Form ABS-15G Santander UK plc For: Apr 20
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM ABS-15G
ASSET-BACKED SECURITIZER
REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 15G OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Santander UK plc
(Exact name of securitizer as specified in its charter)
Check the appropriate box to indicate the filing obligation to which this form is intended to satisfy:
☐ Rule 15Ga-1 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.15Ga-1) for the reporting period
to
Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported)
Commission File Number of securitizer:
Central Index Key Number of securitizer:
Name and telephone number, including area code, of the person to contact in connection with this filing.
Indicate by check mark whether the securitizer has no activity to report for the initial period pursuant to Rule 15Ga-1(c)(1) ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the securitizer has no activity to report for the quarterly period pursuant to Rule 15Ga-1(c)(2)(i) ☐
Indicate by check mark whether the securitizer has no activity to report for the annual period pursuant to Rule 15Ga-1(c)(2)(ii) ☐
☒ Rule 15Ga-2 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.15Ga-2)
Central Index Key Number of depositor: 0001087711
Holmes Master Issuer PLC
(Exact name of issuing entity as specified in its charter)
Central Index Key Number of issuing entity (if applicable): 0001394660
Central Index Key Number of underwriter (if applicable):
Alan Williams, +44 7718 121215
Name and telephone number, including area code, of the person to contact in connection with this filing
INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN THE REPORT
PART 1: REPRESENTATION AND WARRANTY INFORMATION
Item 1.01 Initial Filing of Rule 15Ga-1 Representations and Warranties Disclosure
Not applicable.
Item 1.02 Periodic Filing of Rule 15Ga-1 Representations and Warranties Disclosure
Not applicable.
Item 1.03 Notice of Termination of Duty to File Reports under Rule 15Ga-1
Not applicable.
PART II: FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE REPORTS
Item 2.01 Findings and Conclusions of a Third Party Due Diligence Report Obtained by the Issuer
Santander UK plc, as securitizer and depositor, is filing this Form ABS-15G in respect of issuances of residential mortgage-backed securities by Holmes Master Issuer PLC, as issuing entity under Santander UK plc’s residential mortgage-backed securities issuance program, in reliance on Rule 144A under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and a Third Party Due Diligence Report obtained from Deloitte LLP in connection with the annual update of that program and issuances thereunder.
Item 2.02 Findings and Conclusions of a Third-Party Due Diligence Report Obtained by the Underwriter
Not applicable.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the reporting entity has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
Santander UK plc
Securitizer and Depositor
By: /s/ Alan Williams
Name: Alan Williams
Title: Senior officer in charge of securitization of the securitizer
Date: April 20, 2026
 |
Deloitte LLP 2 New Street Square London EC4A 3BZ
Phone:+44 (0)20 7936 3000 Fax +44 (0)20 7583 1198 www.deloitte.co.uk |
Independent Accountant’s Report on Applying Asset Agreed Upon Procedures
The Board of Directors of
Holmes Master Issuer PLC
2 Triton Square
Regent’s Place
London
NW1 3AN
United Kingdom
(the “Issuer”)
The Board of Directors of
Santander UK PLC
2 Triton Square
Regent’s Place
London
NW1 3AN
United Kingdom
(the “Seller”)
Banco Santander, S.A.
Ciudad Grupo Santander
Edificio Encinar
Avenida de Cantabria s/n
28660 Boadilla del Monte
Madrid
Spain
(the “Arranger”)
4 April 2026
Dear Sirs/Madams,
Agreed-upon procedures engagement relating to the 2026 annual update (the “Update”) of the Holmes Master Issuer plc residential mortgage-backed note programme (the “Programme”)
We have performed the procedures enumerated below on certain residential mortgage loans (the “Loan Pool”), which were agreed to by the Issuer, the Seller and the Arranger (as defined in the Engagement Letter). The procedures were performed to assist you in evaluating the validity of certain characteristics of the Loan Pool. This agreed upon procedures engagement was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. The appropriateness of these procedures is solely the responsibility of the Issuer, the Seller and the Arranger. Consequently, we make no representation regarding the appropriateness of the procedures described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.
This report (the “Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report”) is addressed to the Board of Directors of the Issuer, the Board of Directors of the Seller and the Arranger identified in the Engagement Letter who have agreed to participate in the proposed Update.
Deloitte LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC303675 and its registered office at 1 New Street Square, London, EC4A 3HQ, United Kingdom.
Deloitte LLP is the United Kingdom affiliate of Deloitte NSE LLP, a member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee (“DTTL”). DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL and Deloitte NSE LLP do not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about to learn more about our global network of member firms.
© 2026 Deloitte LLP. All rights reserved.
These procedures were established with the Issuer and the Seller and the appropriateness of the procedures is solely the responsibility of the Issuer, the Seller and the Arranger as discussed above. The Issuer and the Seller shall be solely responsible for providing accurate and complete information requested by Deloitte necessary to perform the procedures. Deloitte has no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information provided by or on behalf of the Issuer and the Seller, even if Deloitte had reason to know or should have known of such inaccuracy or incompleteness.
The procedures that we performed and our findings are as follows:
1. Scope of our work and factual findings
The procedures performed were as defined in Appendix 2 of the Engagement Letter (the “Agreed Upon Procedures”).
The Seller provided us with a data file ‘Holmes_AUP_List.xlsx’ (the “First Pool Run”) containing a loan identifier for each of the 50,449 loans with greater than zero current balance in the Loan Pool.
A random sample of 458 loans was selected from the First Pool Run (the “Sample”) using the sampling approach below.
The Seller then provided the data file ‘HT_AUD_FEB26_Data_Tape.xlsx’ (the “Sample Pool”) containing information for each loan in the Sample as at 31 January 2026 (the “Cut-off Date”).
We have carried out the Agreed Upon Procedures on the Sample Pool during the period 17 February to 20 March 2026.
The sampling approach
Sampling confidence is the probability that the actual errors, within a total population, are contained within the range of an estimate. Precision is the range of that estimate. The precision limit is the estimated maximum predicted number of errors within the total population. Sampling confidence and precision are stated in percentages.
Attribute sampling is a method of assessing the rate of occurrences of a specified attribute in a population and requires agreed upon procedures in relation to certain characteristics of a random sample of individual loans. In this case the Agreed Upon Procedures related to the documentation and procedures that support the Sample Pool contained in the First Pool Run.
Our method of calculating attribute sample sizes is based on the binomial probability distribution.
Statistical tests can only provide estimates of the error.
The procedures we have undertaken, set out in paragraphs 2.1 to 2.24 under the pool agreed upon procedures section below, has been limited to confirming that the selected attribute from the Sample Pool information relating to the First Pool Run agreed to the original loan documentation or copies thereof provided to us in the loan file. We are entitled to assume that the loan documentation is correct and we have not sought to independently verify this information. The loan documentation used in these Agreed upon Procedures was the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter, credit limit review, Certificate of Title (“CoT”), the completion letter, Official Copy of Register Entries, original or latest valuation report (the “valuation report”) or subsequent valuer’s letter, the personal identification documentation, the ANMF system (the “System”) and the data file ‘HT_AUD_FEB26_Back_ups.xlsx’ (the “System extract”).
Objectives
On the assumption that the information in the First Pool Run is a complete and accurate representation of the Loan Pool, the sample sizes chosen were designed with the objective of us being able to state that there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the population of the First Pool Run contained an error in the relevant attribute. Where errors were found in the Sample Pool, we have re-calculated the percentage errors that there might be in the First Pool Run and noted the revised percentage below. It is for you to ensure you understand this basis of reporting and to determine whether the errors are acceptable to you and for the purposes of the Update.
2
| 2. | Pool agreed upon procedures |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we carried out the following agreed upon procedures and have given a confidence and precision percentage
for each procedure.
For the purposes of this report, the failure of a single attribute is termed an error.
| 2.1 | Borrower Name |
In cases where the surname of one borrower changed to the surname of a joint borrower, we were informed by the Seller that such changes are as a result of changes in the marital status of the borrowers. For the avoidance of doubt, we did not agree that any change in the surname of the borrower was due to a change in their marital status, as no evidence of changes to the marital status was available in the mortgage files.
In relation to procedures 2.1.1-2.1.2 below, substantially agreed is defined as being able to identify the borrower’s name where minor spelling errors or reversals of initials had occurred.
| 2.1.1. | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the borrower name(s) shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed to that shown on the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter or credit limit review. We found that the borrower name(s) shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed to the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter or credit limit review, except for 1 case. |
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT283 | Sample Pool = 1 borrower name; Loan documentation = 2 borrower names |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 2% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.1.2. | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the borrower name(s) shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed with that shown on the CoT or Official Copy of Register Entries. We found that the borrower name(s) shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed to the CoT or Official Copy of Register Entries, except for 1 case. |
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT283 | Sample Pool = 1 borrower name; Loan documentation = 2 borrower names |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 2% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.2 | Property Address |
We were instructed by the management of the Seller that this procedure should not include agreeing the postcode if other segments of the property address were sufficient to identify the property. In addition, for new build properties, we were instructed by the management of the Seller that, where the original plot address and final full postal address differ, these differences are expected as a mortgage progresses from application to completion and thus these should not be considered to be errors if the property address was not substantially changed. For the avoidance of doubt, if the postcode was missing, incomplete or incorrect, or if the original plot address and final full postal address did not substantially differ, they were not considered to be an error.
In relation to procedures 2.2.1-2.2.3 below, substantially agreed is defined as being able to identify the property address where minor spelling errors has occurred.
3
| 2.2.1. | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the property address shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed with that shown on the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter or credit limit review. We found that the property address shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed to the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter or credit limit review, with no exception. |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.2.2. | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the property address shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed with that shown on the valuation report. We found that the property address shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed to the valuation report, except for 5 cases. |
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT014 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT020 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT444 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT457 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT458 | Valuation report unavailable |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 3% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.2.3. | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the property address shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed with that shown on the CoT or Official Copy of Register Entries. We found that the property address shown on the Sample Pool substantially agreed to the CoT or Official Copy of Register Entries, with no exception. |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.3. | Property Tenure |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the property tenure shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the valuation report or Official Copy of Register Entries. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System, we confirmed whether the property tenure shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System. We found that the property tenure agreed to one of the above documents or the System, except for 4 cases.
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT001 | Sample Pool = Leasehold; Valuation report, Official Copy of Register Entries = Freehold |
| DT009 | Sample Pool = Leasehold; Valuation report, Official Copy of Register Entries = Freehold |
| DT101 | Sample Pool = Freehold; Official Copy of Register Entries = Leasehold; not shown on valuation report |
| DT273 | Sample Pool = Freehold; Official Copy of Register Entries = Leasehold; not shown on valuation report |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 3% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.4. | Amount Advanced |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the net amount advanced shown on the Sample Pool agreed, to within +/- £1,000, with the net amount advanced shown on the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter or credit limit review, where appropriate. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System, we confirmed whether the net amount advanced shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System. We found that the net amount advanced agreed, to within +/- £1,000, to the offer letter, additional borrowing offer letter, credit limit review or the System, with no exception.
4
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.5. | Current Balance |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the current balance shown on the Sample Pool (defined as the interest charging balance, or the latest further advance balance plus any subsequent transactions as at the Cut-off Date) agreed, to within +/- £250, with the current balance shown on the System as at the Cut-off Date. We found that the current balance agreed, to within +/- £250, to the System as at the Cut-off Date, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.6. | Completion Date |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the completion date per loan part shown on the Sample Pool agreed, to within +/- 30 days, with the completion date per loan part shown on the CoT or Official Copy of Register Entries or completion letter. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System, we confirmed whether the completion date per loan part shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System. We found that the completion date per loan part agreed, to within +/- 30 days, to one of the above documents or the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.7. | Maturity Date |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the maturity date per loan part shown on the Sample Pool agreed, to within +/- 30 days, with the maturity date as at the latest active loan part shown on the System. We found that the maturity date per loan part agreed, to within +/- 30 days, to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.8. | Valuation Amount |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the valuation amount shown on the Sample Pool agreed with either the ‘Valuation in Present Condition’ or the ‘Valuation Following Completion of Works’ shown on the valuation report or subsequent valuer’s letter. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System or where an indexed valuation had been used, we confirmed whether the valuation amount shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the valuation amount shown on the System. We found that the valuation amount agreed to the above, except for 1 case.
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT344 | Sample Pool = 303303; Valuation report = 275000 |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 2% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.9. | Valuation Date |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the valuation date shown on the Sample Pool agreed, to within +/- 30 days, with the valuation date shown on the valuation report or subsequent valuer’s letter. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System or where an indexed valuation had been used, we confirmed whether the valuation date shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the valuation date shown on the System. We found that the valuation date agreed to the above, with no exception.
5
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.10. | Document Signatories |
| 2.10.1 | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the valuation report had been signed in the space designated for the valuer. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System, we did not perform this procedure. We found that the valuation report had been signed in the space designated for the valuer as described above, except for 7 cases. |
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT014 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT020 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT088 | Valuation report signature unavailable |
| DT180 | Valuation report signature unavailable |
| DT444 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT457 | Valuation report unavailable |
| DT458 | Valuation report unavailable |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 4% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.10.2 | For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the CoT had been signed in the space designated for the conveyancer or the Official Copy of Register Entries was present on the mortgage file. In the case of a loan that had been transferred to the System, we did not perform this procedure. We found that the CoT had been signed in the space designated for the conveyancer or the Official Copy of Register Entries was present on the mortgage file as described above, with no exception. |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.10. | Repayment Type |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the repayment type shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the repayment type shown on the System. We found that the repayment type agreed to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.11. | Product Type |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the product type shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the product type shown on the System. We found that the product type agreed to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.12. | Valuation Type |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the valuation type shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the valuation type shown on the System. We found that the valuation type agreed to the System, except for 6 cases.
6
| Deloitte reference | Description of exception |
| DT012 | Sample Pool = Full, internal and external inspection; System = Halifax Property Index |
| DT014 | Sample Pool = Full, internal and external inspection; System = Halifax Property Index |
| DT150 | Sample Pool = Full, internal and external inspection; System = AVM |
| DT158 | Sample Pool = Full, internal and external inspection; System = AVM |
| DT166 | Sample Pool = Full, internal and external inspection; System = AVM |
| DT263 | Sample Pool = Full, internal and external inspection; System = AVM |
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 4% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.13. | Arrears Balance |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the arrears balance amount shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the arrears balance amount shown on the System as at the Cut-off Date. We found that the arrears balance amount agreed to the System as at the Cut-off Date, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.14. | Loan Ownership |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the loan ownership shown on the Sample Pool agreed with the loan ownership shown on the System or the System extract. We found that the loan ownership agreed to the System or the System extract, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.15. | Monthly payment amount |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the monthly payment amount shown on the Sample Pool agreed, to within +/- £0.01, with that shown on the System as at the Cut-off Date. We found that the monthly payment amount agreed, to within +/- £0.01, to the System as at the Cut-off Date, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.16. | Credit Score |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the credit score shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System extract. We found that the credit score agreed to the System extract, [with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.17. | Income Amount |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the income amount for the primary borrower shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System extract. We found that the income amount for the primary borrower agreed to the System extract, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
7
| 2.18. | Account Number |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the account number shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System. We found that the account number agreed to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.19. | Term |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the term of the loan defined as the difference between the original completion date and current maturity date shown on the Sample Pool agreed, to within +/- 30 days, with that shown on the System. We found that the term of the loan defined as the difference between the original completion date and current maturity date agreed, to within +/- 30 days, to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.20. | Employment Status |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the employment status for all borrower(s) shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System or the System extract. We found that the employment status for all borrower(s) agreed to the System or the System extract, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.21. | Current Interest Rate |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the current interest rate shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System. We found that the current interest rate agreed to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.22. | Revisionary Date |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the revisionary date shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System. We found that the revisionary date agreed to the System, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
| 2.23. | Year of Birth |
For each loan in the Sample Pool, we confirmed whether the borrower(s) year of birth shown on the Sample Pool agreed with that shown on the System or the personal identification documentation. We found that the borrower(s) year of birth agreed to the System or the personal identification documentation, with no exception.
As a result of the procedure performed there is a 99% confidence that not more than 1% of the First Pool Run contained errors.
8
| 3. | Eligibility Criteria |
The management of the Seller provided the data files ‘HOLMES_31JAN2026.xlsx’, ‘AZ_STAFF_INDICATOR.xlsx’, ‘AZ_TENURE_TYPE.xlsx’, ‘Holmes_FPD.xlsx’, ‘Initial_LTV.xlsx’, ‘Latest_Valuation_2026_AUP.xlsx’ and ‘Missing_DOB.xlsx’ (together, the “Eligibility Data Files”) containing data in respect of the Loan Pool as at 31 January 2026 (the “Cut-off-Date”). For the avoidance of doubt, we have not independently verified the data in the Eligibility Data Files. We used the Eligibility Data Files to confirm whether certain eligibility criteria (as listed below which the Seller has identified as required to be met for the purpose of the Update) had been met.
| 3.1 | We confirmed whether each loan was originated by the Seller; |
| 3.2 | We confirmed whether each loan was originated and is denominated in pounds sterling; |
| 3.3 | We confirmed whether each loan matures for repayment not later than the maximum loan maturity date; |
| 3.4 | We confirmed whether each loan does not have an outstanding principal balance of more than £750,000; |
| 3.5 | We confirmed whether each borrower has made at least one monthly payment as at the Cut-off Date; |
| 3.6 | We confirmed whether each loan is not guaranteed by a third party; |
| 3.7 | We confirmed whether all of the borrowers are individuals; |
| 3.8 | We confirmed whether each loan is not made to an employee or officer of the Seller; |
| 3.9 | We confirmed whether all of the properties are in England, Wales or Scotland; |
| 3.10 | We confirmed whether (i) each property constitutes a separate dwelling unit and (ii) is either freehold, heritable or leasehold; |
| 3.11 | We confirmed whether each borrower was at least eighteen years old at the time of origination; |
| 3.12 | We confirmed whether there is no property subject of a shared ownership lease arrangement or staircase purchasing arrangement; |
| 3.13 | (i) We confirmed whether each property had a valuation date not more than 18 months as at the latest loan advance date; |
(ii) We confirmed whether the principal amount of the initial advance advanced is not more than 95% of the lower of the purchase price and the appraised value;
We confirmed that each loan in the Eligibility Data Files agreed to the above criteria, with no exception.
| 4. | Scope of this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report |
The scope of our work in preparing this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report was limited solely to those procedures set out above. We were not engaged to and did not conduct an audit the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the matters subject to the procedures described above. Accordingly we do not express any opinion or overall conclusion on the procedures we have performed. You are responsible for determining whether the scope of our work specified is sufficient for your purposes and we make no representation regarding the appropriateness of these procedures for your purposes. If we were to perform additional procedures, other matters might come to our attention that would be reported to you.
This Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report should not be taken to supplant any other enquiries and procedures that may be necessary to satisfy the requirements of the recipients of this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report.
This Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report has been prepared for use in connection with the offering of securities inside of the United States and in accordance with United States attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and not in accordance with United Kingdom or other professional standards. This Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report is only intended to be relied on in connection with any obligations or responsibilities in connection with the Update that you may have under any legislation, regulations and/or rule of law under United States federal or state securities law. We accept no responsibility to, and deny any liability to, any person or in any way arising from or in connection with the use of this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report in connection with any offering of securities outside the United States.
| 5. | Use of this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report |
Subject to the terms specified in in our Engagement Letter dated 26 March 2026, this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report is provided solely for the private information and use of the Issuer, the Seller, and the Arranger and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than the Issuer, the Seller, and the Arranger. This Agreed Upon Procedures Report should not be included in any publicly filed or publicly available document nor should this Agreed Upon Procedures Report, the services performed hereunder, or Deloitte’s engagement hereunder be referred to in any publicly filed or publicly available document, in each case, except under the terms specified in our Engagement Letter. For the avoidance of doubt, the Arranger is being provided with the Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report in its capacity as addressee and not the engaging party.
9
If you have any questions or would like to discuss the content of this Asset Agreed Upon Procedures Report please do not hesitate to contact Louise Gill on +44 113 292 1299.
Yours truly,
/s/ Deloitte LLP
Deloitte LLP
10