Back to GetFilings.com

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

_________________

FORM 10-Q

[X]  QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2004

OR

[   ]    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ____________ to ______________.

COMMISSION FILE NUMBER: 000-26489

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(877) 445 – 4581
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

5775 Roscoe Court
San Diego, California 92123
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
_____________________________

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 [X] No [   ]                      

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act)

Yes [    ] No [X]                      

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of stock, as of the latest practicable date.

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
INDEX TO FORM 10-Q

1

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
(In Thousands, Except Par Value Amounts)

2

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
(In Thousands, Except Per Share Amounts)
(Unaudited)

3

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statement of Stockholders' Equity
(Unaudited, In Thousands)

4

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited, In Thousands)

5

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (cont.)
Reconciliation of Net Income to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities
(Unaudited, In Thousands)

Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing activities:

6

ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)

Note 1: Ownership and Description of Business

Encore Capital Group, Inc. (“Encore”) is a systems-driven purchaser and manager of charged-off consumer receivables portfolios. Encore acquires these portfolios at deep discounts from their face values using its proprietary valuation process that is based on the consumer attributes of the underlying accounts. Based upon Encore’s ongoing analysis of these accounts, it employs a dynamic mix of collection strategies to maximize its return on investment. The receivable portfolios Encore purchases consist primarily of unsecured, charged-off domestic consumer credit receivables purchased from national financial institutions, major retail credit corporations, and resellers of such portfolios. Acquisitions of receivable portfolios are financed by operations and by borrowings from third parties (see Note 8).

Encore is a Delaware holding company whose principal assets are its investments in various wholly owned subsidiaries (collectively the “Company”). Encore also has a wholly owned subsidiary, Midland Receivables 98-1 Corporation, which is not consolidated, but was recorded as an investment in retained interest on the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of financial condition. During the second quarter of 2004, the investment in retained interest was fully recovered.

Note 2: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Significant Accounting Policies
Please refer to the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003 for a summary of the Company’s significant accounting policies.

Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and, therefore, do not include all information and footnotes necessary for a fair presentation of financial position, results of operations and cash flows in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In the opinion of the Company, however, the accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly the Company’s consolidated financial position as of September 30, 2004, and its consolidated results of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, and its cash flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The unaudited interim condensed consolidated results of operations of the Company for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2004 may not be indicative of future results. These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K as of and for the year ended December 31, 2003 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 2, 2004.

7

Certain amounts included in the accompanying prior periods’ consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation.

New Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2003, the AICPA issued Statement of Position 03-03 (“SOP 03-03”), “Accounting for Certain Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer.” SOP 03-03 addresses accounting for differences between contractual cash flows and cash flows expected to be collected from an investor’s initial investment in loans or debt securities (loans) acquired in a transfer if those differences are attributable, at least in part, to credit quality. This SOP limits the yield that may be accreted (accretable yield) to the excess of the investor’s estimate of undiscounted expected principal, interest, and other cash flows (cash flows expected at acquisition to be collected) over the investor’s initial investment in the loan. This SOP requires that the excess of contractual cash flows over cash flows expected to be collected (nonaccretable difference) not be recognized as an adjustment of yield, loss accrual, or valuation allowance. This SOP prohibits investors from displaying accretable yield and nonaccretable difference in the balance sheet. Subsequent increases in cash flows expected to be collected generally will be recognized prospectively through adjustment of the loan’s yield over its remaining life. Decreases in cash flows expected to be collected will be recognized as an impairment of the loan. SOP 03-03 is effective in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2004, and accordingly, the Company expects to adopt the provisions of this SOP in the first quarter of 2005. The Company does not believe that the implementation of SOP 03-03 will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. See Note 5 for the Company’s current method of accounting for investment in loans under the provisions of AICPA Practice Bulletin 6.

Note 3: Stock-Based Compensation

The 1999 Equity Participation Plan (“1999 Plan”), as amended, permits the grant of stock or options to employees, directors and consultants. Stockholders approved the issuance of 2,600,000 shares under the 1999 Plan. There were an additional 700,000 shares approved by the Company’s stockholders on May 5, 2004. These shares increased the number of common shares available for grant under the 1999 Plan from 2,600,000 to 3,300,000. Options may be granted at prices, which exceed 85.0% of the fair market value on the date of the grant and expire over a term not to exceed ten years. Options generally vest ratably over a three-year period, unless otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors.

In September 2004, the Company’s Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors approved the issuance of stock options to an officer to purchase 250,000 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $18.63 per share. The exercise price of all these granted stock options was equal to the estimated market value of the underlying common stock at the date of grant and no compensation expense was recognized. The options vest ratably over five years, commencing September 2005.

8

A summary of the Company’s stock option activity and related information is as follows:

The following table summarizes outstanding and exercisable options at September 30, 2004:

The Company has elected to follow Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25 (“APB 25”), Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations in accounting for its employee stock options rather than the alternative fair value accounting provided for under SFAS No. 123, Accounting and Disclosure for Stock-Based Compensation. The Company has also adopted the pro forma disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation—Transition and Disclosure an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123. In accordance with APB 25, compensation cost relating to stock options granted by the Company is measured as the excess, if any, of the market price of the Company’s stock at the date of grant over the exercise price of the stock options. This expense is recognized over the vesting period of the stock options.

As required by SFAS No. 148 and SFAS No. 123, the Company provides pro forma net income and pro forma net income per common share disclosures for stock-based awards made during the periods presented as if the fair-value-based method defined in SFAS No. 123 had been applied.

9

The fair value for options granted during each of the periods presented was estimated at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions:

The Black-Scholes option-pricing model was developed for use in estimating the fair value of traded options, which have no vesting restrictions and are fully transferable. Option valuation models require the input of highly subjective assumptions including the expected stock price volatility. Because the Company’s employee stock options have characteristics significantly different from those of traded options, and because changes in the subjective input assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate, in management’s opinion, the existing models do not provide a reliable single measure of the fair value of its employee stock options.

For purposes of pro forma disclosures, the estimated fair value of the options is amortized to expense over the options’ vesting period. The Company’s pro forma information is as follows (in thousands, except per share amounts):

Note 4: Litigation Settlement

On March 21, 2003, certain of the Company’s subsidiaries entered into a settlement agreement with MBNA America Bank, N.A. (“MBNA”) in connection with the lawsuit filed against MBNA in February 2001. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement (the “Litigation Settlement”), MBNA paid the Company $11.1 million on April 4, 2003 in full and complete satisfaction of the claims. The net proceeds of $7.9 million, which is net of litigation expenses and attorneys’ fees, were used to repay debt (see Notes 6 and 8).

10

During the first quarter of 2003, the Company recorded a net gain of $7.2 million, which was comprised of the net proceeds of $7.9 million, reduced by the remaining carrying value of the related receivable portfolios as of March 31, 2003, which was $0.7 million.

Note 5: Investment in Receivable Portfolios, Net

The Company accounts for its investment in receivables portfolios on either the “accrual basis” or “cost recovery method” of accounting in accordance with the provisions of the AICPA’s Practice Bulletin 6, “Amortization of Discounts on Certain Acquired Loans.” Static pools are established with accounts having similar attributes, based on the specific seller and timing of acquisition. Once a static pool is established, the receivables are permanently assigned to the pool. The discount (i.e., the difference between the cost of each static pool and the related aggregate contractual receivable balance) is not recorded because the Company expects to collect a relatively small percentage of each static pool’s contractual receivable balance. As a result, receivables portfolios are recorded at cost at the time of acquisition.

The Company accounts for each static pool as a unit for the economic life of the pool (similar to one loan) for recognition of revenue from receivables portfolios, for collections applied to principal of receivables portfolios and for provision for loss or impairment. Revenue from receivables portfolios is accrued based on each pool’s effective interest rate applied to each pool’s adjusted cost basis. The cost basis of each pool is increased by revenue earned and decreased by gross collections and impairments. The effective interest rate is the internal rate of return as derived from the timing and amounts of actual cash received and anticipated future cash flow projections for each pool.

The Company monitors and evaluates actual and projected cash flows for each receivable portfolio on a quarterly basis. Through September 30, 2003, the Company had not increased the total estimated cash flows for any receivable portfolio. As a result, for those portfolios whose actual cumulative collections exceeded the forecast, such excess amounts were subtracted from the future estimated collections in order to maintain the original forecast. The Company has, on the other hand, reduced the total estimated cash flows on certain receivable portfolios where actual cumulative collections to date have not met the forecast. If the remaining forecasted cash flows are in excess of the remaining carrying value, the effective interest is reduced prospectively. If the remaining forecasted cash flows are less than the remaining carrying value, the receivable portfolio is impaired and all of the remaining collections are subsequently applied against book value. An impairment charge is taken for the difference between the carrying value and the remaining forecasted cash flow amount. Additionally, if the amount and timing of future cash collections are not reasonably estimable, the Company accounts for these portfolios on the cost recovery method (“Cost Recovery Portfolios”). No revenue is accreted on Cost Recovery Portfolios; all collections are applied 100% to recover the remaining cost basis of the portfolio and thereafter are recognized as revenue. At September 30, 2004, one portfolio with a remaining carrying value of $4 thousand was accounted for using the cost recovery method by the Company. No provision for impairment losses was recorded during the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003.

11

On purchases made since mid-2000, the Company’s gross collections, in the aggregate, have exceeded expectations. The Company has developed the statistical support to assist it in determining whether the better than expected performance resulted from: (i) the Company collecting at a more rapid rate than originally forecast; (ii) the Company increasing its penetration of the portfolio and thus increasing the likelihood of collecting more than the original forecast; or (iii) some combination of both faster collections and additional penetration of the portfolio. Effective October 1, 2003, the Company implemented its Unified Collection Score (“UCS”) model to project these remaining cash flows, considering known data about the Company’s customers’ accounts, including, among other things, the Company’s collection experience, and changes in external customer factors, in addition to all data known when it acquired the accounts. The Company routinely evaluates and implements enhancements to its UCS model.

During the third quarter of 2004, the Company revised the projected collections for 72 portfolios with carrying values totaling $52.3 million at September 30, 2004, which represented 52.6% of the aggregate carrying value of its portfolios at that date. Although the revised projected collections changed the timing of expected cash flows, the total change in the estimate of projected collections only resulted in a net increase in the aggregate total estimated remaining collections for the reforecasted portfolios by less than 0.1% as of September 30, 2004. The implementation of these revised forecasts resulted in a current quarter increase in the recognition of accretion revenue of $1.1 million and an increase in the accrual for contingent interest of $0.5 million. The net impact of the change in estimate was to increase third quarter pretax income by $0.6 million, net income by $0.4 million and fully diluted earnings per share by $0.02. The reforecast of collections resulted in expanding the budgeted life of the reforecasted portfolios by an average of 3 months from an average remaining life of 39 months to a revised average remaining life of 42 months. The resulting ratio of revenues to collections for accruing portfolios for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 increased 2.2 percentage points to 72.6% as a result of this adjustment.

Collections realized after the net book value of a portfolio has been fully recovered (“Zero Basis Portfolios”) are recorded as revenue (“Zero Basis Revenue”). During the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, approximately $34.1 million and $11.4 million, respectively, was recognized as revenue pertaining to collections on portfolios for which the related net book value has been fully recovered.

12

The following tables summarize the changes in the balance of the investment in receivable portfolios during the following periods (in thousands, except percentages):

The annualized weighted average effective interest rate for receivable portfolios on the accretion method was 143.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2004, compared to 148.6% for the nine months ended September 30, 2003. For accrual basis portfolios, the weighted average annualized effective interest rate is the accrual rate utilized in recognizing revenue on our accrual basis portfolios. This rate represents the monthly internal rate of return, which has been annualized utilizing the simple interest method. The monthly internal rate of return is derived from the timing and amounts of actual cash received and the anticipated future cash flow projections for each pool.

During 2001, the Company resumed purchasing charged-off unsecured consumer loans, in 2002 began purchasing auto loan deficiencies, and in 2004 began purchasing charged-off consumer telecom receivables. The Company purchased $27.2 million and $4.1 million of these loans during the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Gross collections related to all portfolios of charged-off unsecured consumer loans, auto loan deficiencies and telecom receivables amounted to $15.5 million and $4.4 million for the nine month ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively.

13

The Company currently utilizes various business channels for the collection of its receivables. The following table summarizes the collections by collection channel (in thousands):

During the first quarter of 2004, the Company discontinued its rewrite program, released or reassigned the eight employees involved in the processing of rewrites, and sold the portfolio of rewritten notes. Our rewrite program offered debtors the ability to settle their obligation by paying a certain percentage of the amount due and executing a new “rewritten” note for the remaining negotiated balance. The notes, which were related to accounts throughout the Company’s portfolios, were sold for $4.0 million. The cash proceeds of $2.9 million from accruing portfolios and $1.1 million from zero basis portfolios were treated as additional portfolio collections for revenue recognition purposes. This is consistent with the Company’s historical accounting for collections from the rewritten notes.

Note 6: Securitization of Receivable Portfolios

1999 Warehouse and 1999 Securitization Financing
In March of 1999, and January of 2000, the Company entered into two securitized receivable acquisition facilities through two subsidiaries, Midland Funding 98-A Corporation and Midland Receivables 99-1 Corporation, respectively. Midland Funding 98-A Corporation entered into a $35.0 million facility (the “Warehouse Facility”), structured as a term loan bearing interest at 1.17% plus the one-week London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). Midland Receivables 99-1 Corporation issued securitized non-recourse notes in the amount of $28.9 million (“Securitization 99-1”), bearing interest at 10% per annum. The Warehouse Facility and Securitization 99-1 were collateralized and cross-collateralized by certain charged-off receivables and were insured through a financial guaranty insurance policy.

On April 15, 2003, all obligations related to the Warehouse Facility and Securitization 99-1 were repaid in full. The funds to repay these liabilities came from the Litigation Settlement (see Note 4), funds held in related reserve accounts and other internal cash sources. Since the payment in full of all obligations related to the Warehouse Facility and Securitization 99-1, the Company receives 100% of collections from the related portfolios.

14

Investment in Retained Interest
On September 11, 2000, Midland Receivables 98-1 Corporation, a subsidiary of Midland Credit Management Inc., repaid non-recourse notes originally issued in the principal amount of $33.0 million in 1998. In connection with this securitization transaction, the Company recorded an Investment in Retained Interest in securitized receivables (the “Retained Interest”). The Investment in Retained Interest was originally recorded at fair value, with the difference between fair value and cost basis recorded as unrealized gain and included in accumulated other comprehensive income as a component of stockholders’ equity. In September 2000, the note holders were fully repaid and the Company’s interest from that point forward represented a 100% interest in the underlying portfolios. The Company accounts for its Investment in Retained Interest in the same manner as it accounts for its investment in portfolio receivables (see Note 5). In the second quarter of 2004, the Company’s Investment in Retained Interest was fully recovered and all collections from that point forward have been recorded entirely as revenue. This Zero Basis Revenue amounted to $2.0 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2004.

The following summarizes the changes in the balance of the Investment in Retained Interest (in thousands):

15

Note 7: Property and Equipment

Property and equipment consist of the following as of the dates presented (in thousands):

Note 8: Notes Payable and Other Borrowings

The Company is obligated under borrowings as follows (in thousands):

Secured Financing Facility
On December 31, 2004, the $75.0 million secured financing facility (the “Secured Financing Facility”), will expire. The Secured Financing Facility was entered into on December 20, 2000 by MRC Receivables Corporation, a wholly owned bankruptcy-remote, special-purpose entity. The facility generally provides for a 90.0% advance rate with respect to each qualified receivable portfolio purchased. Interest accrues at the prime rate plus 3.0% per annum and is payable weekly. The interest rate reduces by 1.0% on outstanding amounts in excess of $25.0 million. Notes to be issued under the facility are collateralized by the charged-off receivables that are purchased with the proceeds from this financing arrangement. Each note has a maturity date not to exceed 27 months after the borrowing date. Once the notes are repaid and the Company has been repaid its investment, the Company and the lender share the residual cash flows from the receivable portfolios, net of servicing fees. The sharing in residual cash flows continues for the entire economic life of the receivable portfolios financed using this facility, and will extend substantially beyond the expiration date of the Secured Financing Facility, which is December 31, 2004. New advances for portfolio purchases under the Secured Financing Facility would not be available beyond the December 31, 2004 expiration date. The Company is required to give the lender the opportunity to fund all of its purchases of charged-off credit card receivables with advances on the Secured Financing Facility through December 31, 2004.

16

The following table summarizes interest expense associated with the Secured Financing Facility for the periods presented (in thousands):

From inception of the Secured Financing Facility through September 30, 2004, the Company utilized this facility to purchase charged-off receivable portfolios with a face value of $8.0 billion at a purchase price of approximately $213.3 million ($191.3 million of which was financed through this facility) or an average cost of 2.7% of face value. During the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, the Company recorded $24.9 million and $11.0 million, respectively, in contingent interest expense relating to the residual cash flow sharing agreement. Contingent interest expense is based on actual and forecasted residual collections for portfolios financed through the Secured Financing Facility. The estimated contingent interest expense during the life of any particular portfolio is recorded as a percent of the total estimated revenue earned from that portfolio. The total contingent interest expense as a percent of the revenues for all portfolios financed under the Secured Financing Facility amounted to 22.4% for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 15.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2003. When the total interest expense, including contingent interest, is compared to the average outstanding loan balances of $29.8 million and $29.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively, the weighted average effective interest rates amount to 118.4% for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 as compared to 56.4% for the nine months ended September 30, 2003. Total cash payments made related to the contingent interest were $17.3 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2004, and $10.8 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2003.

The Secured Financing Facility is collateralized by certain charged-off receivable portfolios with an aggregate carrying amount of $71.6 million at September 30, 2004. The Secured Financing Facility had a balance of $25.1 million as of September 30, 2004. The assets pledged under this financing facility, together with their associated cash flows, would not be available to satisfy claims of general creditors of the Company.

In conjunction with the Secured Financing Facility, the Company issued warrants to purchase up to 621,576 shares of Encore’s common stock at $1.00 per share subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments. The Secured Financing Facility lender exercised all of the warrants in December 2003.

Revolving Credit Facility
On June 30, 2004, the Company entered into a $75.0 million, three-year revolving credit facility (the “Revolving Credit Facility”) to be utilized for the purposes of purchasing portfolio receivables and for working capital needs. Interest rates on borrowings under this facility will, at the Company’s option, be at the lender’s prime rate or at Eurodollar plus a current margin of 2.50%. The applicable margin will be adjusted quarterly based on a pricing grid which takes into account certain financial covenants related to the Company’s consolidated financial condition and results of operations. The Revolving Credit Facility provides for an 85.0% initial advance rate with respect to each qualified receivables portfolio purchased. The balance outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility must not exceed an amount determined under a “Borrowing Base” formula. The eligible borrowing base of each portfolio financed under this facility is calculated by applying a three percentage point reduction to the 85.0% initial advance rate each month, commencing after the first three complete months of our ownership. The aggregate Borrowing Base is the sum of all of the borrowing bases of all portfolios financed under this facility. The Revolving Credit Facility is secured by a security interest in all assets of the Company, except for those assets in which the Secured Financing Facility lender has a first priority security interest.

17

This financing arrangement does not require the Company to share residual collections with the lender. Draws on the Revolving Credit Facility for portfolio purchases during the third and fourth quarters of 2004 are limited to non-credit card portfolios, and upon expiration of the Company’s Secured Financing Facility on December 31, 2004, will be available to fund all types of portfolio purchases, including credit card receivables. The Revolving Credit Facility provides for a $5.0 million letter of credit sub-facility and requires, under certain circumstances, permanent reductions in the outstanding balance and overall availability of the facility. The Revolving Credit Facility may be repaid without penalty. The Revolving Credit Facility contains substantial restrictive financial covenants, including but not limited to, financial ratios and limitations on acquisitions, dispositions, merger, dissolution, indebtedness and capital expenditures. The Revolving Credit Facility had a balance of $9.1 million as of September 30, 2004.

Secured Financing
On July 25, 2003, through Midland Funding NCC-1 Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary, the Company entered into a $1.8 million secured financing arrangement (the “Secured Financing”). This financing was repaid in full on June 30, 2004. The Secured Financing provided for a 75.0% advance rate with respect to four purchased receivables portfolios of charged-off unsecured consumer loans and auto loan deficiencies. Interest accrued at 15.0% and was payable weekly. This note had a maturity date not to exceed October 25, 2005. This financing arrangement did not require the Company to share residual collections with the lender.

Secured Note
On October 1, 2003, the Company entered into a loan for the purchase of certain equipment (“Secured Note”) in the amount of $0.3 million with a term of 36 months. This note is secured by the equipment, carries an interest rate of 7.24%, and had a balance of $0.2 million as of September 30, 2004.

Note 9: Income Taxes

The Company recorded an income tax provision of $11.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and $9.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2003. The provision for income tax expense reflects tax expense at an effective rate of 40.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2004 and an effective rate of 40.1% for the nine months ended September 30, 2003. For the nine months ended September 30, 2004, this consists primarily of a provision for Federal income taxes of 31.9% (which is net of a benefit for state taxes of 3.1%), a provision for state taxes of 8.8%, the effect of permanent book versus tax differences, less the impact of various changes to the net deferred tax assets of 0.7%. For the nine months ended September 30, 2003, this consists primarily of a provision for Federal income taxes of 31.3 % (which is net of a benefit for state taxes of 2.7%), a provision for state taxes of 8.0%, the effect of permanent book versus tax differences, and the impact of various changes to the net deferred tax assets of 0.8%.

18

Note 10: Commitments and Contingencies

Litigation
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and comparable state statutes may result in class action lawsuits, which can be material to the Company’s business due to the remedies available under these statutes, including punitive damages.

On December 5, 2003, the Company was served with a complaint filed on May 16, 2003 by plaintiff Paul Michael Cox in the Superior Court for the County of San Diego, California against its wholly owned subsidiaries Midland Acquisition Corporation (“MAC”) and Midland Credit Management, Inc. (“Midland”). The plaintiff sought to enforce against MAC and Midland a $2.2 million default judgment obtained in another state against an unrelated company. The action against the unrelated company was filed several months after MAC had acquired that company’s operating assets in an arms-length transaction. The plaintiff alleged that MAC and Midland were liable for the judgment on the theory of successor corporation liability. The Company believes the claims were without merit and this matter was settled during the third quarter of 2004 for an immaterial amount.

On October 18, 2004, Timothy W. Moser, a former officer of the Company, filed an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California against the Company, its underwriters and certain individuals including several of the Company’s officers and directors, alleging defamation, intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, intentional interference with contractual relations, breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing arising out of certain statements in the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 originally filed in August 2003 and alleged to be included in the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S–3 originally filed in May 2004. The complaint seeks injunctive relief, economic and punitive damages in an unspecified amount plus an award of profits allegedly earned by the defendants as a result of the alleged conduct, in addition to attorneys’ fees. To date, the Company has not been served with the complaint. The Company believes the claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. Although the outcome of this matter cannot be predicted with certainty, based on currently available information, including the possible availability of insurance and legal defenses available to the Company, management does not believe that this matter will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

There are a number of other lawsuits or claims pending or threatened against the Company. In general, these lawsuits or claims have arisen in the ordinary course of business and involve claims for actual damages arising from alleged misconduct of the Company or its employees or alleged improper reporting of credit information by the Company. Although litigation is inherently uncertain, based on past experience, the information currently available, and the possible availability of insurance and/or indemnification from originating institutions in some cases, management of the Company does not believe that the currently pending and threatened litigation or claims will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations. However, future events or circumstances, currently unknown to management, may determine whether the resolution of pending or threatened litigation or claims will ultimately have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations in any future reporting periods.