XML 61 R28.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
Lease Commitments, Rent Expense, and Contingent Liabilities
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2012
Lease Commitments, Rent Expense, and Contingent Liabilities  
Lease Commitments, Rent Expense, and Contingent Liabilities

 

 

21.  Lease Commitments, Rent Expense, and Contingent Liabilities

 

LEASE COMMITMENTS AND RENT EXPENSE

 

Annual rental commitments for leased office space, automobiles and data processing equipment accounted for as operating leases, excluding leases on a month-to-month basis and the amortization of the lease intangibles recorded as a result of the FCFI Transaction, were as follows:

 

 

 

Lease

 

(dollars in thousands)

 

Commitments*

 

 

 

 

 

First quarter 2013

 

   $

5,326

 

Second quarter 2013

 

7,364

 

Third quarter 2013

 

6,892

 

Fourth quarter 2013

 

6,427

 

2013

 

26,009

 

2014

 

21,393

 

2015

 

13,814

 

2016

 

8,261

 

2017

 

4,141

 

2018+

 

2,168

 

Total

 

   $

75,786

 

 

 

*            Includes $2.4 million of rental commitments for leased office space at closed locations (included in other liabilities at December 31, 2012).

 

In addition to rent, we pay taxes, insurance, and maintenance expenses under certain leases. In the normal course of business, we will renew leases that expire or replace them with leases on other properties. Rental expense totaled $36.3 million in 2012, $37.9 million in 2011, $3.6 million for the one month ended December 31, 2010, and $41.3 million for the eleven months ended November 30, 2010. We anticipate minimum annual rental commitments in 2013 to be less than the amount of rental expense incurred in 2012 primarily due to branch office closings in 2012.

 

LEGAL CONTINGENCIES

 

In the normal course of business, the Company has been named, from time to time, as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation arising in connection with its activities. Some of the actual or threatened legal actions include claims for substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages or claims for indeterminate amounts of damages. While we will continue to identify certain legal actions where we believe a material loss to be reasonably possible and reasonably estimable, there can be no assurance that material losses will not be incurred from claims that we have not yet been notified of or are not yet determined to be probable or reasonably possible.

 

We contest liability and/or the amount of damages, as appropriate, in each pending matter. Where available information indicates that it is probable that a liability had been incurred at the date of the consolidated financial statements and we can reasonably estimate the amount of that loss, we accrue the estimated loss by a charge to income. In many actions, however, it is inherently difficult to determine whether any loss is probable or even reasonably possible or to estimate the amount of any loss. In addition, even where loss is reasonably possible or an exposure to loss exists in excess of the liability already accrued with respect to a previously recognized loss contingency, it is not always possible to reasonably estimate the size of the possible loss or range of loss.

 

For certain legal actions, we cannot reasonably estimate such losses, particularly for actions that are in their early stages of development or where plaintiffs seek substantial or indeterminate damages. Numerous issues may need to be resolved, including through potentially lengthy discovery and determination of important factual matters, and by addressing novel or unsettled legal questions relevant to the actions in question, before a loss or additional loss or range of loss or additional loss can be reasonably estimated for any given action.

 

For certain other legal actions, we can estimate reasonably possible losses, additional losses, ranges of loss or ranges of additional loss in excess of amounts accrued, but do not believe, based on current knowledge and after consultation with counsel, that such losses will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial statements as a whole.

 

King v. American General Finance, Inc., Case No. 96-CP-38-595, in the Court of Common Pleas for Orangeburg County, South Carolina. In this lawsuit, filed in 1996, the plaintiffs asserted class claims against our South Carolina operating entity for alleged violations of S.C. Code § 37-10-102(a), which requires, among other things, a lender making a mortgage loan to ascertain the preference of the borrower as to an attorney who will represent the borrower in closing the loan. After almost 17 years of litigation, on August 27, 2012, the parties settled the case on a claims made basis. Preliminary approval of the settlement was obtained on September 6, 2012 and final approval was obtained on November 19, 2012. At December 31, 2012, the remaining reserve for this class action lawsuit totaled $3.5 million. Funds were distributed beginning in late December 2012. Class members who made a claim and had one loan in the class period received $5,000; those with two loans, $5,750; those with three loans, $6,500; those with four loans, $7,250; and those with five or more loans, $8,000. Aggregate payments to these class members totaled $16.8 million in 2012. In addition, we paid $13.5 million in attorney fees and costs in December 2012 and $3.5 million of unclaimed funds to South Carolina charities in February 2013.

 

PAYMENT PROTECTION INSURANCE

 

Ocean provides payments of compensation to its customers who have made claims concerning Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) policies sold in the normal course of business by insurance intermediaries. On April 20, 2011, the High Court in the United Kingdom handed down judgment supporting the Financial Services Authority (FSA) guidelines on the treatment of PPI complaints. In addition, the FSA issued a guidance consultation paper in March 2012 on the payment protection insurance customer contact letters. As a result, we have concluded that there are certain circumstances where customer contact and/or redress is appropriate. The total reserves related to the estimated PPI claims were $62.7 million at December 31, 2012 and $13.5 million (net of professional indemnity insurance receivable) at December 31, 2011. In 2012, our professional indemnity insurance claim was disputed, and in the fourth quarter of 2012, we reversed this claim based upon our assessment that the probability of the recovery of the claim no longer met the probability standard for recognition.