[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in generalTerms
- To: <cdwg@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in generalTerms
- From: "Guy Gurden" <guy.gurden@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:44:03 -0400
- Cc: "Lamy, Pierre" <pierre.lamy@xxxxxx>
- Reply-to: cdwg@xxxxxxxx
- Sender: cdwg@xxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: Ace/6URZfYlbM9tBQGCSBCbBI6G2dgDNp3HAAA5PviAAAfVUBgABaKJlABsgEWAAAXagkAAGpHkg
- Thread-topic: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in generalTerms
I agree with Karel. The rationale being that the remaining party wants
continuing credit protection from the original effective date so to
change the effective date on the new transaction would be to imply the
credit protection now starts from a new date.
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: cdwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:cdwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Karel Engelen
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 12:34 PM
To: cdwg@xxxxxxxx
Cc: Lamy, Pierre
Subject: RE: FpML-CD RE: creditDefultSwap - Effective Date in
generalTerms
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a commercial communication sent by SwapsWire Limited.
This message contains confidential information and is intended only
for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you
should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please
notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this
e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system.
E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free
as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed,
arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore
does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents
of this message which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If
verification is required please request a hard-copy version.
Company Details
SwapsWire Limited is regulated by the Financial Services Authority
and is entered in the FSA's Register (FSA Reference Number 207294).
SwapsWire Limited is subject to Value Added Tax
(VAT Registration No 761 4444 34).
SwapsWire Limited is registered in England at Companies House, no: 4027741.
Registered Office: One Silk Street, London, EC2Y 8HQ
Contact information
If you have any questions in relation to this policy please contact us at:
Fountain House
130 Fenchurch Street
London EC3M 5DJ
Attn: Rachel Cunningham-Day, General Counsel
Email: Rachel.cunningham-day@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
If you currently receive marketing information from us which you would
prefer not to receive in the future please email us at info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
All email messages sent to and from info@xxxxxxxxxxxxx may be monitored to
ensure compliance with internal policies and to protect our business.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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