XML 33 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.7.0.1

Note 9: Reinsurance, Commitments and Contingencies | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2016
Notes |
Note 9: Reinsurance, Commitments and Contingencies | 9) Reinsurance, Commitments and Contingencies Reinsurance The Company follows the procedure of reinsuring risks in excess of a specified limit, which ranged from $25,000 to $100,000 during the years 2016 and 2015. The Company is liable for these amounts in the event such reinsurers are unable to pay their portion of the claims. The Company has also assumed insurance from other companies having insurance in force amounting to approximately $110,000 (unaudited) and approximately $1,468,935,000 (unaudited) at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The Company terminated its participation in Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance in 2016 causing this assumed insurance in force amount to decrease. Reinsurance Agreement with North America Life Insurance Company On May 8, 2015, the Company, through its wholly owned subsidiary, Security National Life, signed a paid-up business offer under a coinsurance agreement that was effective December 1, 2010 to reinsure certain life insurance policies from North America Life Insurance Company (“North America Life”). Pursuant to the paid-up business offer, North America Life ceded and transferred to Security National Life all contractual obligations and risks under the coinsured policies. Security National Life paid a ceding commission to North America Life in the amount of $281,908. As a result of the ceding commission, North America Life transferred $8,900,282 of cash and $9,182,190 in statutory reserves, or liabilities, to Security National Life. Reinsurance Agreement with American Republic Insurance Company On February 11, 2015, the Company, through its wholly owned subsidiary, Security National Life, signed a coinsurance agreement to reinsure certain life insurance policies from American Republic Insurance Company (“American Republic”). The policies were previously reinsured by North America Life under a coinsurance agreement between World Insurance Company (“World Insurance”) and North America Life that was entered into on July 22, 2009, which was subsequently commuted. World Insurance was subsequently purchased by and merged into American Republic. The current coinsurance agreement is now between Security National Life and American Republic and became effective on January 1, 2015. As part of the coinsurance agreement, American Republic transferred all contractual obligations and risks to Security National Life and Security National Life took control of $15,004,771 of assets in a trust account held by Texas Capital Bank as the trustee. The assets have subsequently been moved to a trust account held by Zions Bank as the trustee. Mortgage Loan Loss Settlements Future loan losses can be extremely difficult to estimate. However, management believes that the Company’s reserve methodology and its current practice of property preservation allow it to estimate potential losses on loans sold. The amounts expensed for loan losses in years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 were $4,689,000 and $6,295,000, respectively. The estimated liability for indemnification losses is included in other liabilities and accrued expenses and, as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, the balances were $628,000 and $2,806,000, respectively. Settlement of Investigation by U.S. Department of Justice and the Office of the Inspector General for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of Certain FHA-Insured Mortgage Loans Originated On September 30, 2016, the Company, through its wholly owned subsidiary, SecurityNational Mortgage, announced the execution of a settlement agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice and the United States Attorney's Office in connection with the origination and underwriting by SecurityNational Mortgage of certain Federal Housing Administration (FHA) insured loans. SecurityNational Mortgage, like many other high volume FHA-approved lenders, was being reviewed by the U.S. Department of Justice and the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for loan origination activities that occurred as long as nine years ago. Without any admission of liability and in order to avoid the extended distractions and expenses associated with protracted litigation, SecurityNational Mortgage made a business decision to resolve this matter. Pursuant to the settlement agreement, SecurityNational Mortgage was required to make a payment in the amount of $4,250,000 to the U.S. Department of Justice, which payment was made on October 4, 2016. SecurityNational Mortgage continues to be able to originate FHA-insured mortgage loans and participate fully in all FHA programs as this settlement agreement does not affect SecurityNational Mortgage's status with the Department of Housing and Urban Development. In addition, this settlement does not include any allegations or findings against any particular individuals, such as officers, directors, employees or agents of SecurityNational Mortgage. Mortgage Loan Loss Litigation Lehman Brothers and Aurora Loan Services Litigation - Utah On April 15, 2005, SecurityNational Mortgage entered into a Loan Purchase Agreement with Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB (“Lehman Bank”) which agreement incorporated a Seller's Guide. Pursuant to the Loan Purchase Agreement, Lehman Bank purchased mortgage loans from time to time from SecurityNational Mortgage. Lehman Bank asserted that certain of the mortgage loans that it purchased from SecurityNational Mortgage contained alleged misrepresentations and early payment defaults. As a result, Lehman Bank contended it had the right to require SecurityNational Mortgage to repurchase certain loans or be liable for losses related to such Loans under the Loan Purchase Agreement. SecurityNational Mortgage disagreed with these claims. On December 17, 2007, SecurityNational Mortgage entered into an Indemnification Agreement with Lehman Bank and Aurora Loan Services LLC (“Aurora”). Under the terms of the Indemnification Agreement, SecurityNational Mortgage agreed to indemnify Lehman Bank and Aurora for certain amounts of actual losses, as defined, that Lehman Bank and Aurora may incur on account of the alleged breaches and early payment defaults pertaining to certain identified loans. A reserve account was set up to cover said losses. From the time the reserve account was established, approximately $4,300,000 was taken from the reserve account to indemnify Lehman Bank and Aurora for alleged losses. On March 28, 2011, Aurora Bank FSB (formerly known as Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB) (“Aurora Bank”) and Aurora allegedly assigned certain rights and remedies under the Indemnification Agreement to Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. ("Lehman Holdings"). On May 11, 2011, SecurityNational Mortgage filed a complaint against Aurora Bank and Aurora in the United States District Court, Utah, which was assigned to Judge David Nuffer. The allegations in the complaint included breach of the Indemnification Agreement. SecurityNational Mortgage claimed it was entitled to a judgment of approximately $4,000,000 against Aurora Bank, as well as Aurora to the extent of its involvement, for payments which should not have been taken from the reserve account. On June 8, 2011, Lehman Holdings, which had filed for bankruptcy in September 2008, filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Utah against SecurityNational Mortgage. The case was assigned to Judge Ted Stewart. The complaint alleged claims for damages for breach of contract and breach of warranty pursuant to the Loan Purchase Agreement, as well as alleged early payment default loans, and initially claimed damages in excess of $5,000,000. Lehman Holdings further alleged that Aurora Bank sold mortgage loans to it and assigned contractual rights and remedies. SecurityNational Mortgage strongly disagreed with the claims in Lehman Holdings’ complaint. On November 29, 2016, Judge Nuffer entered a judgment in favor of SecurityNational Mortgage Company, jointly and severally against Aurora Commercial Corporation (successor by merger to Aurora Bank), Aurora Bank and Aurora. The amount of the judgment was $3,892,974 principal, plus interest through May 31, 2014 in the amount of $1,674,240, plus interest for each day after May 31, 2014 until judgment (dated November 29, 2016) at the rate of $960 per diem. In December 2016, the cases before Judge Nuffer and Judge Stewart were settled. Final settlement agreements were executed on December 20, 2016, which were effective as of December 9, 2016. Under the terms of the settlement, payments were made by Aurora Commercial to SecurityNational Mortgage, and by SecurityNational Mortgage to Lehman Holdings. The net result of the settlement involving both of the Utah cases was that $2,125,000 more was paid to Lehman Holdings. Additionally, the release agreed to by the parties covered claims arising from the sale of mortgage loans by SecurityNational Mortgage to Aurora Bank or Lehman Holdings that were included in the Utah cases. Lehman Brothers Litigation – Delaware and New York In January 2014, Lehman Holdings entered into a settlement with the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) concerning the mortgage loan claims asserted by Fannie Mae against Lehman Holdings that were based on alleged breaches of certain representations and warranties by Lehman Holdings. Lehman Holdings had acquired these loans from Aurora Bank, which in turn purchased the loans from residential mortgage loan originators, including SecurityNational Mortgage. A settlement based on similar circumstances was entered into between Lehman Holdings and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) in February 2014. Lehman Holdings filed a motion in May 2014 with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York to require the mortgage loan originators, including SecurityNational Mortgage, to engage in non-binding mediations of its alleged indemnification claims against the mortgage loan originators relative to the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac settlements with Lehman Holdings. The mediation was not successful in resolving any issues between SecurityNational Mortgage and Lehman Holdings. On January 26, 2016, SecurityNational Mortgage filed a declaratory judgment action against Lehman Holdings in the Superior Court for the State of Delaware. In the Delaware action, SecurityNational Mortgage asserted its right to obtain a declaration of rights in that there are allegedly millions of dollars in dispute with Lehman Holdings pertaining to approximately 136 loans. SecurityNational Mortgage sought declaratory judgment as to its rights as it contends that it has no liability to Lehman Holdings as a result of Lehman Holdings’ settlements with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Lehman Holdings filed a motion in the Delaware court seeking to stay or dismiss the declaratory judgment action. On August 24, 2016, the Court ruled that it would exercise its discretion to decline jurisdiction over the action and granted Lehman Holdings’ motion to dismiss. On February 3, 2016, Lehman Holdings filed an adversary proceeding against approximately 150 mortgage loan originators, including SecurityNational Mortgage, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of New York seeking a declaration of rights similar in nature to the declaration that SecurityNational Mortgage sought in its Delaware lawsuit, and for damages relating to the defendants’ obligations under indemnification provisions of the alleged agreements, in amounts to be determined at trial, including interest, attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Lehman Holdings in enforcing the obligations of the defendants. A Case Management Order (“CMO”) was entered on November 1, 2016. On December 27, 2016, pursuant to the CMO, Lehman Holdings filed a Second Amended Complaint against SecurityNational Mortgage. The case is presently in a motion period and no Answer is required to be filed by SecurityNational Mortgage pending further order of the Court. SecurityNational Mortgage denies that it has any liability to Lehman Holdings and intends to vigorously protect and defend such position. Non-Cancelable Leases The Company leases office space and equipment under various non-cancelable agreements, with remaining terms up to five years. Minimum lease payments under these non-cancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2016, are approximately as follows:
Years Ending |
December 31 |
2017 | $ 6,556,093
2018 | 4,121,399
2019 | 2,583,941
2020 | 1,151,873
2021 | 496,713
Total | $ 14,910,019
Total rent expense related to non-cancelable operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, and 2014 was approximately $7,879,000, $7,199,000 and $5,589,000, respectively. Other Contingencies and Commitments The Company has entered into commitments to fund construction and land development loans and has also provided financing for land acquisition and development. As of December 31, 2016, the Company’s commitments were approximately $56,422,000, for these loans of which $40,800,000 had been funded. The Company will advance funds once the work has been completed and an independent inspection is made. The maximum loan commitment ranges between 50% and 80% of appraised value. The Company receives fees and interest for these loans and the interest rate is generally fixed 5.50% to 8.00% per annum. Maturities range between six and eighteen months. The Company belongs to a captive insurance group for certain casualty insurance, worker compensation and liability programs. Insurance reserves are maintained relative to these programs. The level of exposure from catastrophic events is limited by the purchase of stop-loss and aggregate liability reinsurance coverage. When estimating the insurance liabilities and related reserves, the captive insurance management considers a number of factors, which include historical claims experience, demographic factors, severity factors and valuations provided by independent third-party actuaries. If actual claims or adverse development of loss reserves occurs and exceed these estimates, additional reserves may be required. The estimation process contains uncertainty since captive insurance management must use judgment to estimate the ultimate cost that will be incurred to settle reported claims and unreported claims for incidents incurred but not reported as of the balance sheet date. At December 31, 2016, $416,576 of reserves was established related to such insurance programs versus $834,855 at December 31, 2015. The Company is a defendant in various other legal actions arising from the normal conduct of business. Management believes that none of the actions will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. Based on management’s assessment and legal counsel’s representations concerning the likelihood of unfavorable outcomes, no amounts have been accrued for the above claims in the consolidated financial statements. The Company is not a party to any other material legal proceedings outside the ordinary course of business or to any other legal proceedings, which, if adversely determined, would have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations.

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_DisclosureTextBlockAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration