94-3874. Cityfed Financial Corp.; Notice of Application  

  • [Federal Register Volume 59, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 22, 1994)]
    [Unknown Section]
    [Page 0]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 94-3874]
    
    
    [[Page Unknown]]
    
    [Federal Register: February 22, 1994]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    
    [Rel. No. IC-20074; 812-7613]
    
     
    
    Cityfed Financial Corp.; Notice of Application
    
    February 15, 1994.
    AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'').
    
    ACTION: Notice of Application for Exemption under the Investment 
    Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'').
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    APPLICANT: Cityfed Financial Corp. (``Cityfed'').
    
    RELEVANT ACT SECTIONS: Exemption requested under sections 6(c) and 6(e) 
    of the Act.
    
    SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicant requests an order that would exempt 
    it from all provisions of the Act, except sections 9, 17(a) (modified 
    as discussed herein), 17(d) (modified as discussed herein), 17(e), 
    17(f), 36 through 45, and 47 through 51 of the Act and the rules 
    thereunder. Applicant would be exempt until the earlier of one year 
    from the date of the requested order or such time as applicant would no 
    longer be required to register as an investment company.
    
    FILING DATE: The application was filed on October 19, 1990 and amended 
    on September 23, 1993 and January 18, 1994. Applicant has agreed to 
    file an additional amendment, the substance of which is incorporated 
    herein, during the notice period.
    
    HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An order granting the application 
    will be issued unless the SEC orders a hearing. Interested persons may 
    request a hearing by writing to the SEC's Secretary and serving 
    applicant with a copy of the request, personally or by mail. Hearing 
    requests should be received by the SEC by 5:30 p.m. on March 14, 1994, 
    and should be accompanied by proof of service on applicant, in the form 
    of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of service. Hearing 
    requests should state the nature of the writer's interest, the reason 
    for the request, and the issues contested. Persons who wish to be 
    notified of a hearing may request notification by writing to the SEC's 
    Secretary.
    
    ADDRESSES: Secretary, SEC, 450 Fifth Street, NW., Washington, DC 20549. 
    Applicant, 4 Young's Way, P.O. Box 3126, Nantucket, MA 02584.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Felice R. Foundos, Staff Attorney, at (202) 272-2190, or Robert A. 
    Robertson, Branch Chief, at (202) 272-3018 (Division of Investment 
    Management, Office of Investment Company Regulation).
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the 
    application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the 
    SEC's Public Reference Branch.
    
    Applicant's Representations
    
        1. Cityfed was a savings and loan holding company that conducted 
    its savings and loan operations through its wholly-owned subsidiary, 
    City Federal Savings Bank (``City Federal''). City Federal was the 
    source of substantially all of Cityfed's revenues and income. As a 
    result of substantial losses in its mortgage banking and real estate 
    operations, City Federal was unable to meet its regulatory capital 
    requirements. Accordingly, on December 7, 1989, the Office of Thrift 
    Supervision (the ``OTS'') placed City Federal into receivership and 
    appointed the Resolution Trust Corporation (the ``RTC'') as City 
    Federal's receiver. City Federal's deposits and substantially all of 
    its assets and liabilities were acquired by a newly created federal 
    mutual savings bank, City Savings Bank, F.S.B., whose deposits, assets, 
    and liabilities in turn were acquired by City Savings, F.S.B. (``City 
    Savings''). The OTS appointed the RTC as receiver of City Savings.
        2. Once City Federal was placed into receivership, Cityfed no 
    longer conducted savings and loan operations through any subsidiary and 
    substantially all of its assets consisted of cash that has been 
    invested in money market instruments with a maturity of one year or 
    less and money market mutual funds. On September 30, 1993, Cityfed held 
    cash and securities of approximately $9.7 million. Because of Cityfed's 
    asset composition, it may be an investment company under the Act. Rule 
    3a-2 under the Act provides a one-year safe harbor to issuers that meet 
    the definition of an investment company but intend to engage in a 
    business other than investing in securities. Because of various claims 
    against Cityfed and certain Cityfed officers and directors, Cityfed 
    could not acquire an operating company within the one year safe harbor. 
    The expiration of the safe harbor period necessitated the filing of an 
    application for exemption from all provisions of the Act, with certain 
    exceptions.
        3. While Cityfed's board of directors has considered from time to 
    time whether to engage in an operating business, the board has 
    determined not to engage in an operating business at the present time 
    because of the claims filed against Cityfed, whose liability thereunder 
    cannot be reasonably estimated and may exceed its assets.
        4. On December 7, 1992, the RTC filed suit against Cityfed and two 
    former officers of City Federal seeking damages of $12 million dollars 
    for failure to maintain the net worth of City Federal (the ``First RTC 
    Action''). In connection with this action, the RTC sought a court order 
    to place Cityfed's assets under the control of the court. On January 5, 
    1993, the RTC and Cityfed entered into an agreement (the ``Agreement'') 
    whereby the RTC would refrain from seeking the above order and Cityfed 
    could continue to make payments for ordinary and reasonable business 
    expenses and certain legal fees. Cityfed, however, must give a monthly 
    accounting of its expenditures to the RTC, and the RTC may apply to the 
    court for an appropriate order to prohibit an expenditure. In addition, 
    Cityfed must give the RTC written notice before paying extraordinary 
    expenses of more than $5,000 and before making certain payments for 
    defense costs, attorneys' fees and other legal disbursements.
        5. On September 30, 1993, the OTS staff advised Cityfed that it 
    intended to recommend that the OTS initiate an administrative 
    enforcement proceeding against Cityfed. Applicant represents that in 
    such a proceeding, the OTS will likely assert claims similar to the RTC 
    in the First RTC Action and may attempt to freeze Cityfed's assets. 
    Because such a proceeding may render moot the issues in the First RTC 
    Action, the court entered an order on October 15, 1993 to stay that 
    action for 60 days. The court subsequently ordered the stay extended to 
    January 28, 1994. The orders do not affect the Agreement, except to 
    provide that the Agreement will terminate upon the effective date of 
    any order issued by the OTS, or of any consent order or agreement 
    between the OTS and Cityfed, that addresses the subject matter of the 
    Agreement. As of the date of filing the last amendment to this 
    application, the OTS has not initiated any administrative enforcement 
    proceeding against Cityfed.
        6. In addition, the RTC filed suit against several former directors 
    and officers of City Federal alleging gross negligence and breach of 
    fiduciary duty with respect to certain loans (the ``Second RTC 
    Action''). The RTC seeks in excess of $200 million in damages. Under 
    Cityfed's bylaws, Cityfed may be obligated to indemnify these former 
    officers and directors and advance their legal expenses. Currently, 
    Cityfed is advancing reasonable defense costs to the former directors 
    and officers named in the First and Second RTC Actions. Furthermore, 
    Cityfed is currently aware of several other legal actions involving 
    former officers, directors, or employees of Cityfed who have requested 
    that Cityfed advance expenses and indemnify them. Cityfed generally has 
    agreed to advance expenses in connection with these requests. Cityfed 
    is unable to determine with any accuracy the extent of its liability 
    with respect to these indemnification claims, although the amount may 
    be material.
        7. Currently, Cityfed's stock is traded sporadically in the over-
    the-counter market. Cityfed has one employee who is president, chief 
    executive officer and treasurer. Cityfed's secretary does not receive 
    any compensation for her service. If Cityfed is unable to resolve the 
    above claims successfully, Cityfed may seek protection from the 
    bankruptcy courts or liquidate. Cityfed asserts that it probably will 
    not be in a position to determine what course of action to pursue until 
    most, if not all, of its contingent liabilities are resolved.
        8. During the term of the proposed exemption, Cityfed will comply 
    with sections 9, 17(a), 17(d), 17(e), 17(f), 36 through 45, and 47 
    through 51 of the Act and the rules thereunder, subject to the 
    following modifications. With respect to section 17(d), Cityfed 
    represents that it established a stock option plan when it was an 
    operating company. Although the plan has been terminated, certain 
    former employees of City Federal have existing rights under the plan. 
    Cityfed asserts that the plan may be deemed a joint enterprise or other 
    joint arrangement or profit-sharing plan within the meaning of section 
    17(d) and rule 17d-1 thereunder. Because the plan was adopted when 
    Cityfed was an operating company and to the extent there are existing 
    rights under the plan, Cityfed seeks an exemption to the extent 
    necessary from section 17(d). In addition, Cityfed may become subject 
    to the jurisdiction of a bankruptcy court. With respect to transactions 
    approved by the bankruptcy court, applicants request an exemption from 
    sections 17(a) and 17(d) as further described in condition 3 below.
    
    Applicant's Legal Analysis
    
        1. Section 3(a)(1) defines an investment company as any issuer of a 
    security who ``is or holds itself out as being engaged primarily * * * 
    in the business of investing, reinvesting or trading in securities.'' 
    Section 3(a)(3) further defines an investment company as an issuer who 
    is engaged in the business of investing in securities that have a value 
    in excess of 40% of the issuer's total assets (excluding government 
    securities and cash). Cityfed acknowledges that it may be deemed to 
    fall within one of the Act's definitions of an investment company. 
    Accordingly, applicant requests an exemption under sections 6(c) and 
    6(e) from all provisions of the Act, subject to certain exceptions.
        2. In determining whether to grant an exemption for a transient 
    investment company, the Commission considers such factors as whether 
    the failure of the company to become primarily engaged in a non-
    investment business or excepted business or liquidate within one year 
    was due to factors beyond its control; whether the company's officers 
    and employees during that period tried, in good faith, to effect the 
    company's investment of its assets in a non-investment business or 
    excepted business or to cause the liquidation of the company; and 
    whether the company invested in securities solely to preserve the value 
    of its assets. Cityfed asserts that it meets these criteria.
        3. Cityfed's failure to become primarily engaged in a non-
    investment business by the end of the one year safe harbor of rule 3a-2 
    is due to factors beyond its control. Because of outstanding and 
    potential claims against Cityfed and certain of its officers and 
    directors, Cityfed cannot acquire an operating company. Cityfed has 
    diligently pursued its claims against others and has taken steps to 
    determine the extent of its contingent liabilities. Since the filing of 
    this application on October 19, 1990, Cityfed has invested in money 
    market instruments and money market mutual funds solely to preserve the 
    value of its assets.
        4. Cityfed requests an order that would exempt it from all 
    provisions of the Act, subject to certain exemptions, until the earlier 
    of one year from the date of any order issued on this application or 
    such time as Cityfed would no longer be required to register as an 
    investment company under the Act.
    
    Applicant's Conditions
    
        Cityfed agrees that the requested exemption will be subject to the 
    following conditions, each of which will apply to Cityfed from the date 
    of the order until it no longer meets the definition of an investment 
    company or during the period of time it is exempt from registration 
    under the Act:
        1. Cityfed will not purchase or otherwise acquire any additional 
    securities other than securities that are rated investment grade or 
    higher by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, 
    if unrated, deemed to be of comparable quality under guidelines 
    approved by Cityfed's board of directors, subject to two exceptions:
        a. Cityfed may make an equity investment in issuers that are not 
    investment companies as defined in section 3(a) of the Act (including 
    issuers that are not investment companies because they are covered by a 
    specific exclusion from the definition of investment company under 
    section 3(c) of the Act other than section 3(c)(1)) in connection with 
    the possible acquisition of an operating business as evidenced by a 
    resolution approved by Cityfed's board of directors; and
        b. Cityfed may invest in one or more money market mutual funds that 
    limit their investments to ``Eligible Securities'' within the meaning 
    of rule 2a-7(a)(5) promulgated under the Act.
        2. Cityfed's Form 10-KSB, Form 10-QSB and annual reports to 
    shareholders will state that an exemptive order has been granted 
    pursuant to sections 6(c) and 6(e) of the Act and that Cityfed and 
    other persons, in their transactions and relations with Cityfed, are 
    subject to sections 9, 17(a), 17(d), 17(e), 17(f), 36 through 45, and 
    47 through 51 of the Act, and the rules thereunder, as if Cityfed were 
    a registered investment company, except insofar as permitted by the 
    order requested hereby.
        3. Notwithstanding sections 17(a) and 17(d) of the Act, an 
    affiliated person (as defined in section 2(a)(3) of the Act) of Cityfed 
    may engage in a transaction that otherwise would be prohibited by these 
    sections with Cityfed:
        (a) if such proposed transaction is first approved by a bankruptcy 
    court on the basis that (i) the terms thereof, including the 
    consideration to be paid or received, are reasonable and fair to 
    Cityfed, and (ii) the participation of Cityfed in the proposed 
    transaction will not be on a basis less advantageous to Cityfed than 
    that of other participants; and
        (b) in connection with each such transaction, Cityfed shall inform 
    the bankruptcy court of (i) the identity of all of its affiliated 
    persons who are parties to, or have a direct or indirect financial 
    interest in, the transaction; (ii) the nature of the affiliation; and 
    (iii) the financial interests of such persons in the transaction.
    
        For the SEC, by the Division of Investment Management, under 
    delegated authority.
    Margaret H. McFarland,
    Deputy Secretary.
    [FR Doc. 94-3874 Filed 2-18-94; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
02/22/1994
Department:
Securities and Exchange Commission
Entry Type:
Uncategorized Document
Action:
Notice of Application for Exemption under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ``Act'').
Document Number:
94-3874
Dates:
The application was filed on October 19, 1990 and amended on September 23, 1993 and January 18, 1994. Applicant has agreed to file an additional amendment, the substance of which is incorporated herein, during the notice period.
Pages:
0-0 (1 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Federal Register: February 22, 1994, Rel. No. IC-20074, 812-7613