---

---

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

Commission file number 33-93068

WFS FINANCIAL INC

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (949) 727-1002

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Title of each class

Common Stock, no par value

      Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports,) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the last 90 days.     Yes þ          No o

      Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o

      Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934).     Yes þ          No o

      The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2004:

Common Stock, No Par Value — $320,766,726

The number of shares outstanding of the issuer’s class of common stock as of February 28, 2005:

Common Stock, No Par Value — 41,057,789

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

      Portions of the definitive proxy statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held April 26, 2005 are incorporated by reference into Part III.

---

---

WFS FINANCIAL INC AND SUBSIDIARIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Forward-Looking Statements

      This Form 10-K includes and incorporates by reference forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act, as amended. Forward-looking statements relate to analyses and other information that are based on forecasts of future results and estimates of amounts not yet determinable. These statements also relate to our future prospects, developments and business strategies. These statements are subject to uncertainties and factors relating to our operations and business environment, all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control, that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in or implied by these forward-looking statements.

      These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “plan,” “predict,” “project,” “will,” and similar terms and phrases, including references to assumptions. These statements are contained in sections entitled “Business,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and other sections of this Form 10-K and in the documents incorporated by reference.

      The following factors are among those that may cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements:

      If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if underlying assumptions as to these items prove incorrect, our actual results may vary materially from those expected, estimated or projected.

      We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements to reflect future events or circumstances.

INDUSTRY DATA

      In this Form 10-K, we rely on and refer to information regarding the automobile lending industry from market research reports, analyst reports and other publicly available information. Although we believe that this information is reliable, we cannot guarantee the accuracy and completeness of this information, and we have not independently verified any of it.

Available Information

      We provide access to all of our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission on our Web site at http:www.wfsfinancial.com free of charge on the same day that these reports are electronically filed with the Commission. The information contained in our Web site does not constitute part of this filing.

PART I

General

      We are one of the nation’s largest independent automobile finance companies with 32 years of experience in the automobile finance industry. We believe that the automobile finance industry is the second largest consumer finance industry in the United States with approximately $500 billion of loan originations during 2004. We originate installment contracts, otherwise known as contracts, secured by new and pre-owned automobiles through our relationships with franchised and independent automobile dealers nationwide. We originated $6.6 billion of contracts during 2004 and managed a portfolio of $11.6 billion contracts at December 31, 2004.

      For the year ended December 31, 2004, approximately 34% of our contract originations were for the purchase of new automobiles and approximately 66% of our contract originations were for the purchase of pre-owned automobiles. Approximately 80% of our contract originations were what we refer to as prime contracts, and approximately 20% of our contract originations were what we refer to as non-prime contracts. Our determination of whether a contract is categorized as prime, non-prime or other is based on a number of factors including the borrower’s credit history and our expectation of credit loss, and may differ from definitions of these categories utilized by others, including competitors and regulators. All references made throughout this document regarding prime, non-prime or subprime automobile contracts are based on our determination.

      We underwrite contracts through a credit approval process that is supported and controlled by a centralized, automated front-end system. This system incorporates proprietary credit scoring models and industry credit scoring models and tools, which enhance our credit analysts’ ability to tailor each contract’s pricing and structure to maximize risk-adjusted returns. We believe that as a result of our sophisticated credit and underwriting systems, we are able to earn attractive risk-adjusted returns on our contracts. For the year ended December 31, 2004, the average net interest spread on our automobile contract originations was 7.02% and the net interest spread on our managed automobile portfolio was 6.65% while net credit losses averaged 1.99% for the same period.

      We structure our business to minimize operating costs while providing high quality service to our dealers. Those aspects of our business that require a local market presence are performed on a decentralized basis in our 42 offices. All other operations are centralized. We fund our purchases of contracts, on an interim basis, with deposits raised by our parent, Western Financial Bank, also known as the Bank, which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, also known as the FDIC, and other borrowings of the Bank. These funds are made available to us through a series of intercompany agreements that are made under terms, rates and conditions that we believe to approximate arrangements we could enter into with outside third party relationships. For long-term financing, we issue automobile contract asset-backed securities. Since 1985, we have sold or securitized over $42.0 billion of contracts in 66 public offerings of asset-backed securities, making us the fourth largest issuer of such securities in the nation. We have employed a range of securitization structures and our most recent $1.6 billion issuance of asset-backed securities was structured as a senior/subordinated transaction with a weighted average interest rate of 3.66%. Our relationship with the Bank gives us a competitive advantage relative to other independent automobile finance companies by providing an additional liquidity source.

      The following table presents a summary of our contracts purchased:

The History of WFS

      Western Thrift & Loan Association, a California-licensed thrift and loan association, was founded in 1972. In 1973, Western Thrift Financial Corporation was formed as the holding company for Western Thrift & Loan Association. It later changed its name to Westcorp. In 1982, Westcorp acquired Evergreen Savings and Loan Association, a California-licensed savings and loan association, which became its wholly owned subsidiary. The activities of Western Thrift & Loan Association were merged into Evergreen Savings and Loan Association in 1982. Evergreen Savings and Loan Association’s name was changed ultimately to Western Financial Bank and the Bank ultimately became chartered as a federal savings institution.

      Western Thrift & Loan Association was involved in automobile finance activities from its incorporation until its merger with Evergreen Savings and Loan Association. Since such time, the Bank continued the automobile finance activities of Western Thrift & Loan Association. In 1988, we were incorporated as a wholly owned consumer finance subsidiary of the Bank to provide non-prime automobile finance services, a market not serviced by the Bank’s automobile finance division.

      In 1995, the Bank transferred its automobile finance division to us. In connection with that restructuring, the Bank transferred to us all assets relating to its automobile finance division, including the contracts held on balance sheet and all interests in the excess spread payable from outstanding securitization transactions. The Bank also transferred to us all of the outstanding stock of WFS Financial Auto Loans, Inc., also known as WFAL, and WFS Financial Auto Loans 2, Inc., also known as WFAL2, the securitization entities of the Bank, thereby making these companies our subsidiaries. In 1995, we sold approximately 20% of our shares in a public offering. At December 31, 2004, the Bank owned 84% of our common stock.

Proposed Merger

      On May 23, 2004, we entered into a definitive agreement pursuant to which Westcorp will acquire our outstanding 16% common stock minority interest not already owned by our parent, the Bank. The transaction is structured as a merger of us with and into the Bank. If the merger is consummated, the public holders of our shares would receive 1.11 shares of Westcorp’s common stock for each share of our common stock held by them in a tax-free exchange. Based on the $42.60 closing price of Westcorp’s common stock on May 21, 2004, the last business day prior to the execution of the agreement, the transaction has an indicated value of $47.29 per share of our common stock.

      In connection with the merger, the Bank has filed an application with the California Department of Financial Institutions, also known as the DFI, to convert its federal thrift charter to a California state bank charter. Among other things, the merger is conditioned upon the conversion of the charter and the transaction is subject to, among other closing conditions, the receipt of regulatory approvals and the approval of a majority of our minority shareholders, other than shares controlled by Westcorp. The DFI and the Office of Thrift Supervision, also known as the OTS, have approved the Bank’s application to convert from a federal savings bank to a California state commercial bank subject to receipt of all other required regulatory approvals. The FDIC approved the application to merge us into the Bank as part of the acquisition of our minority interest.

      The conversion is still contingent upon the approval by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, also known as the Federal Reserve, of Westcorp’s application to become a bank holding company, which process is taking longer than originally expected. As a result, Westcorp believes that the proposed conversion will not occur until the latter half of 2005, if at all. The Federal Reserve recently has raised some questions and potential concerns with Westcorp’s proposal and has requested additional information from Westcorp. Assembling the information and responding to the Federal Reserve’s concerns and questions will take additional time. Those concerns and questions will need to be addressed to the Federal Reserve’s satisfaction before the Federal Reserve will deem Westcorp’s application complete.

      Although Westcorp intends to continue to pursue Federal Reserve approval, there can be no assurance that such approval will ultimately be granted or that any conditions to such approval imposed on the Bank will not affect the feasibility of moving forward with the proposed conversion and the related merger of us into the Bank. Westcorp is currently exploring other alternatives in the event that the proposed conversion and related merger cannot go forward as planned. In that regard, we have begun the process of filing for state licenses.

      If the conversion is completed, Westcorp and its subsidiaries will be subject to the laws, regulation and oversight of the DFI, the FDIC and the Federal Reserve.

Market and Competition

      The automobile finance industry is generally segmented according to the type of vehicle sold (new versus pre-owned) and the credit characteristics of the borrower (prime, non-prime or subprime). Based upon industry data, we believe that during 2004, prime, non-prime and subprime loan originations in the United States were approximately $350 billion, $100 billion and $50 billion, respectively. The United States captive automobile finance companies, General Motors Acceptance Corporation, Ford Motor Credit Company and Chrysler Financial Corporation account for approximately 25% of the automobile finance market. We believe that the balance of the market is highly fragmented and that no other market participant has greater than a 6% market share. Other market participants include the captive automobile finance companies of other manufacturers, banks, credit unions, independent automobile finance companies and other financial institutions.

      Our dealer servicing and underwriting capabilities and systems enable us to compete effectively in the automobile finance market. Our ability to compete successfully depends largely upon our strong personal relationships with dealers and their willingness to offer us contracts that meet our underwriting criteria. These relationships are fostered by the promptness with which we process and fund contracts, as well as the flexibility and scope of the programs we offer. We purchase the full spectrum of prime and non-prime contracts secured by both new and pre-owned vehicles.

      The competition for contracts available within the prime and non-prime credit quality contract spectrum is more intense when the rate of automobile sales declines. Although we have experienced consistent growth for many years, we can give no assurance that we will continue to do so. Several of our competitors have greater financial resources than we have and may have a lower cost of funds. Many of our competitors also have longstanding relationships with automobile dealers and may offer dealers or their customers other forms of financing or services not provided by us. The finance company that provides floor planning for the dealer’s inventory is ordinarily one of the dealer’s primary sources of financing for automobile sales. We do not currently provide financing on dealers’ inventories. We also must compete with dealer interest rate subsidy programs offered by the captive automobile finance companies. However, these programs are not generally offered on pre-owned vehicles and are limited to certain models or loan terms that may not be attractive to many automobile purchasers.

Our Business Strategy

      Our business objective is to maximize long-term profitability by efficiently purchasing and servicing prime and non-prime contracts that generate strong and consistent risk-adjusted returns. We achieve this objective by employing our business strategy, which includes the following key elements:

      Over the past five years, we have experienced a compounded annual growth rate in contract purchases of 15%. We believe we provide a high degree of personalized service to our dealer base by marketing, underwriting and purchasing contracts on a local level. Our focus is to provide each dealer superior service by providing a single source of contact to meet the dealer’s prime and non-prime financing needs. We believe that the level of our service surpasses that of our competitors. We provide personalized, efficient, and consistently excellent service by making our business development representatives available when a dealer is open, making prompt credit decisions, negotiating credit decisions within available programs by providing structural alternatives, and funding promptly.

      Growth of originations is primarily through increased dealer penetration. We intend to increase contract purchases from our current dealer base as well as develop new dealer relationships. Although our presence is well-established throughout the country, we believe that we still have opportunities to build market share, especially in those states that we entered since 1994. In addition, we have improved our dealer education and delivery systems in order to increase the ratio of contracts purchased to the number of applications received from a dealer, thereby improving the efficiency of our dealer relationships. We are also seeking to increase contract purchases through new dealer programs targeting high volume, multiple location dealers. These programs focus on creating relationships with dealers to achieve higher contract originations and improving efficiencies. On a limited basis, we also originate loans directly from consumers and purchase loans from other automobile finance companies. Additionally, we continue to explore other distribution channels, including the Internet. In December 2001, we acquired an interest in DealerTrack Holdings, Inc., also known as DealerTrack, an Internet business-to-business portal that brings together finance companies and dealers. DealerTrack has signed up over 100 finance companies and approximately 24,000 dealers. As of December 31, 2004, we owned approximately 6.3% of DealerTrack. Currently, over 80% of our applications are processed through DealerTrack.

      We currently have a 2% market share of the United States auto finance industry. However, we are the largest originator of pre-owned automobile contracts in California, by a two to one margin to our nearest competitor, with a 9% market share. Our leading market share in California enables us to earn a higher risk-adjusted margin in this market. We are seeking to expand our market share in other states to achieve similar returns.

      Quality underwriting and servicing are essential to effectively assess and price for risk and to maximize risk-adjusted returns. We rely on a combination of credit scoring models, system-controlled underwriting policies and the judgment of our trained credit analysts to make risk-based credit and pricing decisions. We use credit scoring to differentiate applicants and to rank order credit risk in terms of expected default probability. Based upon this statistical assessment of credit risk, the underwriter is able to appropriately tailor contract pricing and structure.

      To achieve the return anticipated at origination, we have developed a disciplined behavioral servicing process for the early identification and cure of delinquent contracts and for loss mitigation. In addition, we provide incentives to our associates based on credit performance and profitability measurements on both an individual and company level.

      The following table shows the risk adjusted margins on contracts originated over the past five years:

      We evaluate all aspects of our operations in order to streamline processes and employ best practices throughout the organization. Our key technology systems implemented through this process include:

      As a result of these efforts, over the last five years we have reduced our operating costs as a percent of managed contracts to 2.2% for 2004 from 3.1% in 2000. We will continue to evaluate new technology and best practices to further improve our operating efficiencies.

      Cash flows from our operations provide a significant source of liquidity for us. In addition, we are able to raise additional liquidity through the asset-backed securities market. Over the last year we held an average of approximately $654 million of unencumbered automobile contracts on our balance sheet, which provides another source of liquidity.

      Presenting high quality earnings and maintaining a conservative, well-capitalized balance sheet have been our focus since our founding in 1972. We believe this strategy ensures success over the long term, rather than providing extraordinary short-term results. Components of this strategy include accounting for our automobile securitizations as secured financings rather than sales, maintaining appropriate allowances for credit losses and holding a strong capital position.

      Since March 2000, we have structured our automobile contract securitizations as secured financings. By accounting for these securitizations as secured financings, the contracts and asset-backed notes issued remain on our balance sheet with the earnings of the contracts in the trust and the related financing costs reflected over the life of the underlying pool of contracts as net interest income on our Consolidated Statements of Income. Additionally, no retained interest in securitized assets, also known as RISA, is recorded on the balance sheet and no corresponding non-cash gain on sale is recorded on the income statement. The RISA must be written off over the life of a securitization. This asset is subject to impairment if assumptions made about the performance of a securitization are not realized. At December 31, 2002, the RISA created from asset-backed securities issued prior to April 2000 had been fully amortized.

      Our allowance for credit losses was $252 million at December 31, 2004 compared with $240 million at December 31, 2003. The increase in the allowance for credit losses was the result of a higher level of automobile contracts held on balance sheet. The allowance for credit losses as a percentage of owned contracts outstanding was 2.6% at December 31, 2004 compared with 2.8% at December 31, 2003. Based on the analysis we performed related to the allowance for credit losses as described in “Note 1 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” in our Consolidated Financial Statements, we believe that our allowance for credit losses is currently adequate to cover probable losses in our contract portfolio that can be reasonably estimated.

      Total shareholders’ equity, excluding accumulated other comprehensive loss, was $1.0 billion or 10.4% of total assets at December 31, 2004. This compares with total shareholders’ equity of $852 million or 8.7% of total assets at December 31, 2003.

Operations

      We currently originate contracts nationwide through our 42 offices. Each regional business center manager is accountable for the performance of contracts originated in that office throughout the life of the contracts, including acquisition, underwriting, funding and collection. We have two national service centers located in California and Texas with functions including data verification, records management, remittance processing, customer service call centers, automated dialers and asset recovery. We also maintain four regional bankruptcy and remarketing centers. Our corporate offices are located in Irvine, California.

      Our business development representatives are responsible for improving our relationship with existing dealers and enrolling and educating new dealers to increase the number of contracts originated. Business development managers within each regional business center provide direct management oversight to each business development representative. In addition, the director of sales and marketing provides oversight management to ensure that all business development managers and representatives are following overall corporate guidelines.

      Business development representatives target selected dealers within their territory based upon volume, potential for business, financing needs of the dealers, and competitors that are doing business with such dealers. Before we decide to do business with a new dealer, we perform a review process of the dealer and its business. If we then determine to proceed, we enter into a non-exclusive dealership agreement with the dealer. This agreement contains certain representations regarding the contracts the dealer will sell to us. Due to the non-exclusive nature of our relationship with dealers, the dealers retain discretion to determine whether to sell contracts to us or another financial institution. The business development representative is responsible for educating the dealers’ finance managers about the types of contracts that meet our underwriting standards. We believe this educational process helps to minimize the number of applications we receive that are outside of our underwriting guidelines, thereby increasing our efficiency and lowering our overall cost to originate contracts.

      After the dealer relationship is established, the business development representative continues to actively monitor the relationship with the objective of maximizing the overall profitability of each dealer relationship within his or her territory. This includes monitoring the number of approved applications received from each dealer that are converted into contracts, verifying that the contracts meet our underwriting standards, monitoring the risk-based pricing of contracts acquired and reviewing the actual performance of the contracts purchased. To the extent that a dealer does not meet minimum conversion ratios, lending volume standards or overall profitability targets, the dealer may be precluded from sending us applications in the future. Our dealer base increased during the year from approximately 8,000 to 8,200, primarily as a result of us expanding our nationwide presence. Our increase in volume is the result of this increase in our dealer base, in addition to funding more contracts from our existing dealers.

      The underwriting process begins when an application is sent to us via the Internet or fax. Internet applications are automatically loaded into our front-end underwriting computer system. Applicant information from faxed applications is manually entered into our front-end system. Once an application is in the front-end system, the system automatically obtains the applicant’s credit bureau information and calculates our proprietary credit score.

      We use credit scoring to differentiate credit applicants and to rank order credit risk in terms of expected default probabilities. This enables us to tailor contract pricing and structure according to our statistical assessment of credit risk. For example, a consumer with a lower score would indicate a higher probability of default; therefore, we would structure and price the transaction to compensate for this higher default risk. Multiple scorecards are used to accommodate the full spectrum of contracts we purchase. In addition to a credit score, the system highlights certain aspects of the credit application that have historically impacted the credit worthiness of the borrower.

      Our credit analysts are responsible for properly structuring and pricing deals to meet our risk-based criteria. They review the applicant’s information and the structure and price of an application and determine whether to approve, decline or make a counteroffer to the dealer. Each credit analyst’s lending levels and approval authorities are established based on the individual analyst’s credit experience and portfolio performance, credit manager audit results and quality control review results. Higher levels of approvals are required for higher credit risk and are controlled by system driven parameters and limits. System driven controls include limits on minimum contract buy rates, contract terms, contract advances, payment to income ratios, debt to income ratios, collateral values and low side overrides.

      Once a credit decision has been made, the computer system automatically sends a response to the dealer through the Internet or via fax specifying approval, denial or conditional approval. Conditional approval is based upon modification to the structure, such as an increase in the down payment, reduction of the term, or the addition of a co-signer. As part of the approval process, the credit analyst may require that some of the information be verified, such as the applicant’s income, employment, residence or credit history. The system increases efficiency by automatically denying approval in certain circumstances without additional

underwriting being performed. These automated notices are controlled by parameters set by us, consistent with our credit policy.

      If the dealer accepts the terms of the approval, the dealer is required to deliver the necessary documentation for each contract to us. Our funding group audits such documents for completeness and consistency with the application and provides final approval and funding of the contract. A direct deposit is made or a check is prepared and promptly sent to the dealer for payment. The dealer’s proceeds may include dealer participation for consideration of the acquisition of the contract. The completed contract file is then forwarded to our records center for imaging.

      Under the direction of the Credit and Pricing Committee, the Chief Credit Officer oversees credit risk management, sets underwriting policy, monitors contract pricing, tracks compliance to underwriting policies and re-underwrites select contracts. If re-underwriting statistics are unacceptable, a portion of quarterly incentives are forfeited by the office that originated the contracts. Our internal quality control group reviews contracts on a statistical sampling basis to ensure adherence to established lending guidelines and proper documentation requirements. Credit managers within each regional business center provide direct management oversight to each credit analyst. In addition, the Chief Credit Officer provides oversight management to ensure that all credit managers and analysts are following overall corporate guidelines.

      The following table sets forth information for contracts originated, contracts managed and the number of dealers in the states in which we operate our business:

Servicing of Contracts

      We service all of the contracts we purchase, both those held by us and those sold in automobile securitizations. The servicing process includes collecting and processing payments, responding to borrower inquiries, maintaining the security interest in the vehicle, maintaining physical damage insurance coverage and repossessing and selling collateral when necessary. We utilize a decision support system that incorporates behavioral scoring models and we purchase credit bureau information on all borrowers, which is updated each quarter. We believe these processes are the most efficient and effective collection methods.

      We use monthly billing statements to serve as a reminder to borrowers as well as an early warning mechanism in the event a borrower has failed to notify us of an address change. Payments received in the mail or through our offices are processed by our centralized remittance processing center. To expedite the collection process, we accept payments from borrowers through automated payment programs including Internet banking, direct debits and third party payment processing services. Our customer service center uses interactive voice response technology to answer routine account questions and route calls to the appropriate service counselor.

      Our fully integrated servicing, decision and collections system automatically forwards accounts to our automated dialer or regional collection centers based on the assessed risk of default or loss. Account assessment poses several courses of action, including delaying collection activity based on the likelihood of self curing, directing an account to the automated dialer for a predetermined number of days before forwarding it to a regional collections office, or directly forwarding to a loan service counselor in the regional office for accelerated collection efforts as early as when the contract is seven days past due. This process balances the efficiency of centralized collection efforts with the effectiveness of decentralized personal collection efforts. Our systems track delinquencies and chargeoffs, monitor the performance of our collection associates and assist in delinquency forecasting. To assist in the collection process, we can access original documents through our imaging system, which stores all the documents related to each contract. We limit deferments to a maximum of three over the life of the contract and rarely rewrite contracts.

      If an account is delinquent and satisfactory payment arrangements are not made, the automobile is generally repossessed within 60 to 90 days of the date of delinquency, subject to compliance with applicable law. We use independent contractors to perform repossessions. The automobile remains in our custody for 10 days, or longer if required by applicable law, to provide the obligor the opportunity to redeem the automobile. If after the redemption period the delinquency is not cured, we write down the vehicle to fair value and reclassify the contract as a repossessed asset. After the redemption period expires, we prepare the automobile for sale. We sell substantially all repossessed automobiles through wholesale automobile auctions, subject to applicable law. We do not provide the financing on repossessions sold. We use regional remarketing departments to sell our repossessed vehicles. Once the vehicles are sold, we charge off any remaining deficiency balances. At December 31, 2004, repossessed automobiles outstanding managed by us were $8.0 million or 0.07% of the total managed contract portfolio compared with $10.3 million or 0.10% of the total managed contract portfolio at December 31, 2003.

      It is our policy to charge off an account when it becomes contractually delinquent by 120 days, except for accounts that are in Chapter 13 bankruptcy, even if we have not yet repossessed the vehicle. At the time that a contract is charged off, all accrued interest is reversed. After chargeoff, we collect deficiency balances through our centralized asset recovery center. These efforts include contacting the borrower directly, seeking a deficiency judgment through a small claims court or instituting other judicial action where necessary. In some cases, particularly where recovery is believed to be less likely, the account may be assigned to a collection agency for final resolution. For those accounts that are in Chapter 13 bankruptcy and contractually past due 120 days, we reverse all accrued interest and recognize income on a cash basis.

Transactions with Related Parties

Relationship with the Bank and its Controlling Parties

      We believe that the transactions with affiliates described below are on terms no less favorable to us than could be obtained from unaffiliated parties. These transactions were approved by our Board of Directors and the Boards of Directors of the Bank, Westcorp and other subsidiaries, including their respective independent directors.

Intercompany Borrowings

      We have various borrowing arrangements with the Bank, including long-term, unsecured debt and lines of credit designed to provide financing for us and our subsidiaries. These borrowings are the only source of liquidity we currently utilize outside of the asset-backed securities market. These borrowing arrangements, on an unconsolidated basis, provide the Bank with what it believes to be a market rate of return.

      We borrowed $150 million from the Bank under the terms of a $150 million note, as amended. This note’s original maturity was August 1, 2007, although we paid off this note in the third quarter of 2004. Interest payments on the $150 million note were due quarterly in arrears, calculated at the rate of 8.875% per annum. Pursuant to the terms of this note, we could not incur any other indebtedness that was senior to the obligations evidenced by this note except for (i) indebtedness collateralized or secured under the $1.8 billion line of credit discussed below and (ii) indebtedness for similar types of warehouse lines of credit. We made principal payments on this note totaling $101 million and $7.2 million during the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. There was no amount outstanding on this note at December 31, 2004 compared with $101 million at December 31, 2003. Interest expense on this note totaled $5.0 million, $9.1 million and $12.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

      Additionally, we borrowed $300 million from the Bank under the terms of a $300 million note in May 2002. This note matures on May 15, 2012. Interest payments on the $300 million note are due semi-annually, in arrears, calculated at the rate of 10.25% per annum. Pursuant to the terms of this note, we may not incur any other indebtedness that is senior to the obligations evidenced by this note except for (i) indebtedness under the $150 million note, (ii) indebtedness collateralized or secured under the $1.8 billion line of credit and (iii) indebtedness for similar types of warehouse lines of credit. There was $300 million outstanding on this note at December 31, 2004 and 2003. Interest expense on this note totaled $30.8 million, $30.8 million and $20.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

      We have a line of credit extended by the Bank permitting us to draw up to $1.8 billion as needed to be used in our operations. We do not pay a commitment fee for this line of credit. The line of credit terminates on December 31, 2009. There was $161 million outstanding at December 31, 2004 and no amount outstanding at December 31, 2003. The average amount outstanding on the line was $20.5 million for 2004 and $14.7 million for 2003. The $1.8 billion line of credit carries an interest rate based on the one-month London Interbank Offered Rate, also known as LIBOR, plus an interest spread of 125 basis points when unsecured and 90 basis points when secured. The Bank has the right under this line of credit to refuse to permit additional amounts to be drawn if, in the Bank’s discretion, the amount sought to be drawn will not be used to finance the purchase of contracts or other working capital requirements.

      Some of our subsidiaries have entered into lines of credit with the Bank. These lines permit our subsidiaries to draw up to a total of $320 million to fund activities related to our securitizations. The $320 million in lines of credit terminate on January 1, 2010, although the terms may be extended by these subsidiaries for additional periods of up to 60 months. At December 31, 2004, the amount outstanding on these lines of credit totaled $52.7 million compared with $21.8 million at December 31, 2003. These lines of credit with the Bank held by our subsidiaries carry an interest rate based on the one-month LIBOR on the last day of the prior month plus an interest spread of 335 basis points when unsecured and 275 basis points when secured.

      Interest on the amounts outstanding under the lines of credit is paid monthly, in arrears, and is calculated on the daily average amount outstanding that month. Interest expense for these lines of credit totaled

$1.8 million, $1.0 million and $3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the weighted average interest rates for the lines of credit were 3.38%, 2.28% and 2.74%, respectively. At December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the weighted average interest rates for the lines of credit were 3.65%, 2.28% and 2.55%, respectively.

Short-Term Investment — Parent

      We invest our excess cash at the Bank under an investment agreement. The Bank pays us an interest rate on this excess cash equal to the one-month LIBOR. The weighted average interest rate was 1.37%, 1.23% and 1.77% for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. We held no amounts and $764 million excess cash with the Bank under the investment agreement at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The average investment was $529 million during 2004 compared with $660 million during 2003. Interest income earned by us under this agreement totaled $7.5 million, $8.2 million and $10.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The interest rate was 2.29% at December 31, 2004 compared with 1.17% at December 31, 2003.

Reinvestment Contracts

      Pursuant to a series of agreements to which we, the Bank and our subsidiary, WFAL2, among others, are parties, we have access to the cash flows of certain outstanding securitizations, including the cash held in the spread accounts for these securitizations. We are permitted to use that cash as we determine, including to originate contracts.

      In certain securitizations, the Bank and WFAL2 have entered into a reinvestment contract that is deemed to be an eligible investment under the relevant securitization agreements. The securitization agreements require that all cash flows of the relevant trust and the associated spread accounts be invested in the applicable reinvestment contract. A limited portion of the invested funds may be used by WFAL2 and the balance may be used by the Bank. The Bank makes its portion available to us pursuant to the terms of the WFS Reinvestment Contract. Under the WFS Reinvestment Contract, we receive access to all of the cash available to the Bank under each trust reinvestment contract and are obligated to repay to the Bank an amount equal to the cash so used when needed by the Bank to meet its obligations under the individual trust reinvestment contracts. With the portion of the cash available to it under the individual trust reinvestment contracts, WFAL2 purchases contracts from us pursuant to the terms of the sale and servicing agreement.

      In accordance with these agreements, the Bank and WFAL2 pledge property owned by each of them for the benefit of the trustee of each trust and the surety. We paid the Bank a fee equal to 55 basis points of the amount of collateral pledged by the Bank as consideration for the pledge of collateral and for our access to cash under the WFS Reinvestment Contract in 2004. Prior to January 1, 2004, this fee was 12.5 basis points. We paid the Bank $4.2 million, $1.2 million and $1.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively, for this purpose. As WFAL2 directly utilizes the cash made available to it to purchase contracts for its own account from us, no additional consideration from us is required to support WFAL2’s pledge of its property under the agreement with Financial Security Assurance Inc., also known as FSA. While we are under no obligation to repurchase contracts from WFAL2, to the extent WFAL2 needs to sell any such contracts to fund its repayment obligations under the trust reinvestment contracts, it is anticipated that we would prefer to purchase those contracts than for WFAL2 to sell those contracts to a third party. The WFS Reinvestment Contract, by its terms, is to remain in effect so long as any of the trust reinvestment contracts are an eligible investment for the related securitization. There was $465 million and $789 million outstanding on the trust reinvestment contracts at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

Whole Loan Sales

      We sold $1.5 billion and $1.7 billion of contracts to Westcorp in whole loan sales for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. We sold no contracts to Westcorp for the year ended December 31, 2002. In these transactions, we received cash for the amount of the principal outstanding on the contracts plus a premium of $48.5 million and $49.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,

respectively. These premiums were recorded as a cash gain on sale, net of the write-off of outstanding dealer participation balances and the effect of hedging activities. These contracts were subsequently securitized by Westcorp and continue to be managed by us under the terms of the transactions.

Tax Sharing Agreement

      We and our subsidiaries are parties to an amended tax sharing agreement with Westcorp, the Bank and other subsidiaries of Westcorp, pursuant to which a consolidated federal tax return is filed for all of the parties to the agreement. Under this agreement, the tax due by the group is allocated to each member based upon the relative percentage of each member’s taxable income to that of all members. Each member pays Westcorp its estimated share of tax liability when otherwise due, but in no event may the amount paid exceed the amount of tax that would have been due if a member were to file a separate return. A similar process is used with respect to state income taxes for those states that permit the filing of a consolidated or combined return. Each company pays its own tax liabilities to states that require the filing of separate tax returns. The term of the amended tax sharing agreement commenced on the first day of the consolidated return year beginning January 1, 2002 and continues in effect until the parties to the tax sharing agreement agree in writing to terminate it. See “Note 14 — Income Taxes” in our Consolidated Financial Statements.

Management Agreements

      We have entered into certain management agreements with the Bank and Westcorp pursuant to which we pay an allocated portion of certain costs and expenses incurred by the Bank and Westcorp with respect to services or facilities of the Bank and Westcorp used by us or our subsidiaries, including our principal office facilities, our field offices, and overhead and associate benefits pertaining to Bank and Westcorp associates who also provide services to us or our subsidiaries. Additionally, as part of these management agreements, the Bank and Westcorp have agreed to reimburse us for similar costs incurred. Net amounts paid to us by the Bank, Westcorp and their affiliates under these agreements were $12.0 million, $9.3 million and $6.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The management agreements may be terminated by any party upon five days prior written notice without cause, or immediately in the event of the other party’s breach of any covenant, obligation, or duty contained in the applicable management agreement or for violation of law, ordinance, statute, rule or regulation governing either party to the applicable management agreement.

      On January 1, 2004, we entered into a services agreement with Western Financial Associate Solutions, also known as WFAS, a subsidiary of the Bank, pursuant to which we transferred our human resources function and the majority of our employees to WFAS, and WFAS provides us employees to perform certain business functions and provides human resource functions for our remaining employees. We paid WFAS $149 million during 2004 for its services. This service agreement may be terminated by any party upon 30 days prior written notice without cause, or immediately in the event of the other party’s breach of any covenant, obligation, or duty contained in the applicable management agreement or for violation of law, ordinance, statute, rule or regulation governing either party to the applicable management agreement.

Supervision and Regulation

General

      The following discussion describes federal and state laws and regulations that have a material effect on our business. These laws and regulations generally are intended to protect consumers, depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, rather than stockholders and creditors. To the extent that this section refers to statutory or regulatory provisions, it is qualified in its entirety by reference to these provisions. The federal banking regulatory agencies have substantial enforcement powers over the depository institutions that they regulate. Civil and criminal penalties may be imposed on such institutions and persons associated with those institutions for violations of laws or regulation. Further, these statutes and regulations are subject to change by Congress and federal or state regulators. A change in the laws, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to us could have a material effect on our business.

Bank Operations

      The Bank and its subsidiaries are subject to examination and comprehensive regulation and reporting requirements by the OTS, the Bank’s primary federal regulator, as well as by the FDIC. The OTS is required to conduct a full scope, on-site examination of the Bank every twelve months, with the examination costs assessed against the Bank. In addition, the Bank is subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, which governs reserves required to be maintained against deposits and other matters. The Bank also is a member of the FHLB of San Francisco, one of twelve regional banks for federally insured savings and loan associations and banks comprising the FHLB System. The FHLB System is under the supervision of the Federal Housing Finance Board. In addition, various other laws and regulations, such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act, Federal Home Loan Bank Act, Community Reinvestment Act, Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and USA Patriot Act, directly or indirectly affect our business.

      Since we are owned by the Bank, a federal savings association, we are subject to regulation and examination primarily by the OTS as well as by the FDIC. Our service corporation subsidiaries also are subject to regulation by the OTS and other applicable federal and state agencies. We and certain of our other subsidiaries are further regulated by various departments or commissions of the states in which they do business.

Automobile Lending Operations

      We purchase automobile installment contracts in 45 states and are subject to both state and federal regulation of our automobile lending operations. We must comply with each state’s consumer finance, automobile finance, licensing and titling laws and regulations to the extent those laws and regulations are not pre-empted by OTS regulations or federal law.

      The contracts we originate and service are subject to numerous federal and state consumer protection laws, including the Federal Truth-in-Lending Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Fair Credit Billing Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, the California Rees-Levering Act, other retail installment sales laws and similar state laws. Most state consumer protection laws also govern the process by which we may repossess and sell an automobile pledged as security on a defaulted contract. We must follow those laws carefully in order to maximize the amount of money we can recover on a defaulted contract.

Affiliate Transaction Restrictions

      The Home Owners’ Loan Act, also known as HOLA, and regulations of the OTS that incorporate Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W promulgated thereunder, limit the type of activities and investments in which the Bank or its subsidiaries may participate if the investment or activity involves an affiliate of the Bank. In addition, transactions between the Bank or its subsidiaries and an affiliate must be on terms that are at least as favorable to the Bank or its subsidiaries as are the terms of the transactions with unaffiliated companies. Sections 23A and 23B and Regulation W limit the risks to a bank from transactions between the bank and its affiliates and limit the ability of a bank to transfer to its affiliates the benefits arising from the bank’s access to insured deposits, the payment system and the discount window and other benefits of the Federal Reserve System. The statute and rule impose quantitative and qualitative limits on the ability of a bank to extend credit to, or engage in certain other transactions with, an affiliate (and a nonaffiliate if an affiliate benefits from the transaction). The OTS enforces Sections 23A and 23B and Regulation W to the extent applicable to the Bank. This permits the OTS to, as necessary, limit transactions between Westcorp, the Bank, and the subsidiaries or affiliates of Westcorp or the Bank, and limit any of Westcorp’s activities that might create a serious risk that the liabilities of Westcorp and its affiliates may be imposed on the Bank.

Investment Restrictions

      HOLA regulations limit certain of the Bank activities and the activities of our operating subsidiaries to a percentage of the Bank’s total consolidated assets, excluding for these purposes, assets held by our service corporations. The Bank is precluded from holding consumer loans, including automobile contracts, on its consolidated balance sheet, in an aggregate principal balance in excess of 30% of its total consolidated assets. The limitation is increased to 35% of consolidated assets if all of the consumer loans in excess of the 30% limit are obtained by the Bank and its operating subsidiaries directly from consumers. Our securitization activities are structured to enable the Bank to remove securitized automobile contracts from the HOLA consumer loan limitation calculation. As a result, securitized automobile contracts are not included in the calculation of the percentage of the Bank’s consolidated assets subject to either the 30% or 35% limitation on consumer loans. The Bank is precluded from holding commercial loans, including loans to our service corporations, on its consolidated balance sheet, in an aggregate principal balance in excess of 10% of its total consolidated assets. Commercial loans secured by real estate and small business loans with $2.0 million or less in outstanding principal are not included in the calculation of the percentage of commercial loans. The Bank is precluded from investing more than 2% of its consolidated assets in service corporations, although it may invest an additional 1% in service corporations devoted to community service activities as specified in the regulations. Retained earnings or losses from the operations of our service corporations are not included in the calculation of its investment in service corporations.

Capital Requirements

      As a federally chartered savings bank, the Bank is subject to certain minimum capital requirements imposed by the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act, also known as FIRREA, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act, also known as FDICIA. FDICIA separates all financial institutions into one of five capital categories: “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized,” and “critically undercapitalized.” To be considered “well capitalized,” an institution must have a ratio of total risk-based capital to risk-weighted assets of 10.0% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio to risk-weighted assets of 6.0% or greater, a leverage ratio of 5.0% or greater and not be subject to any OTS order. To be “adequately capitalized,” an institution must have a total risk-based capital ratio of not less than 8.0%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of not less than 4.0% and a leverage ratio of not less than 4.0%. Any institution that is neither well-capitalized nor adequately capitalized will be considered undercapitalized. In addition, HOLA and the OTS regulations require savings associations to maintain “tangible capital” in an amount not less than 1.5% of adjusted total assets and “core capital” in an amount not less than 3% of adjusted total assets.

      HOLA mandates that the OTS promulgate capital regulations that include capital standards no less stringent than the capital standards applicable to national banks. The OTS in its regulations has defined total risk-based capital as core capital plus supplementary capital less direct equity investments not permissible to national banks (subject to a phase-in schedule) and reciprocal holdings that other depository institutions may count in their regulatory capital. Supplementary capital is limited to 100% of core capital. Supplementary capital is comprised of permanent capital instruments not included in core capital, general valuation loan and lease loss allowance, and maturing capital instruments such as subordinated debentures. The amount of general valuation loan and lease allowance that may be included in supplementary capital is limited to 1.25% of risk-weighted assets. At December 31, 2004, the Bank had one debenture issuance remaining, with an outstanding balance, excluding discounts and issuance costs, of $300 million and an interest rate of 9.625% due in 2012. Pursuant to the approval from the OTS to treat those debentures as supplementary capital, the total amount of debentures issued by the Bank that may be included as supplementary capital may not exceed the total amount of the Bank’s core capital. Presently, $296 million is included as supplementary capital. The 9.625% debentures will not begin to be phased out as supplementary capital until May 15, 2007.

      The Bank currently meets all capital requirements to which it is subject and satisfies the requirements of a “well capitalized” institution. Because the Bank is “well capitalized,” it may accept brokered deposits without restriction. Federal regulators must take prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of insured depository institutions that fall below certain capital ratios.

Safety and Soundness Standards

      The federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines establishing safety and soundness standards for all insured depository institutions. Those guidelines relate to internal controls, information systems, internal audit systems, loan underwriting and documentation, compensation and interest rate exposure. In general, the standards are designed to assist the federal banking agencies in identifying and addressing problems at insured depository institutions before capital becomes impaired. If an institution fails to meet these standards, the appropriate federal banking agency may require the institution to submit a compliance plan and institute enforcement proceedings if an acceptable compliance plan is not submitted.

Distributions

      The OTS has adopted regulations for determining if capital distributions of a savings association are permitted. Capital distributions are permissible unless the savings association would be undercapitalized, the proposed distribution raises safety and soundness concerns, or violates a prohibition in any statute, regulation or agreement between the Bank and the OTS. The Bank also is subject to certain limitations on the payment of dividends by the terms of the indentures for its debentures. Those limitations are more severe than the OTS capital distribution regulations. Under the most restrictive of those limitations arising in connection with the Bank’s sale of debentures, the greatest capital distribution that the Bank could currently make is $358 million.

Subprime Lending Programs

      The OTS, along with other federal banking regulatory agencies, has adopted guidance pertaining to subprime lending programs. Pursuant to the guidance, lending programs that provide credit to borrowers whose credit histories reflect specified negative characteristics, such as recent bankruptcies or payment delinquencies, are deemed to be subprime lending programs. Many of the loans that we originate possess one or more of the factors identified in the guidance as indicative of a subprime loan. Pursuant to the guidance, examiners may require that an institution with a subprime lending program hold additional capital that ranges from one and one-half to three times the normal capital required for similar loans made to borrowers who are not subprime borrowers. Because many of the loans we originate possess one or more of the factors identified in the guidance as indicative of a subprime loan, the Bank maintains its capital levels higher than those otherwise required by the OTS. The maintenance of higher capital levels by the Bank may slow our growth, require us to raise additional capital or sell assets, all of which would negatively impact our earnings. We cannot predict whether the Bank will be required by the OTS to hold additional capital with respect to those automobile contracts we hold as to which the borrowers are deemed by the OTS to be subprime borrowers.

Community Reinvestment Act

      The Bank is subject to certain requirements and reporting obligations involving activities in connection with the Community Reinvestment Act, also known as the CRA. The CRA generally requires the federal banking agencies to evaluate the record of a financial institution in meeting the credit needs of its local communities, including low-and moderate-income neighborhoods. The CRA further requires the agencies to take into account a financial institution’s record of meeting its community credit needs when evaluating applications for, among other things, domestic branches, consummating mergers or acquisitions, or holding company formations. In measuring a bank’s compliance with its CRA obligations, the regulators utilize a performance-based evaluation system which bases CRA ratings on the bank’s actual lending, service and investment performance, rather than on the extent to which the institution conducts needs assessments, documents community outreach activities or complies with other procedural requirements. In connection with its assessment of CRA performance, the FDIC assigns a rating of “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs to improve” or “substantial noncompliance.” The Bank’s most recent rating was “satisfactory.”

Other Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations

      Examination and enforcement have become intense, and banks have been advised to monitor carefully compliance with various consumer protection laws and their implementing regulations. In addition to the other

laws and regulations discussed herein, the Bank is subject to certain consumer and public interest laws and regulations that are designed to protect customers in transactions with banks and certain other financial services companies. While the list set forth below is not exhaustive, these laws and regulations include the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Right to Financial Privacy Act, as well as various state consumer protection laws. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans and providing other services. We also are subject to the federal Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and similar state laws affecting enforcement of loans to those in military service. The Bank must comply with the applicable provisions of these laws and regulations as part of its ongoing customer relations. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations can subject the Bank to various penalties, including but not limited to enforcement actions, injunctions, fines or criminal penalties, punitive damages to consumers and the loss of certain contractual rights. The installment sales contracts purchased by us are typically subject to stringent state laws. Violations of these state laws by the sellers could subject us, as the holder of the contracts, to severe remedies, including, in some instances, the loss of the right to collect interest or principal.

Taxation

Federal Income Taxes

      We file federal and certain state tax returns as part of a consolidated group that includes the Bank and Westcorp, the holding company parent of the Bank. We file other state returns as a separate entity. Tax liabilities from the consolidated returns are allocated in accordance with our tax sharing agreement based on the relative taxable income or loss of each entity on a stand-alone basis.

California Franchise Tax and Other State Provisions

      At the end of 2004, we had a tax presence in approximately 39 states. However, we expect that approximately 50% of the activity of the group and the resulting income will be taxed as California source income, with the remaining amounts apportioned or allocated outside California.

      The California franchise tax applicable to financial corporations is higher than the rate of tax applicable to non-financial corporations because it includes an amount “in lieu” of local personal property and business license taxes paid by non-financial corporations, but not generally paid by financial institutions. For taxable years ending on or after December 31, 1995, the tax rate for a financial corporation is equal to the tax rate on a regular corporation plus 2%. For income years beginning after January 1, 1997, the California regular corporate tax rate is 8.84% and the financial corporation tax rate is 10.84%.

      We compute our taxable income for California purposes on a unitary basis, or as if we were one business unit, and file one combined California franchise tax return with Westcorp and its other subsidiaries excluding Westhrift Life Insurance. The California Franchise Tax Board has completed an examination of tax years 1998 through 2001.

Subsidiaries

      The following subsidiaries are included in our Consolidated Financial Statements.

WFS Financial Auto Loans, Inc.

      WFAL was a wholly owned, Nevada based, limited purpose service corporation subsidiary. WFAL was organized primarily for the purpose of purchasing contracts that we originated and securitizing them in the asset-backed securities market. All sales to securitization trusts directly from WFAL were treated as sales for accounting purposes. WFAL had not purchased any automobile contracts since March 2000. In January 2003, we regained control over the assets of the outstanding securitization trusts accounted for as sales for

accounting purposes and consolidated all remaining contracts and related notes payable on automobile secured financing outstanding under these trusts. At December 31, 2004, WFAL had been dissolved.

WFS Financial Auto Loans 2, Inc.

      WFAL2 is a wholly owned, Nevada based, limited purpose operating subsidiary. WFAL2 purchases contracts that are then used as collateral for its reinvestment contract activities. See “Transactions with Related Parties — Reinvestment Contracts.”

WFS Funding, Inc.

      WFS Funding, Inc., also known as WFSFI, is a wholly owned, Nevada based, limited purpose service corporation subsidiary. WFSFI was incorporated for the purpose of providing conduit financings.

WFS Investments, Inc.

      WFS Investments, Inc. also known as WFSII, was a wholly owned, California based, limited purpose operating subsidiary. WFSII was incorporated for the purpose of purchasing limited ownership interests in owner trusts in connection with securitization transactions. WFSII was limited by its Articles of Incorporation from engaging in any business activities not incidental or necessary to its stated purpose. At December 31, 2004, WFSII had been dissolved.

WFS Receivables Corporation

      WFS Receivables Corporation, also known as WFSRC, is a wholly owned, Nevada based, limited purpose service corporation subsidiary. WFSRC was incorporated for the purpose of purchasing contracts that we originate and securitizing them in the asset-backed securities market. Securitizations originated by WFSRC are guaranteed under a financial guaranty insurance policy issued by FSA. Securitization transactions in which contracts are sold through WFSRC are treated as secured financings for accounting purpose. At December 31, 2004, WFSRC had $1.8 billion in notes payable on automobile secured financing outstanding.

WFS Receivables Corporation 3

      WFS Receivables Corporation 3, also known as WFSRC3, is a wholly owned, Nevada based, limited purpose service corporation subsidiary. WFSRC3 was organized for the purpose of purchasing contracts that we originate and securitizing them in the asset-backed securities market. Securitizations originated by WFSRC3 include senior notes that are credit enhanced through the issuance of subordinated notes. Securitization transactions in which contracts are sold through WFSRC3 are treated as secured financings for accounting purposes. At December 31, 2004, WFSRC3 had $6.3 billion in notes payable on automobile secured financing outstanding.

WFS Web Investments

      WFS Web Investments, also known as WFSWEB, is a wholly owned, California based, limited purpose service corporation subsidiary. WFSWEB was incorporated for the purpose of investing in an Internet service company called DealerTrack. Our investment in DealerTrack provides us with the opportunity to be involved with a company that provides a business-to-business Internet portal specifically designed for the indirect automobile lending market.

Associates

      At December 31, 2004, we had 12 full-time associates and one part-time associate, and we contracted 2,032 full-time and 49 part-time associates from Western Financial Associate Solutions, a subsidiary of the Bank. None of our associates are represented by a collective bargaining unit or union. We believe that we have good relations with our associates.

      At December 31, 2004, we owned one property in Texas. Additionally, we leased 42 properties at various locations in various states.

      Our executive offices are located at 23 Pasteur, Irvine, California and are leased from the Bank. The remaining owned and leased properties are used as automobile lending regional business centers and other operating centers. At December 31, 2004, the net book value of property and leasehold improvements was approximately $15.4 million.

      We or our subsidiaries are involved as a party to certain legal proceedings incidental to our business, including Lee, et al v. WFS Financial Inc, United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville, No. 3-02-0570 filed June 17, 2002 (raising claims under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act) and Thompson, et al v. WFS Financial Inc, California Superior Court, County of Alameda Civil Action No. RG03088926, Court of Appeal No. A104967 (raising claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law and related claims). We reached a settlement in the Lee, et al v. WFS Financial Inc and Thompson, et al v. WFS Financial Inc cases. The United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee at Nashville, granted final approval of these settlements and entered judgment on November 15, 2004, and the settlement became effective on December 20, 2004 after the expiration of the time for appeal. The pending appeal in the Thompson, et al v. WFS Financial Inc case was dismissed on December 15, 2004, pursuant to the terms of the settlement.

      Beginning on May 24, 2004 and continuing thereafter, a total of four separate purported class action lawsuits relating to the announcement by Westcorp and us that Westcorp was commencing an exchange offer for our outstanding public shares were filed in the Orange County, California Superior Court against Westcorp, us, our individual board members, and individual board members of Westcorp. On June 24, 2004, the actions were consolidated under the caption In re WFS Financial Shareholder Litigation, Case No. 04CC00559, also know as the Action. On July 16, 2004, the court granted a motion by plaintiff Alaska Hotel & Restaurant Employees Pension Trust Fund, in Case No. 04CC00573, to amend the consolidation order to designate it the lead plaintiff in the litigation. The lead plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint on August 9, 2004, and then filed the present “corrected” consolidated amended complaint on September 15, 2004. All of the shareholder-related actions allege, among other things, that the defendants breached their respective fiduciary duties and seek to enjoin or rescind the transaction and obtain an unspecified sum in damages and costs, including attorneys’ fees and expenses. The parties have tentatively agreed to a full and final resolution of the Action and, on January 19, 2005, the parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, also known as the MOU, concerning the terms of the tentative settlement. The parties are in the process of preparing a formal settlement agreement based on the terms of the MOU and will present it to the Court for approval. Pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the parties have agreed, among other things, that additional disclosures will be made in Westcorp’s Registration Statement on Form S-4 (as filed with the SEC on July 16, 2004), the claims asserted in the Action will be fully released, and the Action will be dismissed with prejudice. Further, pursuant to the MOU, we have agreed to pay plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and expenses in the amount of $675,000, or in such lesser amount as the Court may order.

      We do not believe that the outcome of any of these proceedings will have a material effect upon our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

      None.

PART II

Price Range by Quarter

      Our common stock has been publicly traded since 1995 and is currently traded on the Nasdaq National Market®, also known as Nasdaq, identified by the symbol, WFSI. The following table illustrates the high and low sale prices by quarter in 2004 and 2003, as reported by Nasdaq, which prices are believed to represent actual transactions:

      We had 2,298 shareholders of our common stock at February 28, 2005. The number of shareholders was determined by the number of record holders, including the number of individual participants, in security position listings.

Dividends

      We have not declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently expect to retain future earnings, if any, for use in the operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We are not currently under any regulatory or contractual limitations on our ability to declare or pay dividends.

      The following table presents summary audited financial data for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001 and 2000. Since this table is only a summary and does not provide all of the information contained in our financial statements, including the related notes, you should read our Consolidated Financial Statements contained elsewhere herein. Certain amounts from the prior years’ Consolidated Financial Statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.

      The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto and other information included or incorporated by reference herein.

Overview

      Our primary sources of revenue are net interest income and noninterest income. Net interest income is the difference between the income earned on interest earning assets and the interest paid on interest bearing liabilities. We generate interest income from our loan portfolio and short-term investments. We fund our loan portfolio with securitizations, lines of credit, notes payable to the Bank and equity.

      Noninterest income is primarily made up of revenues generated from the sale and servicing of contracts. The primary components of noninterest income include late charges and other collection related fee income on managed contracts, gain on sale of contracts sold to Westcorp through whole loan sales, contractual servicing income and retained interest income or expense. We continue to manage contracts sold to Westcorp, so we receive servicing fees and other ancillary income on those contracts. Since March 2000, we have structured our securitizations as secured financings and no longer record non-cash gain on sale at the time of each securitization or subsequent contractual servicing and retained interest income, the valuation of which is based upon subjective assumptions. Rather, the earnings of the contracts in the trust and the related financing costs are reflected over the life of the underlying pool of contracts as net interest income.

      The following are highlights for 2004:

Business Risks

      Our operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected by any of the following business risks. In addition to the risks described below, we may encounter risks that are not currently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial, which may also impair our business operations.

Risks Related to the Merger

      Westcorp’s board of directors and our board of directors each believe that conversion of the Bank from a federal savings bank to a California state commercial bank and the merger of us with and into the Bank will yield certain benefits. These anticipated benefits are based on certain assumptions and, if the merger is consummated, the combined company may not realize the anticipated benefits of the merger to the extent or in the timeframe anticipated.

      Westcorp will account for the merger if consummated, using the purchase method of accounting under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, also known as GAAP. Under the purchase method of accounting, Westcorp will record the market value of its common stock issued in connection with the merger and the amount of direct transaction costs as the cost of acquiring our minority interest. Westcorp will allocate that cost to the individual assets acquired and liabilities assumed. As a result, purchase accounting treatment of the merger could adversely impact Westcorp’s income, which could have an adverse effect on the market value of Westcorp common stock following completion of the merger.

      If the current market prices of Westcorp’s and our common stock reflect an assumption that the merger will be completed, the price of our respective securities may decline if the merger is not completed. In addition, Westcorp’s and our costs related to the merger, including legal, accounting and other fees, must be paid and expensed even if the merger is not completed.

      Westcorp’s obligation and our obligation to complete the merger are subject to the satisfaction or waiver, where permissible, of certain conditions set forth in the merger agreement. Some of these conditions cannot be waived, including obtaining the requisite approval of our minority shareholders and converting the Bank from a federal savings bank to a California state commercial bank. If the conditions of the merger are not satisfied or waived (to the extent any such conditions may be waived), the merger will not be completed. Among the conditions that cannot be waived is that Westcorp must be approved by the Federal Reserve to become a bank holding company. The Federal Reserve has not yet approved Westcorp’s application to become a bank holding company, and may impose conditions to such approval that are not acceptable to us.

      In addition, pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement, because the merger was not consummated on or prior to February 28, 2005, any party to the merger agreement has the right to unilaterally terminate the agreement.

      If the conversion and merger are not consummated, the regulatory requirements imposed by HOLA, particularly the limitations on the percentage of the Bank’s assets that may be invested in consumer loans and the guidance issued by the OTS as to the amount of capital that must be held with respect to loans which the OTS deems to be subprime, may cause significant changes in our operations or corporate structure. Westcorp may determine to separate our automobile finance business from its banking business, substantially reduce our automobile finance operations or cease operations as a regulated banking entity. It is uncertain whether one or more of these changes in our operations or corporate structure would be more or less profitable than the pending conversion and merger.

      The Bank and its subsidiaries are subject to inspection and regulation by the OTS pursuant to HOLA. The OTS is the primary federal banking agency responsible for its supervision and regulation. The OTS has the power to enforce HOLA and its regulations by a variety of actions ranging from a memorandum of understanding to cease and desist proceedings under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. The OTS can take such action based solely upon its determination that we have violated one or more of the laws or regulations to which we are subject or that any aspect of our business is being conducted in an unsafe or unsound manner. As such, the OTS has broad powers to, among other things, require us to change our business practices, hold additional capital and change management. Such action could have a material adverse impact on our business and may impact the price of securities we issue, including our common stock, and access to the capital markets.

      HOLA limits the amount of our consumer loans, commercial loans and investment in service corporations. See “Business — Supervision and Regulation — Investment Restrictions.” Our securitization activities are structured to enable the Bank to remove securitized automobile contracts from the HOLA consumer loan limitation calculation. Changes in the OTS’s interpretation of HOLA as it affects our securitization activities could cause us to change the manner in which we securitize automobile contracts or to limit our acquisition of such contracts, thereby negatively impacting the price of our common stock. Furthermore, if we are unable to continue to securitize the automobile contracts we purchase, this regulatory limitation may force us to limit our acquisition of new automobile contracts, thereby adversely affecting our ability to remain a preferred source of financing for the dealers from whom we purchase automobile contracts, or cause the Bank to fail the regulatory limitations. Any such limitations may also have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity and results of operations. In addition, other regulatory actions taken by the OTS could have a negative impact on the price of our common stock.

      The OTS, along with other federal banking regulatory agencies, has adopted guidance pertaining to subprime lending programs. Pursuant to the guidance, lending programs which provide credit to borrowers whose credit histories reflect specified negative characteristics, such as recent bankruptcies or payment delinquencies, are deemed to be subprime lending programs for regulatory purposes. Many of the contracts that we originate possess one or more of the factors identified in the guidance as indicative of a subprime loan for this purpose. Pursuant to the guidance, examiners may require that an institution with a lending program deemed to be subprime hold additional capital that ranges from one and one-half to three times the normal capital required for similar loans made to borrowers who are not deemed to be subprime borrowers.

      Because many of the automobile contracts we originate possess one or more of the factors identified in the guidance as indicative of a subprime loan, the Bank maintains its capital levels higher than would otherwise be required by regulations. Maintenance of higher capital levels by the Bank may slow our growth, require us to raise additional capital or sell assets, all of which could negatively impact our earnings. We cannot predict to what extent the Bank may be required to hold additional capital with respect to those automobile contracts we hold as to which the borrowers are deemed by the OTS to be subprime borrowers.

      Our operations are subject to regulation, supervision and licensing under various federal, state and local statutes, ordinances and regulations. In most states in which we operate, a consumer credit regulatory agency regulates and enforces laws relating to consumer lenders and sales finance agencies such as us. These rules and regulations generally provide for licensing of sales finance agencies, limitations on the amount, duration and charges, including interest rates, for various categories of loans, requirements as to the form and content of finance contracts and other documentation, and restrictions on collection practices and creditors’ rights. So long as we are an operating subsidiary of the Bank, licensing and certain other of these requirements are not applicable to us due to federal preemption.

      We are also subject to extensive federal regulation, including the Truth in Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. These laws require us to provide certain disclosures to prospective borrowers and protect against discriminatory lending practices and unfair credit practices. The principal disclosures required under the Truth in Lending Act include the terms of repayment, the total finance charge and the annual percentage rate charged on each loan. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibits creditors from discriminating against loan applicants on the basis of race, color, sex, age or marital status. Pursuant to Regulation B promulgated under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, creditors are required to make certain disclosures regarding consumer rights and advise consumers whose credit applications are not approved of the reasons for the rejection. In addition, the credit scoring system we use must comply with the requirements for such a system as set forth in the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B. The Fair Credit Reporting Act requires us to provide certain information to consumers whose credit applications are not approved on the basis of a report obtained from a consumer reporting agency. Additionally, we are subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which requires us to maintain privacy with respect to certain consumer data in our possession and to periodically communicate with consumers on privacy matters. We are also subject to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, and similar state laws, which requires us to reduce the interest rate charged on each loan to customers who have subsequently joined the military.

      The dealers that originate automobile contracts we purchase also must comply with both state and federal credit and trade practice statutes and regulations. Failure of the dealers to comply with these statutes and regulations could result in consumers having rights of rescission and other remedies that could have an adverse effect on us.

      We believe that we maintain all material licenses and permits required for our current operations and are in substantial compliance with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to maintain all requisite licenses and permits, and the failure to satisfy those and other regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on our operations. Other legislative and regulatory initiatives that could affect Westcorp, the Bank and the banking industry in general are pending, and additional initiatives may be proposed or introduced, before the U.S. Congress, the California legislature and other governmental bodies in the future. Such proposals, if enacted, may further alter the structure, regulation and competitive relationship among financial institutions, and may subject Westcorp and the Bank to increased regulation, disclosure and reporting requirements. In addition, the various banking regulatory agencies often adopt new rules and regulations to implement and enforce existing legislation. It cannot be predicted whether, or in what form, any such legislation or regulations may be enacted or the extent to which our business would be affected, but a change in the laws, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to us could have a material effect on our business.

      The Bank is subject to routine periodic examinations by the OTS on a variety of financial and regulatory matters. The Bank’s most recent annual safety and soundness examination by the OTS was completed in September 2004.

      Delinquencies, defaults, repossessions and credit losses generally increase during periods of economic slowdown, recession or higher unemployment. These periods also may be accompanied by decreased consumer demand for automobiles and declining values of automobiles securing outstanding contracts, which weakens collateral coverage and increases the amount of loss in the event of default. Significant increases in the inventory of pre-owned automobiles during periods of economic recession also may depress the prices at which repossessed automobiles may be sold or delay the timing of these sales. Because a portion of our borrowers are considered non-prime borrowers, the actual rates of delinquencies, defaults, repossessions and credit losses on these contracts are higher than those experienced in the general automobile finance industry for borrowers considered to be prime borrowers and could be more dramatically affected by a general economic downturn. In addition, during an economic slowdown or recession, our servicing costs may increase without a corresponding increase in our servicing fee income. While we seek to manage the higher risk inherent in non-prime contracts through the underwriting criteria and collection methods we employ, we cannot assure you that these criteria or methods will afford adequate protection against these risks. Any

sustained period of increased delinquencies, defaults, repossessions, credit losses or servicing costs could adversely affect our financial position, liquidity and results of operations and our ability to enter into future securitizations.

      Our profitability may be directly affected by the level of and fluctuations in interest rates, which affects the gross interest rate spread we earn on our contracts. As interest rates change, our gross interest rate spread on new originations may increase or decrease depending upon the interest rate environment. In addition, the rates charged on the contracts originated or purchased from dealers are limited by statutory maximums, restricting our opportunity to pass on increased interest costs. We believe that our profitability and liquidity could be adversely affected during any period of changing interest rates, possibly to a material degree. We monitor the interest rate environment and employ our hedging strategies designed to mitigate the impact of changes in interest rates. We cannot assure you that our hedging strategies will mitigate the impact of changes in interest rates.

      We sell repossessed automobiles at wholesale auction markets located throughout the United States. Auction proceeds from the sale of repossessed vehicles and other recoveries usually do not cover the outstanding balance of the contracts, and the resulting deficiencies are charged off. Decreased auction proceeds resulting from the depressed prices at which pre-owned automobiles may be sold during periods of economic slowdown or recession will result in higher credit losses for us. Furthermore, depressed wholesale prices for pre-owned automobiles may result from significant liquidations of rental or fleet inventories and from increased volume of trade-ins due to promotional financing programs offered by new vehicle manufacturers. There can be no assurance that our recovery rates will stabilize or improve in the future.

      Ernest S. Rady is the founder, Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Westcorp. Mr. Rady is also the Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank and is our Chairman of the Board of Directors. Mr. Rady is the beneficial owner of approximately 53% of the outstanding shares of common stock of Westcorp and is able to exercise significant control over our company. The Westcorp common stock ownership of Mr. Rady enables him to elect all of Westcorp’s directors and effectively control the vote on all matters submitted to a vote of Westcorp, including mergers, sales of all or substantially all of our assets, “going private” transactions, conversions and other corporate restructurings or reorganizations. Because of the significant block of Westcorp common stock controlled by Mr. Rady, decisions may be made that, while in the best interest of Mr. Rady, may not be in the best interest of other stockholders.

      Our automobile finance operations require substantial operating cash flows. Operating cash requirements include premiums paid to dealers for acquisition of automobile contracts, expenses incurred in connection with the securitization of automobile contracts, capital expenditures for new technologies and ongoing operating costs. Our primary source of operating cash is the excess cash flows received from securitizations and contracts held on the balance sheet. The timing and amount of excess cash flows from contracts varies based on a number of factors, including:

      Any adverse change in these factors could reduce or eliminate excess cash flows to us. Although we currently have positive operating cash flows, we cannot assure you that we will continue to generate positive cash flows in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity and results of operations.

      Our business depends on our ability to aggregate and sell automobile contracts in the form of asset-backed securities. These sales generate cash proceeds that allow us to repay amounts borrowed and to purchase additional automobile contracts. Changes in our asset-backed securities program could materially adversely affect our earnings or ability to purchase and resell automobile contracts on a timely basis. Such changes could include, among other things, a:

      If we are unable to effectively securitize our automobile contracts, we may have to reduce or even curtail our automobile contract purchasing activities, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity and results of operations.

      Our results of operations have fluctuated in the past and are expected to fluctuate in the future. Factors that could affect our quarterly earnings include:

Critical Accounting Estimates

      Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, also known as MD&A, is based on our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes that have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. Our significant accounting policies are described in “Note 1 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” in our Consolidated Financial Statements and are essential in understanding our MD&A. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, income, and expenses in our Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates. We have identified accounting for the allowance for credit losses as the most critical accounting estimate to understanding and evaluating our reported financial results of operations. This estimate is critical because it requires us to make difficult, subjective and complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because it is possible that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or

using different assumptions. Additionally, the accounting for derivative financial instruments and accrued taxes requires the use of assumptions and accounting estimates that are also inherently subjective.

      The allowance for credit losses is our estimate of probable losses in our loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date. Our determination of the amount of the allowance for credit losses was based on a review of various quantitative and qualitative analyses. Our process for determining the allowance for credit losses is discussed in detail in “Note 1 — Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” in our Consolidated Financial Statements.

      Key analyses considered in the process of establishing our allowance for credit losses include chargeoff trends by loan program, migration analysis of delinquent and current accounts by risk category, analysis of historical cumulative losses, econometric forecasts, the evaluation of the size of any particular asset group, the concentration of any credit tier, the percentage of delinquency, chargeoffs over various time periods and at various statistical midpoints and high points, the severity of depreciated values of repossessions, trends in the number of days repossessions are held in inventory, trends in the number of loan modifications, trends in delinquency roll rates, trends in deficiency balance collections both internally and from collection agencies, trends in custom scores and the effectiveness of our custom scores, and trends in the economy generally or in specific geographic locations. The process of determining the level of the allowance for credit losses based upon the foregoing analyses requires a high degree of judgment. It is possible that others, given the same information, may reach different conclusions and such differences could be material. To the extent that the analyses considered in determining the allowance for credit losses are not indicative of future performance or other assumptions used by us do not prove to be accurate, loss experience could differ significantly from our estimate, resulting in either higher or lower future provision for credit losses.

      We use derivatives in connection with our interest rate risk management activities. We record all derivative instruments at fair value. Fair value information for our derivative financial instruments is reported using quoted market prices for which it is practicable to estimate that value. In cases where quoted market prices are not readily available, fair values are based on estimates using present value or other valuation techniques.

      Some of our derivatives qualify for hedge accounting. To qualify for hedge accounting, we must demonstrate, on an ongoing basis, that our derivatives are highly effective in protecting us against interest rate risk. We employ regression analysis and discounted cash flow analysis to determine the effectiveness of our hedging activity.

      The techniques used in estimating fair values and hedge effectiveness are significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rates and estimates of future cash flows. It is possible that others, given the same information, may reach different conclusions and such differences could be material.

      We estimate tax expenses based on the amount we expect to owe various tax jurisdictions. We currently file tax returns in approximately 39 states. Our estimate of tax expense is reported on our Consolidated Statements of Income. Accrued taxes represent the net estimated amount due or to be received from taxing jurisdictions either currently or in the future and are reported as a component of other assets on our Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. In estimating accrued taxes, we assess the relative merits and risks of the appropriate tax treatment of transactions taking into account statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance in the context of our tax position.

      Changes to our estimate of accrued taxes occur periodically due to changes in the tax rates, implementation of new tax planning strategies, resolution with taxing authorities of issues with previously taken tax positions, and newly enacted statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance. These changes, when they

occur, affect accrued taxes and could be material. See “Note 14 — Income Taxes” in our Consolidated Financial Statements for additional detail on our income taxes.

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

      Prior to April 1, 2000, our securitization transactions were structured as sales for accounting purposes. Under this structure, the notes issued by our unconsolidated securitization trusts were not recorded as a liability on our Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition. Effective January 1, 2003, we regained control over assets of the securitization trusts for all of our outstanding securitization transactions treated as sales for accounting purposes, excluding loans sold in whole loan sales. We recorded $525 million of automobile contracts and the related notes payable on automobile secured financing on our Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and have eliminated all remaining off balance sheet amounts related to these transactions. At December 31, 2004, we had no off balance sheet arrangements.

Results of Operations

      Net interest income is affected by our interest rate spread, which is the difference between the rate earned on our interest earning assets and the rate paid on our interest bearing liabilities, and the relative amounts of our interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities. Net interest income totaled $584 million, $602 million and $471 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. The decline in net interest income from 2003 to 2004 is attributable to both the decline in our interest bearing assets as a result of whole loan sales and a decrease in interest rate spread. The increase in net interest income from 2002 to 2003 is primarily the result of us holding a greater percentage of contracts on balance sheet even as overall net interest margins declined.

      The following table presents information relative to the average balances and interest rates on an owned basis for the periods indicated:

      The total interest rate spread decreased 9 basis points for 2004 compared with 2003 due to a decrease of 78 basis points in the yield on interest earning assets while the cost of funds decreased 69 basis points. The decrease in the yield on interest earning assets in 2004 was primarily due to a lower interest rate environment. The decrease in the cost of funds in 2004 was primarily due a lower interest rate environment and an improvement of credit spreads on our automobile secured financings.

      The total interest rate spread decreased 30 basis points in 2003 compared with 2002 due to a decrease of 100 basis points in the yield on interest earning assets while the cost of funds decreased 70 basis points. The decrease in the yield on interest earning assets in 2003 was primarily due to our shift to originating a higher percentage of prime credit quality contracts and an overall lower interest rate environment. The decrease in the cost of funds in 2003 was primarily due to a declining interest rate environment.

      The following table sets forth the changes in net interest income attributable to changes in volume (change in average portfolio volume multiplied by prior period average rate) and changes in rates (change in weighted average interest rate multiplied by prior period average portfolio balance):

      We maintain an allowance for credit losses to cover probable losses that can be reasonably estimated for contracts held on the balance sheet. The allowance for credit losses is increased by charging the provision for credit losses and decreased by actual losses on such contracts or by reversing the allowance for credit losses through the provision for credit losses when the amount of contracts held on balance sheet is reduced through whole loan sales. The level of the allowance is based principally on the outstanding balance of contracts held on balance sheet and historical loss trends. We believe that the allowance for credit losses is currently adequate to absorb probable losses in our owned portfolio that can be reasonably estimated.

      The provision for credit losses was $192 million, $234 million and $249 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Net chargeoffs were $180 million, $222 million and $158 million for the same respective periods. The decrease in provision for credit losses from 2003 to 2004 was primarily a result of an improving economy as well as our continued emphasis on risk-focused underwriting. The reduction in the provision for credit losses from 2002 to 2003 was the result of holding a greater percentage of prime credit quality contracts, which require a lower percentage of allowance for credit losses.

      Since the first quarter of 2000, we have not completed a securitization that has been accounted for as an off balance sheet arrangement. For transactions treated as off balance sheet arrangements prior to April 2000, we recorded a non-cash gain equal to the present value of the estimated future cash flows from the portfolio of

contracts sold less the write-off of dealer participation balances and the effect of hedging activities. For these securitizations, net interest earned on the contracts sold was recognized over the life of the transactions as contractual servicing income and retained interest income or expense. Effective January 1, 2003, we regained control over assets of the securitization trusts for all of our outstanding securitization transactions treated as sales for accounting purposes, excluding loans sold in whole loan sales. We no longer recognize retained interest income or expense or contractual servicing income for these securitization transactions on our Consolidated Statements of Income. Rather, we recognize interest income on automobile contracts held in these trusts and record interest expense on notes payable on automobile secured financings.

      We occasionally sell contracts to Westcorp in whole loan sales. These contracts are subsequently securitized by Westcorp and continue to be managed by us under the terms of such securitizations. We recognize a cash gain on a whole loan sale equal to the cash premium received adjusted for the write-off of dealer participation balances and the effect of hedging activities. Additionally, we recognize contractual servicing income on these contracts.

      The components of servicing income were as follows:

      Fee income consists primarily of documentation fees, late charges and deferment fees on our managed portfolio, including contracts securitized in transactions accounted for as sales and secured financings, as well as contracts sold in whole loan sales and contracts not securitized. The increase in fee income is due to the growth in our average managed portfolio to $11.1 billion in 2004 from $10.1 billion in 2003 and $8.8 billion in 2002.

      According to the terms of each securitization, we earn contractual servicing income on the outstanding balance of securitized contracts. For accounting purposes, this income is only recognized on contracts sold through securitizations treated as sales and whole loan sales to our ultimate parent, Westcorp. Contractual servicing income earned by us relating to sales to securitization trusts totaled approximately $10.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. There was no contractual servicing income earned by us relating to sales to securitization trusts for the years ended December 31, 2004 or 2003. The decline was due to our regaining control over the assets of the trusts for all our outstanding securitization transactions previously treated as sales for accounting purposes. Contractual servicing income earned by us relating to the whole loan sales to Westcorp totaled approximately $37.6 million, $31.8 million and $51.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.

      There was no retained interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 as a result of reconsolidating all remaining off balance sheet trusts on January 1, 2003. For accounting purposes, this expense is recognized only on contracts sold through securitizations treated as sales. Retained interest expense is dependent upon the average excess spread on the contracts sold, credit losses, the size of the sold portfolio and the amount of amortization of the RISA. The retained interest expense recognized in 2002 was the result of higher chargeoffs on our sold portfolio as well as revised estimates of future chargeoffs due to continued slowing in the economy. Net chargeoffs on the sold portfolio were $30.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2002. The average balance of the sold portfolio, excluding the loans sold in whole loan sales on which we do not recognize retained interest income, was $840 million in 2002. The outstanding sold portfolio had a weighted average gross interest rate spread of 6.71% in 2002.

      The following table sets forth our contract sales and securitizations and related gains on sales:

      The following table lists each of our public securitizations: