Attached files

file filename
EX-33.1 - EXHIBIT 33.1 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex33_1.htm
EX-31 - EXHIBIT 31 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex31.htm
EX-35.2 - EXHIBIT 35.2 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex35_2.htm
EX-35.1 - EXHIBIT 35.1 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex35_1.htm
EX-34.2 - EXHIBIT 34.2 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex34_2.htm
EX-34.1 - EXHIBIT 34.1 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex34_1.htm
EX-33.2 - EXHIBIT 33.2 - SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1ex33_2.htm

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017 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 of issuing entity: 333-164557-01

Central Index Key of issuing entity: 0001493611


 
SLC STUDENT LOAN TRUST 2010-1
(Exact name of issuing entity as specified in its charter)

Commission file number of depositor: 333-164557

Central Index Key of depositor: 0001164019

SLC STUDENT LOAN RECEIVABLES I, INC.
(Exact name of depositor as specified in its charter)

Central Index Key of sponsor: 0000893955

THE STUDENT LOAN CORPORATION
(Exact name of sponsor as specified in its charter)

Delaware
 
04-3598719
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
 
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
 
4000 Regent Boulevard
C2B-260
Irving, Texas
 
75063
(Address of principal executive offices)
 
(Zip Code)

 
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (469) 220-4928

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: NONE.
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: NONE.
 

 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒
 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

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 past 90 days.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ☐    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) 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.  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act:

Large accelerated filer
Accelerated filer
       
Non-accelerated filer
☒  (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Smaller reporting company

 
Emerging growth company
 
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    Yes  ☐    No   ☒

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked prices of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter.

REGISTRANT HAS NO VOTING OR NON-VOTING COMMON EQUITY OUTSTANDING HELD BY NON-AFFILIATES.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of December 31, 2017.

NOT APPLICABLE.

List hereunder the following documents if incorporated by reference and the Part of the Form 10-K (e.g., Part I, Part II, etc.) into which the document is incorporated: (1) Any annual report to security holders; (2) Any proxy or information statement; and (3) Any prospectus filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) or (c) under the Securities Act of 1933. The listed documents should be clearly described for identification purposes (e.g., annual report to security holders).

NOT APPLICABLE.
 


PART I

The following Items have been omitted in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

Item 1.
Business.

Item 1A.
Risk Factors.

Item 2.
Properties.

Item 3.
Legal Proceedings.

Item 1B.
Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 4.
Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

The following substitute information is provided in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

Item 1112(b) of Regulation AB. Significant Obligors of Pool Assets.

No single obligor represents 10% or more of the asset pool held by SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1 (the “Trust”).

Item 1114(b)(2) of Regulation AB. Credit Enhancement and Other Support, Except for Certain Derivatives Instruments.

No entity or group of affiliated entities provides any external credit enhancement or other support with respect to either payment on the pool assets held by the Trust or payments on the notes (the “Notes”) or the certificate (the “Certificate”) issued by the Trust.

Item 1115(b) of Regulation AB. Certain Derivatives Instruments (Financial Information).

No entity or group of affiliated entities provides any external derivative instruments to either payment on the pool assets held by the Trust or payments on the Notes or the Certificate.

Item 1117 of Regulation AB. Legal Proceedings.

Other than as stated in the following paragraphs, there are no legal proceedings that would be material to investors that are pending against the depositor, the issuing entity or, to the knowledge of the registrant and not previously disclosed, the sponsor, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company or Navient Solutions, LLC (formerly, Navient Solutions, Inc.), nor does the registrant know of any such proceeding contemplated by any governmental authorities.
 
2

The following four paragraphs are disclosure received from Navient Solutions, LLC (formerly, Navient Solutions, Inc.), the successor subservicer for this transaction.
 
On January 18, 2017, the CFPB and Attorneys General for the State of Illinois and the State of Washington (collectively the “Attorneys General”) initiated civil actions naming Navient Corporation (the "Company") and several of its subsidiaries as defendants alleging violations of Federal and State consumer protection statutes, including the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and various state consumer protection laws. These civil actions are related to the Civil Investigative Demands and the Notice and Opportunity to Respond and Advise letter that were previously issued by the CFPB and the Attorneys General. In addition to these matters, a number of lawsuits have been filed by nongovernmental parties or may be filed by additional governmental or nongovernmental parties, including other state attorneys general or private litigants, seeking damages or other remedies related to similar issues raised by the CFPB and the Attorneys General.  One such lawsuit was filed on October 5, 2017 by the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, naming Navient Corporation and Navient Solutions, LLC as defendants alleging claims and seeking legal and equitable relief that are substantially similar to claims made and relief by the CFPB and other Attorneys General.  The Company filed its Motion to Dismiss on March 20, 2017 with respect to the Attorneys General actions and on March 24, 2017 with respect to the CFPB action.  In April 2017, the CFPB filed their response to our Motion to Dismiss and in May 2017, we filed our response.  A hearing on our Motion to Dismiss was held on June 27, 2017 and the Court denied our motion on August 4, 2017.  On May 24, 2017, the WA AG filed their response to our Motion to Dismiss and on July 5, 2017, we filed our response.  The Motion to Dismiss was denied on July 10, 2017, after a hearing.  On May 24, 2017, the IL AG filed their response to our Motion to Dismiss and on June 30, 2017, we filed our response. A hearing on our Motion to Dismiss was held on July 18, 2017 and as of March 28, 2018, the Court has not ruled on the motion.   In relation to the Pennsylvania Attorney General lawsuit, the Company filed its Motion to Dismiss on December 22, 2017.  The motion has not been heard by the court.  As the Company has previously stated, we believe the suits improperly seek to impose penalties on Navient based on new servicing standards applied retroactively and applied only against one servicer and that the allegations are false. We intend to vigorously defend against the allegations included in these lawsuits and any subsequent lawsuits that may be filed by governmental or nongovernmental parties, including other state attorneys general or private litigants, seeking similar damages and remedies. At this point in time, the Company is unable to anticipate the timing of a resolution or the ultimate impact that these legal proceedings may have on the Company’s consolidated financial position, liquidity, results of operation or cash flows. As a result, it is not possible at this time to estimate a range of potential exposure, if any, for amounts that may be payable in connection with these matters and reserves have not been established. It is possible that an adverse ruling or rulings may have a material adverse impact on the Company.
 
During the first quarter of 2016, Navient Corporation, certain Navient officers and directors, and the underwriters of certain Navient securities offerings were sued in three putative securities class action lawsuits filed on behalf of certain investors in Navient stock or Navient unsecured debt. These three cases, which were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, were consolidated by the District Court, with Lord Abbett Funds appointed as Lead Plaintiff. The caption of the consolidated case is Lord Abbett Affiliated Fund, Inc., et al. v. Navient Corporation, et al. The plaintiffs filed their amended and consolidated complaint in September 2016. The Court ruled on our Motion to Dismiss on September 6, 2017 and dismissed the complaint in its entirety without prejudice. The plaintiffs filed a further amended and restated complaint on November 17, 2017.  The Navient defendants intend to vigorously defend against the allegations.
 
During the fourth quarter of 2017, Navient Corporation and certain Navient officers were named in two putative class action lawsuits filed on behalf of certain investors in Navient stock entitled Pope v. Navient Corporation, et al and Gross v. Navient Corporation, et al.  These cases have been consolidated.  The Navient defendants intend to vigorously defend against these allegations.
 
At this stage in the proceedings, we are unable to anticipate the timing of resolution or the ultimate impact, if any, that the legal proceedings may have on the consolidated financial position, liquidity, results of operations or cash-flows of Navient and its affiliates. As a result, it is not possible at this time to estimate a range of potential exposure, if any, for amounts that may be payable in connection with these matters and reserves have not been established. It is possible that an adverse ruling or rulings may have a material adverse impact on the Company.

The following seven paragraphs are disclosure received from Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”), the successor indenture trustee and successor indenture administrator for the SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1 transaction, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“DBTCA”), the successor eligible lender trustee for the SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1 transaction:

Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“DBTCA”) and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”) have been sued by investors in civil litigation concerning their role as trustees of certain residential mortgage backed securities (“RMBS”) trusts.
 
3

On June 18, 2014, a group of investors, including funds managed by Blackrock Advisors, LLC, PIMCO-Advisors, L.P., and others, filed a derivative action against DBNTC and DBTCA in New York State Supreme Court purportedly on behalf of and for the benefit of 544 private-label RMBS trusts asserting claims for alleged violations of the U.S. Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (TIA), breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence based on DBNTC and DBTCA’s alleged failure to perform their duties as trustees for the trusts. Plaintiffs subsequently dismissed their state court complaint and filed a derivative and class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of and for the benefit of 564 private-label RMBS trusts, which substantially overlapped with the trusts at issue in the state court action. The complaint alleges that the trusts at issue have suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $89.4 billion, but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion to dismiss, and on January 19, 2016, the court partially granted the motion on procedural grounds: as to the 500 trusts that are governed by Pooling and Servicing Agreements, the court declined to exercise jurisdiction. The court did not rule on substantive defenses asserted in the motion to dismiss.  On March 22, 2016, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in federal court.  In the amended complaint, in connection with 62 trusts governed by indenture agreements, plaintiffs assert claims for breach of contract, violation of the TIA, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest.   The amended complaint alleges that the trusts at issue have suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $9.8 billion, but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain.  On July 15, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint.  On January 23, 2017, the court granted in part and denied in part DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss.  The court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to plaintiffs’ conflict-of-interest claim, thereby dismissing it, and denied the motion to dismiss with respect to plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim (except as noted below) and claim for violation of the TIA, thereby allowing those claims to proceed.  On January 26, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation and proposed order dismissing plaintiffs’ claim for breach of fiduciary duty.  On January 27, 2017, the court entered the parties’ joint stipulation and ordered that plaintiffs’ claim for breach of fiduciary duty be dismissed.  On February 3, 2017, following a hearing concerning DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss on February 2, 2017, the court issued a short form order dismissing (i) plaintiffs’ representation and warranty claims as to 21 trusts whose originators and/or sponsors had entered bankruptcy and the deadline for asserting claims against such originators and/or sponsors had passed as of 2009 and (ii) plaintiffs’ claims to the extent they were premised upon any alleged pre-Event of Default duty to terminate servicers.  On March 27, 2017, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the amended complaint.  On January 26, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification.  The motion is being briefed by the parties.  Discovery is ongoing.

On March 25, 2016, the BlackRock plaintiffs filed a state court action against DBTCA in the Superior Court of California, Orange County with respect to 513 trusts.  On May 18, 2016, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint with respect to 465 trusts, and included DBNTC as an additional defendant.  The amended complaint asserts three causes of action:  breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; and breach of the duty to avoid conflicts of interest.  Plaintiffs purport to bring the action on behalf of themselves and all other current owners of certificates in the 465 trusts.  The amended complaint alleges that the trusts at issue have suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $75.7 billion, but does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain.  On August 22, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a demurrer as to Plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary duty cause of action and breach of the duty to avoid conflicts of interest cause of action and motion to strike as to Plaintiffs’ breach of contract cause of action.  On October 18, 2016, the court granted DBNTC and DBTCA’s demurrer, providing Plaintiffs with thirty days’ leave to amend, and denied DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to strike.  Plaintiffs did not further amend their complaint and, on December 19, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the amended complaint.  On January 17, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification.  The motion is being briefed by the parties.  Discovery is ongoing.
 
On September 27, 2017, DBTCA was added as a defendant to a case brought by certain special purpose entities including Phoenix Light SF Limited in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which the plaintiffs previously alleged incorrectly that DBNTC served as trustee for all 43 of the trusts at issue.  On September 27, 2017, plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint that names DBTCA as a defendant in addition to DBNTC.  DBTCA serves as trustee for one of the 43 trusts at issue.  DBNTC serves as trustee for the other 42 trusts at issue.  Plaintiffs’ third amended complaint brings claims for violation of the TIA; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence and gross negligence; violation of the Streit Act; and breach of the covenant of good faith.  However, in the third amended complaint, plaintiffs acknowledge that, before DBTCA was added to the case, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ TIA Act claims, negligence and gross negligence claims, Streit Act claims, claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, and certain theories of plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims, and plaintiffs only include these claims to preserve any rights on appeal.  Plaintiffs allege damages of “hundreds of millions of dollars.”  On November 13, 2017, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the third amended complaint.  Discovery is ongoing.
 
4

On November 30, 2017, DBTCA was added as a defendant to a case brought by Commerzbank AG (“Commerzbank”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which Commerzbank previously alleged incorrectly that DBNTC served as trustee for all 50 of the trusts at issue.  On November 30, 2017, Commerzbank filed a second amended complaint that names DBTCA as a defendant in addition to DBNTC.  DBTCA serves as trustee for 1 of the 50 trusts at issue.  DBNTC serves as trustee for the other 49 trusts at issue.  Commerzbank’s second amended complaint brings claims for violation of the TIA; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence; violation of the Streit Act; and breach of the covenant of good faith.  However, in the second amended complaint, Commerzbank acknowledges that, before DBTCA was added to the case, the court dismissed Commerzbank’s TIA claims for the trusts governed by pooling and servicing agreements, as well as its Streit Act claims and claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, and Commerzbank only includes these claims to preserve any rights on appeal.  The second amended complaint alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA caused Commerzbank to suffer “hundreds of millions of dollars in losses,” but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain.  On January 29, 2018, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the second amended complaint.  Discovery is ongoing.

On December 30, 2015, IKB International, S.A. in Liquidation and IKB Deutsche Industriebank A.G. (collectively, “IKB”), as an investor in 37 RMBS trusts, filed a summons with notice in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, against DBNTC and DBTCA as trustees of the trusts.  On May 27, 2016, IKB served its complaint asserting claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest, violation of New York’s Streit Act, violation of the Trust Indenture Act, violation of Regulation AB, and violation of Section 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code.  IKB alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA are liable for over U.S. $268 million in damages.  On October 5, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA, together with several other trustees defending lawsuits by IKB, filed a joint motion to dismiss.  On January 6, 2017, IKB filed a notice of discontinuance, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to three trusts.  As of January 17, 2017, DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss has been briefed and is awaiting decision by the court.  On June 20, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to four additional trusts.  Certain limited discovery is permitted to go forward while the motion to dismiss is pending.
 
It is DBTCA’s and DBNTC’s belief that they have no pending legal proceedings (including, based on DBTCA’s and DBNTC’s present evaluation, the litigation disclosed in the immediately preceding six paragraphs) that would materially affect their ability to perform their duties as trustee under the indenture for this transaction.
 
5

PART II

The following Items have been omitted in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

Item 5.
Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Item 6.
Selected Financial Data.

Item 7.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

Item 7A.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Item 8.
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

Item 9.
Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

Item 9A.
Controls and Procedures.

Item 9B.
Other Information.

Nothing to report.

PART III

The following Items have been omitted in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

Item 10.
Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

Item 11.
Executive Compensation.

Item 12.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.

Item 13.
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.

Item 14.
Principal Accountant Fees and Services.

The following substitute information is provided in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

Item 1119 of Regulation AB. Affiliations and Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.

Information required by Item 1119 of Regulation AB has been omitted from this report on Form 10-K in reliance on the Instruction to Item 1119.

Item 1122 of Regulation AB. Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria.

The reports required by Item 1122(a) and (b) of, or relating to, all parties determined by the registrant to be participating in the servicing function with respect to the issuing entity are attached to this Form 10-K as Exhibits 33.1, 33.2, 34.1 and 34.2.

Item 1123 of Regulation AB. Servicer Compliance Statement.

The statements required by Item 1123 are attached to this Form 10-K as Exhibits 35.1 and 35.2.
 
6

PART IV

Item 15.
Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.

(a)
The following documents are filed as part of this report:

1.
Not applicable.

2.
Not applicable.

3.
See Item 15(b) below.

(b)
Exhibits Required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K.

Exhibit
Number
 
Description
     
 
     
 
     
 
Indenture, dated as of July 6, 2010, among SLC Student Loan Trust 2010-1 (the “Trust”), Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (as successor to Citibank, N.A.), as eligible lender trustee (the “Eligible Lender Trustee”), Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (as successor to Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (which itself was successor to Citibank, N.A.)) as indenture administrator (in such capacity, the “Indenture Administrator”), and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (as successor to Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (which itself was successor to U.S. Bank National Association)) as indenture trustee (in such capacity, the “Indenture Trustee”), incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of the Current Report on Form 8-K filed by the Trust on July 6, 2010 (File No. 333-164557-01).
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
 
7

 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
     
 
 

*
Filed herewith
 
8

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 
SLC STUDENT LOAN RECEIVABLES I, INC.
     
Dated: March 30, 2018
By:
/s/ Calvin C. Balliet
   
Name:
Calvin C. Balliet
   
Title:
Chairman of the Board
   
(senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
 
9

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION TO BE FURNISHED WITH REPORTS FILED PURSUANT TO SECTION 15(d) OF THE ACT BY REGISTRANTS WHICH HAVE NOT REGISTERED SECURITIES PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE ACT.

No annual report to security holders, proxy statement, form of proxy or other proxy soliciting material has been sent to security holders or is anticipated to be furnished to security holders subsequent to the filing of this annual report on Form 10-K.
 
 
10