15.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Commitments

At December 31, 2017 and 2016, the Bank had commitments to extend credit of approximately $924.5 million and $844.3 million, respectively, and obligations under letters of credit of $37.6 million and $36.5 million, respectively. Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to customers, provided there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. Commitments are generally variable rate, and many of these commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon. As such, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements. The Bank uses the same credit underwriting policies in granting or accepting such commitments or contingent obligations as it does for on-balance-sheet instruments, which consist of evaluating customers’ creditworthiness individually. The Bank had a reserve for unfunded loan commitments of $6.3 million as of December 31, 2017 and $6.7 million as of December 31, 2016 included in other liabilities.

Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Bank to guarantee the financial performance of a customer to a third party. Those guarantees are primarily issued to support private borrowing or purchase arrangements. The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loan facilities to customers. When deemed necessary, the Bank holds appropriate collateral supporting those commitments. Management does not anticipate any material losses as a result of these transactions.

At December 31, 2017, the Bank has available lines of credit totaling $3.35 billion from correspondent banks, FHLB and Federal Reserve Bank of which $3.02 billion were secured.

Other Contingencies

The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to various lawsuits and threatened lawsuits in the ordinary and non-ordinary course of business. From time to time, such lawsuits and threatened lawsuits may include, but are not limited to, actions involving employment, wage-hour and labor law claims, consumer, lender liability claims and negligence claims, some of which may be styled as “class action” or representative cases. Some of these lawsuits may be similar in nature to other lawsuits pending against the Company’s competitors.

The Company has been involved in several related actions entitled Glenda Morgan v. Citizens Business Bank, et al., Case No. BC568004, in the Superior Court for Los Angeles County, and Jessica Osuna v. Citizens Business Bank, et al., Case No. CIVDS1501781, in the Superior Court for San Bernardino County, alleging wage and hour claims on behalf of the Company’s “exempt” and “non-exempt” hourly employees. These cases, which were consolidated in Los Angeles County Superior Court in April 2015, are styled as putative class action lawsuits and allege, among other things, that (i) the Company misclassified certain employees and managers as “exempt” employees, (ii) the Company violated California’s wage and hour, overtime, meal break and rest break rules and regulations, (iii) certain employees did not receive proper expense reimbursements, (iv) the Company did not maintain accurate and complete payroll records, and (v) the Company engaged in unfair business practices. Subsequently, related cases were filed by the same law firm representing Morgan and Osuna in the Superior Court for San Bernardino County, alleging (1) violations of the California Labor Code and seeking penalties under the California Private Attorney General Act of 2004 and (2) seeking a declaratory judgment that certain releases and arbitration agreements previously signed by CBB employees were invalid.

On November 28, 2016, the parties reached an agreement in principle to settle all of the related wage and hour class action lawsuits (“Wage-Hour Settlement”). Plaintiffs will dismiss all their lawsuits with prejudice in exchange for the payment of $1.5 million to the putative class members, including attorneys’ fees and costs, but not including credit for monies previously paid to certain employees in exchange for releases and arbitration agreements. The Wage-Hour Settlement received preliminary Court approval at a hearing on September 28, 2017, and the hearing for final Court approval is presently scheduled to take place on March 6, 2018. In the interim, a settlement administrator is handling certain administrative matters related to the settlement, including notification to eligible class members, the filing of claims and any objections, and the reconciliation of amounts to be paid to individual claimants. We anticipate that the Wage-Hour Settlement will be finally concluded sometime in the second or third quarter of 2018. As of December 31, 2017, the Company maintained a litigation accrual of $1.5 million for the Wage-Hour Settlement, and at this time no further accrual is expected to be necessary.

For lawsuits where the Company has determined that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable, a liability representing the best estimate of the Company’s financial exposure based on known facts has been recorded in accordance with FASB guidance over loss contingencies (ASC 450). However, as a result of ambiguities and inconsistencies in the myriad laws applicable to the Company’s business, and the unique, complex factual issues presented in any given lawsuit, the Company often cannot determine the probability of loss or estimate the amount of damages which a plaintiff might successfully prove if the Company were found to be liable. For lawsuits or threatened lawsuits where a claim has been asserted or the Company has determined that it is probable that a claim will be asserted, and there is a reasonable possibility that the outcome will be unfavorable, the Company will disclose the existence of the loss contingency, even if the Company is not able to make an estimate of the possible loss or range of possible loss with respect to the action or potential action in question, unless the Company believes that the nature, potential magnitude or potential timing (if known) of the loss contingency is not reasonably likely to be material to the Company’s liquidity, consolidated financial position, and/or results of operations.

Our accruals and disclosures for loss contingencies are reviewed quarterly and adjusted as additional information becomes available. We disclose the loss contingency and/or the amount accrued if we believe it is reasonably likely to be material or if we believe such disclosure is necessary for our financial statements to not be misleading. If we determine that an exposure to loss exists in excess of an amount previously accrued or disclosed, we assess whether there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss, or additional loss, may have been incurred, and we adjust our accruals and disclosures accordingly.