Commitments, Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements, and Legal Proceedings

The Corporation utilizes a variety of financial instruments in the normal course of business to meet the financial needs of its customers and to manage its own exposure to fluctuations in interest rates. These financial instruments include lending-related and other commitments (see below) as well as derivative instruments (see Note 10). The following is a summary of lending-related commitments.



	September 30, 2016		December 31, 2015
	($ in Thousands)
Commitments to extend credit, excluding commitments to originate residential mortgage loans held for sale(1)(2)	$	7,849,498	$	7,402,518
Commercial letters of credit(1)	8,935		9,945
Standby letters of credit(3)	265,381		296,508


1)	These off-balance sheet financial instruments are exercisable at the market rate prevailing at the date the underlying transaction will be completed and, thus, are deemed to have no current fair value, or the fair value is based on fees currently charged to enter into similar agreements and is not material at September 30, 2016 or December 31, 2015.


2)	Interest rate lock commitments to originate residential mortgage loans held for sale are considered derivative instruments and are disclosed in Note 10.


3)	The Corporation has established a liability of $3 million at both September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, as an estimate of the fair value of these financial instruments.

Lending-related Commitments

As a financial services provider, the Corporation routinely enters into commitments to extend credit. Such commitments are subject to the same credit policies and approval process accorded to loans made by the Corporation, with each customer’s creditworthiness evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require the payment of a fee. The Corporation’s exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to these financial instruments is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. The amount of collateral obtained, if deemed necessary by the Corporation upon extension of credit, is based on management’s credit evaluation of the customer. Since a significant portion of commitments to extend credit are subject to specific restrictive loan covenants or may expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash flow requirements. An allowance for unfunded commitments is maintained at a level believed by management to be sufficient to absorb estimated probable losses related to unfunded commitments (including unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit). The allowance for unfunded commitments increased to $28 million at September 30, 2016 compared to $24 million at December 31, 2015, and is included in accrued expenses and other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.

Lending-related commitments include commitments to extend credit, commitments to originate residential mortgage loans held for sale, commercial letters of credit, and standby letters of credit. Commitments to extend credit are legally binding agreements to lend to customers at predetermined interest rates, as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contracts. Interest rate lock commitments to originate residential mortgage loans held for sale and forward commitments to sell residential mortgage loans are considered derivative instruments, and the fair value of these commitments is recorded on the consolidated balance sheets. The Corporation’s derivative and hedging activity is further described in Note 10. Commercial and standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party. Commercial letters of credit are issued specifically to facilitate commerce and typically result in the commitment being drawn on when the underlying transaction is consummated between the customer and the third party, while standby letters of credit generally are contingent upon the failure of the customer to perform according to the terms of the underlying contract with the third party.

Other Commitments

The Corporation has principal investment commitments to provide capital-based financing to private and public companies through either direct investments in specific companies or through investment funds and partnerships. The timing of future cash requirements to fund such commitments is generally dependent on the investment cycle, whereby privately held companies are funded by private equity investors and ultimately sold, merged, or taken public through an initial offering, which can vary based on overall market conditions, as well as the nature and type of industry in which the companies operate. The Corporation also invests in unconsolidated projects including low-income housing, new market tax credit projects, and historic tax credit projects to promote the revitalization of primarily low-to-moderate-income neighborhoods throughout the local communities of its bank subsidiary. As a limited partner in these unconsolidated projects, the Corporation is allocated tax credits and deductions associated with the underlying projects. The aggregate carrying value of these investments at September 30, 2016, was $68 million, compared to $52 million at December 31, 2015, and is included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets. Related to these investments, the Corporation had remaining commitments to fund of $54 million at September 30, 2016, and $61 million at December 31, 2015.

Legal Proceedings

The Corporation is party to various pending and threatened claims and legal proceedings arising in the normal course of business activities, some of which involve claims for substantial amounts. Although there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcomes, the Corporation believes it has meritorious defenses to the claims asserted against it in its currently outstanding matters, including the matters described below, and with respect to such legal proceedings, intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. The Corporation will consider settlement of cases when, in management’s judgment, it is in the best interests of both the Corporation and its shareholders.

On at least a quarterly basis, the Corporation assesses its liabilities and contingencies in connection with all pending or threatened claims and litigation, utilizing the most recent information available. On a matter by matter basis, an accrual for loss is established for those matters which the Corporation believes it is probable that a loss may be incurred and that the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. Once established, each accrual is adjusted as appropriate to reflect any subsequent developments. Accordingly, management’s estimate will change from time to time, and actual losses may be more or less than the current estimate. For matters where a loss is not probable, or the amount of the loss cannot be estimated, no accrual is established.

Resolution of legal claims is inherently unpredictable, and in many legal proceedings various factors exacerbate this inherent unpredictability, including where the damages sought are unsubstantiated or indeterminate, it is unclear whether a case brought as a class action will be allowed to proceed on that basis, discovery is not complete, the proceeding is not yet in its final stages, the matters present legal uncertainties, there are significant facts in dispute, there are a large number of parties (including where it is uncertain how liability, if any, will be shared among multiple defendants), or there is a wide range of potential results.

A lawsuit, R.J. ZAYED v. Associated Bank, N.A., was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on January 29, 2013. The lawsuit relates to a Ponzi scheme perpetrated by Oxford Global Partners and related entities (“Oxford”) and individuals and was brought by the receiver for Oxford. Oxford was a depository customer of Associated Bank (the "Bank"). The lawsuit claims that the Bank is liable for failing to uncover the Oxford Ponzi scheme, and specifically alleges the Bank aided and abetted (1) the fraudulent scheme; (2) a breach of fiduciary duty; (3) conversion; and (4) false representations and omissions. The lawsuit seeks unspecified consequential and punitive damages. The District Court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss the complaint on September 30, 2013. On March 2, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit reversed the District Court and remanded the case back to the District Court for further proceedings. It is not possible for management to assess the probability of a material adverse outcome or reasonably estimate the amount of any potential loss at this time. A lawsuit by investors in the same Ponzi scheme, Herman Grad, et al v. Associated Bank, N.A., brought in Brown County, Wisconsin in October 2009 was dismissed by the circuit court, and the dismissal was affirmed by the Wisconsin Court of Appeals in June 2011 in an unpublished opinion.

On May 22, 2015, the Bank entered into a Conciliation Agreement ("Conciliation Agreement") with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") which resolved the HUD investigation into the Bank's lending practices during the years 2008-2010. The Bank's commitments under the Conciliation Agreement are spread over a three-year period and include commitments to do the following in minority communities: make mortgage loans of approximately $196 million; open one branch and four loan production offices; establish special financing programs; make affordable home repair grants; engage in affirmative marketing outreach; provide financial education programs; and make grants to support community reinvestment training and education. The cost of these commitments will be spread over four calendar years and is not expected to have a material impact on the Corporation's financial condition or results of operation.

A variety of consumer products, including legacy debt protection and identity protection products provided by third parties, and mortgage and deposit products, and certain fees and charges related to such products, have come under increased regulatory scrutiny. It is possible that regulatory authorities could bring enforcement actions, including civil money penalties, or take other actions against the Corporation and the Bank in regard to these consumer products. The Bank could also determine of its own accord, or be required by regulators, to refund or otherwise make remediation payments to customers in connection with these products. It is not possible at this time for management to assess the probability of a material adverse outcome or reasonably estimate the amount of any potential loss related to such matters.

Two complaints were filed against the Bank on January 11, 2016 in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division in connection with the In re: World Marketing Chicago, LLC, et al Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding. In the first complaint, The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of World Marketing Chicago, LLC, et al v. Associated Bank, N.A., the plaintiff seeks to avoid guarantees and pledges of collateral given by the debtors to secure a revolving financing commitment of $6 million to the debtors’ parent company from the Bank. The plaintiff alleges a variety of legal theories under federal and state law, including fraudulent conveyance, preferential transfer and conversion, in support of its position. The plaintiff seeks return of approximately $4 million paid to the Bank and the avoidance of the security interest in the collateral securing the remaining indebtedness to the Bank. The Bank intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit. In the second complaint, American Funds Service Company v. Associated Bank, N.A., the plaintiff alleges that approximately $600,000 of funds it had advanced to the World Marketing entities to apply towards future postage fees was swept by the Bank from World Marketing’s bank accounts. Plaintiff seeks the return of such funds from the Bank under several theories, including Sec. 541(d) of the Bankruptcy Code, the creation of a resulting trust, and unjust enrichment. The Bank intends to vigorously defend this lawsuit. It is not possible for management to assess the probability of a material adverse outcome or reasonably estimate the amount of any potential loss at this time with respect to these two lawsuits.

Mortgage Repurchase Reserve

The Corporation sells residential mortgage loans to investors in the normal course of business. Residential mortgage loans sold to others are predominantly conventional residential first lien mortgages originated under our usual underwriting procedures, and are most often sold on a nonrecourse basis, primarily to the GSEs. The Corporation’s agreements to sell residential mortgage loans in the normal course of business usually require certain representations and warranties on the underlying loans sold, related to credit information, loan documentation, collateral, and insurability. Subsequent to being sold, if a material underwriting deficiency or documentation defect is discovered, the Corporation may be obligated to repurchase the loan or reimburse the GSEs for losses incurred (collectively, “make whole requests”). The make whole requests and any related risk of loss under the representations and warranties are largely driven by borrower performance.

As a result of make whole requests, the Corporation has repurchased loans with principal balances of approximately $2 million and $3 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and the year ended December 31, 2015, respectively. The loss reimbursement and settlement claims paid for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and the year ended December 31, 2015, respectively, were negligible. Make whole requests during 2015 and the first nine months of 2016 generally arose from loans sold during the period of January 1, 2012 to September 30, 2016, which totaled $8.8 billion at the time of sale, and consisted primarily of loans sold to GSEs. As of September 30, 2016, approximately $6.0 billion of these sold loans remain outstanding.

The balance in the mortgage repurchase reserve at the balance sheet date reflects the estimated amount of potential loss the Corporation could incur from repurchasing a loan, as well as loss reimbursements, indemnifications, and other settlement resolutions. The following summarizes the changes in the mortgage repurchase reserve.



	Nine Months Ended September 30, 2016			Year Ended December 31, 2015
	($ in Thousands)
Balance at beginning of period	$	1,197		$	3,258
Repurchase provision expense	342			428
Adjustments to provision expense	—			(2,450		)
Charge offs, net	(5		)	(39		)
Balance at end of period	$	1,534		$	1,197

The Corporation may also sell residential mortgage loans with limited recourse (limited in that the recourse period ends prior to the loan’s maturity, usually after certain time and / or loan paydown criteria have been met), whereby repurchase could be required if the loan had defined delinquency issues during the limited recourse periods. At September 30, 2016, and December 31, 2015, there were approximately $48 million and $68 million, respectively, of residential mortgage loans sold with such recourse risk. There have been limited instances and immaterial historical losses on repurchases for recourse under the limited recourse criteria.

The Corporation has a subordinate position to the FHLB in the credit risk on residential mortgage loans it sold to the FHLB in exchange for a monthly credit enhancement fee. The Corporation has not sold loans to the FHLB with such credit risk retention since February 2005. At September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, there were $104 million and $132 million, respectively, of such residential mortgage loans with credit risk recourse, upon which there have been negligible historical losses to the Corporation.