RE: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in generalTerms

["Karel Engelen" <KEngelen@xxxxxxxx>]

Going back to Jamie his original example: 1) is the correct way of
working i.e. the effective date does not change (the only change to the
original trade is the counterparty). This seems to be in contradiction
though with what Marc indicates below.

Regards,
Karel

-----Original Message-----
From: cdwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:cdwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc Teichman
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:07 PM
To: cdwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in
generalTerms

Hi Jamie,

The old trade between the Transferor and Remaining Party should retain
the original effective date. The new trade between the Transferee and
the Remaining Party should have the new effective date.

The Novation type in FpML has explicit newTransaction and oldTransaction
elements that contain the old and new trades respectively. 

In regards to your question about DTCC, the Deriv/SERV implementation is
in line with the above in that the old trade retains the original
effective date while the new trade assumes the new effective date.

Regards,
Marc Teichman

Product Manager
T-Zero
T: +1-212-323-6045
marc.teichman@xxxxxxxxx

www.tzero.com
________________________________

From: cdwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:cdwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Orme, Jamie
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2007 2:29 PM
To: cdwg@xxxxxxxx
Cc: Lamy, Pierre; Parab, Rupali J.; Martensson, Bjorn
Subject: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in generalTerms

 

Can we raise this issue as part of the next WG meeting (tomorrow?).
Would be good to get a DTCC viewpoint on this. 

Thanks 

Jamie 

_____________________________________________ 
From:   Orme, Jamie  
Sent:   Friday, July 06, 2007 5:18 PM 
To:     'cdwg@xxxxxxxx' 
Cc:     Lamy, Pierre; Parab, Rupali J.; Martensson, Bjorn 
Subject:        creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in generalTerms 

All, 

We are seeking clarification on how the Effective Date should be
represented within the General Terms on a Credit Default Swap,
especially post assignment/novation.

For example: 

Trade with effective date of 16th December 2005: 

 

                    <generalTerms> 
                        <effectiveDate> 
                            <unadjustedDate>2005-12-16</unadjustedDate> 
                            <dateAdjustments> 
 
<businessDayConvention>NONE</businessDayConvention> 
                                <businessCenters> 
 
<businessCenter>GBLO</businessCenter> 
 
<businessCenter>EUTA</businessCenter> 
                                </businessCenters> 
                            </dateAdjustments> 
                        </effectiveDate> 
                        .... 

If the novation/assignment is effective on 15th December 2006, should
the general terms be: 

1) As before, with the Effective Date of 16th December 2005: 

 

                    <generalTerms> 
                        <effectiveDate> 
                            <unadjustedDate>2005-12-16</unadjustedDate> 
                            <dateAdjustments> 
 
<businessDayConvention>NONE</businessDayConvention> 
                                <businessCenters> 
 
<businessCenter>GBLO</businessCenter> 
 
<businessCenter>EUTA</businessCenter> 
                                </businessCenters> 
                            </dateAdjustments> 
                        </effectiveDate> 
                        ... 

OR 

2) Should the Effective Date change to reflect the new assignment
effective date: 

                     <generalTerms> 
                        <effectiveDate> 
                            <unadjustedDate>2006-12-15</unadjustedDate> 
                            <dateAdjustments> 
 
<businessDayConvention>NONE</businessDayConvention> 
                                <businessCenters> 
 
<businessCenter>GBLO</businessCenter> 
 
<businessCenter>EUTA</businessCenter> 
                                </businessCenters> 
                            </dateAdjustments> 
                        </effectiveDate> 
                        ... 

Currently our internal representation is in-line with 1), which assumes
that the Fpml contains the contractual representation of the deal.  We
have modelled the assignment effective date within a life-cycle event
node, outside of the "main" Fpml element.

Is that correct?  Any help/guidance on this matter would be greatly
appreciated. 

Many Thanks 

Jamie 


------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe cdwg youremail@address
To view archives: http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_cdwgmail/threads.html
**************************************************************************************************************************
The information contained in either this email and, if applicable, the attachment, are confidential and are intended only for the recipient. The contents of either the email or the attachment may not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient(s), any use, disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail at isda@xxxxxxxx then delete the e-mail and all attachments and any copies thereof. This communication is part of an ISDA process and is not intended for unauthorized use or distribution.
**************************************************************************************************************************

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe: Email majordomo@xxxxxxxx with a blank subject line
In the body include the line: unsubscribe cdwg youremail@address
To view archives: http://www.fpml.org/_wgmail/_cdwgmail/threads.html