41%.

The remaining nine specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $190 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (42% expected loss on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 29 poorly
performing loans, constituting 24% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $291 million (a 24% expected loss based on a
55% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2013 operating results for 96% of the
pool and partial year 2014 operating results for 90% of the pool.
Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 119% compared to 121% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and specially serviced
and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a
weighted average haircut of 6% to the most recently available net
operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.29X and 0.87X,
respectively, compared to 1.27X and 0.84X 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 loans represent 30% of the pool balance. The largest
loan is the Shorenstein Portland Portfolio ($697 million -- 14% of
the pool), which is secured by a portfolio of 16 office properties
in and around Portland, Oregon. The portfolio is occupied by a
diverse roster of tenants, with the average lease covering just
4,000 SF. The loan is on the watchlist following several years of
declining DSCR, after the leases for a number of tenants expired
in recent years and renewed at lower base rents. There are strong
signs that financial performance is recovering: portfolio
occupancy was 86% as of June 2014, up from 82% as of year-end 2012
and 74% as of year-end 2011. The loan is interest only for the
entire term, and matures in 2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 144% and 0.67X, respectively, compared to 144% and 0.68X at
the last review.

The second largest loan is the Wells Fargo Tower Loan ($550
million -- 11% of the pool), which is secured by a 1.4 million SF
office skyscraper in downtown Los Angeles, California. The loan
transferred to special servicing in April 2011 for imminent
default, and was returned to the master servicer in June 2011
after the borrower made timely debt service payments. The property
was 83% leased as of year-end 2013, down from 87% at year end 2012
and 93% at year end 2011. Wells Fargo signed a new lease,
extending its tenancy at the property for ten years through June
2023. The loan sponsor is Brookfield Properties. The loan has been
below break-even for several years. Moody's has identified this as
a troubled loan.

The third largest loan is the TIAA RexCorp New Jersey Portfolio
($270 million -- 5% of the pool), which is secured by a six-
building portfolio of Class A suburban office property in the
northern New Jersey towns of Madison, Morristown, and Short Hills.
Tenants include Dun & Bradstreet, Pfizer, Quest Diagnostics, and
Prudential. Portfolio occupancy was 80% as of June 2014, up from
the 77% reported as of year-end 2012. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 138% and 0.70X, respectively, compared to 138% and 0.71X
at the last review.


HARBOR SERIES 2006-2: Moody's Affirms 'Caa3' Rating on 4 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by Harbor Series 2006-2 LLC:

Cl. A, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2014 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2014 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2014 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 4, 2014 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its
key transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing
ratings. The rating actions are the result of Moody's on-going
surveillance of commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligation (CRE CDO Synthetic) transactions.

Harbor Series 2006-2 LLC is a static synthetic transaction backed
by a portfolio of credit default swaps on commercial mortgage
backed securities (CMBS) (100% of the reference obligation pool
balance). As of the November 20, 2014 trustee report, the
aggregate note balance of the transaction has decreased to $116.3
million from $120 million at issuance, with the reference pool
amortization being paid to the notes on a pro-rata basis. This
transaction features a pro-rata to senior-sequential and vice-
versa waterfall switch which is based upon certain thresholds.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the reference obligations
it does not rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF
of 1642, compared to 1385 at last review. The current ratings on
the Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-
Moody's rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 and 19.3% compared to
20.0% at last review, A1-A3 and 19.2% compared to 18.7% at last
review, Baa1-Baa3 and 13.3% compared to 20.7% at last review, Ba1-
Ba3 and 26.5% compared to 24.9% at last review, B1-B3 and 11.8%
compared to 6.1% at last review, Caa1-Ca/C and 10.0% compared to
9.7% at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.7 years, compared to 2.0 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
reference obligations.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 13.7%, compared to 35.0% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 14.1 % compared to 13.4% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in March 2014.

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

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the
rated notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption
could be offset by a change in one or more of the other key
parameter assumptions. The rated notes are particularly sensitive
to changes in the recovery rates of the underlying collateral and
credit assessments. Notching down the collateral pool by one notch
would result in no modeled rating movement on the rated notes.
Notching up the collateral pool by one notch would result in no
modeled rating movement on the rated notes.

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


HEMPSTEAD CLO: Fitch Affirms 'BBsf' Rating on Class D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings affirms the ratings of Hempstead CLO LP as:

   -- $383,500,000 class A-1 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $47,320,000 class A-2 notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $69,500,000 class B notes 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $31,100,000 class C loans 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $26,700,000 class D notes 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the income notes.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations are based on the stable performance of the
underlying portfolio since the transaction's inception in December
2013, the sufficient credit enhancement available to the notes,
and the cushions available in the CLO's cash flow modeling
results.  As of the November 2014 trustee report, the transaction
continues to pass all coverage tests and collateral quality tests,
and there have been no defaults in the underlying portfolio to
date.  Fitch's cash flow analysis also indicates each class of
notes is passing all 12 interest rate and default timing scenarios
at or above their current rating levels.

The loan portfolio par amount plus principal cash is approximately
$654.1 million, compared to the effective date target balance of
$650 million.  The current weighted average spread (WAS) is 4.8%
versus a minimum WAS trigger of 4.7%, as reported by the trustee.
Additionally, the weighted average rating factor remains unchanged
at 'B/B-' since the closing date.  Fitch currently considers 10.1%
of the collateral assets to be rated in the 'CCC' category versus
10% in the indicative portfolio at closing, based on Fitch's
Issuer Default Rating (IDR) Equivalency Map.

The Stable Outlook on each class of notes of Hempstead CLO
reflects the expectation that the notes have sufficient levels of
credit protection to withstand potential deterioration in the
credit quality of the portfolio.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The ratings of the notes may be sensitive to the following: asset
defaults, portfolio migration, including assets being downgraded
to 'CCC', portions of the portfolio being placed on Rating Watch
Negative, overcollateralization or interest coverage (IC) test
breaches, or breach of concentration limitations or portfolio
quality covenants.  Fitch conducted rating sensitivity analysis on
the closing date of Hempstead CLO, incorporating increased levels
of defaults and reduced levels of recovery rates, among other
sensitivities.

Hempstead CLO is an arbitrage cash flow collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) that is managed by Guggenheim Partners Investment
Management, LLC, with a four-year reinvestment period and two-year
non-call period.  During the reinvestment period, discretionary
sales are permitted at any time and are limited to 30% of the
portfolio balance, as measured at the beginning of the preceding
12-month period.  The manager also has the ability to reinvest
unscheduled principal proceeds and sales proceeds from the
disposal of credit risk obligations after the reinvestment period,
subject to certain conditions.

This review was conducted under the framework described in the
report 'Global Rating Criteria for Corporate CDOs' using Fitch's
Portfolio Credit Model (PCM) to project future default and
recovery levels for the underlying portfolio.  These default and
recovery levels were then utilized in Fitch's cash flow model
under various combinations of default timing and interest rate
stress scenarios, as described in the report.  The cash flow model
was customized to reflect the transaction's structural features.

The current portfolio's 'AAAsf' Rating Default Rate (RDR) and
Rating Recovery Rate (RRR) outputs from PCM (the stress used to
achieve a 'AAAsf' rating on the class A-1 notes) are 55.5% and
37.7%, respectively, versus an RDR of 55.6% and RRR of 39.9% for
the indicative portfolio at closing.  The RDR decreases to 36.9%
and the RRR increases to 66.4% at the 'BBsf' stress (the stress
used to achieve a 'BBsf' rating on the class D notes) versus an
RDR of 37.1% and RRR of 69.8% for the indicative portfolio at
closing.

Initial Key Rating Drivers and Rating Sensitivity are further
described in the Rating Action Commentary (RAC) published on
Dec. 26, 2013.  A comparison of the transaction's Representations,
Warranties, and Enforcement Mechanisms (RW&Es) to those of typical
RW&Es for that asset class is also available by accessing the
reports and links.


HESPERIA REDEVELOPMENT: S&P Raises Rating on 2005A TABs From BB+
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its long-term rating and
underlying rating (SPUR) to 'BBB-' from 'BB+' on Hesperia
Redevelopment Agency, Calif.'s series 2005A tax allocation bonds.
The outlook is stable.

"The rating action reflects our view of the project areas' recent
assessed value (AV) growth, which has contributed to improving
debt service coverage," said Standard & Poor's credit analyst
Beverly Correa.

The stable outlook reflects S&P's anticipation that AV growth will
likely continue, which should improve MADS coverage slightly, and
that management will continue prudent cash management practices as
required by the indenture provisions.


HIGHBRIDGE LOAN 5-2015: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB Rating on E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to Highbridge Loan Management 5-2015 Ltd./Highbridge Loan
Management 5-2015 LLC's $472.25 million floating-rate notes.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 10,
2014.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of
final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

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

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

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

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

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

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and
      ultimate principal payments on the preliminary rated notes,
      which S&P assessed using its cash flow analysis and
      assumptions commensurate with the assigned preliminary
      ratings under various interest-rate scenarios, including
      LIBOR ranging from 0.2336%-12.5311%.

   -- 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 transactions interest diversion test, a failure of which
      will lead to the reclassification of a certain amount of
      excess interest proceeds, that are available (before paying
      subordinated management fees, uncapped administrative
      expenses and fees; and subordinated note payments) as
      principal proceeds to purchase additional collateral assets
      during the reinvestment period.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS LIST

Highbridge Loan Management 5-2015 Ltd./
Highbridge Loan Management 5-2015 LLC

Class            Rating                         Amount (mil. $)
X                AAA (sf)                                  3.00
A                AAA (sf)                                309.00
B                AA (sf)                                  68.50
C                A (sf)                                   34.00
D                BBB (sf)                                 27.75
E                BB (sf)                                  21.25
F                B (sf)                                    8.75
Subordinated notes   NR                                   46.25

NR--Not rated.


HILLMARK FUNDING: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-1, A-2, and B notes from Hillmark Funding Ltd., a cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by
Hillmark Capital Management L.P., and removed them from
CreditWatch, where S&P placed them with positive implications on
Nov. 17, 2014.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the
class C and D notes and removed its rating on the class C note
from CreditWatch with positive implications.

Since S&P's March 2012 rating actions, this transaction has exited
its reinvestment period, which ended in Nov. of 2013.  The class
A-1 notes have paid down by $83 million to 77% of their initial
issuance amount.  The class A overcollateralization (O/C) ratio
increased to 124% as of the November 2014 trustee report, from
121% as of the February 2012 trustee report, which S&P referenced
for its March 2012 rating actions.

There is some portfolio concentration as the top five obligors
account for over 10% of the portfolio.  Although the class C and D
notes now pass S&P's cash flow stresses at a higher rating
category, it affirmed its ratings on both notes because they were
constrained by the top obligor test.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Hillmark Funding Ltd.

                             Cash flow
        Previous             implied     Cash flow       Final
Class   rating               rating      cushion(i)      rating
A1      AA+(sf)/Watch Pos    AAA (sf)    4.34%           AAA (sf)
A2      AA (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)    10.03%          AA+ (sf)
B       A (sf)/Watch Pos     A+ (sf)     6.23%           A+ (sf)
C       BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos   BBB- (sf)   2.15%           BB+ (sf)
D       B+ (sf)              BB (sf)     0.89%           B+ (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              thin industry (%)     Between industries (%)
Below base case             15.0                    5.0
Base case equals rating     20.0                    7.5
Above base case             25.0                    10.0

                    10% Recovery   Correlation   Correlation
        Cash flow   decrease     increase      decrease
        implied     implied      implied       implied    Final
Class   rating      rating       rating        rating     rating
A1      AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)   AAA (sf)
A2      AA+ (sf)    AA (sf)      AA (sf)       AA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
B       A+ (sf)     A (sf)       A (sf)        A (sf)     A+ (sf)
C       BBB- (sf)   BB+ (sf)     BB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)
D       BB (sf)     B+ (sf)      B+ (sf)       B+ (sf)    B+ (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
A1      AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)
A2      AA+ (sf)    AA (sf)       AA (sf)       AA+ (sf)
B       A+ (sf)     A (sf)        A (sf)        A+ (sf)
C       BBB- (sf)   BB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)      BB+ (sf)
D       BB (sf)     B+ (sf)       B+ (sf)       B+ (sf)

RATINGS LIST

Hillmark Funding Ltd.

                     Rating
Class   Identifier   To         From
A-1     43164QAA2    AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
A-2     43164QAB0    AA+ (sf)   AA (sf)/Watch Pos
B       43164QAC8    A+ (sf)    A (sf)/Watch Pos
C       43164QAD6    BB+ (sf)   BB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D       43164RAC6    B+ (sf)    B+ (sf)


HSI ASSET 2006-OPT2: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. M-2 Debt to B2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of four
tranches from two subprime RMBS transactions backed by Subprime
mortgage loans.

Issuer: ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2005-
HE6

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jan 22, 2014
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jan 22, 2014
Upgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: HSI Asset Securitization Corporation Trust 2006-OPT2

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jan 13, 2014
Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating actions reflect recent performance of the underlying
pools and Moody's updated loss expectations on the pools. The
upgrade actions are a result of improving performance of the
related pools and/or improving credit enhancement on the bonds due
to continued availability of spread and failure of performance
triggers.

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 November 2014 from 7%
in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range
of 6% to 7% 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.


ICONS LTD: S&P Raises Ratings on 3 Note Classes to 'BB+'
--------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A, B, C-1, C-2, C-3, and II comp notes from ICONS Ltd., a
collateralized debt obligation transaction backed by trust-
preferred securities (TruPs) issued by insurance companies, and
removed the ratings on the class A and II comp notes from
CreditWatch, where they were placed with positive implications on
Sept. 17, 2014.  At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the
class D and I comp notes.

The upgrades reflect approximately $57.0 million in total paydowns
to the class A, I comp, and II comp notes and the improved credit
support available to the notes since S&P raised its ratings on all
of the rated notes in July 2012.  This has left the class A notes
at 37.79% of their original balance.  The class I comp and II comp
notes were initially class A notes that were then issued into
classes I comp and II comp, where principal payments to the class
I comp notes are senior to that of the class II comp notes.

The upgrades also reflect the improved overcollateralization (O/C)
available to the notes, mainly due to the aforementioned paydowns,
since S&P's July 2012 rating actions.  The class B O/C ratio was
164.81% according to the Sept. 2014 quarterly report, compared
with 149.04% in the May 2012 quarterly report, which S&P used for
its July 2012 rating actions.

The affirmations of S&P's ratings on the class D and I comp notes
reflect the availability of credit support at the current rating
levels.

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

RATINGS LIST

ICONS Ltd.

                       Rating     Rating
Class     Identifier   To         From

A         45104SAA6    A+ (sf)    A- (sf)/Watch Pos
B         45104SAB4    A (sf)     BBB (sf)
C-1       45104SAC2    BB+ (sf)   B (sf)
C-2       45104SAD0    BB+ (sf)   B (sf)
C-3       45104SAF5    BB+ (sf)   B (sf)
D         45104SAE8    B- (sf)    B- (sf)
I Comp    45104SAG3    A+ (sf)    A+ (sf)
II Comp   45104SAH1    A+ (sf)    A- (sf)/Watch Pos


JAMESTOWN CLO V: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating on $8MM Cl. F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following ratings to notes issued by Jamestown CLO V Ltd.:

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

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

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

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

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

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

$8,000,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2027 (the "Class F Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned 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."

Ratings Rationale

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

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 approximately 80%
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.


JP MORGAN 2001-CIBC1: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on 5 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded one class and affirmed five classes
of J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp. series
2001-CIBC1 commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

Key Rating Drivers

The downgrade to class G reflects the increased likelihood of
losses to the class as realized losses have eroded credit
enhancement since Fitch's last rating action.  The pool remains
concentrated as only seven of the original 167 loans remain.
Fitch modeled losses of 35.8% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 6.3%, including $58.4
million (5.8% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date.  Fitch has designated three loans (70.7%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes two specially serviced assets (43%).

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 98.3% to $17.2 million from
$1.01 billion at issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, one loan
(1.5% of the pool) is defeased.  Interest shortfalls are currently
affecting classes H through NR.

The largest contributor to expected losses is a 45,000 square foot
(sf) retail property (17.6% of pool) located in Akron, OH.  The
property was previously 100% occupied by Dicks Sporting Goods
which vacated the property upon their lease expiration in November
2013.  The property remains completely vacant and foreclosure was
completed in September 2014.  Since becoming real estate owned
(REO), the property was marketed for sale and has gone under
contract with an expected closing to occur within the next 60
days.

The largest remaining loan in the pool is secured by a 70,099 sf
retail center in Fresno, CA.  The largest tenant who occupies
32,080 sf (46% of net rentable area [NRA]) is no longer making
payments.  The next two largest tenants, which combine for 14.9%
of the NRA have matured leases with no update to their current
occupancy status.  The master servicer anticipates a transfer to
the special servicer as payments have begun to become delinquent.
As of year-end 2013 the property had a net operating income debt
service coverage ratio of 1.3X.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The rating on the class G notes may be subject to further
downgrades as losses are realized.

Fitch downgrades these classes and assigns a Recovery Estimate
(REs) as indicated:

   -- $14.6 million class G to 'Csf' from 'CCCsf', RE 75%.

Fitch affirms these classes as indicated:

   -- $2.6 million 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%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3, B, C, D, E, X-2 and F certificates have
paid in full.  Fitch does not rate the class NR certificate.


JP MORGAN 2005-LDP4: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Class D Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on eight
classes and upgraded the rating on one class in J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2005-LDP4 as follows:

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-M, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Affirmed
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2014 Downgraded
to B1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

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

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

The rating on the P&I class A-M was upgraded primarily due to an
increase in credit support since Moody's last review, resulting
from paydowns and amortization, as well as Moody's expectation of
additional increases in credit support resulting from the payoff
of loans approaching maturity that are well positioned for
refinance. The pool has paid down by 6% since Moody's last review.
In addition, loans constituting 64% of the pool that have debt
yields exceeding 10.0% are scheduled to mature within the next 12
months.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 5.6% of the
current balance compared to 6.0% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 11.0% of the
original pooled balance compared to 10.7% 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 "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 40 compared to 45 at Moody's last review.

Deal Performance

As of the November 17, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 51% to $1.3 billion
from $2.7 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 139 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 6% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 34%
of the pool. One loan, constituting 5% of the pool, has an
investment-grade structured credit assessment. Thirteen loans,
constituting 17% of the pool, have defeased and are secured by US
government securities.

Thirty loans, constituting 22% 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.

Twenty-one loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $219 million (for an average loss
severity of 57%). Four loans, constituting 2% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the University Club Loan (for $11 million 0.8% of the
pool), which is secured by a 480-unit multifamily property located
across the street from Western Michigan University Campus in
Kalamazoo, Michigan. It was transferred to special servicing in
2013 for imminent default. The timing and strategy for the
property has not yet been determined.

The remaining three specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $13.6 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (56% expected loss on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 17 poorly
performing loans, constituting 19% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $48 million (a 19% expected loss based on a
50% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2013 operating results for 89% of the
pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 82% compared to 91%
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 10% 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 1.50X and 1.27X,
respectively, compared to 1.45X and 1.14X 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 Plastipak
Portfolio Loan ($68.6 million -- 5.2% of the pool), which is
secured by 14 industrial warehouses across eight states. The
buildings are solely occupied by Plastipak Holdings (LT Rating B2
-- Positive Outlook), which makes plastic bottles for the food and
consumer industry. The triple net leases expire in 2025. Occupancy
is 100%, same as at last review and securitization. Moody's
structured credit assessment and stressed DSCR are a3 (sca) and
2.19X, respectively, compared to a3 (sca) and 1.99X at the last
review.

The top three conduit loans represent 13% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the One World Trade Loan ($84.4 million -- 6.4% of
the pool), which is secured by a 27-story, Class A office property
located in downtown Long Beach, California. The loan is on the
watchlist due to low DSCR caused by occupancy loss. As of
September 2014, the occupancy was 59% compared to 74% at last
review. Moody's has identified this as a troubled loan.

The second largest loan is the Highland Landmark Building Loan
($50 million -- 3.8% of the pool), which is secured by an office
property in Downers Grove, Illinois, located 22 miles west of
Chicago. As of June 2014, the property was 71% leased compared to
70% at last review. The property declined from 100% occupancy in
2012 when one tenant occupying 57% vacated at lease expiration.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 240% and 0.41X, respectively,
compared to 128% and 0.76X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Simmons Tower Loan ($42 million --
3.2% of the pool), which is secured by a 40-story office building
located in downtown Little Rock, AR. Simmons Bank purchased
Metropolitan National Bank in 2014 (11% of NRA) and renamed the
tower. As of September 2014, the building was 85% leased. Moody's
LTV and stressed DSCR are 84% and 1.19X, respectively, compared to
91% and 1.10X at the last review.


JP MORGAN 2006-A4: Moody's Cuts Rating on Cl. 4-A-4 Debt to Caa2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the rating of one tranche
backed by Prime Jumbo RMBS loans, issued by J.P. Morgan Mortgage
Trust 2006-A4.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2006-A4

Cl. 4-A-4, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2013
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The action is a result of the recent performance of the underlying
pool and reflects Moody's updated loss expectation on the pool.
The downgrade rating action is a result of deteriorating
performance and higher than expected losses on the bond where the
credit support has been depleted.

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

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

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 November 2014 from
7.0% in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 5% to 6% for the 2015 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 2015. 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.


JP MORGAN 2006-CIBC15: Moody's Cuts Rating on Cl. A-J Certs to C
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on four classes
and downgraded the ratings on two classes in J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., Commercial Mortgage Pass-
Through Certificates, Series 2006-CIBC15 as follows:

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 22, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on May 22, 2014 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on May 22, 2014 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. A-M, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 22, 2014
Affirmed Ba2 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on May 22, 2014 Affirmed
Ca (sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on May 22, 2014 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on the P&I classes A-SB, A-1A and A-4 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 rating on the IO class was affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor) of the
referenced classes.

The ratings on the P&I classes, A-M and A-J, were downgraded due
to higher than anticipated realized losses, expected losses from
specially serviced and troubled loans, and the treatment of loans
that constitute 10% or more of the pool balance.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 8.6% of the
current balance compared to 9.3% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 19.5% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 19.0% 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 "Approach to Rating US
and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December 2014 and
"Moody's Approach to Rating CMBS Large Loan/Single Borrower
Transactions" published in July 2000.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and conduit loans that represent 10% or greater of
the current pool balance.

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 15 compared to 16 at Moody's last review.

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

Deal Performance

As of the November 12, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 3% to $1.44 billion
from $2.12 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 98 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 20% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 48% of
the pool. Fifteen loans, constituting 9% of the pool, have
defeased and are secured by US government securities.

Thirty-six loans, constituting 43% 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.

Twenty-three loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting
in an aggregate realized loss of $288.4 million (for an average
loss severity of 61.5%). Four loans, constituting 3% of the pool,
are currently in special servicing. The largest specially serviced
loan is the Rockwell Automation Loan ($16.1 million -- 1.1% of the
pool), which is secured by a two-story commercial and industrial
building located in Shirley, New York. The lease for the
property's sole tenant expired in November 2013 and the building
has been vacant since then. The deal's special servicer recently
changed to LNR Partners, LLC; they are currently evaluating a
strategy for this asset.

The remaining three specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $21.3 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (52.9% expected loss on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 16 poorly
performing loans, constituting 13% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $41.5 million (a 22% expected loss based on a
49% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full or partial year 2013 operating results for
100% of the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 104%
compared to 103% 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 positive adjustment of
25.2% to the most recently available net operating income (NOI).
Excluding the positive adjustment to the Warner Building Loan,
which represents 20.3% of the pool, Moody's NCF reflects a
weighted average haircut of 10.8%. Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.23%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.26X and 1.00X,
respectively, compared to 1.28X 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 conduit loans represent 32% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Warner Building Loan ($292.7 million -- 20.3%
of the pool), which is secured by 602,000 square foot (SF) Class A
office building located four blocks from the White House in
Washington, DC. The property is approximately 75% leased. The
property's low occupancy is the result of the loss of a major
tenant, which occupied almost half of the net rentable area, in
2011. Since 2013, notable lease signings have included Camris
International, Inc., Cooley LLP, and Facebook. The property
benefits from strong sponsorship, which is a partnership between
Vornado Realty Trust and Canada Pension Plan Investment Board.
Moody's analysis reflects a stabilized occupancy level. Moody's
LTV and stressed DSCR are 126% and 0.73X, respectively, unchanged
since last review.

The second largest loan is the Greenway Portfolio Loan ($112
million -- 7.8% of the pool), which is secured by eight office and
flex properties located in Middleton, Wisconsin. As of September
2014, the portfolio was approximately 90% leased compared to 100%
at year-end 2013. The loan is interest-only for its entire term.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 120% and 0.83X, respectively,
unchanged since last review.

The third largest loan is the Scottsdale Plaza Resort Loan ($57.6
million -- 4.0% of the pool), which is secured by a 404 room un-
flagged full-service hotel located in Scottsdale, Arizona. The
owner, John W. Dawson, has owned the property since 1976. Property
performance has been depressed since 2013. Occupancy for year to
date through June 2014 is 67%; occupancy for full year 2013 was
55%. Due to poor performance, Moody's has identified this as a
troubled loan.


JP MORGAN 2007-CIBC20: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 4 Certificates
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of three
classes and affirmed 13 classes in J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2007-CIBC20 as follows:

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-M, Downgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014
Affirmed A2 (sf)

Cl. A-MFX, Downgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014
Affirmed A2 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014
Affirmed B1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-1, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 24, 2014 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The ratings on P&I classes A-M, A-MFX and A-J were downgraded due
to higher than anticipated realized losses, expected losses from
specially serviced and troubled loans, and the treatment of loans
that constitute 10% or more of the pool balance.

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

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

The rating IO class, Class X-1, was 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 11.9% of
the current balance compared to 10.1% at Moody's prior review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 14.6% of
the original pooled balance compared to 13.0% at the prior 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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or
weaker than Moody's had previously anticipated.

Factors that may cause an upgrade of the ratings include
significant loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in the
pool's share of defeasance or overall improved pool performance.

Factors that may cause a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the overall performance of the pool, loan
concentration, increased expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 v8.7 and then reconciles and weights the results from
the conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation. The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship. Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

Deal Performance

As of the November 12, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 24% to $1.93
billion from $2.54 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 99 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 15% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) representing 56% of the pool. The pool contains one
loan, representing less than 1% of the pool, that has an
investment grade structured credit assessment. One loan,
representing less than 1% of the pool has defeased and is secured
by US Government securities.

Forty-one loans, representing 40% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans which meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, Moody's reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
impact performance.

Twenty-eight loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting
in an aggregate realized loss of $143 million (56% loss severity
on average). Eight loans, representing 12% of the pool, are in
special servicing. The servicer has notified Moody's that the
smallest of the eight has been resolved as of December 2, 2014,
which will be reflected in next month's remittance statement. The
largest specially serviced loan is the Colony Portfolio Loan ($107
million -- 5.5% of the pool), which consists of three cross-
collateralized and cross-defaulted loans secured by office and
industrial properties totaling 1,662,810 square feet (SF). The
properties are located in six states: California, Colorado,
Georgia, Illinois, Kansas and Missouri. The loan was transferred
to special servicing in September 2014 due to imminent maturity
default. Currently, the Borrower has requested a six month
extension on the loan and expects to pay off the loan in full,
along with any refinance proceeds. The property was 96% leased as
of June 2014.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the Clark Tower Loan
($59.9 million -- 3.1% of the pool), which is secured by a 34-
story, 657,245 SF office building located in Memphis, Tennessee.
The property was 68% leased as of April 2014 compared to 66% as of
December 2012. The loan was transferred to special servicing in
September 2013 due to imminent payment default. The special
servicer is evaluating the borrower's A/B note modification.

The remaining four specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $72.3 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (66% expected loss on
average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 25 poorly-
performing loans representing 20% of the pool and has estimated an
aggregate $64 million loss (17% expected loss based on a 50%
probability of default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full-year 2013 operating results for 98% of the
pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 107% compared to
106% at Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 12% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.25X and 0.97X,
respectively, compared to 1.29X and 0.99X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's net cash flow (NCF) and
the loan's actual debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on
Moody's NCF and a 9.25% stressed rate applied to the loan balance.

The loan with a structured credit assessment is the 1564 Broadway
Loan ($18.0 million -- 0.9% of the pool), which is secured by a
52,657 SF mixed use property located in Times Square in New York,
New York. Moody's structured credit assessment and stressed DSCR
are aa2 (sca.pd) and 2.30X, respectively, compared to a2 (sca.pd)
and 2.16X at the last review.

The top three conduit loans represent 35% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Retail Portfolio Loan (formerly Centro -- New
Plan Pool I; $292.9 million -- 15.0% of the pool), which is
secured by a portfolio of 18 retail properties that are cross-
collateralized and cross-defaulted and total 3.1 million SF. The
properties are located in 12 states, with the largest
concentrations in Georgia (20%), Florida (14%) and Texas (13%).
The portfolio was 92% leased as of July 2014 compared to 93%
leased as of January 2014. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 110%
and 0.89X, respectively, compared to 110% and 0.88X at the last
review.

The second largest loan is the Gurnee Mills Loan ($246 million --
12.7% of the pool), which is a pari passu interest in a $321.0
million first mortgage loan. The loan is secured by the borrower's
interest in a 1.8 million SF regional mall located in Gurnee,
Illinois. The mall's major tenants include Sears, Bass Pro Shops
Outdoor World and Kohl's. The property was 96% leased as of June
2014 compared to 95% as of December 2013. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 122% and 0.78X, respectively, the same as at last review.

The third largest loan is the North Hills Mall Loan ($141.2
million -- 7.3% of the pool), which is secured by the borrower's
interest in a 586,000 SF mixed use property that includes Main
Street outdoor retail, an office component, a 14-screen movie
theater, JC Penney, and two bank outparcels. The property is
situated within a mixed-use development that includes residential
condominiums, commercial and hotel properties, a retirement
community and recreational amenities. Although the property has
been well leased, and was 97% leased as of July 2014, it has been
operating below break-even for several years. Moody's considers
this a troubled loan.


JP MORGAN 2007-LDP12: Fitch Lowers Rating on Class C Notes to CC
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one class, downgraded one distressed
class, and affirmed 19 classes of J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2007-LDP12.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The upgrade is due to increasing credit enhancement from paydown
including two of the previous top 15 loans at the time of the
prior rating action.  Fitch modeled losses of 12.4% of the
remaining pool; expected losses on the original pool balance total
13.1%, including $152 million (6.1% of the original pool balance)
in realized losses to date.  Fitch has designated 31 loans (25.1%)
as Fitch Loans of Concern, which includes 10 specially serviced
assets (8.4%).

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 43.1% to $1.43 billion from
$2.5 billion at issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, two loans
(0.6% of the pool) are defeased.  Interest shortfalls are
currently affecting classes D through NR.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the Liberty Plaza, a
real estate owned (REO) asset (3% of the pool).  The property is a
365,556 square foot (sf) community shopping plaza, anchored by a
24-hour Wal-Mart, Dicks Clothing & Sporting Goods and Super Fresh
Food Market.  The property was built in 1989, renovated in 1994,
and is situated on a 33 acre pad.  The loan transferred to special
servicing in January 2013 due to imminent default.  The largest
tenant, Wal-Mart exercised an option to extend its lease through
March 2015.  Wal-Mart comprises 131,812 sf (34% of net rentable
area [NRA] and 33% of net rental income).  Per the special
servicer, Wal-Mart has acquired the former Boscov's space at the
adjacent Franklin Mills Mall and is in the process of building a
supercenter and will vacate the center at lease expiration in
March of 2015.  The property is 94% occupied as of October 2014.
The special servicer continues to search for replacements for Wal-
Mart.

The next largest contributor to expected losses is the St. Joe -
150 W. Main loan (3.2%), which is secured by a 227,047 sf multi-
tenant office building located in Norfolk, VA.  The largest
tenants are Kaufman & Canoles (28%), lease expiration July 31,
2022; SunTrust Bank (21%), lease expiration Dec. 31, 2018; CB
Richard Ellis (7%), lease expiration Dec. 31, 2015; Wilbanks Smith
(7%), lease expiration Dec. 31, 2021; Crenshaw Ware & Mart (6%),
lease expiration May 31, 2022.  The property is 81% occupied as of
September 2014 with average rent $29 sf.  Per REIS as of the third
quarter of 2014 (3Q'14), the Norfolk submarket had a vacancy rate
of 16.7% with average asking rent $19.28 psf.  There is
approximately 5% upcoming rollover in 2015.  Per the master
servicer, the borrower has indicated one tenant is expected to
downsize a portion of their space and another will vacate at lease
expiration in 2015.  Additionally, a lease has been signed with a
new tenant for the entire 12th floor with expected occupancy in
September 2015.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is the specially-
serviced BB&T Tower loan (2.2%), which is secured by an 18 story
high rise office building consisting of 282,000 sf built in 1975,
renovated in 1994, and located in Jacksonville, FL.  The largest
tenants are Branch Banking and Trust Co, with 46,831 sf comprising
16.6% of the Property's net rentable sf (nrsf), expiring Feb. 28,
2019, HDR Engineering, with 22,000 sf comprising 7.8% of the
Property's nrsf, expiring Dec. 31, 2018, and Patriot
Transportation Holdings, with 14,649 sf comprising 5.2% of the
property's nrsf, expiring April 30, 2023.  The loan was
transferred to special servicing in May 2014 and no payments have
been made on the loan since June 2014.  The loan matured in July
2014.  The special servicer is currently dual tracking foreclosure
along with negotiation discussions with the Borrower.  At
securitization, the loan was underwritten to pro forma income with
a 1.24x 'as stabilized' debt service coverage ratio (DSCR), while
the 'as-is' DSCR was only 1.01x.  Similarly, the true underwritten
occupancy was 65.8%, but the loan was underwritten assuming a
stabilized occupancy of 91%. The year-end (YE) 2013 financials
reported a 0.81x DSCR and 1Q'14 DSCR was 1.04x with occupancy of
84%.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks on classes A-3 through A-M remain Stable due to
increasing credit enhancement and continued paydown.  Further
upgrades to class A-M are possible in the future provided loans
within the top 15 with upcoming lease rollover stabilize.

Fitch downgrades these classes as indicated:

   -- $28.2 million class C to 'CCsf' from 'CCCsf', RE 0%.

Fitch upgrades these classes as indicated:

   -- $250.5 million class A-M to 'Asf' from 'BBBsf', Outlook
      Stable.

Fitch affirms these classes and revises REs as indicated:

   -- $18.4 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $601.7 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $23.7 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $182.8 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
   -- $197.2 million class A-J at 'CCCsf', RE 15%;
   -- $21.9 million class B at 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
   -- $21.9 million class D at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
   -- $12.5 million class E at 'Csf', RE 0%;
   -- $25 million class F at 'Csf', RE 0%;
   -- $28.2 million class G at 'Csf', RE 0%;
   -- $13.9 million 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 P at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class Q at 'Dsf', RE 0%;
   -- $0 class T at 'Dsf', RE 0%.

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


JP MORGAN 2010-C1: Fitch Cuts Rating on Class F Certs to 'Bsf'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded three classes of JP Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust commercial mortgage pass
through certificates, series 2010-C1 and revised the Rating
Outlooks on two classes.

Key Rating Drivers

The downgrades are primarily driven by the performance of The
Gateway at Salt Lake City (19.1% of the pool), the largest loan in
the pool, which is performing below expectations.

The subject property is a 623,972 square foot (sf) retail center
located in downtown Salt Lake City, UT that is anchored by Dick's
Sporting Goods, Barnes & Noble and Gateway Theaters. The property
has suffered a steady decline in occupancy since 2012 when City
Creek, a nearby retail center opened and immediately put pressure
on Gateway's operations, luring certain tenants away from the
subject property. As of September 2014, the Gateway was 77.4%
occupied, compared to 83% at YE2013, 85.5% at YE2012 and 93% at
YE2011. The property was 96.4% occupied at issuance. Since Fitch's
last review in July 2014, the property NOI continues to decline as
a result of lower occupancy and an increase in tenants paying
percentage rent, as allowed by existing co-tenancy clauses. Per
the September 2014 rent roll, leases representing approximately
30% of the property are paying a percentage rent. NOI as of
trailing 12 month (TTM) ending September 2014 dropped 12% from YE
2013. Total mall sales were down 16% for the same period. The
servicer reported the annualized 3Q 2014 DSCR was 0.78x, compared
to 1.09x at YE2013 and 1.36x at YE2012. Fitch calculated DSCR as
of TTM ending September 2014 was 0.95x.

Fitch also has concerns over the performance of the 13th largest
loan, Aquia Office Building (2.9%), which is secured by a 97,990sf
office property located in Stafford, VA. Per the November 2014
rent roll, the property was 91.5% occupied. The largest tenant,
TASC, occupies 62,184 SF (63% NRA) with a lease expiring in
December 2014. Per the servicer, the tenant will vacate upon lease
expiration. A new tenant has executed a four year lease to take
over part of TASC's space (14,784 SF, representing 15% of NRA),
effective May 2015. As a result, the occupancy rate is expected to
drop to 28.5% in January 2015 and subsequently increase to 44%
after the new tenant takes occupancy. Per the servicer, the YE2014
pro forma NOI DSCR without TASC is 0.14x and the 2015 pro forma
NOI DSCR with 8 months of rent from the new tenant is 0.41x.

Fitch modeled losses of 4.7% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 3.2%. As of the November
2014 distribution date, the pool's certificate balance has paid
down 32.9% to $480.9 million from $716.3 million at issuance.
There are currently 26 loans in the pool collateralized by 64
properties. No loans are special serviced or delinquent. At
Fitch's previous rating action, one loan was in special servicing,
it has since paid off in full. One loan is defeased (3.5%).

Rating Sensitivities

The Rating Outlooks for classes A1 through C remain Stable; the
majority of the pool has maintained performance consistent with
issuance and many of the loans have low leverage. In addition,
34.3% of the pool matures in 2015, most of which are expected to
pay off at maturity. The Negative Rating Outlooks for classes D, E
and F indicate that future downgrades are possible if the
performance of the Gateway at Salt Lake City loan deteriorates
further. Ratings on distressed classes may subject to further
downgrades when losses are allocated.

Fitch downgrades the following classes:

-- $9 million class F to 'Bsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $7.2 million class G to 'CCCsf' from 'B+sf'; RE30%
-- $6.3 million class H to 'CCCsf' from 'B-sf'; RE 0%.

Fitch affirms the following classes and revises Outlooks as
indicated:

-- $180.7million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $131.3 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $61.5 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest Only class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable.
-- $16.1 million class B at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $26.9 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $14.3 million class D at 'BBBsf'; Outlook to Negative from
   Stable;
-- $16.1 million class E at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook to Negative from
   Stable.

Fitch does not rate classes NR and X-B.


JP MORGAN 2014-1: Fitch Expects to Rate Class B-4 Certs 'BBsf'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects to rate J.P. Morgan Seasoned Mortgage Trust
2014-1:

   -- $249,769,000 class A-1 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $50,000,000 class A-2 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $19,397,000 class A-M certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $319,166,000 class A-IO notional certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;
   -- $10,051,000 class B-1 certificates 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $8,464,000 class B-2 certificates 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $6,525,000 class B-3 certificates 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $3,879,000 class B-4 certificates 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;

The $4,585,332.41 class B-5 certificates will not be rated.

Key Rating Drivers

High-Quality Seasoned Mortgage Pool: The loans were originated by
MLCC to high net worth borrowers who generally held brokerage
accounts with Merrill Lynch, which was acquired by Bank of
America.  The collateral pool consists of adjustable-rate
mortgages (ARM) with an interest-only (IO) period of 10 years
originated between 2004 and 2007.  Overall, the borrowers in this
pool have strong credit profiles and low leverage as evidenced by
current credit scores and loan-to-value ratios (LTVs) and
substantial liquid reserves at origination.

Solid Performance History: All but 0.7% (six loans) of the pool
has not had a delinquency during the past 36 months, which Fitch
identifies as a 'clean current' loan.  The six loans only had a
1x30-day delinquency over 12 months ago, which Fitch identifies as
'dirty current'.  No loans have been modified for performance
issues.  Fitch believes that the strong performance is reflective
of a high credit quality borrower profile.

Payment Shock Exposure: While most of the loans are past their
initial rate periods, they all face a payment increase from
principal amortization, which can be sizable relative to the
current payment.  Borrower payments could also increase further
should interest rates rise substantially from today's levels.  The
payment shock risk is mitigated by the qualifying interest-only
payment at the higher of 1) the note rate plus 2% or 2) 8% under
which borrowers were underwritten.  Fitch also believes that the
borrowers' strong credit profiles and substantial equity in the
property indicate a greater refinance ability.  Fitch applied a
probability of default (PD) penalty of approximately 1.16x to
account for the payment shock risk.

Geographic Concentration: Approximately 25.3% of the pool is
concentrated in the New York-Northern New Jersey MSA, which
resulted in a 1.08x PD multiple due to the concentration risk.

R&W Framework: Loan-level reps will be provided by Everbank, FSA
(Everbank), while J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. (JPMMAC)
will be providing gap reps (for the period between loan
acquisition and securitization close).  Although not all seasoned
loan-level reps are being provided or comply with Fitch's
criteria, they all have strong mitigating factors.  However, Fitch
considered the transaction's reps and warranties (R&W) framework
to be consistent with a Tier 2 quality, as review of the
delinquent loans for possible breaches is at the option of the
controlling holder and senior holders cannot override the decision
nor do they have the ability to request a review if no controlling
holder is present.  For this reason, Fitch applied a small upward
adjustment to its loss expectations.

Due Diligence Results, Findings and Mitigants: The due diligence
review was conducted by Opus Capital Markets Consultants LLC
(Opus) in general accordance with Fitch's criteria for seasoned
loans.  A full compliance review was performed that resulted in
one loan graded 'C'.  Fitch considered extended foreclosure
timelines for 37.1% of the pool to account for potential
collateral file issues.  Given the seasoning of the loans, all
have passed the statute of limitations for certain violations and
evidence of recordation was confirmed by the custodian, Wells
Fargo Bank N.A. (WFB).  Everbank is making a rep that the original
mortgages were recorded or sent for recording.  For this reason,
no adjustment was applied for recordation issues.

Clean Current Loan PD Adjustment: A credit was applied to the PD
of loans that were current over the last 24 months.  Fitch's
model-projected PDs for clean current loans is more conservative
than those projected from Fitch's roll rate analysis.  For this
reason, Fitch applied a small credit to clean current loans to
better align the agency's model default projections with its roll
rate expectations.  The PD credit applied at the 'AAAsf' level is
approximately 12.5%.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

After Fitch determines credit ratings through a rating stress
scenario analysis, additional sensitivity analyses are considered.
The analyses provide a defined stress sensitivity to demonstrate
how the ratings would react to steeper MVDs than that assumed at
issuance as well as a defined sensitivity that demonstrates the
stress assumptions required to reduce a rating by one full
category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.

This defined stress sensitivity analysis demonstrates how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level.  The
analysis assumes MVDs of 10%, 20% and 30%, in addition to the
model projected 3.2%.  As shown in the table to the right, the
analysis indicates that there is some potential rating migration
with higher MVDs, compared with the model projection.

Fitch also conducted defined rating sensitivities, which determine
the stresses to MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full
category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.  For example,
additional MVDs of 4%, 24% and 43% would potentially reduce the
'AAAsf' rated class down one rating category, to non-investment
grade, and to 'CCCsf', respectively.


JP MORGAN 2014-FL6: S&P Assigns 'B-' Rating on 4 Note Classes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL6's
$503.987 million commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
series 2014-FL6.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed
securities transaction backed by 13 commercial mortgage loans with
a $503.987 million aggregate principal balance (of which $409.960
million will be pooled), secured by the fee or leasehold
interests, or both in 40 properties across 11 U.S. states and the
District of Columbia.

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-FL6

Class         Rating(i)        Amount ($)
A             AAA (sf)        282,800,000
X-CP          BBB- (sf)   409,960,000(ii)
X-EXT         BBB- (sf)   409,960,000(ii)
B             AA- (sf)         40,600,000
C             A (sf)           31,500,000
D             BBB- (sf)        55,060,000
DFW1(iii)     BB- (sf)         12,800,000
DFW2(iii)     B (sf)            6,900,000
MTP1(iii)     BB- (sf)          8,200,000
MTP2(iii)     B- (sf)          13,800,000
PHW1(iii)     BB- (sf)          9,400,000
PHW2(iii)     B (sf)            6,100,000
BAT1(iii)     BB (sf)           6,400,000
BAT2(iii)     BB- (sf)          1,037,500
VINE(iii)     BB+ (sf)          3,110,000
TLAN(iii)     BB (sf)           2,130,000
WCP1(iii)     BB- (sf)          3,300,000
WCP2(iii)     B- (sf)           3,900,000
HSRV(iii)     BB- (sf)          4,700,000
FMS1(iii)     BB- (sf)          4,100,000
FMS2(iii)     B- (sf)           3,750,000
BWT1(iii)     BB- sf)           2,200,000
BWT2(iii)     B- (sf)           2,200,000

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


JP MORGAN 2014-IVR6: Fitch Rates Class B-4 Certificates 'BBsf'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings assigns the following ratings to J.P. Morgan
Mortgage Trust 2014-IVR6 (JPMMT 2014-IVR6):

   -- $179,819,000 class 1-A-1 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $179,819,000 class 1-A-2 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $134,864,000 class 1-A-3 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $44,955,000 class 1-A-4 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $143,855,000 class 1-A-5 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $35,964,000 class 1-A-6 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $16,607,000 class 1-A-7 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $8,991,000 class 1-A-8 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $179,819,000 class 1-A-IO notional certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $158,089,000 class 2-A-1 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $158,089,000 class 2-A-2 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $118,567,000 class 2-A-3 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $39,522,000 class 2-A-4 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $126,471,000 class 2-A-5 exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $31,618,000 class 2-A-6 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $14,600,000 class 2-A-7 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;

   -- $7,904,000 class 2-A-8 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $158,089,000 class 2-A-IO notional certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $31,207,000 class A-M exchangeable certificates 'AAAsf';
      Outlook Stable;

   -- $8,746,400 class B-1 certificates 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $6,559,400 class B-2 certificates 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $5,565,600 class B-3 certificates 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

   -- $2,981,500 class B-4 certificates 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

The 'AAAsf' rating on the senior certificates reflects the 7.15%
subordination provided by the 2.20% class B-1, 1.65% class B-2,
1.40% class B-3, 0.75% class B-4 and 1.15% class B-5.  Fitch will
not rate the $4,571,764 class B-5 certificates.

Fitch's ratings reflect the high quality of the underlying
collateral, the straightforward capital structure, and the high
percentage of loans reviewed by third party due diligence
companies.  In addition, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. will act as the
master servicer and U.S. Bank Trust, N.A. will act as the trustee
for the transaction.  For federal income tax purposes, elections
will be made to treat the trust as one or more real estate
mortgage investment conduits (REMICs).

This transaction includes the use of Pentalpha Surveillance LLC
(Pentalpha) as representation & warranties (R&W) breach reviewer
for the benefit of the trust.  The securities administrator will
instruct Pentalpha to review any loan that satisfies the review
trigger.  Pentalpha will review the loan using the breach
determination review procedures outlined in the transaction
documents to identify failures with respect to one or more of the
breach determination procedures.  If a failure exists, Pentalpha
will determine whether or not the failure is material, based on
materiality conditions outlined in the transaction documents.
Pentalpha will then provide the final results of its review and
determination to the securities administrator.

JPMMT 2014-IVR6 will be J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp.'s
sixth transaction of prime residential mortgages in 2014.  The
certificates are supported by a pool of prime seven-year hybrid
adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) loans.  Approximately 60% of the
pool has a ten year interest only (IO) period.  The entire pool
was originated by First Republic Bank (FRB).

As of the cut-off date, the aggregate pool consisted of 394 loans
with a total balance of $397,539,664; an average balance of
$1,008,984; a weighted average original combined loan-to-value
ratio (CLTV) of 63.1%, and a weighted average coupon (WAC) of
3.2%. Rate/Term and cash out refinances account for 35.0% and
19.7% of the loans, respectively.  The weighted average original
FICO credit score of the pool is 764. Owner-occupied properties
comprise 86.4% of the loans.  The states that represent the
largest geographic concentration are California (64.5%), New York
(17.4%) and Massachusetts (12.2%).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High-Quality Adjustable Rate Mortgages: The collateral pool
consists of seven-year hybrid adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) to
borrowers with strong credit profiles, low leverage, and
substantial liquid reserves.  All of the loans were originated by
FRB, which Fitch considers to be an above-average originator of
prime jumbo product.  Third-party, loan-level due diligence was
conducted on 100% of the pool with minimal findings indicating
strong underwriting controls.

Payment Shock Exposure: The pool consists entirely of ARM loans
while more than half also have interest-only (IO) features that
were originated prior to January 2014.  Loan products that result
in periodic changes in a borrower's payment such as ARMs and IOs
expose borrowers to payment reset risk.  Future rises in interest
rates and payment re-amortization after the expiration of
interest-only periods can increase monthly payments considerably.
To account for this risk, Fitch applied a probability of default
(PD) penalty of approximately 1.67x to the ARM loans without IO
terms and 1.73x to those with IO features.

High Geographic Concentration: The pool's primary concentration
risk is California, where 64.5% of the properties are located.  In
addition, 87.4% of the properties are located in the pool's top
five metropolitan statistical areas (MSA) in California, New York
and Massachusetts.  The pool has significant regional
concentrations, which resulted in an additional penalty of
approximately 59% to the pool's lifetime default expectation.

Extraordinary Expense Adjustment: Extraordinary expenses will be
taken out of available funds and not accounted for in the
contractual interest owed to the bondholders.  This construct can
result in principal and interest shortfalls to the bonds starting
from the bottom of the capital structure.  To account for this
risk, Fitch adjusted its loss expectations upward by 30 basis
points (bps) for the class A bonds, 20 bps for classes B-1 and B-2
and 10 bps for classes B-3 and B-4.

Nonfull Representation and Warranty Framework: While the
transaction benefits from JPMCB ('A+'/Outlook Stable/'F1') and FRB
('A-'/Outlook Stable/'F1') as representation and warranty (rep and
warranty) providers for the pool, Fitch believes the value of the
rep and warranty framework is diluted by the presence of
qualifying and conditional language in conjunction with sunset
provisions, which reduces lender breach liability.  While the
agency believes the high credit quality pool and clean diligence
results mitigate these risks, Fitch considered the weaker
framework in its analysis.

Market Value Decline Sensitivity: Fitch considered further market
value decline (MVD) sensitivities, in addition to those generated
by its sustainable home price (SHP) model.  These scenarios
aligned Fitch's 'Asf' sustainable MVD (sMVD) assumptions with
peak-to-trough MVDs experienced during the housing crisis through
2009. The sensitivity analysis, which was factored into Fitch's
loss expectations, resulted in applying a sMVD of 20.5% from 27.1%
using the first-quarter 2014 Case-Schiller home price data.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

After Fitch determines credit ratings through a rating stress
scenario analysis, additional sensitivity analyses are considered.
The analyses provide a defined stress sensitivity to demonstrate
how the ratings would react to steeper MVDs than that assumed at
issuance as well as a defined sensitivity that demonstrates the
stress assumptions required to reduce a rating by one full
category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.

In its analysis, Fitch considered additional sMVD stress
assumptions to those generated by the SHP model.  These
supplementary scenarios reflected base case sMVDs that aligned
Fitch's 'Asf' sMVD stress assumptions with peak-to-trough market
value declines experienced in the U.S. during the recent financial
crisis (2007 - 2009).  This is consistent with Fitch's view as
described in its U.S. RMBS Loan Loss Model Criteria, which
associates the recent national housing recession and related
performance observations with an 'Asf' stress.  The result of this
sensitivity analysis was included in the consideration of the loss
expectations for this transaction.  The sensitivity analysis
resulted in a base sMVD of 20.5% from 27.1% using the first-
quarter 2014 Case-Schiller home price data.

Another sensitivity analysis focused on determining how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level.  The
analysis assumes MVDs of 10%, 20%, and 30%, in addition to the
model projected 27.1% for this pool.  The analysis indicates there
is some potential rating migration with higher MVDs, compared with
the model projection.

Fitch also conducted defined rating sensitivities, which determine
the stresses to MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full
category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.  For example,
additional MVDs of 3%, 19% and 38% would potentially reduce the
'AAAsf' rated class down one rating category, to non-investment
grade, and to 'CCCsf', respectively.


KKR CLO 10: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to KKR CLO
10 Ltd./KKR CLO 10 LLC's $368.00 million floating- and fixed-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 ratings reflect S&P's view of:

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

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

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

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

   -- The collateral manager's experienced management team.

   -- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and
      ultimate principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned ratings under various
      interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from
      0.2321%-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
      rated notes' outstanding balance.

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

RATINGS LIST

KKR CLO 10 Ltd./KKR CLO 10 LLC

Class                Rating     Amount (mil. $)
A                    AAA (sf)             247.0
B-1                  AA (sf)               32.0
B-2                  AA (sf)               20.0
C-1                  A (sf)                25.0
C-2                  A (sf)                 5.0
D                    BBB (sf)              20.0
E                    BB (sf)               19.0
Subordinated notes   NR                    47.6

NR--Not rated.


LB MULTIFAMILY 1991-4: Moody's Affirms Caa1 Rating on A-1 Debt
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings of two classes
in LB Multifamily Mortgage Trust 1991-4 as follows:

Cl. A-1 Senior Secured Pass-Through Apr 25, 2021, Affirmed at Caa1
(sf); previously on Jan 24, 2014 Affirmed at Caa1 (sf)

Cl. A-2 Senior Secured Pass-Through Apr 25, 2021, Affirmed at B1
(sf); previously on Jan 24, 2014 Affirmed at B1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of class A-1 is affirmed because the rating is
consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating of class A-2 is affirmed because the reserve fund
provides sufficient credit support to maintain class A-2's current
rating.

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 an
increase in the performance of the one remaining loan or
defeasance of the one remaining loan.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the one remaining loan.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

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

Description of Models Used

No models were used in the rating action.

Deal Performance

As of the November 25, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99.9% to $63,002
from $105.8 million at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan, which is secured by a multi-
family property located in Huntington Beach, California. The loan
is fully amortizing and matures in 2019. It has amortized by 78%
since securitization. The loan is current.

The pool has experienced realized losses which have eliminated
non-rated Classes B, C and D and resulted in a $9.2 million loss
for Class A-1. Class A-2 has not experienced any losses to date.
Realized losses allocated to the Class A-2 certificates are offset
by a reserve fund held by the Trustee. It is anticipated that
there are sufficient funds available in the reserve fund to offset
any potential losses to Class A-2. However, due to exposure to
only one remaining small balance loan Moody's is concerned about
the possibility of interest shortfalls.


LIBERTY CLO: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on $52MM Class C Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
notes issued by Liberty CLO, Ltd.:

  $49,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Deferrable Senior Secured
  Extendable Notes due 2017, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on
  August 21, 2014 Upgraded to Baa3 (sf).

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

  $68,500,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Senior Secured Extendable
  Notes due 2017 (current outstanding balance of $56,812,837.51),
  Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on August 21, 2014 Affirmed Aaa
  (sf);

  $68,500,000 Class A-3 Floating Rate Senior Secured Extendable
  Notes due 2017, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on August 21,
  2014 Affirmed Aaa (sf);

  $43,000,000 Class A-4 Floating Rate Senior Secured Extendable
  Notes due 2017, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on August 21,
  2014 Upgraded to Aaa (sf);

  $52,000,000 Class C Floating Rate Deferrable Senior Secured
  Extendable Notes due 2017 (current outstanding balance of
  $30,378,080.84), Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on August 21,
  2014 Affirmed B2 (sf).

Liberty CLO, Ltd., issued in December 2005, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans and CLO tranches. The transaction's reinvestment
period ended in November 2012.

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios since August 2014. The Class A-1A, A-1B
and A-1C notes have been paid down in full and the Class A-2 notes
were paid down by $11,687,162.49 or 17.06% of its previous balance
since that time. Based on the trustee's October 22, 2014 report,
the over-collateralization (OC) ratios for the Class A, Class B
and Class C notes are reported at 148.71%, 119.41% and 106.42%,
respectively, versus July 2014 levels of 139.35%, 116.29% and
105.47%, respectively. The October 2014 trustee-reported OC ratios
do not reflect the recent payment of $31.4 million to the Class A-
1A, A-1B, A-1C and A-2 notes on November 3, 2014.

The portfolio includes a number of investments in securities that
mature after the notes do (long-dated assets), which make up
approximately 15.12% of the portfolio based on the trustee's
October 2014 report. These investments could expose the notes to
market risk in the event of liquidation when the notes mature. The
ratings on the Class B and C notes reflect Moody's concerns with
the potential market risk stemming from the deal's exposure to
these long-dated assets.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Because some of the defaulted assets are illiquid loans that
defaulted over three years ago, Moody's also ran sensitivity
scenarios assuming zero recovery value for these assets.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

6) Long-dated and illiquid assets: The presence of illiquid assets
and those that mature after the CLO's legal maturity date exposes
the deal to liquidation risk. This risk is borne first by
investors with the lowest priority in the capital structure.
Moody's assumes that the terminal value of a long-dated asset upon
liquidation at maturity will be equal to the lower of an assumed
liquidation value (depending on the extent to which the asset's
maturity lags that of the liabilities) or the asset's current
market value. In light of the deal's exposure to illiquid and
long-dated assets, which increases its sensitivity to the
liquidation assumptions in the rating analysis, Moody's ran
scenarios using a range of liquidation value assumptions. However,
actual asset exposures and prevailing market prices and conditions
at the CLO's maturity will drive the deal's actual losses, if any,
from such assets.

7) Exposure to credit estimates: The deal contains a large number
of securities whose default probabilities Moody's has assessed
through credit estimates. If Moody's does not receive the
necessary information to update its credit estimates in a timely
fashion, the transaction could be negatively affected by any
default probability adjustments Moody's assumes in lieu of updated
credit estimates. Moody's also ran stress scenarios to assess the
collateral pool's concentration risk because loans to obligors it
assesses with credit estimates constitute more than 3% of the
collateral pool.

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):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (2286)

Class A-2: 0

Class A-3: 0

Class A-4: 0

Class B: +2

Class C: 0

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3428)

Class A-2: 0

Class A-3: 0

Class A-4: 0

Class B: -1

Class C: -2

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

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

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base
case, Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing
par and principal proceeds balance of $257.2 million, defaulted
par of $54.8 million, a weighted average default probability of
13.36% (implying a WARF of 2857), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 50.94%, a diversity score of 21 and a weighted
average spread of 3.18%.

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. Moody's generally applies
recovery rates for CLO securities as published in "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs." In some cases, alternative recovery
assumptions may be considered based on the specifics of the
analysis of the CLO transaction. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.

A proportion of the collateral pool includes debt obligations
whose credit quality Moody's assesses through credit estimates.
Moody's analysis reflects adjustments with respect to the default
probabilities associated with credit estimates. Specifically,
Moody's assumed an equivalent of Caa3 for assets with credit
estimates that have not been updated within the last 15 months,
which represent approximately 2.16% of the collateral pool.
Additionally, for each credit estimates whose related exposure
constitutes more than 3% of the collateral pool, Moody's applied a
two-notch equivalent assumed downgrade to approximately 4.67% of
the pool.


LOUISIANA HOUSING: S&P Raises Rating on 2009B Bonds From BB
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its rating on Louisiana
Housing Finance Agency's (GMF-Louisiana Chateau projects) series
2009A multifamily housing revenue bonds two notches to 'A- (sf)'
from 'BBB (sf)', and its rating on the agency's series 2009B
multifamily housing revenue bonds three notches to 'BBB (sf)' from
'BB (sf)'.  These bonds are issued on behalf of Global Ministries
Fellowship.  The outlook is stable.

The raised ratings are based on the ratings service's affordable
multifamily housing criteria released June 19, 2014.  More
specifically, the ratings reflect Standard & Poor's view of:

   -- The adequate debt service coverage of 1.3x and 1.13x maximum
      annual debt service (MADS) on the 2009A and 2009B bonds,
      respectively, based on 2013 audited financials;

   -- Strong loss coverage indicated by a low loan-to-value ratio,
      a debt service reserve fund sized at 12 months' MADS, and
      other funds available for debt service; and

   -- Global Ministries Fellowship's strong sponsorship and
      management of the transaction.

Offsetting the aforementioned strengths is Standard & Poor's view
of the properties' vulnerable operating performance, indicated by
a high vacancy rate (14.5%).

"The stable outlook reflects our view of the properties' improved
operating performance and good public demand.  However, we believe
the properties must improve overall occupancy and maintain it at a
higher level, and curtail expenses to avoid significant rental
revenue declines," said Standard & Poor's credit analyst Ki Beom
K. Park.  "If debt service coverage improves, it will strengthen
the issues' credit quality and potentially lead to higher ratings.
Conversely, a debt service coverage decline may cause credit
quality to erode and in turn lead to lower ratings."

GMF-Louisiana Chateau comprises seven separate affordable
multifamily projects with a combined 1,105 units in Lake Charles
and Lafayette, La.


MADISON PARK XV: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to two
classes of notes to be issued by Madison Park Funding XV, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

  $413,200,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2026 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

  $40,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2026 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

The Class A-1 Notes and the Class D Notes are referred to herein,
collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

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

Ratings Rationale

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

Madison Park Funding XV is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued
notes will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first
lien senior secured corporate loans. At least 92.5% of the
portfolio must consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible
investments, and up to 7.5% of the portfolio may consist of second
lien loans and senior unsecured loans. Moody's expect the
portfolio to be approximately 80% ramped as of the closing date.

Credit Suisse Asset Management, 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 will issue five classes
of notes, including subordinated subordinated notes. The Issuer
and Co-Issuer will also issue six classes of funding notes. A
corresponding class of funding notes will be issued in connection
with each class of notes (other than the subordinated notes) and
may be used to fund re-pricing redemptions and refinancings of the
related class of notes. Moody's is not assigning provisional
ratings to the funding 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: $675,000,000

Diversity Score: 57

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2775

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.75%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 44.0%

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 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 2775 to 3191)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class D Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2775 to 3608)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class D Notes: -2

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.


MCAP CMBS 2014-1: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned these final ratings and Rating Outlooks
to MCAP CMBS Issuer Corporation's (MCAP) commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates, series 2014-1.

   -- $189,302,000 class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $5,600,000 class B 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $8,121,000 class C 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $7,001,000 class D 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $3,361,000 class E 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $2,800,000 class F 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $2,800,000 class G 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

All currencies are in Canadian dollars (CAD).

Fitch does not rate the $224,026,365 (notional balance) interest-
only class X, or the $5,041,365 non-offered class H.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership in the trust,
primary assets of which are 32 Canadian loans secured by 40
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
approximately $224.0 million as of the cutoff date.  The loans
were originated or acquired by MCAP Financial Corporation.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 83.7% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 100%, and asset summary reviews
on 100% of the pool.

The transaction has a Fitch stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) of 1.06x, a Fitch stressed loan-to-value (LTV) of 108.5%,
and a Fitch debt yield of 8.4%.  Fitch's aggregate net cash flow
represents a variance of 6.0% to issuer cash flows.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Canadian Loan Attributes and Historical Performance: The ratings
reflect strong historical Canadian commercial real estate loan
performance, including a low delinquency rate and low historical
losses of less than 0.1%, as well as positive loan attributes,
such as short amortization schedules, recourse to the borrower and
additional guarantors.

Fitch DSCR and LTV: The pool has a Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.06x and
108.5%, respectively, which represents higher leverage than recent
Canadian multiborrower deals.  The CMLSI 2014-1 deal had a Fitch
DSCR and LTV of 1.16x and 102.2%, respectively, and the Real-T
2014-1 deal had a Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.15x and 110.2%,
respectively.  The DSCR and LTV are slightly lower than the third-
quarter 2014 year-to-date averages for U.S. CMBS, which are a DSCR
of 1.19x and an LTV of 106.9%.

Significant Amortization: The pool has a weighted average original
amortization term of 25.2 years, which represents faster
amortization than typical U.S. conduit pools.  There are no
partial or full interest-only loans.  The pool's maturity balance
represents a pay down of 12.5% of the closing balance and 15.9%
from the original loan balance.

Loans with Recourse: Of the pool, 82.9% of the loans feature full
or partial recourse to the borrowers and/or sponsors.  The
recourse is in line with the CMLSI 2014-1 transaction (82.6%), and
lower than the IMSCI 2014-5 (84.9%) and the Real-T 2014-1 (91.2%)
transactions.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch performed two model-based break-even analyses to determine
the level of cash flow and value deterioration the pool could
withstand prior to $1 of loss being experienced by the 'BBB-sf'
and 'AAAsf' rated classes.  Fitch found that the MCAP 2014-1 pool
could withstand a 36.9% decline in value (based on appraised
values at issuance) and an approximately 16.4% decrease to the
most recent actual cash flow prior to experiencing a $1 of loss to
the 'BBB-sf' rated class.  Additionally, Fitch found that the pool
could withstand a 46.4% decline in value and an approximately
25.9% decrease in the most recent actual cash flow prior to
experiencing $1 of loss to any 'AAAsf' rated class.

Key Rating Drivers and Rating Sensitivities are further described
in the accompanying presale report.

The master and special servicer is MCAP Financial Corporation,
which is unrated by Fitch.  However, Fitch performed a limited
scope review which included a discussion with management, and has
begun the full servicer review process.  Fitch views MCAP as
acceptable to serve as servicer for the transaction.


ML-CFC 2007-9: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on 4 Note Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of ML-CFC Commercial
Mortgage Trust, commercial mortgage pass-through certificates,
series 2007-9 (ML-CFC 2007-9).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect the stable to improved performance of the
remaining pool since Fitch's last rating action.  Fitch modeled
losses of 18.1% of the remaining pool; expected losses on the
original pool balance total 15.1%, including $113.6 million (4% of
the original pool balance) in realized losses incurred to date.
Fitch has designated 93 loans (57.4% of the current pool) as Fitch
Loans of Concern, which includes 22 specially serviced assets
(19.7%).  In addition, 15.1% of the current pool consists of
assets in the foreclosure process or are real-estate owned (REO).
As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 38.9% to $1.72 billion from
$2.81 billion at issuance.  Three loans (2.3%) are defeased.
Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes B through T.

The three largest contributors to Fitch-modeled losses remain the
same since the last rating action; all three are specially
serviced and REO.

The largest contributor to Fitch-modeled losses is the DLJ West
Coast Hotel Portfolio asset (4.5% of the current pool).  The loan,
which was transferred to special servicing in May 2009 for
imminent default, was initially secured by six cross-
collateralized and cross-defaulted hotel properties totaling 1,159
rooms located in California and Oregon.  The hotels operated under
the Residence Inn, Hawthorne Suites, Courtyard Marriot, and Hilton
Garden Inn flags.  All six properties were foreclosed upon between
August and September 2011 with five of the six properties having
sold between August and October 2012.  The remaining asset, The
Hilton Garden Inn Lake Oswego located in Lake Oswego, Oregon and
consisting of 180 keys, was held by the special servicer to
implement a value-add strategy.  The property has exhibited
positive performance improvement since the economic downturn.  For
the first nine months of September 2014 and according to the
financial statement provided by the special servicer, the
occupancy, average daily rate, and revenue per available room were
82%, $126, and $103, respectively, compared to 69%, $114, and $79,
respectively, reported at year-end 2008.  The property had
recently completed the required brand lobby renovations.
According to the special servicer, the asset was pulled from the
September 2014 auction with no new disposition timeline set.

The second largest contributor to Fitch-modeled losses is the St.
Louis Flex Office Portfolio asset (2.9%).  The loan was
transferred to special servicing in November 2010 for imminent
default due to cash flow issues.  The asset consists of a
portfolio of six industrial/flex properties totaling 864,540
square feet located in the St. Louis, Missouri metropolitan
statistical area.  All six of the properties became REO in May
2012.  The special servicer indicated it is currently implementing
and engaging in a value-add and lease-up strategy on the
underlying properties.  As of the September 2014 rent roll, the
overall portfolio was 69.3% occupied with individual property
occupancies ranging from 89.7% to 100%.  A disposition timeline
has not been set by the special servicer.

The third largest contributor to Fitch-modeled losses is the
Morgan 7 RV Park Portfolio asset (2.1%).  The loan was transferred
to special servicing in October 2011 for delinquent payments.  The
asset consists of a portfolio of seven recreational vehicle (RV)
parks totaling 1,586 RV sites located in Maine (three RV parks),
New York (two), Michigan (one), and New Jersey (one).  Five of the
seven collateral properties are REO.  The Maine properties were
foreclosed in March 2013 and June 2013.  The Michigan property was
foreclosed in October 2013.  The New Jersey property was
foreclosed in March 2014.  The two New York properties are still
going through the foreclosure process with receivers remaining in
place.  The borrower is resisting foreclosures in New York.  The
servicer indicated that two of the five REO assets in Michigan and
New Jersey have recently been sold.  The remaining three REO
assets failed to trade at auction.

Rating Sensitivity

Rating Outlooks on classes A-3, A-SB, and A-4 remain Stable due to
sufficient credit enhancement and expected continued paydown.
Although pool-wide expected losses have decreased since Fitch's
previous rating action, upgrades were not yet warranted due to the
lack of resolution of the specially serviced loans.  The Positive
Rating Outlooks on classes AM and AM-A reflect the improvement in
credit enhancement since Fitch's last rating action and the
possibility for upgrades should stable to improved performance
continue and as the specially serviced assets are disposed and
liquidated over the next one to two years.  The distressed classes
(those rated below 'Bsf') may be subject to further downgrades as
additional losses are realized.

Fitch has affirmed these ratings on these classes and revised
Outlooks where indicated:

   -- $25.9 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $47.1 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $931 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $210 million class AM at 'BBBsf'; Outlook to Positive from
      Negative;
   -- $55.4 million class AM-A at 'BBBsf', Outlook to Positive
      from Negative;
   -- $168 million class AJ at 'CCCsf'; RE 65%;
   -- $56.8 million class AJ-A at 'CCCsf'; RE 65%;
   -- $31.6 million class B at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $21.1 million class C at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $28.1 million class D at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $24.6 million class E at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $24.6 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $28.1 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $28.1 million class H at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $24.6 million class J at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $12.9 million class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2, and A-1A certificates have paid in full.
Fitch does not rate the class P, Q, S and T certificates.  Fitch
previously withdrew the ratings on the interest-only class XP and
XC certificates.


MORGAN STANLEY 2004-TOP15: S&P Cuts Rating on Class J Notes to B-
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on five
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2004-TOP15, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In addition, S&P
lowered its rating on class J and affirmed our ratings on three
other classes from the same transaction.

S&P's rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow S&P's 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 B, 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 estimate of
necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels.
The upgrades also reflect S&P's views regarding the collateral's
current and future performance, the available liquidity support,
and the trust balance's significant reduction.

While available credit enhancement levels suggest further positive
rating movements on classes C, D, E, and F as well as potential
upgrades on classes G and H, S&P's analysis also considered the
effect of the work-out fee associated with the largest loan in
special servicing ($8.6 million, 12.2%), which is being
transferred back to the master servicer, on the future liquidity
available to the trust, and the potential for future transfers to
special servicing that could increase interest shortfalls.

The downgrade on class J reflects credit support erosion that S&P
anticipates will occur upon the eventual resolution of two ($7.2
million, 10.1%) of the three specially serviced assets ($15.8
million, 22.3%), as well as the reduction in the liquidity support
available to this class and its susceptibility to future interest
shortfalls.

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

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X1 interest-only
(IO) certificates based on S&P's criteria for rating IO
securities.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Nov. 13, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $70.7 million, which is 7.9% of the pool balance
at issuance.  The pool currently includes 27 loans, down from 118
loans at issuance.  Three of these loans are with the special
servicer, four ($15.2 million, 21.4%) are defeased, and eight
loans ($12.9 million, 18.3%) are on the master servicer's
watchlist.  The master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., reported
financial information for 100.0% of the nondefeased loans in the
pool, of which 64.9% as year-end 2013 data and the remaining
corresponds to year-end 2012 or partial-year 2013 or 2014 data.

S&P calculated a 1.55x Standard & Poor's weighted average debt
service coverage (DSC) and 44.8% loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using a
7.71% Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate.  The
DSC, LTV, and capitalization rate calculations exclude the three
specially serviced assets and four defeased loans.  The top 10
nondefeased loans have an aggregate outstanding pool trust balance
of $39.1 million (55.3%).  Using servicer-reported numbers, S&P
calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average DSC and LTV of
1.72x and 36.8%, respectively, for seven of the top 10 nondefeased
loans.  The remaining three loans are specially serviced and
discussed.

To date, the transaction has experienced $12.5 million in
principal losses, or 1.4% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P
expects losses to reach approximately 1.5% 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
two ($7.2 million, 10.1%) of the three specially serviced assets.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the Sacramento--Roseville--Arden-Arcade, Reno, and Houston-
The Woodlands-Sugar Land metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs).
Standard & Poor's U.S. Public Finance Group provides credit
ratings on Sacramento County, Washoe County, and Harris County,
which participate within these MSAs.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Nov. 13, 2014, trustee remittance report, three loans in
the pool were with the special servicer, C-III Asset Management
LLC (C-III).  Details of the three largest specially serviced
loans (all of which are top 10 loans), are:

   -- The Franklin Business Center loan ($8.6 million, 12.2%) is
      the largest non-defeased loan in the pool and has a reported
      $8.6 million exposure.  The loan is secured by a 198,255-
      sq.-ft. industrial property in Sacramento, Calif.  The loan
      was transferred to C-III on Nov. 21, 2013, due to imminent
      maturity default.  The loan matured on Jan. 1, 2014.  The
      reported DSC and occupancy for the nine months ended
      Sept. 30, 2013, were 0.88x and 57.9%, respectively.  C-III
      stated that it has approved a loan modification that closed
      on Oct. 31, 2014, which included extending the loan maturity
      to Jan. 1, 2016. C-III stated that the loan is being
      monitored for return to master servicing.

   -- The West Orange Professional Center loan ($4.2 million,
      5.9%), the third-largest nondefeased loan in the pool, has a
      total reported exposure of $4.4 million.  The loan is
      secured by a 36,882-sq.-ft. office building in Ocoee, Fla.
      The loan was transferred to C-III on April 8, 2014, due to
      maturity default.  The loan matured on April 1, 2014.  The
      reported DSC and occupancy as of year-end 2013 were 0.68x
      and 60.8%, respectively.  An appraisal reduction amount of
      $662,233 is in effect against this loan.  C-III stated that
      the property is under contract, and S&P expects a minimal
      loss (less than 25%) upon its sale.

   -- The Curlew Lakes loan ($3.0 million, 4.2%), the eighth
      largest nondefeased loan in the pool, has a total reported
      exposure of $3.1 million.  The loan is secured by a 43,446
      sq. ft. retail property in Palm Harbor, Fla.  The loan was
      transferred to C-III on Jan. 29, 2014. C-III indicated that
      the loan has been included in a note auction, with closing
      in December 2014.  The reported DSC and occupancy as of
      year-end 2012 were 1.50x and 52.4%, respectively.  S&P
      expects a minimal loss upon this loan's eventual resolution.

RATINGS LIST

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2004-TOP15
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2004 TOP15

                                 Rating            Rating
Class         Identifier         To                From
B             61745ML50          AAA (sf)          AA (sf)
C             61745ML68          AA+ (sf)          A (sf)
D             61745ML76          A+ (sf)           A- (sf)
E             61745MM26          A- (sf)           BBB+ (sf)
F             61745MM34          BBB+ (sf)         BBB (sf)
G             61745MM42          BBB- (sf)         BBB- (sf)
H             61745MM59          BB (sf)           BB (sf)
J             61745MM75          B- (sf)           B+ (sf)
X1            61745ML84          AAA (sf)          AAA (sf)


MORGAN STANLEY 2005-IQ9: S&P Affirms CCC Rating on Class J Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on three
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2005-IQ9, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In addition, S&P
affirmed its ratings on nine other classes from the same
transaction.

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

S&P raised its ratings on the class A-J, B, and C certificates 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 follow S&P's views regarding the current and
future performance of the transaction's collateral and available
liquidity support.

The affirmations on the seven principal- and interest-paying
certificates 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.
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.

Although available credit enhancement levels suggest positive
rating movements on the class D, E, F, G, H, and J certificates,
as well as further upgrades to the A-J, B, and C certificates, S&P
considered the near-term uncertainty regarding the resolution of
the pool's largest loan, Central Mall ($119.5 million, 33.1%),
which was just transferred to the special servicer in Oct. 2014.

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

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Nov. 17, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $360.6 million, which is 23.6% of the pool
balance at issuance.  The pool currently includes 95 loans, down
from 240 loans at issuance.  Four of these loans ($138.4 million,
38.3%) are with the special servicer, one ($12.3 million, 3.4%) is
defeased, 15 ($32.4 million, 9.0%) are identified as residential
cooperative (co-op) loans, and 36 ($89.8 million, 24.8%) are on
the master servicer's watchlist.

The two master servicers, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. and NCB FSB (the
master servicer related to the NCB mortgage loans), reported
financial information for 96.6% of the nondefeased loans in the
pool, 92.3% of which was year-end 2013 data.

S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average debt service
coverage (DSC) of 1.28x and loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 67.1%
using a Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate of
7.85%.  The DSC, LTV, and capitalization rate calculations exclude
three of the four specially serviced loans, 15 co-op loans, one
loan that S&P deemed credit impaired, and one defeased loan.  The
top 10 nondefeased loans have an aggregate outstanding pool trust
balance of $195.4 million, 54.2%.  Using servicer-reported
numbers, S&P calculated a Standard & Poor's weighted average DSC
and LTV of 1.32x and 1.6%, respectively, for seven of the top 10
nondefeased performing loans.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the Beaumont-Port Arthur and Fort Worth metropolitan
statistical area (MSAs).  Standard & Poor's U.S. Public Finance
Group provides a credit rating on Jefferson County, which
participates within the Beaumont-Port Arthur MSA.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Nov. 17, 2014, trustee remittance report, four ($138.4
million, 38.3%) loans in the pool were with the special servicers,
C-III Asset Management LLC (C-III) and NCB Financials Group (NCB).
Subsequent to the Nov. 2014 trustee reporting period, an
additional loan, London Towne Houses Inc ($3.3 million, 0.9%), was
transferred to special servicing on Nov. 12, 2014.

Details of the two largest specially serviced assets, both of
which are within the top 10 nondefeased loans, and the loan S&P
deemed as credit impaired are:

The Central Mall loan ($119.5 million, 33.1%) is the largest
nondefeased loan in the trust and the largest loan with the
special servicer.  The loan is secured by three retail shopping
malls with a combined square footage of 1,752,673 sq.-ft. located
in Port Arthur, Texas, Texarkana, Texas, and Lauton, Okla.  The
loan was transferred to C-III on Oct. 7, 2014, because of imminent
maturity default.  The reported DSC and occupancy as of year-end
2013 were 1.15x and 92%, respectively.  The payment status of the
loan is current. C-III indicated that two of the three properties
are expected to pay off in full.

The Okeechobee Industrial Park loan ($10.1 million, 2.8%) is the
fourth-largest nondefeased loan in the trust and the second-
largest loan with the special servicer.  The loan is secured by an
industrial property totaling 148,214-sq.-ft. located in West Palm
Beach, Fla.  The loan was transferred to C-III on June 11, 2014,
because of imminent monetary default.  The reported DSC and
occupancy as of year-end 2013 were 0.9x and 78%, respectively.
S&P expects a minimal loss upon the loan's eventual resolution.

S&P considered the London Towne Houses Inc. loan ($3.3 million,
0.9%) to be credit impaired.  This loan was transferred to the
special servicer on Nov. 12, 2014, because of imminent payment
default; this transfer was subsequent to the Nov. 2014 trustee
reporting period.  The loan is secured by a co-op. apartment
property totaling 200 units located in Atlanta, Ga.  The reported
DSC and occupancy as of year-end 2013 were 0.98x and 95%,
respectively.  S&P expects a minimal loss upon the loan's eventual
resolution.

S&P estimated losses for three out of the four specially serviced
assets and one credit impaired loan and arrived at a weighted
average loss severity of 29.1%.

With respect to the specially serviced assets noted above, a
minimal loss is less than 25%.

RATINGS RAISED

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2005-IQ9
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

              Rating
Class     To          From        Credit enhancement (%)
A-J       AA+ (sf)    AA- (sf)                     42.26
B         AA- (sf)    A (sf)                       33.26
C         A+ (sf)     A- (sf)                      30.08

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2005-IQ9
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class     Rating    Credit enhancement (%)
A-1A      AAA (sf)                   78.27
D         BBB+ (sf)                  22.67
E         BBB (sf)                   18.43
F         BBB- (sf)                  14.20
G         BB (sf)                    11.02
H         CCC+ (sf)                   6.25
J         CCC (sf)                    4.66
X-1       AAA (sf)                     N/A
X-Y       AAA (sf)                     N/A

N/A -- Not applicable.


MORGAN STANLEY 2005-TOP17: S&P Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to D
------------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its ratings on three
classes of commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2005-TOP17, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In addition, S&P
affirmed its ratings on three classes from the same transaction.

S&P's rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow S&P's 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 (four loans [$31.7
million, 17.93%], which paid off in full after the Nov. 2014
trustee reporting period), the transaction's structure, and the
liquidity available to the trust.

The downgrades reflect S&P's analysis of interest shortfalls
affecting the trust, and the reduced liquidity support due to
ongoing interest shortfalls.

According to the Nov. 13, 2014, remittance report, the trust
experienced monthly net interest shortfalls totaling $51,826,
primarily from $135,766 in an interest rate reduction as result of
the modification of the Coventry Mall loan, which is expected to
be ongoing until its Dec. 1, 2016 maturity, the repayment of
appraisal subordinate entitlement reductions (ASERs) of $126,406
related to Coventry Mall, non-advanced interest of $26,891 due to
a non-recoverability determination for Butterfield Plaza Shopping
Center, and special servicing fees of $15,283. Currently, classes
D through P have an outstanding unpaid interest balance.

Class D has experienced interest shortfalls for eight months, and
S&P expects these shortfalls to remain outstanding for an extended
period of time; consequently, S&P lowered its rating to 'D (sf)'.

S&P lowered its ratings on classes B and C due to reduced
liquidity support available to these classes, which makes them
more susceptible to future interest shortfalls.  Both classes had
experienced interest shortfalls from Aug. to Oct. 2014.  Depending
on the timing and final resolution of the Coventry Mall loan, S&P
may take further negative rating actions if Coventry Mall's
operating performance deteriorates further.

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

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Nov. 13, 2014, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $176.83 million, which is 18.0% of the pool
balance at issuance.  The pool currently includes 21 loans and
three REO assets (reflecting the Coventry Mall A and B notes),
down from 124 loans at issuance.  Three of these assets ($71.0
million, 40.1%) are with the special servicer, two ($17.9 million,
10.1%) loans are defeased, and 10 ($55.1 million, 31.2%) loans are
on the master servicer's watchlist.  The master servicer, Wells
Fargo Bank N.A., reported financial information for 78.7% of the
nondefeased loans in the pool, of which 38.4% was year-end 2013
data, 27.7% was year-end 2012 data, and the remaining 12.6% are as
of Sept. 30, 2014.

S&P calculated a 2.29x Standard & Poor's weighted average debt
service coverage (DSC) and 49.8% loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using
7.71% a Standard & Poor's weighted average capitalization rate.
The DSC and LTV calculations exclude the three specially serviced
assets ($71.0 million, 40.1%) and two defeased loans ($17.9
million, 10.1%).  The top 10 nondefeased loans have an aggregate
outstanding pool trust balance of $143.4 million (81.1%).  Using
servicer-reported numbers, we calculated a Standard & Poor's
weighted average DSC and LTV of 2.29x and 49.8%, respectively, for
three of the top 10 nondefeased loans.  The remaining two of the
top 10 assets are being specially serviced and the other one is on
the master servicer's watchlist.

To date, the transaction has experienced $5.9 million in principal
losses, or 0.6% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P expects
losses to reach approximately 6.0% 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
three ($71.0 million, 40.1%) specially serviced assets.

The properties securing the underlying loans are concentrated
within the Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, New York-Newark-Jersey
City, and San Diego-Carlsbad metropolitan statistical areas
(MSAs).  Standard & Poor's U.S. Public Finance Group provides
credit ratings on Chester County, New York City, and San Diego
County, which participate within these MSAs.

RATINGS LOWERED

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2005-TOP17
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

          Rating      Rating
Class     To          From         Credit enhancement (%)
B         BB- (sf)    BBB (sf)            36.88
C         B- (sf)     B (sf)              32.72
D         D (sf)      CCC+ (sf)           26.48

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2005-TOP17
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class     Rating    Credit enhancement (%)
A-5       AAA (sf)                   90.95
A-J       A+ (sf)                    48.66
X-1       AAA (sf)                     N/A

N/A--Not applicable.


MORGAN STANLEY 2008-TOP29: Fitch Cuts Rating on Cl. F Debt to CCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded three classes of Morgan Stanley
Capital I Trust (MSCI), series 2008-TOP29.

Key Rating Drivers

The downgrades were the result of increased loss expectation on
the specially serviced loan and higher modeled losses. Fitch
modeled losses of 4.8% of the remaining pool. Expected losses of
the original pool are at 5%, including losses realized to date.
Fitch designated 29 loans (28% of the pool balance) as Fitch Loans
of Concern. One loan (1.7% of the pool) transferred to special
servicing in June 2014. There were no loans in special servicing
at Fitch's prior rating action.

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by approximately 14.9%
(including 1% in realized losses) to $1.05 billion from $1.23
billion at issuance. Approximately 83% of the pool is partial or
full-term interest-only which limits deleveraging of the senior
and mezzanine classes. One loan is defeased (0.6% of the pool).
Interest shortfalls are affecting the non-rated class P.

Rating Sensitivities

The Negative Outlooks reflect the likelihood of a future downgrade
should values deteriorate further on highly leveraged loans. While
only one loan is currently in special servicing, if a significant
number of loans transfer to the special servicer, additional
downgrades may be possible due to the pool's high leverage and the
relatively small tranche sizes of the subordinate classes. In
addition, Fitch is modeling 63% of the pool as a maturity default,
indicating a high refinance risk based on Fitch's stressed
refinance constants and the likelihood a sponsor would have to put
new equity into the property.

The largest contributor to Fitch modeled losses is a 98,772 square
foot (sf) office property (2.1% of the pool balance) located in
Valencia, CA. Cash flow had significantly declined after the
largest tenant vacated; however, the borrower has filled some of
the space and is now approximately 87% occupied.

The second-largest contributor to modeled losses is the specially
serviced loan, which is secured by a retail property located in
Scottsdale, AZ. The property formerly had a Wild Oats then Whole
Foods but is now dark, though Whole Foods, the guarantor,
continues to pay rent. Other major tenants include Sports Chalet
and Mega Furniture.

The third-largest contributor to modeled losses is backed by a
140,204 sf grocery anchored retail center (1.5% of the pool
balance) in Fredericksburg, VA. The property has experienced cash
flow issues due to a decline in occupancy; however, it remains
current and per the most recent rent roll, remains anchored by a
Giant grocery store on a long-term lease.

Fitch downgrades the following classes as indicated:

-- $21.6 million class D to 'BBsf' from 'BBB-sf'; Outlook
   Negative;
-- $12.3 million class E to 'Bsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $13.9 million class F to 'CCCsf' from 'Bsf'; RE 100%.

Fitch affirms the following classes and revises Outlooks as
indicated:

-- $24.3 million class A-AB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $629.6 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $75 million class A-4FL at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $123.4 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $72.5 million class A-J1 at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $20.1 million class B at 'Asf'; Outlook to Negative from
   Stable;
-- $10.8 million class C at 'BBBsf'; Outlook to Negative from
   Stable;
-- $13.9 million class G at 'CCCsf', RE 15%;
-- $10.8 million class H at 'CCCsf', RE 0%;
-- $1.5 million class J at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
-- $4.6 million class K at 'CCsf', RE 0%;
-- $1.5 million class L at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $1.5 million class M at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $4.6 million class N at 'Csf', RE 0%;
-- $4.6 million class O at 'Csf', RE 0%.


MOUNTAIN VIEW III: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its ratings on the class
A-2, B, and C notes from Mountain View CLO III Ltd., a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by Seix
Investment Advisers LLC, and removed them from CreditWatch, where
they were placed with positive implications on Nov. 17, 2014.  At
the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on the class A-1, D, and E
notes from the same transaction.

The upgrades on the class A-2, B, and C notes reflect the
increased credit support following paydowns to the class A-1
notes.  The transaction is currently in its amortization phase
since the reinvestment period ended in April 2014.  According to
the Oct. 2014 trustee report, the class A-1 notes have paid down
by $25.88 million and are now at 91.37% of its original balance.

S&P's affirmations on the class A-1, D, and E notes reflect the
availability of adequate credit support at their current rating
levels.

The ratings on the class D and E notes are driven by S&P's
largest-obligor default test, which intends to address the
potential concentration of exposure to obligors in the
transaction's portfolio.  The class D largest-obligor test pointed
to a lower rating; however, S&P considered the strong cash flow
results and paydowns to the A-1 notes in affirming S&P's 'BBB
(sf)' rating.

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

CASH FLOW RESULTS AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Mountain View CLO III Ltd.

                            Cash flow
       Previous             implied     Cash flow    Final
Class  rating               rating      cushion(i)   rating
A-1    AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    32.69%       AAA (sf)
A-2    AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)    8.17%        AAA (sf)
B      AA (sf)/Watch Pos    AAA (sf)    0.30%        AA+ (sf)
C      A (sf)/Watch Pos     AA- (sf)    3.30%        A+ (sf)
D      BBB (sf)             BBB+ (sf)   2.44%        BBB (sf)
E      B+ (sf)              BB+ (sf)    0.65%        B+ (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-1    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
A-2    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)
B      AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)    AA+ (sf)
C      AA- (sf)   A+ (sf)    AA- (sf)    AA+ (sf)    A+ (sf)
D      BBB+ (sf)  BBB- (sf)  BBB+ (sf)   BBB+ (sf)   BBB (sf)
E      BB+ (sf)   B+ (sf)    BB (sf)     BB+ (sf)    B+ (sf)

DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

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

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

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

Mountain View CLO III Ltd.

             Rating          rating
Class        To              From
A-2          AAA (sf)        AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B            AA+ (sf)        AA (sf)/Watch Pos
C            A+ (sf)         A (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Mountain View CLO III Ltd.

Class        Rating
A-1          AAA (sf)
D            BBB (sf)
E            B+ (sf)


NEUBERGER BERMAN XVIII: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class D Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
Neuberger Berman CLO XVIII Ltd./Neuberger Berman CLO XVIII LLC's
$459.50 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 ratings reflect:

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

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

   -- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and
      ultimate principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned ratings under various
      interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from
      0.2321%-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
      rated notes' outstanding balance.

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

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Neuberger Berman CLO XVIII Ltd./Neuberger Berman CLO XVIII LLC

Class                Rating               Amount
                                        (mil. $)
A-1                  AAA (sf)             307.50
A-2                  AA (sf)               65.00
B (deferrable)       A (sf)                37.00
C (deferrable)       BBB (sf)              30.00
D (deferrable)       BB (sf)               20.00
Subordinated notes   NR                    53.35

NR--Not rated.


NEW RESIDENTIAL 2014-3: S&P Assigns Prelim. B Rating on B-5 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its preliminary
ratings to the New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2014-3 $503.734
million mortgage-backed notes series 2014-3.

The note issuance is backed by seasoned first-lien fixed-rate
residential mortgage loans secured by one- to four-family
residences, condominiums, cooperatives, and planned-unit
developments.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

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

   -- The pool's collateral composition, which consists of highly
      seasoned fixed and adjustable rate mortgages;

   -- The representation and warranty framework; and

   -- S&P's view of the ability and willingness of key transaction
      parties to perform their contractual obligations, and the
      likelihood that the parties could be replaced if needed.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2014-3

Class       Prelim rtg      Amount (mil. $)

A-FXD       AAA (sf)        229.948
A-FXDIO     AAA (sf)        Notional amount
A-FLT       AAA (sf)        229.948
A-FLTIO     AAA (sf)        Notional amount
B-1         AA (sf)         12.600
B1-IO       AA (sf)         Notional amount
B-2         A (sf)          11.025
B2-IO       A (sf)          Notional amount
B-3         BBB (sf)        8.400
B-4         BB (sf)         3.413
B-5         B (sf)          8.400
B-6         NR              21.262
FB          NR              2.667

NR--Not rated.


NORTHWOODS CAPITAL XIV: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to
Northwoods Capital XIV Ltd./Northwoods Capital XIV LLC's $462.50
million floating-rate note.

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

The ratings reflect S&P's assessment of:

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

   -- The transaction's credit enhancement, which is sufficient to
      withstand the defaults applicable for the supplemental tests
      (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 rated notes, which S&P assessed
      using its cash flow analysis and assumptions commensurate
      with the assigned ratings under various interest-rate
      scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from 0.2316%-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.

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                       44.80

NR--Not rated.


OCEAN TRAILS V: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services assigned its ratings to Ocean
Trails CLO V/Ocean Trails CLO V LLC's $368.55 million fixed- and
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 ratings reflect S&P's assessment of:

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

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

   -- The transaction's ability to make timely interest and
      ultimate principal payments on the rated notes, which S&P
      assessed using its cash flow analysis and assumptions
      commensurate with the assigned ratings under various
      interest-rate scenarios, including LIBOR ranging from
      0.2316%-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 a certain amount
      of excess interest proceeds that are available before paying
      subordinated asset management fees, uncapped administrative
      expenses and fees, incentive asset management fees, and
      subordinated note payments, to either pay the notes
      according to the principal payment sequence or for the
      purchase of additional collateral assets during the
      reinvestment period, at the asset manager's discretion.

RATINGS LIST

Ocean Trails CLO V
Class                Rating     Amount (mil. $)
X                    AAA (sf)              2.80
A-1                  AAA (sf)            184.50
A-2                  AAA (sf)             50.00
A-3                  AAA (sf)             10.00
B                    AA (sf)              57.75
C-1                  A (sf)               18.00
C-2                  A (sf)                7.00
D                    BBB (sf)             21.25
E                    BB (sf)              17.25
Subordinated notes   NR                   42.65

NR--Not rated.


OHA LOAN 2014-1: Fitch Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings assigns the following 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 rate the subordinated notes.

Transaction Summary

OHA Loan Funding 2014-1, LLC (the issuer) comprises 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
93.9% first lien senior-secured loans. Approximately 87.5% 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 72.1%. 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 class A-2 notes to remain
investment grade, while classes B, C, and D 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 'BBB-sf' and 'AAAsf' for the class B-1 and B-2
notes, between 'BB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for the class C notes, between
'B+sf' and 'AA+sf' for the class D notes, and between a level
below 'CCCsf' and 'Asf' for the class E notes. The results of
these scenarios remain consistent with the assigned ratings.

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 new issue report, which will be available
shortly to investors on Fitch's website at 'www.fitchratings.com'.


OMI TRUST 2000-B: S&P Lowers Rating on Class A-1 Notes to D
-----------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its rating on the class
A-1 notes from OMI Trust 2000-B, an asset-backed securities
transaction backed by fixed-rate manufactured housing loans
originated by Oakwood Acceptance Corp., to 'D (sf)' from 'CC
(sf)'.

The lowered rating on the class A-1 notes reflects a payment
default resulting from the class' interest shortfall on the
Nov. 12, 2014, payment date.  S&P believes that the interest
shortfall will likely persist into the future due to the adverse
performance trends and higher-than-initially-expected losses S&P
has observed in the underlying pool of collateral.


PACIFIC BEACON: S&P Raises Rating on 2006A Revenue Bonds to 'BB+'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services raised its unenhanced rating
(SPUR) on Pacific Beacon LLC's series 2006A class III taxable
military housing revenue bonds one notch to 'BB+' from 'BB'.  At
the same time, Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'AA' and 'A+' SPURs
on Pacific Beacon LLC's series 2006A class I and II bonds,
respectively.  The SPURs were also removed from CreditWatch, where
they were placed with developing implications on July 14, 2014.
Finally, Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'AA' long-term rating on
the class I bonds, and its 'AA-' long-term rating on the class II
and class III bonds.  The bonds are issued for the Naval Base San
Diego Unaccompanied Housing project.  The outlook is stable.

These actions reflect application of the ratings service's
affordable multifamily housing criteria released June 19, 2014.
More specifically, the ratings reflect Standard & Poor's view of:

   -- The project's very strong financial strength,
   -- The very strong asset quality consisting of a federally
      appropriated revenue stream,
   -- The project's high level of occupied housing,
   -- The fully funded reserves coupled with the high quality of
      the real estate collateral supporting the bonds,
   -- The high military essentiality of Naval Station (NAVSTA) San
      Diego, and
   -- Strong program administration that includes a joint venture
      between an affiliate of Clark Realty Capital LLC (the
      project manager) and the Department of the Navy.

Somewhat offsetting the above-mentioned strengths is what Standard
& Poor's considers relatively weak 1.09x maximum annual debt
service (MADS) coverage on the class III bonds, the SPUR of which
is capped at 'BB+'.

"The stable outlook reflects our view of strong debt service
coverage, revenue stream strength, high occupancy rates, the
military importance of NAVSTA San Diego to the Department of
Defense, and the experience of the project owner and manager.
However, if debt service coverage on the class III bonds declines
further, we could lower the ratings," said Standard & Poor's
credit analyst Ki Beom K. Park.  "We could also lower the ratings
on the class I and class II bonds if the project's financial
performance is below expectations.  This would be evidenced by
higher-than-anticipated operating expenses combined with reduced
net operating income, weakened occupancy, or a greater proportion
of units rented to military personnel earning less than the full
basic allowance for housing rate."

The July 14, 2014 CreditWatch placement was based on the then-
pending application of the ratings service's revised criteria,
which affected a substantial number of similar multifamily
affordable housing transactions.

Pacific Beacon LLC previously issued the debt to finance the
acquisition and new construction of 1,199 units of unaccompanied
Navy housing in San Diego.


PUTNAM STRUCTURED 2001-1: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Notes to Ca
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the
following notes issued by Putnam Structured Product CDO 2001-1
LTD.:

  $24,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Notes Due 2037, Upgraded to
  A3 (sf); previously on Jan 29, 2014 Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

  $9,000,000 Class C-1 Floating Rate Notes due 2037, Upgraded to
  Ca (sf); previously on Jan 29, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

  $9,000,000 Class C-2 Fixed Rate Notes Due 2037, Upgraded to Ca
  (sf); previously on Jan 29, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has upgraded the ratings on the transaction due to greater
than expected prepayments resulting in approximately $23.3 million
of paydowns to the capital structure since the last review. The
rating action is the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of
commercial real estate collateralized debt obligation CRE CDO
transactions.

Putnam 2001-1 is a cash transaction whose reinvestment period
ended in November 2006. The transaction is backed by a portfolio
of: i) asset backed securities (ABS) (26.4% of the pool balance)
which are primarily in the form of home equity and Alt-A
securities; ii) commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS)
(15.5%); iii) CRE CDO bonds (15.2%); iv) corporate bonds (16.3%);
and v) real estate investment trust (REIT) debt (26.6%). As of the
trustee's November 18, 2014 report, the aggregate note balance of
the transaction, including preferred shares, is $66.4 million,
compared to $89.7 million at last review.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 2127,
compared to 1788 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (18.2% compared to 13.1% at last
review); A1-A3 (7.0% compared to 6.3% at last review); Baa1-Baa3
(41.8% compared to 55.3% at last review); Ba1-Ba3 (8.2% compared
to 3.7% at last review); B1-B3 (3.8% compared to 5.0% at last
review); and Caa1-Ca/C 20.9%, compared to 16.6% at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.2 years, compared to 3.6 at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 28.6%, compared to 37.8% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 3.0%, compared to 3.2% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in March 2014.

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

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for the rated notes,
although a change in one key parameter assumption could be offset
by a change in one or more of the other key parameter assumptions.
The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes in the
ratings recovery rates of the underlying collateral and credit
assessments. Reducing the recovery rate of 100% of the collateral
pool by 5% would result in an average modeled rating movement on
the rated notes of zero to notches (e.g., one notch down implies a
ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1). Increasing the recovery rate of
100% of the collateral pool by 5% would result in an average
modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero notches (e.g.,
one notch upward implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Baa2).

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


RESOURCE CAPITAL: DBRS Confirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Inc. has confirmed the rating on the Floating Rate Notes (the
Notes) issued by Resource Capital Corp. CRE Notes 2013, Ltd. as
follows:

-- Class A at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-S at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class C at A (low) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class E at BB (sf)
-- Class F at B (sf)

All trends are Stable.

The rating confirmations reflect the continued stable performance
of the pool since issuance in December 2013.  The current pool
consists of 23 loans secured by traditional commercial real estate
assets, including multifamily, retail, office and hotel
properties.  According to the December 2014 remittance, there has
been collateral reduction of 11.0%.  The loans benefit from low
leverage on a per-unit basis, with the weighted-average debt yield
based on the most recently reported net operating income and
outstanding trust balance at 10.3%, which is relatively strong,
given the pool consists of stabilizing assets.

The collateral loans are secured by stabilizing properties, which
carry initial terms of two or three years and include built-in
extensions options of up to an additional two or three years.  The
borrowers are typically new equity sponsors of fairly well-
positioned assets within their respective markets.  Some loans
also contain future funding facilities designed to aid in property
stabilization.  The releases of designated future funding dollars
to individual borrowers are at the discretion of the servicer upon
determination that all requirements for such future funding have
been met.  As of the December 2014 remittance, there is a total of
$2.7 million remaining in future funding allocated across six
loans, which currently represent 27.2% of the current pool
balance.

To date, three loans have been paid in full and two additional
loans have experienced partial principal repayment.  The Stone
Ranch loan, secured by a multifamily property in Dallas, Texas,
experienced a $1.0 million partial principal prepayment as a
result of insurance proceeds released to the borrower after one of
the collateralized buildings was destroyed by a fire in February
2014.  The loan now has a balance of $14.5 million, representing
5.3% of the current pool balance.

While the transaction consists of only 23 loans, the pool is
diversified as the largest loan, the largest five loans and the
largest ten loans account for 8.8%, 35.8% and 61.2% of the current
pool balance, respectively.  The transaction does have exposure to
one sponsor, the Carlyle Group (Carlyle), who sponsors five loans
representing 22.1% of the current pool balance.  Carlyle is a
fully integrated real estate investment firm with $180 billion in
total assets around the globe and is considered a strong sponsor.

The ratings assigned by DBRS contemplate timely payments of
distributable interest and, in the case of the Offered Notes other
than the Class A, Class A-S and Class B Notes, ultimate recovery
of Deferred Collateralized Note Interest Amounts (inclusive of
interest payable thereon at the applicable rate, to the extent
permitted by law).  The transaction is a standard sequential pay
waterfall.


SALOMON BROTHERS 1999-C1: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on X Secs.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class of
Salomon Brothers Mortgage Securities VII, Inc., Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through, Series 1999-C1 as follows:

  Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Jan 24, 2014
  Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The rating of the IO class, Class X, was affirmed based on the
credit performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF)
of its referenced classes. The IO class is the only outstanding
Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

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

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of
its referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a
lower weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

Methodology Underlying The Rating Action

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

Description of Models Used

Moody's review incorporated the use of the excel-based Large Loan
Model v 8.7. 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.

Deal Performance

As of the November 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $5 million
from $735 million at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by three mortgage loans ranging in size from 14% to
20% of the pool, as well as one loan representing 66% of the pool
that has defeased and is secured by US Government securities.

Fifteen loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $20 million (57% loss severity on
average). One loan is in special servicing, The Cannon Building
Loan ($1 million -- 20% of the pool), which is secured by a 43-
unit extended stay hotel containing ground level retail and
commercial space. The property is located in Troy, NY. The
property has a historical designation and was constructed in
approximately 1845. Both the borrower and the guarantor have filed
Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Following the bankruptcy, a Settlement
Agreement between the lender and borrower was approved by the
court and executed May 15, 2012. The loan is in default and the
lender obtained the appointment of a receiver in September 2014.
The lender indicates they are seeking a default judgment and
tentatively anticipate completing a foreclosure around September
2015. Moody's anticipates a significant loss from this loan.

Moody's was provided with full year 2013 and partial year 2014
operating results for 100% and 100% of the pool, respectively.

The largest loan not in special servicing is the Breighton
Apartments Loan (approximately $720,000 -- 13.5% of the pool),
which is secured by a 96-unit multi-family property in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma. As of September 2014, the property was 98% leased
compared to 95% as of September 2013. Financial performance
remains stable and the loan has amortized 28% since
securitization. The loan is scheduled to fully amortize by June
2028. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 45% and 2.29X,
respectively, compared to 46% and 2.23X at prior review.


SEAWALL 2007-2: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on Class B Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on the
following notes issued by Seawall 2007-2:

Cl. A, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2014 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2014 Affirmed Ba1
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2014 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2014 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Super Senior Notes, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2014
Affirmed Aa1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its
key transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing
ratings. The rating actions are the result of Moody's on-going
surveillance of commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligation (CRE CDO Synthetic) transactions.

Seawall 2007-2 Ltd is a static synthetic transaction backed by a
portfolio of credit default swaps on commercial mortgage backed
securities (CMBS) (100% of the reference obligation pool balance).
As of the November 25, 2014 trustee report, the aggregate note
balance of the transaction has decreased to $947.3 million from
$986.5 million at last review, with the reference pool
amortization being paid to the notes on a sequential basis.
Additionally, Class X is interest-only with a notional balance
that references all classes of notes.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the reference obligations
it does not rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF
of 12, compared to 14 at last review. The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3: 96.2%, as compared to 96%; A1-A3
2.1%, as compared to 2.0% at last review; and Baa1-Baa3: 1.7%, as
compared to 2.0%, at last review.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.4 years, compared to 2.7 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
reference obligations.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 73.8%, compared to 73.1% at last
review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 50%, same as last review.

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:

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the
rated notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption
could be offset by a change in one or more of the other key
parameter assumptions. The rated notes are particularly sensitive
to changes in the recovery rates of the underlying collateral and
credit assessments. Notching down 100% of the collateral pool by
one notch would result in an average modeled rating movement on
the rated notes of one to two notches (e.g., one notch down
implies a ratings movement of Baa3 to Ba1). Notching up
approximately 18% of the collateral pool by one notch would result
in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of one to
two notches (e.g., two notches down implies a ratings movement of
Baa3 to Ba2).

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


TICP CLO III: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating on $8.75MM Cl. F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to ten classes of
notes issued by TICP CLO III, Ltd.:

  $3,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2027
  (the "Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

  $320,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2027 (the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

  $49,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2027 (the "Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

  $15,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2027
  (the "Class B-2 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

  $23,750,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

  $19,750,000 Class D-1 Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating
  Rate Notes due 2027 (the "Class D-1 Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

  $10,000,000 Class D-2 Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating
  Rate Notes due 2027 (the "Class D-2 Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

  $20,250,000 Class E-1 Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class E-1 Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

  $3,500,000 Class E-2 Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class E-2 Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

  $8,750,000 Class F Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2027 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

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.

TICP CLO III is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 90.0% of the portfolio must consist of
first lien senior secured loans and eligible investments and up to
10.0% 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.

TICP CLO III Management, 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): 2600

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.1 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 2600 to 2990)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: 0

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D-1 Notes: -1

Class D-2 Notes: -1

Class E-1 Notes: 0

Class E-2 Notes: 0

Class F Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2600 to 3380)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -3

Class B-2 Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -3

Class D-1 Notes: -2

Class D-2 Notes: -2

Class E-1 Notes: -1

Class E-2 Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -2

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.


WACHOVIA BANK 2006-C25: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on Cl. D Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 20 classes of Wachovia Bank Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2006-C25 (WBCMT 2006-C25) commercial mortgage pass-
through certificates.

Key Rating Drivers

Fitch modeled losses of 7.3% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 10.5%, including $148.3
million (5.2% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date. Fitch has designated 29 loans (19.7%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes seven specially serviced assets (6.8%).

As of the November 2014 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 26.4% to $2.11 billion from
$2.86 billion at issuance. Per the servicer reporting, four loans
(10.4% of the pool) are defeased. Interest shortfalls are
currently affecting classes H through S.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the specially-
serviced Hercules Plaza loan (3% of the pool), which is secured by
a 517,000 sf office property located in Wilmington, DE. The most
recently reported occupancy was 73%. The property was previously
100% master leased to a single tenant; however, they vacated at
lease expiration in May 2013. Several sub-tenants then went
direct. A modification of the loan was recently completed, which,
among other terms, extended the loan term an additional two years.

The next largest contributor to expected losses is the Piedmont
Center Buildings 9-12 loan (3.1%), which is secured by four multi-
tenanted office properties located in the Buckhead sub-market of
Atlanta, GA. The servicer reported YTD September 2014 DSCR was
1.12x. As of September 2014, occupancy was reported at 74% with
approximately 6% lease rollover expected through 2015. Recent sub-
market metrics indicate the market remains relatively weak.
The third largest contributor to expected losses is the real
estate owned (REO) Skagit Valley Square property (0.8%), which
consists of a 172,000 sf retail property located in Mount Vernon,
WA. The loan transferred to special servicing in 2010 after its
anchor tenant filed for bankruptcy. Foreclosure was completed in
late 2011. As of the November 2014 rent roll, the property was 69%
occupied. The special servicer continues efforts to stabilize the
property prior to any sale.

Rating Sensitivities

Rating Outlooks on classes A-4 through B are Stable due to
increasing credit enhancement and continued paydown. The Rating
Outlook on C remains negative due to the potential for further
negative credit migration of the underlying collateral including
continued transfers to special servicing or performance declines
of current loans.

Distressed classes (those rated below 'B') may be subject to
further downgrades as additional losses are realized.

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

-- $10.7 million class B at 'BBsf'; Outlook to Stable from
   Negative;
-- $32.2 million class D at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%.

Fitch affirms the following classes as indicated:

-- $608.4 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $500 million class A-5 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $287.8 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $286.2 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $218.3 million class A-J at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $35.8 million class C at 'Bsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $17.9 million class E at 'CCCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $32.2 million class F at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $32.2 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $32.2 million class H at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $12.7 million 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%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3, A-PB1 and A-PB2 certificates have paid in
full. Fitch does not rate the class S certificates. Fitch
previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only class IO
certificates.


WACHOVIA BANK 2007-C32: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 9 Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service affirmed 20 classes of Wachovia Bank
Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Securities Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2007-C32 as follows:

Cl. A-PB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-1A, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed A1
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed A1
(sf)

Cl. A-4FL, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed A1
(sf)

Cl. A-MFL, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed
Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. M, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. N, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. IO, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2014 Downgraded to
B1 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

Six investment-grade P&I classes were affirmed because the credit
support was sufficient to maintain the current ratings. Thirteen
below investment-grade P&I classes were affirmed because the
ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss. The majority of
loans in special servicing are real estate owned (REO) and
interest shortfalls continue to increase. The IO class was
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 16.0% of
the current balance, compared to 17.2% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 14.4% of
the original pooled balance compared to 15.3% 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 pay downs 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 "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

Description of Models Used

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model v3.0, which
it uses for both conduit and fusion transactions. Credit
enhancement levels for conduit loans 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). Moody's fuses the conduit results with
the results of its analysis of investment grade structured credit
assessed loans and any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater
of the current pool balance.

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 36, the same as at last review.

Deal Performance

As of the November 18, 2014 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 28% to $2.8 billion
from $3.8 billion at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 123 mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 1% to 8% of the pool. Two loans representing 1% of the pool
have defeased and are secured by U.S. Government securities. The
$200 million Two Herald Square loan is in the process of
defeasing.

There are thirty-three 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.

Eleven loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $108 million (14% loss severity).
Currently eleven loans, representing 12% of the pool, are in
special servicing and represent a mix of property types. Moody's
has estimated an aggregate $217 million loss (66% expected loss on
average) for the specially serviced loans.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for 24 troubled
loans representing 25% of the pool and has estimated an aggregate
$137.4 million loss (20% estimated loss based on a 50% probability
of default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's was provided with full year 2013 operating results for 94%
of the pool's non-specially serviced and non-defeased loans and
82% of partial year 2014 operating results. Excluding specially
serviced and troubled loans, Moody's weighted average LTV is 113%
versus 117% at last review. Moody's net cash flow reflects a
weighted average haircut of 12% to the most recently available net
operating income. Moody's value reflects a weighted average
capitalization rate of 9.2%.

Excluding special serviced and troubled loans, Moody's actual and
stressed DSCRs are 1.57X and 0.92X, respectively, compared to
1.35X and 1.26X at last review. Moody's actual DSCR is based on
Moody's net cash flow (NCF) and the loan's actual debt service.
Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a 9.25% stressed
rate applied to the loan balance.

The top three performing conduit loans represent 19% of the pool
balance. The largest conduit loan is the DDR Southeast Pool ($221
million -- 7.5% of the pool), which represents a pari passu
interest in an $885 million first mortgage. The loan is secured by
52 anchored retail properties located throughout ten states. The
portfolio was 89% leased as of December 2013, compared to 88% as
of December 2012. The loan is interest only for its entire 10 year
term. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 121% and 0.74X,
respectively, compared to 122% and 0.76X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Beacon D.C. & Seattle Pool ($186.7
million -- 6.7% of the pool). The loan represents a participating
interest in a $1.2 billion (originally $2.7 billion) financing
package secured by a portfolio of nine mortgaged properties in
Bellevue/Seattle, Washington D.C. and Northern Virginia. The loan
is pari passu with five other securitizations and was originally
collateralized by 17 mortgaged properties and three cash flow
pledged properties. The borrower, Beacon Capital Partners, is
actively marketing the remaining properties for sale. The most
recent property sold out of the portfolio was Plaza Center and US
Bank Tower, which sold for $186.5 million in first-quarter 2014.
Occupancy for the remaining nine properties was 77% as of March
2014. The loan was previously in special servicing but was
modified in December 2010 and returned to the master servicer in
May 2012. The loan modification included a five-year extension, a
coupon reduction along with an unpaid interest accrual feature and
a waiver of yield maintenance to facilitate property sales. The
borrower, Beacon Capital Partners, is actively marketing the
remaining properties for sale. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
148% and 0.70X, respectively, the same as at last review.

The third largest loan is the DDR-TRT Pool Loan ($110 million --
4.0% of the pool) which represents a three property retail
portfolio of shopping centers located in New Jersey, North
Carolina and Pennsylvania built in 2005. This loan is interest-
only throughout the term. The combined occupancy for these three
retail shopping centers was 97% as of June 2014, the same as at
last review. Financial performance declined slightly since last
review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 111% and 0.83X,
respectively compared to 107% and 0.86X at last review.


WASATCH CLO: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on $29MM Cl. C Sr. Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
notes issued by Wasatch CLO Ltd.

$7,400,000 Type I Composite Notes due 2022 (current rated balance
of $1,060,814.79), Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on April 10,
2014 Affirmed A3 (sf)

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

$60,000,000 Class A-1a Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2022 (current outstanding balance of $55,334,540.60), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on April 10, 2014 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

$429,000,000 Class A-1b Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2022 (current outstanding balance of $395,641,965.69), Affirmed
Aaa (sf); previously on April 10, 2014 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

$24,500,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2022, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on April 10, 2014 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

$42,500,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2022, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on April 10, 2014 Affirmed
A3 (sf)

$29,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2022, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on April 10, 2014 Affirmed
Ba1 (sf)

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

Ratings Rationale

The upgrade of the rating on the Type I Composite Notes is due to
the reduction in the Rated Balance of the notes. Since the last
rating action in April 2014, the Type I Composite Notes' rated
balance has been reduced by $413,725 or 28%, to $1.06 million. The
composite notes are currently backed by $5.5 million of the Class
C notes and $4.5 million of equity.

Moody's affirmed the ratings on the rest of the capital structure
given the slightly higher over-collateralization (OC) ratios,
which were offset by a slight deterioration in the weighted
average rating factor (WARF) since the last rating action in April
2014.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

6) Post-Reinvestment Period Trading: Subject to certain
requirements, the deal can reinvest certain proceeds after the end
of the reinvestment period. Such reinvestment could affect the
transaction either positively or negatively. In particular,
Moody's tested for a possible extension of the actual weighted
average life in its analysis given that the post-reinvestment
period reinvesting criteria has loose restrictions on the weighted
average life of the portfolio.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes 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):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (2263)

Class A-1a: 0

Class A-1b: 0

Class A-2: +1

Class B: +2

Class C: +2

Type I Composite: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (3395)

Class A-1a: -1

Class A-1b: -1

Class A-2: -3

Class B: -2

Class C: -1

Type I Composite: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

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

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base
case, Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing
par and principal proceeds balance of $603.6 million, defaulted
par of $0.9 million, a weighted average default probability of
22.09% (implying a WARF of 2829), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 47.19%, a diversity score of 86 and a weighted
average spread of 3.79% (before accounting for LIBOR floors).

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of
the assets in the collateral pool. Moody's generally applies
recovery rates for CLO securities as published in "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs". In some cases, alternative recovery
assumptions may be considered based on the specifics of the
analysis of the CLO transaction. In each case, historical and
market performance and the collateral manager's latitude for
trading the collateral are also factors.


WESTBROOK CLO: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on $14MM Cl. E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
notes issued by Westbrook CLO Ltd.:

  $24,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
  Notes due 2020, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Oct 16,
  2013 Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

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

  $254,800,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2020 (current outstanding balance of $169,233,000), Affirmed
  Aaa (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2013 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

  $30,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2020, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2013 Affirmed
  Aaa (sf)

  $21,200,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
  2020, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2013 Upgraded to
  Aaa (sf)

  $26,000,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2020, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2013 Upgraded
  to Baa2 (sf)

  $14,000,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
  2020, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2013 Affirmed
  Ba3 (sf)

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

Ratings Rationale

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's over-
collateralization ratios since March 2014. The Class A-1 notes
have been paid down by approximately 34% or $85.6 million since
that time.  Based on the trustee's November 2014 report, the over-
collateralization (OC) ratios for the Class A/B, Class C, Class D
and Class E notes are reported at 138.2%, 124.7%, 112.7% and
107.1%, respectively, versus March 2014 levels of 128.4%, 119.0%,
110.3% and 106.1%, respectively.

The portfolio includes a number of investments in securities that
mature after the notes do. Based on Moody's calculation,
securities that mature after the notes do currently make up
approximately 15.5% of the portfolio. These investments could
expose the notes to market risk in the event of liquidation when
the notes mature. Despite the increase in the OC ratio of the
Class D and the Class E notes, Moody's affirmed the ratings on
those notes owing to market risk stemming from the exposure to
these long-dated assets.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets reported by the trustee and those that Moody's
assumes as having defaulted could result in volatility in the
deal's OC levels. Further, the timing of recoveries and whether a
manager decides to work out or sell defaulted assets create
additional uncertainty. Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries
assuming the lower of the market price and the recovery rate in
order to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Realization of higher than assumed recoveries would positively
impact the CLO.

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

In 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):

Moody's Adjusted WARF -- 20% (1902)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: 0

Class C: +1

Class D: +3

Class E: +1

Moody's Adjusted WARF + 20% (2854)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: 0

Class B: 0

Class C: -2

Class D: -1

Class E: -1

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

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

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In its base
case, Moody's analyzed the collateral pool as having a performing
par and principal proceeds balance of $299.5 million, defaulted
par of $10.1 million, a weighted average default probability of
14.41% (implying a WARF of 2378), a weighted average recovery rate
upon default of 49.72%, a diversity score of 46 and a weighted
average spread of 2.98% (before accounting for LIBOR floors).

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


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2013-C18: Fitch Affirms BB Rating on Cl. E Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 14 classes of WFRBS Commercial Mortgage
Trust 2013-C16 certificates due to stable performance since
issuance.

Key Rating Drivers

The affirmations are based on the stable performance of the
underlying collateral pool. As of the November 2014 distribution
date, the pool's aggregate principal balance has been reduced by
0.6% to $1.03 billion from $1.04 billion at issuance.

There are currently no assets in special servicing, and one loan
(1% of pool) is on the master servicer watchlist. The loan is
secured by a 142-unit multifamily property located in Atlanta, GA.
The property experienced a drop in its net operating income debt
service coverage ratio (NOI DSCR) which was 1.1X as of year-to-
date through June 2014 as compared to 1.49X at origination.
According to the servicer, the decrease is a result of an increase
in expenses including insurance premiums, HOA expenses and
professional fees.

Rating Sensitivity

The Rating Outlook for all classes remains Stable. Due to the
recent issuance of the transaction and stable performance, Fitch
does not foresee positive or negative ratings migration until a
material economic or asset level event changes the transaction's
portfolio-level metrics.

The largest loan in the pool is secured by the 2.2 million square
foot (sf) Garden State Plaza (14.5% of the pool) located in
Paramus, NJ. The property is well-located just 10 miles northwest
of Manhattan, NY. The Garden State Plaza has over 300 stores and
is anchored by Macy's, Nordstrom, Lord and Taylor and JCPenny.
Macy's, Nordstrom and Lord and Taylor are non-collateral anchors
however all three are subject to a ground lease that is part of
the collateral. The loan is subject to a $375 million pari-passu
note within the RBSCF 2013-GSP transaction. The collateral is
performing in line with underwritten expectations with occupancy
of 98% (as of June 2014) and a 2013 net operating income debt
service coverage ratio (NOI DSCR) of 4.45X.

The second largest loan in the pool (13.6% of pool) is secured by
The Outlet Collection, a 1.3 million square foot outlet mall
located in Elizabeth, NJ. The property is well-located just 15
miles southwest of New York City. The mall includes over 200
tenants consisting of manufacturer outlets, discount off-price
stores, full-price retailers, restaurants and entertainment
venues. The loan is subject to two pari-passu notes with a total
debt loan, including the subject loan, of $350 million. The
property continues to perform as expected at underwriting with a
2013 NOI DSCR of 2.8x and a year-to-date 2014 (as of September
2014) NOI DSCR of 2.96x. The property was 99% occupied as of
September 2014.

The third largest loan in the pool (13.34%) is secured by
AmericasMart, a 4.6 million square foot wholesale trade market
located within the Atlanta Central Business District. Of the total
net rentable area, approximately 3.5 million square feet is
permanent showroom space occupied by more than 1,500 tenants and
approximately 1.1 million square feet is exhibition space
temporarily leased to tenants during various trade shows
throughout the year. The property is subject to multiple pari-
passu notes within various MSBAM and WFRBS deals for a total debt
load of $550.5MM. The collateral is continuing to perform as
expected with occupancy of 85% since issuance and a trailing 12-
month NOI DSCR of 1.81X.

Fitch affirms the following classes:

-- $42.7 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $103.3 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $140 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $170 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $201 million class A-5 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $63.7 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $70.1 million class A-S at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $72.7 million class B at 'AA-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $36.3 million class C at 'A-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $0 class PEX at 'A-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $66.2 million class D at 'BBB-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $19.5 million class E at 'BBsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $7.8 million class F at 'Bsf', Outlook Stable;
-- $790.8 million class X-A* at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable.

* Notional balance and interest only

Fitch does not rate the class G certificates.


YORK CLO-1: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating on $23 Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to five
classes of notes to be issued by York CLO-1 Ltd. (the "Issuer" or
"York CLO-1").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

  $250,000,000 Class A Floating Rate Notes due 2027 (the "Class A
Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

$49,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Notes due 2027 (the "Class B
Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

$22,000,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2027 (the
"Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

$24,500,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2027 (the
"Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

$23,500,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2027 (the
"Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

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

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

Ratings Rationale

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

York CLO-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 92.5% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 7.5% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans
and unsecured loans. Moody's expect the portfolio to be
approximately 75% ramped as of the closing date.

York CLO Managed Holdings, 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 will issue subordinated
notes. The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage
tests which, if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds
to pay down the notes in order of seniority.

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

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

Par amount: $400,000,000

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2800

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.90%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 5.125%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.0%

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 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 2800 to 3220)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2800 to 3640)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


* Moody's Takes Action on $1.35 Billion of Subprime RMBS
--------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 42 tranches
and downgraded the rating of 2 tranche from 16 transactions issued
by various issuers, backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Issuer: Accredited Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-1, Asset-Backed Notes,
Series 2005-1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Accredited Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-1

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2005-
HE4

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 17, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 17, 2014
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series 2006-
ASAP2

Cl. A-2C, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 22, 2013
Upgraded to B1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Apr 14, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Aegis Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-4

Cl. IA4, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. IIA, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Issuer: Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust
2005-HE4

Cl. M5, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. M6, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014 Upgraded to
Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-HE12

Cl. I-A-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sep 10, 2012
Confirmed at A2 (sf)

Cl. I-A-3, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 7, 2013 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 7, 2013 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 28, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2006-HE1

Cl. I-A-3, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 7, 2013 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. I-M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. I-M-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. II-A-3, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 7, 2013
Upgraded to A3 (sf)

Cl. II-M-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 1, 2014
Upgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Carrington Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-NC3

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jul 22, 2013 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Apr 29, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: C-BASS Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series
2005-CB3

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 27, 2013
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: C-BASS Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series
2006-CB2

Cl. AF-2, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Sep 14, 2012
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. AF-4, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Sep 14, 2012
Confirmed at Caa3 (sf)

Cl. AV, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 28, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: C-BASS Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2005-CB4

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2013 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 30, 2014 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on May 30, 2014 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 30, 2014 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Issuer: Citicorp Residential Mortgage Trust Series 2006-2

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2012
Confirmed at B2 (sf)

Cl. A-5, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2012 Confirmed
at Caa2 (sf)

Cl. A-6, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2012 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 1, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2007-WFHE3

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 16, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 16, 2014
Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Nationstar Home Equity Loan Trust 2006-B

Cl. AV-4, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 28, 2014
Upgraded to B2 (sf)

Issuer: Nationstar Home Equity Loan Trust 2007-A

Cl. AV-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 28, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. AV-4, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 28, 2014
Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools. The rating 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 rating
downgrades are a result of structural features resulting in higher
expected losses for the bonds than previously anticipated.

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

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

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 November 2014 from
7.0% in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6% to 7% 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.


* Moody's Takes Action on $273MM of Alt-A RMBS Issued 2003-2004
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, on Dec. 8, 2014, upgraded the ratings
of eight tranches and downgraded the ratings of 34 tranches from
eight transactions, backed by Alt-A RMBS loans, issued by multiple
issuers.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: GSAA Home Equity Trust 2004-6

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Apr 3, 2013 Affirmed
B3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-17

Cl. A1, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A1X, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A2, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A2X, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A3, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-2

Cl. 2-A, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 3-A, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 4-A1, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 4-A2, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 4-A3, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 5-A, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp 2003-6A

Cl. 1-A1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A1, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 3-A2, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 3-A1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 4-A1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp 2003-9A

Cl. 2-A1, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A2, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A3, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2003-24A

Cl. 1-A1, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 1-A2, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 1-A3, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 2-A, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 3-A1, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 3-A2, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 4-A, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 5-A, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2003-33H

Cl. 1A1, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 1A-PO, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 18, 2013
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 1B1, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 1B2, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 21, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. 2A1, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 5, 2012
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. 2A-IO, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 5, 2012
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Cl. 2B2, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Mar 21, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2004-9XS

Cl. 1-A4A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 1-A4B, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 1-A4C, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 1-A4D, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 1-A5, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Upgraded to B2 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 26,
2014 Upgraded to B2 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: MBIA Insurance Corporation (Upgraded to B2,
Outlook Stable on May 21, 2014)

Cl. 1-A6, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Mar 26,
2014 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: MBIA Insurance Corporation (Upgraded to B2,
Outlook Stable on May 21, 2014)

Cl. 2-M1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 26, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (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 ratings downgraded are due to the weaker
performance of the underlying collateral and the erosion of
enhancement available for those bonds. The ratings upgraded are
due to faster paydown and improving credit enhancement available
to those bonds.

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

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 5.8% in November 2014 from
7.0% in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6% to 7% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this central
scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House prices
are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's expects
house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases than
Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions.Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Takes Action on $51.2MM of Alt-A RMBS Issued 2003-2004
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of seven
tranches from four transactions backed by Alt-A RMBS loans, issued
by multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2003-3

Cl. A-4, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct 4, 2012
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. A-5, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Oct 4, 2012
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A-PO, Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Oct 4, 2012
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Banc of America Alternative Loan Trust 2004-12

Cl. 4-A-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 17, 2013
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. 15-IO, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jun 21, 2012
Confirmed at Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: CWALT, Inc. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2004-27CB

Cl. A-2, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Oct 3, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: CWALT, Inc. Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2004-36CB

Cl. 2-A-1, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Oct 3, 2012
Downgraded to Caa1 (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 ratings downgraded are due to the weaker
performance of the underlying collateral and the erosion of
enhancement available to the bonds.

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

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment
rate. The unemployment rate fell to 5.8% in November 2014 from
7.0% in November 2013. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 5% to 6% in 2015. 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 2015. Lower increases than Moody's
expects or decreases could lead to negative rating actions.
Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


* Moody's Raises Ratings on $403 Million of Subprime RMBS
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, on Dec. 9, 2014, upgraded the ratings
of 20 tranches from 11 transactions issued by various issuers,
backed by subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-HE3

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 27, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: Popular ABS Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2005-4

Cl. AF-5, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2013 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Issuer: Popular ABS Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-B

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Feb 20, 2014 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 20, 2014
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Popular ABS Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-C

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jul 21, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Popular ABS Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-E

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2014 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 21, 2014 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: Wells Fargo Home Equity Asset-Backed Securities 2007-2
Trust

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 3, 2010 Downgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 3, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: ABFC Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2004-OPT2

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 26, 2013 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jul 26, 2013 Confirmed
at C (sf)

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

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on May 4, 2012 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2002-1

Cl. II-M1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 26, 2013
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: NovaStar Mortgage Funding Trust, Series 2004-4

Cl. M-6, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 18, 2013 Affirmed
B2 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust 2004-4

Cl. M1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 7, 2012 Upgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust 2004-5

Cl. M4, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Ratings Rationale

The actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectations on
the pools. The upgrades are a result of improving performance of
the related pools and/or faster pay-down of the bonds due to high
prepayments/faster liquidations.

The 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 November 2014 from
7.0% in November 2013 . Moody's forecasts an unemployment central
range of 6% to 7% for the 2014 year. Deviations from this central
scenario could lead to rating actions in the sector. House prices
are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's expects
house prices to continue to rise in 2014. Lower increases than
Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions. Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly
dependent on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from
servicing transfers or other policy or regulatory change can
impact the performance of these transactions.


* S&P Withdraws Ratings on 67 Classes From 27 CDO Deals
-------------------------------------------------------
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services withdrew its ratings on 41
classes from 13 cash flow (CF) collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) transactions, four classes from two CF collateral debt
obligation (CDO) transactions backed by structured finance (SF)
securities, eight classes from two CF CDO transactions backed by
trust-preferred securities (TRUPs) assets, three classes from two
CF CDO transactions backed by CDOs, nine classes from six CF CDOs
backed by commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), one class
from one CF CDO transaction backed by project finance securities,
and one class from one collateralized fund obligation (CFO)
transaction backed by private equity funds.

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

   -- Birch Real Estate CDO I Ltd. (CF SF CDO): senior-most
      tranche paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

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

   -- Carlyle Arnage CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): last remaining rated
      tranches paid down.

   -- Carlyle Bristol CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
      Nov. 2014.

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

   -- Crest 2003-1 Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior-most tranche paid
      down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- EIG Global Project Fund III Ltd. (CF project finance):
      senior-most tranche paid down, other rated tranches still
      outstanding.

   -- Glacier Funding CDO II Ltd. (CF SF CDO): senior-most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- Greyrock CDO Ltd. (CF CLO): last remaining rated tranches
      paid down.

   -- I-Preferred Term Securities II Ltd. (CF TRUPs CDO): last
      remaining rated tranches paid down.

   -- LCM XVI L.P. (CF CLO): class X notes(i) paid down, other
      rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- LNR CDO 2002-1 Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior-most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- Madison Park Funding I Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
      Nov. 2014.

   -- Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2004-RR2 (CF CDO of CMBS):
      senior-most tranche paid down, other rated tranches still
      outstanding.

   -- Neuberger Berman CLO XVII Ltd. (CF CLO): class X notes(i)
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

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

   -- N-Star REL CDO IV Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior-most tranche
      paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- N-Star Real Estate CDO I Ltd. (CF CDO of CMBS): senior-most
      tranche paid down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- Oak Hill Credit Partners IV Ltd. (CF CLO): optional
      redemption in Nov. 2014.

   -- Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 Ltd. (CF CDO of
      CMBS): senior most tranche paid down, other rated tranches
      still outstanding.

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

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

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

   -- SVG Diamond Private Equity PLC (private equity CFO): last
      remaining rated tranche paid down.

   -- Trapeza CDO IV LLC (CF TRUPs CDO): senior-most tranche paid
      down, other rated tranches still outstanding.

   -- Trimaran CLO IV Ltd. (CF CLO): optional redemption in
      Dec. 2014.

   -- Wasatch CLO Ltd. (CF CLO): class D notes 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 its waterfall.

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

Birch Real Estate CDO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2                 NR                  B+ (sf)
A-2L                NR                  B+ (sf)

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

Carlyle Arnage CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1L                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-1LB               NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2L                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-3L                NR                  AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B-1L                NR                  BBB+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B-2L                NR                  BB+ (sf)

Carlyle Bristol CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B-1                 NR                  AA+ (sf)
B-2                 NR                  AA+ (sf)
C                   NR                  BB- (sf)
D                   NR                  B+ (sf)

Connecticut Valley Structured Credit CDO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B-1                 NR                  A+ (sf)
B-2                 NR                  A+ (sf)

Crest 2003-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C-1                 NR                  CCC- (sf)
C-2                 NR                  CCC- (sf)

EIG Global Project Fund III Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
Rev                 NR                  AAA (sf)

Glacier Funding CDO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1NV               NR                  BB+ (sf)
A-1V                NR                  BB+ (sf)

Greyrock CDO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B-2F                NR                  AAA (sf)
B-2L                NR                  AAA (sf)

I-Preferred Term Securities II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1-A               NR                  AA+ (sf)

A-2                 NR                  AA+ (sf)
A-3                 NR                  AA+ (sf)
B-1                 NR                  BB+ (sf)
B-2                 NR                  BB+ (sf)
B-3                 NR                  BB+ (sf)
C                   NR                  CCC+ (sf)

LCM XVI L.P.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

LNR CDO 2002-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  BB+ (sf)

Madison Park Funding I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-T                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-VF                NR                  AAA (sf)
B                   NR                  AAA (sf)
C                   NR                  AAA (sf)
D                   NR                  AAA (sf)
E                   NR                  AA+ (sf)

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2004-RR2
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
F                   NR                  BBB- (sf)

Neuberger Berman CLO XVII Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

Nob Hill CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)

N-Star Real Estate CDO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
B-2                 NR                  B+ (sf)
C-1A                NR                  CCC- (sf)
C-1B                NR                  CCC- (sf)

N-Star REL CDO IV Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A                   NR                  A+ (sf)

Oak Hill Credit Partners IV Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1a                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-1b                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2a                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2b                NR                  AAA (sf)
B-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
B-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)
C-1                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)
C-2                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)
C-3                 NR                  BBB+ (sf)

Resource Real Estate Funding CDO 2006-1 Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AA (sf)

Shackleton 2014-V CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
X                   NR                  AAA (sf)

SPF CDO I Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1                 NR                  AAA (sf)
A-2                 NR                  AAA (sf)

Stone Tower CDO II Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-1LB               NR                  BBB+ (sf)

SVG Diamond Private Equity PLC
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
C                   NR                  AA (sf)

Trapeza CDO IV LLC
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A1A                 NR                  A+ (sf)

Trimaran CLO IV Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
A-2L                NR                  AAA (sf)
A-3L                NR                  AAA (sf)
B-1L                NR                  A+ (sf)
B-2L                NR                  BB+ (sf)

Wasatch CLO Ltd.
                            Rating
Class               To                  From
D                   NR                  A+ (sf)

NR--Not rated.




                             *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers'
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look like
the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.
Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical cost
net of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm's
assets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet for
liabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at which
equity securities trade in public market are determined by more
than a balance sheet solvency test.

A list of Meetings, Conferences and Seminars appears in each
Wednesday's edition of the TCR.  Submissions about insolvency-
related conferences are encouraged.  Send announcements to
conferences@bankrupt.com by e-mail.

On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filed
Chapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets and
liabilities delivered to the nation's bankruptcy courts.  The
list includes links to freely downloadable of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF documents.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book of
interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today.

Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday edition
of the TCR.

The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the week
then-ending.

                           *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter is a daily newsletter co-published
by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante, Rousel Elaine
Tumanda, Valerie Udtuhan, Howard C. Tolentino, Carmel Paderog,
Meriam Fernandez, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Cecil R. Villacampa,
Sheryl Joy P. Olano, 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 ***