TCREUR_Public/161020.mbx         T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

                           E U R O P E

          Thursday, October 20, 2016, Vol. 17, No. 208



SCF RAHOITUSPALVELUT: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Cl. E Notes
TRAVIS PERKINS: To Close 30 Branches, 600 Jobs Affected


CAPITAL MORTGAGE 2007-1: S&P Affirms D Rating on Class C Notes
MONTE DEI PASCHI: To Press Ahead with Business Plan


AMANAT INSURANCE: Fitch Affirms 'B' IFS Rating, Outlook Stable


ATF NETHERLANDS: S&P Assigns 'BB+' Rating to Sub. Hybrid Notes
HYDRA DUTCH: S&P Affirms Then Withdraws 'B' CCR
LYONDELL CHEMICAL: Blavatnik Faces Creditors in Trial
WOOD STREET II: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes


BASHNEFT PJSOC: Moody's Affirms Ba1 CFR, Outlook Remains Negative
GLOBEXBANK: Fitch Hikes Viability Rating to 'b-'
IBA-MOSCOW: Moody's Raises Long-Term Deposit Ratings to B2

S L O V A K   R E P U B L I C

CARREFOUR: Creditors to Recover Only 3% of Claims Under Plan


ABENGOA SA: Abeinsa Wins U.S. Court OK to Join Debt Restructuring
BBVA CONSUMO 6: DBRS Confirms B Rating on Series B Notes


DTEK ENERGY: Pegs Additional Payments to Creditors to TPP Tariff

U N I T E D   K I N G D O M

BHS: Must Enter Liquidation by the End of The Month Says PPF
BHS GROUP: Green Admits Mistake in Selling Business to Chappell
DAISY GROUP: S&P Assigns 'B' CCR & Rates Proposed Sr. Notes 'B'
ENQUEST PLC: S&P Lowers Corporate Credit Rating to 'SD'
QUOTIENT LIMITED: Closes $120 Million Secured Debt Financing



SCF RAHOITUSPALVELUT: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' Rating on Cl. E Notes
Fitch Ratings has upgraded SCF Rahoituspalvelut I Designated
Activity Company's (SCF I DAC) class B and D notes and affirmed
the others as follows:

   -- EUR192.4m class A notes: affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Stable

   -- EUR27.2m class B notes: upgraded to 'AA+sf' from 'AAsf';
      Stable Outlook

   -- EUR5.8m class C notes: affirmed at 'A+sf'; Stable Outlook

   -- EUR3.8m class D notes: upgraded to 'A+sf' from 'A-sf';
      Stable Outlook

   -- EUR6.6m class E notes: affirmed at 'BB+sf'; Stable Outlook

SCF I DAC is a securitization of auto loan receivables originated
to Finnish individuals and companies by Santander Consumer
Finance Oy (SCF Oy), a 100% subsidiary of Norway-based Santander
Consumer Bank AS (SCB, A-/Stable/F2).


Strong Performance

The rating actions reflect that the underlying asset pool's
performance has been in line with or better than Fitch's
expectations and credit enhancement has increased for all classes
of notes. About 37% of the SCF I DAC pool has amortized since the
transaction closed in October 2015; the composition of the
remaining pool has similar characteristics to the initial pool.
The proportion of balloon loans has increased somewhat, but this
is expected due to the amortization and reflected in Fitch's
asset assumptions.

Defaults in Line with Expectations

The lifetime default base case for the transaction is 1.75%.
Cumulative defaults to date are at 0.2%, in line with Fitch's
point-in-time expectation, which takes into account the
transaction's six-month default definition.

High Recoveries

The recoveries achieved by SCF Oy are among the highest for rated
European auto ABS, which is reflected in the 70% recovery base
case set for the transaction. Cumulative recoveries to date stand
at 53%, which is consistent with Fitch's expectations given the
time horizon allowed for recoveries to take place.

Liquidity Coverage

The transaction features a liquidity reserve, which provides
liquidity coverage for the class A and B notes. The class C-and-
below notes do not benefit from the reserve, which means timely
payment of interest on the notes may not be achieved in the case
of servicing disruption, constraining their highest achievable
rating to 'A+sf'.


Fitch has found interest payments to the class E and F notes were
incorrectly modelled in the initial rating analysis as senior to
clearing the implied principal deficiency ledger (PDL). Correct
modelling would have resulted in different model-implied ratings
for two classes: one notch higher for the class D notes and one
notch lower for the class E notes. However, the error has had no
effect on the class E rating, as its long interest deferral has
led Fitch to limit the rating to 'BB+sf'.

Correcting for the error for the class D notes, a rating
committee may have assigned a rating up to one notch above the
initially assigned rating of 'A-sf', subject to all other
qualitative factors relevant for that decision.

Nevertheless, the current ratings are based on the corrected
model and the model correction was not considered a key rating
driver for the actions listed above.


Expected impact upon the note rating of increased defaults (class

   -- Current ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AA+sf'/'A+sf'/'A+sf'/'BB+sf'

   -- Increase base case defaults by 10%:

   -- Increase base case defaults by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'AA-

   -- Increase base case defaults by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-

Expected impact upon the note rating of reduced recoveries (class

   -- Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AA+sf'/'A+sf'/'A+sf'/'BB+sf'

   -- Reduce base case recovery by 10%:

   -- Reduce base case recovery by 25%:

   -- Reduce base case recovery by 50%: 'AAAsf'/'AA-

Expected impact upon the note rating of increased defaults and
decreased recoveries (class A/B/C/D/E):

   -- Current Ratings: 'AAAsf'/'AA+sf'/'A+sf'/'A+sf'/'BB+sf'

   -- Increase default base case by 10%; reduce recovery base
      case by 10%: 'AAAsf'/'AAsf'/'A+'Asf'/'BB+sf'

   -- Increase default base case by 25%; reduce recovery base
      case by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'A+sf'/'A-sf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBsf'

   -- Increase default base case by 50%; reduce recovery base
      case by 25%: 'AAAsf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf'/'BB+sf'/'Bsf'


Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action.


Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset
pool and the transaction. There were no findings that affected
the rating analysis. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing

Prior to the transaction closing, Fitch reviewed the results of a
third party assessment conducted on the asset portfolio
information, which indicated no adverse findings material to the
rating analysis.

Prior to the transaction closing, Fitch conducted a review of a
small targeted sample of the origination files and found the
information contained in the reviewed files to be adequately
consistent with the originator's policies and practices and the
other information provided to the agency about the asset

Overall, Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for
the agency's rating analysis according to its applicable rating
methodologies indicates that it is adequately reliable.


The information below was used in the analysis:

   -- Monthly investor reports provided by SCF Oy up to 30
      September 2016

   -- Loan-by-loan data from the European Data Warehouse as at 31
      July 2016


   -- EMEA Cash Flow Model

TRAVIS PERKINS: To Close 30 Branches, 600 Jobs Affected
Press Association reports that Travis Perkins has revealed plans
to close more than 30 branches in a move impacting 600 jobs
across the group.

According to Press Association, Travis Perkins said the branches
would be shut across its trade businesses, while it is also
closing 10 smaller distribution centers and reviewing its
plumbing and heating division as it warned over full-year profits
amid "uncertain" trading.

Travis Perkins is a builders' merchant and Wickes chain owner.


CAPITAL MORTGAGE 2007-1: S&P Affirms D Rating on Class C Notes
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its credit ratings on Capital
Mortgage S.r.l. series 2007-1's class A1, A2, B, and C notes.

The affirmations follow S&P's credit and cash flow analysis of
the most recent transaction information that S&P has received as
of June 2016.  S&P's analysis reflects the application of its
Italian residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) criteria
and S&P's structured finance ratings above the sovereign criteria
(RAS criteria).

Under S&P's RAS criteria, it applied a hypothetical sovereign
default stress test to determine whether a tranche has sufficient
credit and structural support to withstand a sovereign default
and so repay timely interest and principal by legal final

S&P's RAS criteria designate the country risk sensitivity for
RMBS as moderate.  Under S&P's RAS criteria, this transaction's
notes can therefore be rated four notches above the sovereign
rating, if they have sufficient credit enhancement to pass a
minimum of a severe stress.  However, as all six of the
conditions in paragraph 42 of the RAS criteria are met, S&P can
assign ratings in this transaction up to a maximum of six notches
(two additional notches of uplift) above the sovereign rating,
subject to credit enhancement being sufficient to pass an extreme

As S&P's unsolicited foreign currency long-term sovereign rating
on Italy is 'BBB-', S&P's RAS criteria cap at 'AA- (sf)' the
maximum potential rating in this transaction for the class A1 and
A2 notes.

This transaction features a reserve fund, with a EUR37.2 million
target amount, which is meant to be available to mitigate
defaults.  However, it has been fully depleted since the April
2010 payment date.

Severe delinquencies of more than 90 days decreased to 1.12% from
1.43% since S&P's December 2014 review.  Defaults are defined as
mortgage loans in arrears for 180 days or more in this
transaction.  This definition is more stringent than the
servicer's and other comparable transactions in the market.  This
may partly explain the transaction's higher level of reported
defaults than S&P's Italian RMBS index.  The prepayment level has
increased to a current level of 4.37%.

After applying S&P's RMBS criteria to this transaction, its
credit analysis results show a decrease in the weighted-average
foreclosure frequency (WAFF) and in the weighted-average loss
severity (WALS).

Rating level    WAFF (%)     WALS (%)
AAA                13.23        14.41
AA                 10.28        11.25
A                   7.56         5.52
BBB                 6.10         3.02
BB                  4.57         2.00
B                   2.96         2.00

The decrease in the WAFF is mainly due to the decrease in arrears
and seasoning benefit.  The decrease in the WALS is mainly due to
the application of S&P's lower market value decline assumptions
and the lower indexed loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of the pool.

Following the application of S&P's RAS criteria and its RMBS
criteria, it has determined that its assigned rating on each
class of notes in this transaction should be the lower of (i) the
rating as capped by S&P's RAS criteria and (ii) the rating that
the class of notes can attain under our RMBS criteria.  S&P's
ratings on the class A1 and A2 notes are constrained by the
rating on the sovereign.

Taking into account the results of S&P's updated credit and cash
flow analysis and the application of its RAS criteria, S&P
considers the available credit enhancement for the class A1 and
A2 notes to be commensurate with its currently assigned ratings.
S&P has therefore affirmed its 'AA- (sf)' ratings on the class A1
and A2 notes.

The results of S&P's credit and cash flow analysis indicate that
the class B notes receive timely payment of interest and ultimate
repayment of principal at their currently assigned 'BB' rating
level.  S&P has therefore affirmed its 'BB (sf)' rating on the
class B notes.  S&P also considered the likelihood of the class B
notes' interest being deferred as a result of the transaction's
structural features.  Since S&P's previous review, cumulative
defaults have increased to 12.80% from 11.32%.  The interest
deferral trigger is set at 15%.  In S&P's opinion, this is likely
to happen within the next three years.

The class C notes' interest is already being deferred, as the
trigger was hit when the cumulative default ratio reached 7%.  As
the class C notes continue to default on their interest payments,
S&P has affirmed its 'D (sf)' rating on these notes.

Capital Mortgage's series 2007-1 securitizes a pool of performing
mortgage loans, which Banca di Roma originated, that are secured
on Italian residential properties.


Class       Rating

Capital Mortgage S.r.l.
EUR2.479 Billion Mortgage-Backed Floating-Rate Notes Series 2007-

Ratings Affirmed

A1          AA- (sf)
A2          AA- (sf)
B           BB (sf)
C           D (sf)

MONTE DEI PASCHI: To Press Ahead with Business Plan
Simone Meier at Bloomberg News reports that Banca Monte dei
Paschi di Siena SpA said it's pressing ahead with a plan to
bolster capital and sell soured loans.

Monte Paschi on Oct. 18 said the company's board is conducting an
in-depth analysis of a business plan that will be approved on
Oct. 24, while proceeding with a recapitalization and disposals
of non-performing loans, Bloomberg relates.

According to Bloomberg, people familiar with the matter have said
Monte Paschi Chief Executive Officer Marco Morelli, who took over
earlier this year, is seeking to raise EUR5 billion (US$5.5
billion) to bolster profitability and capital buffers.  The bank,
based in Siena, Italy, has said it's readying a third share sale
in two years and preparing to offload EUR28 billion of non-
performing loans through sales and securitizations, Bloomberg

The lender was bailed out twice by the government since 2009 and
already raised EUR8 billion of fresh capital from investors in
the last two years, Bloomberg recounts.  Monte Paschi was the
region's most vulnerable lender to severe economic shock under
stress tests conducted earlier this year, Bloomberg states.

                     About Monte dei Paschi

Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena SpA -- is
an Italy-based company engaged in the banking sector.  It
provides traditional banking services, asset management and
private banking, including life insurance, pension funds and
investment trusts.  In addition, it offers investment banking,
including project finance, merchant banking and financial
advisory services.  The Company comprises more than 3,000
branches, and a structure of channels of distribution.  Banca
Monte dei Paschi di Siena Group has subsidiaries located
throughout Italy, Europe, America, Asia and North Africa.  It has
numerous subsidiaries, including Mps Sim SpA, MPS Capital
Services Banca per le Imprese SpA, MPS Banca Personale SpA, Banca
Toscana SpA, Monte Paschi Ireland Ltd. and Banca MP Belgio SpA.


AMANAT INSURANCE: Fitch Affirms 'B' IFS Rating, Outlook Stable
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Kazakhstan-based AMANAT Insurance's
(AMANAT) Insurer Financial Strength (IFS) rating at 'B' and
National IFS rating at 'BB+(kaz)'. The Outlooks are Stable.


The ratings continue to reflect AMANAT's negative underwriting
result and 'weak' score under Fitch's factor-based Prism model,
although both have improved since 2014. The ratings also take
into account the track record of moderate capital support from
the shareholder and the low quality of AMANAT'S investment

AMANAT's combined ratio improved considerably to 118% in 2015
from 137% in 2014, supported by the strengthening of the loss
ratio and the expense ratio. AMANAT's loss ratio decreased to 50%
in 2015 from 58% in 2014, and benefited in particular from an
improved loss ratio for general third party liability business,
which decreased to 29% in 2015 from 122% in 2014.

In 9M16 AMANAT reported a negative underwriting result of
KZT140m. However, this was offset by the stronger investment
result of KZT230m. The combined ratio improved to 105% (9M15:
120%), with loss ratio of 49% (50%), despite the negative
underwriting result of the general third party liability

Since 2015 AMANAT has focused on decreasing administrative
expenses via staff optimization and IT automation. AMANAT's
administrative expense ratio consequently fell to 52% in 2015
from 60% in 2014, with a further improvement to 47% at 9M16
(9M15: 57%).

AMANAT's net income improved to KZT705m in 2015 from a net loss
of KZT1.1bn in 2014. This was primarily driven by KZT1.5bn FX
gains on investments (2014: KZT215m FX gains), which arose in the
context of a severe devaluation of Kazakh tenge in 2015. In the
absence of FX gains, the insurer's net result improved slightly
to a KZT818m loss in 2015 (2014: net loss of KZT1.3bn).

AMANAT's shareholder injected KZT560m into the company in 2015 to
support the regulatory solvency margin. Capital had fallen to 93%
of minimum regulatory requirements at end-4M15 and returned to
compliant levels throughout the rest of 2015, standing at 105% at

Like its Kazakh peers, AMANAT is exposed to the immaturity of the
local capital market and at end-2015 44% of the investment
portfolio was kept on deposit in local banks, mainly rated in the
'B' category.

In 2015 AMANAT's compound annual growth rate for premium income
was 35%, mainly due to growth in motor damage and commercial
property lines. Fitch considers balanced premium growth and a
diversified business portfolio important to the further
successful development of the company.


The ratings could be upgraded if AMANAT returns to profitable
underwriting results on a sustained basis and the average asset
credit quality of its investment portfolio improves.

Capital depletion either due to underwriting or investment losses
without financial support from the shareholder, or failure to
meet regulatory solvency margin requirements could lead to a


ATF NETHERLANDS: S&P Assigns 'BB+' Rating to Sub. Hybrid Notes
S&P Global Ratings said that it has assigned its 'BB+' long-term
issue rating to the perpetual, optionally deferrable,
subordinated hybrid notes issued by ATF Netherlands B.V., under a
subordinated guarantee provided by the parent company, Aroundtown
Property Holdings PLC (BBB/Stable/--).

Aroundtown plans to use the proceeds to fund the company's growth
and cover some refinancing needs.

S&P classifies the notes as having intermediate equity content
until their first call dates in 2023.  This is because they meet
S&P's criteria in terms of their subordination, permanence, and
optional deferability during this period.

Consequently, in S&P's calculation of Aroundtown's credit ratios,
S&P will treat 50% of the principal outstanding and accrued
interest under the hybrids as equity rather than debt.  S&P will
also treat 50% of the related payments on these notes as
equivalent to a common dividend.  Both treatments are in line
with S&P's hybrid capital criteria.

S&P arrives at its 'BB+' issue rating on the notes by deducting
two notches from S&P's 'BBB' long-term rating on Aroundtown,

   -- One notch for the subordination of the notes, because the
      rating on Aroundtown is investment grade (that is, 'BBB-'
      or above); and

   -- An additional notch for payment flexibility to reflect that
      the deferral of interest is optional.  S&P deducts one
      notch only because it considers that there is a relatively
      low likelihood that Aroundtown will defer interest
      payments. Should S&P's view on this likelihood change, it
      may significantly increase the number of notches S&P
      deducts to derive the issue rating.

HYDRA DUTCH: S&P Affirms Then Withdraws 'B' CCR
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its 'B' long-term corporate credit
rating on Netherlands-based Hydra Dutch Holdings 2 B.V. (Hydra
2). S&P subsequently withdrew the rating at the company's
request.  The outlook was stable at the time of withdrawal.

At the same time, S&P withdrew the ratings on Hydra 2's debt, as
the company's outstanding bonds have been redeemed.

Hydra 2, part of the water and coffee solutions group Eden
Springs, was acquired by Canadian-based beverage manufacturer
Cott Corporation in August 2016 for EUR470 million, and S&P
understands that Hydra 2's outstanding bonds were redeemed as
part of the transaction.

S&P's assessment of Hydra 2's creditworthiness was in line with
S&P's view of the creditworthiness of the parent, Cott

LYONDELL CHEMICAL: Blavatnik Faces Creditors in Trial
Tiffany Kary, writing for Bloomberg News, reported that almost a
decade after the ill-fated deal that created chemical giant
LyondellBasell Industries NV, creditors headed to court to try to
recover billions of dollars that they say Len Blavatnik extracted
before the company went bankrupt.

According to the report, at a trial that began Oct. 17, 2016, in
Manhattan bankruptcy court, the creditors will seek to claw back
more than $1.7 billion from Blavatnik, his firm Access Industries
Holdings LLC and other affiliates.  They're also seeking about $2
billion more from Blavatnik and other executives for alleged
mismanagement of LyondellBasell, which filed for bankruptcy in
2009, the report related.

They say money he extracted as a shareholder and through certain
fees was improperly and intentionally transferred away from the
financially precarious company, dooming it to failure, the report
further related.  If the creditors can prove their case, U.S.
bankruptcy law would let them recover the funds for
redistribution, the report said.

Blavatnik, who is worth about $18.1 billion, according to data
compiled by Bloomberg, denies wrongdoing and says the suit is
premised on the notion that he should have anticipated the 2008
financial crisis.

A trust for the unsecured creditors sued in 2009, alleging that
after Blavatnik bought a 10 percent stake in Lyondell -- but
before a deal was made -- he and other executives made the
company appear more financially healthy than it was, the report
added.  Creditors say they did so in order to benefit themselves
through stock holdings, the report said.

                About Lyondell Chemical

Rotterdam, Netherlands-based LyondellBasell Industries is one of
the world's largest polymers, petrochemicals and fuels companies.
Luxembourg-based Basell AF and Lyondell Chemical Company merged
operations in 2007 to form LyondellBasell Industries, the world's
third largest independent chemical company.  LyondellBasell
became saddled with debt as part of the US$12.7 billion merger.
Len Blavatnik's Access Industries owned the Company prior to its
bankruptcy filing.

On Jan. 6, 2009, LyondellBasell Industries' U.S. operations,
led by Lyondell Chemical Co., and one of its European holding
companies -- Basell Germany Holdings GmbH -- filed voluntary
petitions to reorganize under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code to facilitate a restructuring of the company's debts.  The
case is In re Lyondell Chemical Company, et al., Bankr. S.D.N.Y.
Lead Case No. 09-10023).  Seventy-nine Lyondell entities filed
for Chapter 11.  Luxembourg-based LyondellBasell Industries AF
S.C.A. and another affiliate were voluntarily added to Lyondell
Chemical's reorganization filing under Chapter 11 protection on
April 24, 2009.

Deryck A. Palmer, Esq., at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, in
New York, served as the Debtors' bankruptcy counsel.  Evercore
Partners served as financial advisors, and Alix Partners and its
subsidiary AP Services LLC, served as restructuring advisors.
AlixPartners' Kevin M. McShea acted as the Debtors' Chief
Restructuring Officer.  Clifford Chance LLP served as
restructuring advisors to the European entities.

LyondellBasell emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in
May 2010, with a plan that provides the Company with US$3 billion
of opening liquidity.  A new parent company, LyondellBasell
Industries N.V., incorporated in the Netherlands, is the
successor of the former parent company, LyondellBasell Industries
AF S.C.A., a Luxembourg company that is no longer part of
LyondellBasell.  LyondellBasell Industries N.V. owns and operates
substantially the same businesses as the previous parent company,
including subsidiaries that were not involved in the bankruptcy
cases.  LyondellBasell's corporate seat is Rotterdam,
Netherlands, with administrative offices in Houston and

WOOD STREET II: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on these notes
issued by Wood Street CLO II B.V:

  EUR25.84 mil. Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
   Notes, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Oct. 13, 2015,
   Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)
  EUR25.26 mil. Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
   Notes, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Oct. 13, 2015,
   Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  EUR4.5 mil. Class Z Combination Notes, Upgraded to A1 (sf);
   previously on Oct. 13, 2015, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Moody's has also affirmed the ratings on these notes:

  EUR31.08 mil. (Current Balance: EUR1.90 mil.) Class B Senior
   Secured Floating Rate Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on
   Oct. 13, 2015, Affirmed Aaa (sf)

  EUR9.135 mil. Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
   Notes, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct. 13, 2015,
   Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Wood Street CLO II B.V., issued in March 2006 and managed by
Alcentra Limited, is a Collateralised Loan Obligation backed by a
portfolio of mostly high yield European loans.  The transaction
passed its reinvestment period in March 2011.

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions on the notes are primarily a result of the
substantial deleveraging following amortization of the underlying
portfolio in the last two payment dates in March and September
2016.  The Class A notes fully repaid EUR19.8 million of its
outstanding amount and the Class B notes repaid EUR29.2 million
(94.0% of closing balance), as a result the over-
collateralization (OC) ratios of all classes of rated notes have
increased significantly.  As per the trustee report dated
September 2016, Class A/B, Class C, Class D and Class E OC ratios
are reported at 271.9%, 162.6%, 116.7% and 105.9% compared to
September 2015 levels of 178.2%, 136.7%, 111.4% and
104.4%respectively.  The September 2016 reported OC ratios do not
take into account the payments made to the notes on the September
2016 payment date.

The rating of the Combination Notes address the repayment of the
Rated Balance on or before the legal final maturity.  For Class
Z, the 'Rated Balance' is equal at any time to the principal
amount of the Combination Notes on the Issue Date minus the
aggregate of all payments made from the Issue Date to such date,
either through interest or principal payments.  The Rated Balance
may not necessarily correspond to the outstanding notional amount
reported by the trustee.

The key model inputs Moody's uses in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.  In its base
case, Moody's analyzed the underlying collateral pool as having a
performing par of EUR70.1 million, defaulted par of
EUR7.9 million, a weighted average default probability of 17.9%
over a 3.3 years weighted average life (consistent with a WARF of
2945), a weighted average recovery rate upon default of 43.2% for
a Aaa liability target rating, a diversity score of 9 and a
weighted average spread of 4.2%.

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectation of the remaining life of
the collateral pool.  The estimated average recovery rate on
future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets
in the collateral pool.  In each case, historical and market
performance and a collateral manager's latitude to trade
collateral are also relevant factors.  Moody's incorporates these
default and recovery characteristics of the collateral pool into
its cash flow model analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a
function of the target rating of each CLO liability it is

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations "
published in October 2016.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the

In addition to the base-case analysis, Moody's conducted
sensitivity analyses on the key parameters for the rated notes,
for which it assumed lower weighted average recovery rate for the
portfolio.  Moody's ran a model in which it reduced the weighted
average recovery rate by 5%; the model generated outputs were
unchanged for classes B and C, and within one notch of the base-
case results for the rest of classes.

This transaction is subject to a high level of macroeconomic
uncertainty, which could negatively affect the ratings on the
notes, in light of uncertainty about credit conditions in the
general economy.  CLO notes' performance may also be impacted
either positively or negatively by 1) the manager's investment
strategy and behavior and 2) divergence in the legal
interpretation of CDO documentation by different transactional
parties because of embedded ambiguities.

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to:

  Portfolio amortization: The main source of uncertainty in this
   transaction is the pace of amortization of the underlying
   portfolio, which can vary significantly depending on market
   conditions and have a significant impact on the notes'
   ratings.  Amortization could accelerate as a consequence of
   high loan prepayment levels or collateral sales by the
   collateral manager or be delayed by an increase in loan amend-
   and-extend restructurings.  Fast amortization would usually
   benefit the ratings of the notes beginning with the notes
   having the highest prepayment priority.

  Around 5.5% of the collateral pool consists of debt obligations
   whose credit quality Moody's has assessed by using credit
   estimates.  As part of its base case, Moody's has stressed
   large concentrations of single obligors bearing a credit
   estimate as described in "Updated Approach to the Usage of
   Credit Estimates in Rated Transactions," published in October
   2009 and available at:

  Recovery of defaulted assets: Market value fluctuations in
   trustee-reported defaulted assets and those Moody's assumes
   have defaulted can result in volatility in the deal's over-
   collateralization levels.  Further, the timing of recoveries
   and the manager's decision whether to work out or sell
   defaulted assets can also result in additional uncertainty.
   Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries assuming the lower of
   the market price or the recovery rate to account for potential
   volatility in market prices. Recoveries higher than Moody's
   expectations would have a positive impact on the notes'

  Long-dated assets: The presence of assets that mature beyond
   the CLO's legal maturity date exposes the deal to liquidation
   risk on those assets.  Moody's assumes that, at transaction
   maturity, the liquidation value of such an asset will depend
   on the nature of the asset as well as the extent to which the
   asset's maturity lags that of the liabilities.  Liquidation
   values higher than Moody's expectations would have a positive
   impact on the notes' ratings.

  Lack of portfolio granularity: The performance of the portfolio
   depends to a large extent on the credit conditions of a few
   large obligors non-investment-grade ratings, especially when
   they default.  Because of the deal's low diversity score and
   lack of granularity, Moody's supplemented its typical Binomial
   Expansion Technique analysis with a simulated default
   distribution using Moody's CDOROMTM software.

In addition to the quantitative factors that Moody's explicitly
modeled, qualitative factors are part of the rating committee's
considerations.  These qualitative factors include the structural
protections in the transaction, its recent performance given the
market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation
features, the collateral manager's track record and the potential
for selection bias in the portfolio.  All information available
to rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, input
from other Moody's analytical groups, market factors, and
judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on
the transactions, can influence the final rating decision.


BASHNEFT PJSOC: Moody's Affirms Ba1 CFR, Outlook Remains Negative
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the Ba1 corporate family
rating and the Ba1-PD probability of default rating of Russian
integrated oil company Bashneft PJSOC.  Concurrently, Moody's
upgraded its baseline credit assessment (BCA) to ba1 from ba2.
The rating action follows the sale of a 50.08% stake in the
company owned by the Government of Russia (Ba1 negative) to PJSC
Oil Company Rosneft (Rosneft, Ba1 negative).  The outlook on the
ratings remains negative.

"The rating action reflects our view that Bashneft will continue
to demonstrate strong operating and financial performance," says
Denis Perevezentsev, a Moody's Vice President -- Senior Credit
Officer.  "We upgraded our baseline credit assessment to ba1
reflecting Bashneft's strong credit profile, the elimination of
uncertainty with respect to a potential buyer for Bashneft in the
course of privatization and our expectation that Bashneft will
continue to follow a conservative financial policy under

On Oct. 12, 2016, Rosneft acquired 50.08% of Bashneft's charter
capital, representing 60.16% of its voting shares, from the
Government of Russia.  The Republic of Bashkortostan (Ba2
negative) retained its 25% stake in Bashneft's charter capital,
representing 25.79% of its voting shares.

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

To determine Bashneft's CFR, Moody's applies its Government-
Related Issuers (GRI) rating methodology, according to which the
CFR is driven by the combination of (1) Bashneft's BCA of ba1;
(2) the Ba2 local-currency debt rating of the Republic of
Bashkortostan, with negative outlook; (3) high dependence between
the region and the company; and (4) Moody's assumptions of a
moderate level of support from the regional government in case of

Following privatisation, Moody's has reassessed the GRI
assumptions, upgrading Bashneft's BCA to ba1 from ba2, changing
the support provider to the Republic of Bashkortostan from the
Government of Russia, and lowering the support level to moderate
from strong, which reflects disposal by the Government of Russia
of its 50.08% stake to Rosneft.  Although formal support provider
as per the GRI model is the Republic of Bashkortostan, Moody's
emphasises that Bashneft's credit quality and ratings benefit
from the company's status as subsidiary of a state-controlled
Rosneft, which will provide support to the company in case of
need, given its (and the Russian government) strategic interest
in Bashneft and also Bashneft's status of a material subsidiary
of Rosneft, which triggers a cross-default clause under a number
of Rosneft's credit agreements.  Bashneft's operations and
strategy will be closely aligned with those of Rosneft, including
via the decision-making process, as Rosneft has replaced
Bashneft's executive board by its representatives following this
transaction closing. Extraordinary shareholder meeting of
Bashneft, which will take place on 16 December, will consider
changes to the Bashneft's board of directors, reflecting the
changes in the shareholder structure.

Moody's continues to assess government default dependence as
"high" for Bashneft because the company operates in the oil and
gas sector, which is critically important for both federal and
regional governments.

Bashneft's standalone credit profile reflects (1) its integration
into refining and marketing segment, with more than two thirds of
revenue generated from sales of petroleum products; (2) high
share of export sales exceeding 50% of total revenue; (3) strong
financial metrics, with Moody's-adjusted debt/EBITDA ratio
standing at 1.3x and EBIT/interest expense at 5.3x as of June 30,
2016; and (4) low production costs and positive production
dynamics (oil production increased by 10.9% in the first half of
2016 year-on-year).  Bashneft's rating is constrained by (1) its
exposure to the Russian macroeconomic environment, despite high
volume of exports, given that most of the company's production
facilities are located within Russia; (2) relatively modest scale
of operations compared to its Russian and global peers; (3) high
concentration of reserves in the mature provinces of
Bashkortostan; and (4) risks arising from growing tax burden on
Russian oil and gas sector in 2017-18.


The negative outlook on the ratings is in line with the negative
outlook for the sovereign rating and reflects the fact that a
potential further downgrade of Russia's sovereign rating may lead
to downgrade of the company's ratings.

                      PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Global
Integrated Oil & Gas Industry published in October 2016.  Other
methodologies used include the Government-Related Issuers
methodology published in October 2014.

Bashneft is an integrated oil company operating primarily in the
Republic of Bashkortostan in the lower Volga region of Russia.
Bashneft's upstream assets are concentrated in Bashkortostan, in
close proximity to the company's refining and petrochemical
complex.  The company also operates oil fields in the Tatarstan,
Khanty-Mansi, Nenets and Orenburg regions of Russia.  Rosneft
owns 50.1% stake in the company, the Republic of Bashkortostan
owns 25%.  For the last twelve months ended June 30, 2016,
Bashneft's net revenue amounted to RUB528.4 billion and its
Moody's-adjusted EBITDA to RUB137.1 billion.  For the same
period, Bashneft produced 20.9 million tons (mt) of oil and
refined 18.8 mt of oil.

GLOBEXBANK: Fitch Hikes Viability Rating to 'b-'
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Russia-based Globexbank's (GB)
Viability Rating (VR) to 'b-' from 'f'. The bank's other ratings,
which are driven by potential support from its owner, state-owned
Vnesheconombank (VEB, BBB-/Negative), are unaffected.


The upgrade of GB's VR reflects the recent recapitalization by
VEB. In August 2016, VEB provided RUB30bn of new equity, RUB15bn
of which was from conversion of subordinated debt. Fitch
estimates GB's Fitch Core Capital (FCC) at 10% of risk-weighted
assets (RWA) following the recapitalization, up from 1.2% at end-
2015. However, weak asset quality and profitability continue to
weigh on the bank's VR.

"We downgraded GB's VR to 'f' from 'b-' in May 2016 as
impairment-driven losses resulted in a material capital
shortfall." Fitch said. Regulatory capital ratios were above
minimum required levels, but this was solely due to regulatory
forbearance which allowed gradual recognition of loan impairment

GB has utilized the new equity contributions from VEB to build up
impairment reserves in its regulatory accounts to a similar level
as those already recognized in its IFRS statements. At end-3Q16,
the regulatory Tier 1 and total capital ratios stood at 11.5% and
11.6%, respectively, above the 6% and 8% minimum levels.

Asset quality remains weak, with non-performing loans (NPLs,
overdue more 90 days) comprising 29% of the total portfolio at
end-1H16. NPLs were 86% covered by reserves in the 1H16 IFRS
accounts, which Fitch considers sound. However, there are further
risks in the portfolio of performing restructured loans (26% of
total loans, equal to 1.5x post-recap FCC) and investment
property (a further 1.5x FCC). In addition, the bank's weak
performance, with the pre-impairment result only break-even in
9M16 due to narrow margins and declining scale, could result in
capital erosion.

At end-9M16, GB's liquidity cushion (cash and equivalents, net
short-term interbank placements and bonds eligible for repo with
the Central Bank) covered 17% of its liabilities. GB had RUB18bn
(11% of liabilities at end-9M16) of deposits from non-state
pension funds, which it replaced subsequently with funding from
VEB after GB had been excluded by the Central Bank from the list
of banks with which pension funds are authorized to place
deposits. GB faces moderate refinancing risks as non-customer
funding maturing in up to one year accounted for 15% of
liabilities at end-9M16.


GB's VR could be downgraded in case of further significant asset
quality deterioration or weak performance resulting in material
capital erosion without timely support being made available.
Upside potential is limited and would require a significant
improvement of the bank's asset quality and core profitability.

The rating actions are as follows:

   -- Long-Term Foreign and Local Currency Issuer Default Ratings
      (IDRs): 'BB-'; unaffected

   -- Short-Term Foreign Currency IDR: 'B'; unaffected

   -- Support Rating: '3'; unaffected

   -- Viability Rating: upgraded to 'b-' from 'f'

   -- National Long-Term Rating: 'A+(rus)' ; unaffected

   -- Senior unsecured debt: 'BB-'/'A+(rus)'; unaffected

IBA-MOSCOW: Moody's Raises Long-Term Deposit Ratings to B2
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded IBA-Moscow's (IBAM)
long-term local- and foreign-currency deposit ratings to B2 from
B3, adjusted baseline credit assessment (BCA) to b2 from b3 and
the long-term Counterparty Risk Assessment (CR Assessment) to
B1(cr) from B2(cr).

Concurrently, the rating agency has affirmed the bank's BCA at
b3, the local- and foreign-currency short-term deposit ratings at
Not Prime, and the short-term CR Assessment at Not Prime(cr).
The outlook on long-term deposit ratings remains stable.

The rating action primarily reflects Moody's revision of the
bank's affiliate support from its immediate parent --
International Bank of Azerbaijan (IBA; deposits Ba3 stable, BCA
b3), which -- together with IBAM -- received financial support
from Azeri state company Aqrakredit in the frame of the IBA group
rehabilitation plan.

                          RATINGS RATIONALE

In Q2-Q3 2016, a material share of IBAM's problem and long-term
investment loans was repurchased via IBA by non-banking company
Aqrakredit, a 100% state-owned by committee for property issues
of Azerbaijan Republic, in connection to the rehabilitation plan
worked out for IBA group.  As a result, IBAM's gross loan
portfolio contracted by three times over the first eight months
of 2016 and decreased to RUB13.8 billion as of Sept. 1, 2016,
under local GAAP.  Moody's estimates that Aqrakredit bought toxic
assets of RUB26.3 billion from IBAM.

The upgrade of IBAM's adjusted BCA and long-term deposit ratings
is driven by the review of affiliate support following evidenced
financial assistance from Azeri state company Aqrakredit to IBAM.
In its support assumptions for IBAM, Moody's has taken IBA's Ba3
supported rating, which incorporates the rating agency's view of
the high probability of Azerbaijan government support for IBA.
In addition, Moody's assesses a high probability of such support
from the Azerbaijan government (indirectly through IBA) to IBAM;
the B2 local-currency deposit rating incorporates a one-notch
uplift from the b3 BCA.

Along with the toxic asset repurchase, IBAM's credit profile has
been bolstered by a Tier 1 equity injection in Q2 2016 from the
parent bank that amounted to RUB2.0 billion.  This contribution
was the largest in the last five years and increased Tier 1
capital by c.70%.  As a result, as of Sept. 1, 2016, IBAM
reported a Basel III statutory total capital adequacy ratio
(N1.0) and Tier 1 ratio (N1.2) of 22.4% and 8.3%, respectively,
well above the CBR thresholds.  Moody's expects additional
capital injection and toxic asset repurchase by the parent bank
in the next 12-18 months.


IBAM's ratings could be upgraded in case of further reduction of
problem lending along with a recovery of the bank's
profitability, or deposit ratings upgrade of the bank's parent

A material deterioration in IBAM's capital adequacy as a result
of incurred losses not compensated by capital injection from the
parent could exert downward pressure on the bank's BCA.  A
downgrade of IBAM's deposit ratings could be triggered by a
change in affiliate support assumptions, or a negative rating
action on the parent bank, which could affect the supported
ratings of the subsidiary.

S&P Global Ratings said that it affirmed its 'BB+' long-term
insurer financial strength and counterparty credit ratings on
Ingosstrakh Insurance Co.  S&P also affirmed its 'ruAA+' Russia
national scale rating on the company.  The outlook is stable.

Ingosstrakh demonstrated a sustainable trend of strong operating
performance in the first half of 2016, causing S&P to revise
upward its capital and earnings assessment to strong.  S&P
expects it to maintain this level of operating performance and
forecast that Ingosstrakh will deliver net income of over Russian
ruble (RUB) 5 billion a year during 2016-2018.  S&P also
forecasts that Ingosstrakh will deliver a small underwriting
profit and report a net combined ratio of around 99%-100%. (Lower
combined ratios indicate better profitability.  A combined ratio
of greater than 100% signifies an underwriting loss.)  The
operating profit will continue to be supported by investment
returns, although these will be materially lower than those
reported in 2015.

It is still unclear whether Ingosstrakh's subsidiary, Bank SOYUZ,
will require capital support.  If Ingosstrakh continues to
financially support Soyuz in 2017-2018, S&P expects that it will
maintain a capital cushion sufficient to keep its capital
adequacy ratio in the 'AA' range (measured using S&P's risk-based
capital model).  In 2015, Ingosstrakh reported an extraordinary
level of profitability, which enabled it to build up its capital
buffers and recapitalize Soyuz without this weighing on its group
credit profile (GCP).  S&P expects Ingosstrakh to retain its
capital buffers within its insurance business.

S&P also revised its assessment of Ingosstrakh's risk position to
high risk from very high risk, primarily because it reduced its
foreign exchange risk exposure.  Also, the credit quality of the
investment portfolio has been gradually improving, it remains in
the 'BB' range at present.

In S&P's view, Ingosstrakh's fair business risk profile is
underpinned by its strong competitive position in the Russian
insurance market and its less-than-adequate financial risk
profile is weighed down by the 'BB' credit quality of the
investment portfolio.

The overall GCP is 'bb+', including Ingosstrakh's bank subsidiary
Soyuz, whose stand-alone credit profile S&P assess at 'b-'.  The
GCP reflects S&P's view that Soyuz is a moderately strategic
subsidiary of the group and that it may require further support.
S&P excludes the value of Soyuz in S&P's capital model.

The stable outlook indicates that S&P expects Ingosstrakh to
maintain its strong competitive position and the credit quality
of its investment portfolio in the 'BB' range.

S&P could raise the ratings on Ingosstrakh if the average credit
quality of Ingosstrakh's investments improves to the 'BBB' range
and the company passes its foreign currency stress test at that
point in time.  However, the ratings are likely to be capped by
the local currency sovereign credit rating on Russia and S&P sees
no likelihood that Ingosstrakh will pass the more-severe local
currency sovereign stress test.

Although, S&P views the scenarios below as remote over the next
12 months, it may lower the ratings on Ingosstrakh if S&P revises
its assessment of Ingosstrakh's competitive position down; or if
Ingosstrakh cannot obtain sufficient reinsurance cover for the
risks it is writing.  S&P could also lower the ratings if
Ingosstrakh's operating performance or capital adequacy fall
materially below S&P's expectations, or Soyuz requires
substantially more support than S&P has assumed.

S L O V A K   R E P U B L I C

CARREFOUR: Creditors to Recover Only 3% of Claims Under Plan
The Slovak Spectator reports that the operator of five Carrefour
stores in Slovakia, Retail Value Stores, will erase 97% of its

Instead of more than EUR17.5 million, its creditors will see only
slightly more than EUR430,000 as the Bratislava court approved
the restructuring plan of the company, The Slovak Spectator
relays, citing Dennik N daily.

The information was confirmed by Jozef Spirko, former partner of
the Penta financial group, who became the new investor of Retail
Value Stores only few months ago, The Slovak Spectator notes.

The restructuring plan has already been approved by two of three
groups of creditors in early October, The Slovak Spectator

According to The Slovak Spectator, since the proposed
restructuring plan has been supported by most of the groups and
the majority of the creditors present, Retail Value Stores asked
the court for approval instead of one of the creditors' groups.

The restructuring plan now proposes that the creditors will
receive only 3% of the amount Carrefour owes them in 30 days
after the restructuring is approved, The Slovak Spectator
discloses.  Dennik N reported that retail Value Stores plans to
borrow the money from Privatbanka, The Slovak Spectator relates.


ABENGOA SA: Abeinsa Wins U.S. Court OK to Join Debt Restructuring
Tracy Rucinski at Reuters reports that a leading bankrupt
subsidiary of Abengoa SA won U.S. court approval on Oct. 19 to
join a US$10 billion debt-restructuring agreement in Spain, a
week before a deadline for the renewable energy firm to secure
creditor support for the plan.

According to Reuters, Abengoa, with a global renewable energy
footprint, filed for pre-bankruptcy in November in Spain, and
will become the largest Spanish corporate failure ever unless 75%
of its creditors approve a wide-ranging restructuring deal by
Oct. 25.

Dozens of Abengoa's subsidiaries filed for U.S. Chapter 11
bankruptcy protection this year, and the reorganization of the
U.S. and Spanish businesses both depend on the success of the
so-called master restructuring plan (MRA) in Spain, Reuters
relays, citing lawyers for Abengoa.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Kevin Carey approved the request by Abeinsa
Holding Inc., one of Abengoa's two main U.S. subsidiaries in
bankruptcy, to join the MRA, overruling objections by unsecured
creditors who said the deal would give them a recovery of only
pennies on the dollar, Reuters relates.

Meanwhile, a group of Abengoa's main creditors such as Spanish
bank Santander and global alternative asset managers like Oaktree
Capital Management will gain control of the company in exchange
for over US$1 billion of new cash, Reuters notes.

Without their investment, Abengoa could be forced to liquidate,
Reuters states.

                         About Abengoa S.A.

Spanish energy giant Abengoa S.A. is an engineering and
clean technology company with operations in more than 50
countries worldwide that provides innovative solutions for a
diverse range of customers in the energy and environmental
sectors.  Abengoa is one of the world's top builders of power
lines transporting energy across Latin America and a top
engineering and construction business, making massive renewable-
energy power plants worldwide.

As of the end of 2015, Abengoa, S.A. was the parent company of
687 other companies around the world, including 577 subsidiaries,
78 associates, 31 joint ventures, and 211 Spanish partnerships.
Additionally, the Abengoa Group held a number of other interests
of less than 20% in other entities.

On Nov. 25, 2015 in Spain, Abengoa S.A. announced its intention
to seek protection under Article 5bis of Spanish insolvency law,
a pre-insolvency statute that permits a company to enter into
negotiations with certain creditors for restricting of its
financial affairs.  The Spanish company is facing a March 28,
2016, deadline to agree on a viability plan or restructuring plan
with its banks and bondholders, without which it could be forced
to declare bankruptcy.

On March 16, 2016, Abengoa presented its Business Plan and
Financial Restructuring Plan in Madrid to all of its

                        U.S. Bankruptcies

Abengoa, S.A., and 24 of its subsidiaries filed Chapter 15
petitions (Bankr. D. Del. Case Nos. 16-10754 to 16-10778) on
March 28, 2016, to seek U.S. recognition of its restructuring
proceedings in Spain.  Christopher Morris signed the petitions as
foreign representative.  DLA Piper LLP (US) represents the
Debtors as counsel.

Gavilon Grain, LLC, et al., on Feb. 1, 2016, filed an involuntary
Chapter 7 petition for Abengoa Bioenergy of Nebraska, LLC
("ABNE") and on Feb. 11, 2016, filed an involuntary Chapter 7
petition for Abengoa Bioenergy Company, LLC ("ABC").  ABC's
involuntary Chapter 7 case is Bankr. D. Kan. Case No. 16-20178.
ABNE's involuntary case is Bankr. D. Neb. Case No. 16-80141.  An
order for relief has not been entered, and no interim Chapter 7
trustee has been appointed in the Involuntary Cases.  The
petitioning creditors are represented by McGrath, North, Mullin &
Kratz, P.C.

On Feb. 24, 2016, Abengoa Bioenergy US Holding, LLC and 5 five
other U.S. units of Abengoa S.A., which collectively own,
operate, and/or service four ethanol plants in Ravenna, York,
Colwich, and Portales, each filed a voluntary petition for relief
under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of

Missouri.  The cases are pending before the Honorable Kathy A.
Surratt-States and are jointly administered under Case No. 16-

Abeinsa Holding Inc., and 12 other affiliates, which are energy,
engineering and environmental companies and indirect subsidiaries
of Abengoa, filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy petitions (Bankr. D. Del.
Proposed Lead Case No. 16-10790) on March 29, 2016.

BBVA CONSUMO 6: DBRS Confirms B Rating on Series B Notes
DBRS Ratings Limited has taken the following rating actions on
the bonds issued by BBVA Consumo 6, F.T.A. (the Issuer):

   -- Series A notes upgraded to A (sf) from A (low) (sf).

   -- Series B notes confirmed at B (high) (sf).

The rating actions are based on the following analytical
considerations as described more fully below:

   -- Portfolio performance, in terms of delinquencies and
      defaults, as of August 2016.

   -- Updated portfolio default rate, loss given default (LGD)
      and expected loss assumptions for the remaining collateral

   -- Current available credit enhancement to the Series A and
      Series B notes to cover the expected losses at the A (sf)
      and B (high) rating levels respectively.

BBVA Consumo 6, F.T.A. is a securitization of Spanish consumer
loan receivables originated and serviced by Banco Bilbao Vizcaya
Argentaria, S.A. (BBVA). The transaction had a 12-month revolving
period that ended in January 2016.

As of August 2016, two- to three-month arrears were at 0.26%,
down from 0.65% in July 2015. The 90+ delinquency ratio was equal
to 1.80%. The current cumulative default ratio is 0.23%.

As of the July 2016 Payment Date, credit enhancement to the
Series A notes was 26.07% and credit enhancement to the Series B
notes was 6.52%. Credit enhancement to the Series A notes
consists of subordination of the Series B notes and a reserve
fund, and credit enhancement to the Class B notes consists solely
of the reserve fund.

The reserve fund is available to cover senior fees, interest
shortfall and principal shortfall on the Series A notes. The
reserve fund is currently at the target level of EUR15.00
million, subject to a floor of EUR7.50 million, and is permitted
to amortize once certain conditions have been met. The reserve
fund was reduced from its original amount of EUR 36.0 million in
October 2015, following an amendment to the transaction.

BBVA is the Account Bank for the transaction. The Account Bank
reference rating of "A" -- being one notch below the DBRS Long
Term Critical Obligations Rating of BBVA at A (high) -- complies
with the Minimum Institution Rating given the rating assigned to
the Series A notes, as described in DBRS's "Legal Criteria for
European Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.


All figures are in euros unless otherwise noted.

The principal methodology applicable is the Master European
Structured Finance Surveillance Methodology.

DBRS has applied the principal methodology consistently and
conducted a review of the transaction in accordance with the
principal methodology.

A review of the transaction legal documents was not conducted as
the documents have remained unchanged since the most recent
rating action.

Other methodologies referenced in this transaction are listed at
the end of this press release.

For a more detailed discussion of the sovereign risk impact on
Structured Finance ratings, please refer to DBRS commentary "The
Effect of Sovereign Risk on Securitisations in the Euro Area" on:

The sources of information used for this rating include reports
provided by Europea de Titulizaci¢n S.A., S.G.F.T. (the
Management Company) and data from the European DataWarehouse

DBRS does not rely upon third-party due diligence in order to
conduct its analysis.

DBRS was not supplied with third-party assessments. However, this
did not impact the rating analysis.

DBRS considers the information available to it for the purposes
of providing this rating to be of satisfactory quality.

DBRS does not audit the information it receives in connection
with the rating process, and it does not and cannot independently
verify that information in every instance.

The last rating action on this transaction took place on 27
October 2015 when DBRS downgraded the ratings on the Series A
notes to A (low) (sf) from A (sf) and the Series B notes to B
(high) from BBB (low), following a structural amendment to the

Information regarding DBRS ratings, including definitions,
policies and methodologies, is available on
To assess the impact of changing the transaction parameters on
the rating, DBRS considered the following stress scenarios, as
compared with the parameters used to determine the rating (the
base case):

   -- DBRS expected a lifetime base case probability of default
      (PD) and LGD for the pool based on a review of the current
      assets. Adverse changes to asset performance may cause
      stresses to base case assumptions and therefore have a
      negative effect on credit ratings.

   -- The base case PD and LGD of the current pool of mortgages
      for the Issuer are 12.71% and 56.83%, respectively.

   -- The Risk Sensitivity overview below illustrates the ratings
      expected if the PD and LGD increase by a certain percentage
      over the base case assumption. For example, if the LGD
      increases by 50%, the rating of the Series A notes would be
      expected to fall to A (low) (sf), assuming no change in the
      PD. If the PD increases by 50%, the rating for the Series A
      notes would be expected to fall to A (low) (sf), assuming
      no change in the LGD. Furthermore, if both the PD and LGD
      increase by 50%, the rating of the Series A notes would be
      expected to fall to BBB (sf).

Series A notes Risk Sensitivity:

   -- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (sf)

   -- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)

   -- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of A (sf)

   -- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)

   -- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating
      of BBB (high) (sf)

   -- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating
      of BBB (sf)

   -- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating
      of BBB (sf)

   -- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating
      of BBB (sf)

Series B notes Risk Sensitivity:

   -- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (low) (sf)

   -- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)

   -- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of B (low) (sf)

   -- 50% increase in PD, expected rating below B (sf)

   -- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating
      below B (sf)

   -- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating
      below B (sf)

   -- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating
      below B (sf)

   -- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating
      below B (sf)

Initial Lead Analyst: David Sanchez Rodriguez
Initial Rating Date: 15 October 2014
Initial Rating Committee Chair: Chuck Weilamann

Lead Surveillance Analyst: Andrew Lynch, Senior Financial Analyst
Rating Committee Chair: Christian Aufsatz, Senior Vice President

DBRS Ratings Limited
20 Fenchurch Street
31st Floor
United Kingdom
Registered in England and Wales: No. 7139960.

The rating methodologies and criteria used in the analysis of
this transaction can be found at

   -- Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions

   -- Master European Structured Finance Surveillance Methodology

   -- Operational Risk Assessment for European Structured Finance

   -- Rating European Consumer and Commercial Asset-Backed

A description of how DBRS analyses structured finance
transactions and how the methodologies are collectively applied
can be found at


Issuer            Debt Rated          Rating Action        Rating
------            ----------          -------------        ------
BBVA Consumo       Series A             Upgraded           A (sf)
6, F.T.A.

BBVA Consumo       Series B             Confirmed         B(high)
6, F.T.A.


DTEK ENERGY: Pegs Additional Payments to Creditors to TPP Tariff
Interfax-Ukraine reports that DTEK energy holding has pegged
additional payments to its creditors to the tariff for power
generation by thermal power plants (TPPs).

According to Interfax-Ukraine, the company said that additional
5% on unpaid interest will be accrued in the period from
September 1 until October 28, 2016 if the average tariff of
DTEK's TPPs (on the Ukraine-controlled territories) exceeds
UAH1.14 per kWh in June-October (apart from investment compound
and VAT).

DTEK in early April 2016 said that the company is unable to pay
coupons on its US$750 million eurobonds placed at 7.875% per
annum (due on April 4, 2018) and US$160 million eurobonds placed
at 10.375% (due on March 28, 2018), Interfax-Ukraine recounts.
The company initiated the standstill scheme until October 28,
2016, Interfax-Ukraine relays.

The High Court of Justice of England and Wales late April 2016
sanctioned a arrangements between DTEK Finance B.V. and the
scheme creditors, Interfax-Ukraine discloses.

DTEK is the largest privately-owned vertically-integrated energy
company in Ukraine.

                             *   *   *

On May 20, 2016, the Troubled Company Reporter-Europe reproted
that Moody's Investor Service downgraded the probability of
default rating of DTEK ENERGY B.V (DTEK) to D-PD from Ca-PD. At
the same time, Moody's affirmed DTEK's corporate family rating
(CFR) Ca rating and also the Ca rating of DTEK Finance Plc's $750
million 7.875% notes due April 4, 2018 with a loss given default
(LGD) assessment of LGD4/50%. The outlook on all ratings remains

As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter-Europe on March 14,
2016, Fitch Ratings downgraded Ukraine-based DTEK Energy B.V.'s
Long-term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) to 'RD' (Restricted
Default) from 'C', as Fitch understands from management that the
company is in the payment default under several bank loans due to
uncured expiry of the grace period on some bank debt.

U N I T E D   K I N G D O M

BHS: Must Enter Liquidation by the End of The Month Says PPF
Retail Gazette reports that the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) has
demanded that BHS enter liquidation by the end of the month.

According to Sky News, the PPF has called on the company's two
administrators to bring forward the liquidation of the deceased
high street retailer, allowing the investigation of its former
directors to commence, the report discloses.

After BHS collapsed leaving 22,000 employees with a pension
deficit of over half a billion pounds, the PPF have taken on 90
per cent of the pension debt, the report relays.

The report says following the calls by Frank Field MP to speed up
the investigation in order to provide some results by today, when
the official debate is set to take place, the PPF has taken
action to move the investigation along.

"The regulator said she hoped she would have a report before the
end of the year, and I hope there is a growing demand that they
do need to improve radically on that end of year deadline," Field
told City AM, the report notes.

According to Retail Gazette, a second administrator was called in
to advise Duff & Phelps following concerns about the independence
of the firm, appointed by Sir Philip Green.

When the liquidation of the company is finalized, the
investigation into both Green and Dominic Chappell, the last
owner of BHS, can commence, the report relates.

The report says Mr. Green is facing increasing pressure to cover
the costs of the pensions deficit created by the company's
downfall, which he has promised to "sort".

The latest developments will further add to the pressure to pay
up, the report notes.

BHS GROUP: Green Admits Mistake in Selling Business to Chappell
Press Association reports that retail tycoon Sir Philip Green
admitted that it was a mistake to sell the business to serial
bankrupt Dominic Chappell, who acquired the business for just

"I don't want to make any excuse.  He was clearly, categorically
the wrong buyer," Press Association quotes Mr. Green as saying.
"But we made that decision and, you know, for the last year, and
on a daily basis, I, and my family, have got to live with this
horrid decision, and trust me, these are not fun days."

Sir Philip also denied claims by Work and Pensions Committee
chairman Frank Field, who has accused the former BHS boss of
plundering the company, after taking more than GBP400 million in
dividends, Press Association relates.

According to Press Association, he said that the dividends were
proportionate to the company's profits, adding that the retailer
at the time was paying GBP160 million in profits.

BHS Group was a high street retailer offering fashion for the
whole family, furniture and home accessories.

DAISY GROUP: S&P Assigns 'B' CCR & Rates Proposed Sr. Notes 'B'
S&P Global Ratings assigned its 'B' long-term corporate credit
rating to U.K.-based telecommunications reseller and information
technology (IT) services provider, Daisy Group PLC.  The outlook
is stable.

S&P assigned its 'B' issue rating to Daisy's proposed senior
secured notes.  The recovery rating on these notes is '4',
indicating S&P's expectation of average (30%-50%) recovery
prospects in the event of a payment default.

S&P also assigned its 'B' issue rating to the company's existing
senior secured revolving credit facility (RCF) and term loans
based on a recovery rating of '3', indicating S&P's expectation
of significant (50%-70%) recovery prospects.  Given the
anticipated refinancing action, S&P expects to withdraw its issue
ratings on this existing senior secured debt once it has been
repaid with the proceeds of the proposed notes.

The rating follows Daisy's plans to issue GBP385 million of
senior secured notes.  The proceeds from the new notes are
expected to be used to repay all outstanding senior debt,
including GBP281 million of term loans, a GBP22 million second-
lien loan, and a GBP27.5 million drawdown on its RCF--all as of
June 2016.  In addition, the proceeds will be used to cover
transaction fees and increase the cash balance to GBP66 million
from GBP21 million to provide additional liquidity for potential
bolt-on acquisitions.

In addition, Daisy's capital structure includes payment-in-kind
(PIK) notes and preferred equity certificates (PECs).  These
subordinated instruments will not be part of the refinancing

Daisy's business risk profile is constrained by its limited scale
and geographic diversity, low barriers to entry in many of its
segments, and its reliance on the assets of network operators.
S&P's assessment is also constrained by the fragmented and
competitive nature of the IT services market, notably in managed
services, which leads to constant pricing pressures, as well as
competition with significantly larger players from both the
telecom and IT space.

This is partly offset by Daisy's sizable customer base, as the
leading reseller of telecommunication services for small and
midsize enterprises (SMEs) in the U.K., both directly and through
distribution agreements with other resellers.  The business risk
profile further benefits from relatively limited competition from
network carriers and a low fixed-cost base that constrains
capital expenditure (capex) and thus supports free operating cash
flow (FOCF) generation.  In addition, the recent acquisition of
the Phoenix IT Group has increased Daisy's service offerings,
allowing for cross-selling opportunities and giving it the
ability to offer a more-valuable proposition to its SME customers
in the form of unified communications, managed IT services, and
business continuity services, rather than just telecoms

Daisy's financial risk profile reflects its highly leveraged
capital structure.  Specifically, S&P anticipates that Daisy's
S&P Global Ratings-adjusted debt to EBITDA of 9.5x in financial
year (FY) 2016 will reduce to below 8.5x over FY2017-FY2019
(ending March 31).  S&P excludes the PECs from its adjusted debt
figures, but include the other PIK notes.  Considering solely the
proposed senior secured notes, S&P would anticipate leverage of
just above 4.5x in FY2017.

The high adjusted leverage is partly offset by Daisy's FOCF to
debt, which S&P forecasts will average about 5% over FY2017-
FY2019.  Additionally, S&P recognizes the cash-preserving
function of Daisy's subordinated instruments, and forecast that
Daisy's EBITDA cash interest coverage will be about 4x over this

Daisy's financial risk profile is constrained by its private
equity ownership, which S&P thinks is likely to limit sustainable
deleveraging over the medium term.

S&P's base case assumes:

   -- Like-for-like revenue growth of 1%-3% in FY2017 and FY2018,
      helped by cross-selling data connectivity and managed
      services to businesses, but partly offset by declining
      legacy fixed-line calls--albeit at a slowing pace;

   -- Normalization in EBITDA margins to 14%-16% in FY2017 and
      FY2018 from 10% in FY2016 due to a reduction in
      integration, and restructuring costs compared with recent
      years; and

   -- Total annual capex of 4%-5% of revenues.

Based on these assumptions, S&P arrives at these credit measures:

   -- Debt to EBITDA below 8.5x in FY2017 and FY2018;
   -- FOCF to debt of just below 4.5% in FY2017, increasing to
      below 5.5% thereafter; and
   -- EBITDA cash interest coverage of about 4x.

The stable outlook is based on S&P's view that Daisy will
continue to grow its EBITDA organically and generate solid FOCF.
The outlook also reflects that S&P expects Daisy will remain
highly leveraged, but maintain adequate liquidity.

S&P sees the likelihood of an upgrade as limited over the next 12
months as S&P do not anticipate short-term deleveraging to less
than 5x.  An upgrade could follow S&P's positive reassessment of
the group's currently weak business risk profile, however, S&P
views this as unlikely over the next year.

S& could consider lowering the ratings if Daisy's EBITDA cash
interest coverage falls below 2.5x and FOCF to debt is
sustainably lower than 5% (excluding acquisition related costs).
S&P's assessment of Daisy's business risk profile and adequate
liquidity limit the possibility of a negative rating action in
the short term.  However, if S&P sees increased competition, S&P
could revise our assessment of Daisy's business risk profile

ENQUEST PLC: S&P Lowers Corporate Credit Rating to 'SD'
S&P Global Ratings said that it has lowered its long-term
corporate credit rating on U.K.-based oil and gas exploration
company EnQuest PLC to 'SD' (selective default) from 'B-'.

S&P also lowered its issue rating on EnQuest's $650 million
senior unsecured notes to 'D' (default) from 'CCC+'.  The
recovery rating remains at '5', indicating S&P's expectation of
recovery in the lower half of the 10%-30% range.

The rating actions follow EnQuest's announcement on Oct. 13,
2016, that it had agreed with noteholders representing
approximately 61% of the high yield notes to capitalize the
coupon due Oct. 17, in line with a proposed restructuring.  The
proposed restructuring allows EnQuest to capitalize interest on
the notes when the average oil price is below $65 per barrel.
The company expects to complete the restructuring by Nov. 21.

Key terms of the restructuring proposal include an extension of
the tenor of the revolving credit facility (RCF) due in 2019 to
2021, amendment of the amortization profile and target margins,
as well as relaxation of certain financial covenants.  The
proposal includes the potential for capitalizing interest on the
notes as opposed to making cash payments, based on oil prices and
other factors; and a possible extension of the notes' maturity
date to 2023.  The material amendments to the RCF and notes and
the overall restructuring are inter-conditional, which means that
the company will also need to raise approximately GBP82 million
of additional equity capital to get approval from the surety bond
providers to renew the surety bond facilities.  The company has
already announced the successful conditional placement of
GBP82 million.

Once the restructuring is completed, S&P will reassess the
company's relative creditworthiness based on the new capital
structure.  S&P anticipates that liquidity and leverage metrics
under the new capital structure will improve, but that the
operating environment will remain challenging. Any future rating
action will take into account the company's ability to complete
the Kraken project and reach oil in early 2017, which should
support deleveraging thereafter.

QUOTIENT LIMITED: Closes $120 Million Secured Debt Financing
Quotient Limited announced the completion of a private placement
of up to $120 million of 12% Senior Secured Notes due 2023.  At
the initial closing of the transaction, Quotient issued $84
million of notes and received net proceeds of approximately $79
million after expenses.  Quotient will issue an additional $36
million of notes to note purchasers upon public announcement of
field trial results for the MosaiQ IH Microarray that
demonstrates greater than 99% concordance for the detection of
blood group antigens and greater than 95% concordance for the
detection of blood group antibodies when compared to predicate
technologies for a pre-defined set of blood group antigens and
antibodies.  Quotient intends to use the net proceeds from this
transaction, among other things, to repay all outstanding
obligations to MidCap Financial Trust under its existing loan
agreement and for general corporate purposes.  Morgan Stanley &
Co. LLC acted as sole placement agent for the transaction.

The notes bear interest at a rate of 12% per annum, payable semi-
annually on April 15 and October 15 of each year, commencing on
April 15, 2017.  On each payment date, commencing on April 15,
2019, Quotient will pay an installment of principal of the notes
pursuant to a fixed amortization schedule.  The stated maturity
date of the notes is Oct. 15, 2023.  The notes are redeemable at
the option of Quotient at a redemption price that includes a
make-whole premium until Oct. 14, 2018, and, thereafter, at a
redemption price that includes a declining premium to par over
four years.  The notes are guaranteed by Quotient's subsidiaries
and secured by substantially all of the property and assets
(subject to certain exclusions) of Quotient and its subsidiaries.

Additionally, Quotient has sold a royalty right to the note
purchasers, representing a right to receive an aggregate 2.0%
royalty payment on net sales of MosaiQ instruments and
consumables in the donor testing market in the European Union and
the United States.  The royalty will be payable beginning on the
date that Quotient or its affiliates enters into a contract for
the sale of MosaiQ instruments or consumables in the donor
testing market in the European Union or the United States and
ending on the last day of the calendar quarter in which the
eighth annual anniversary of the first contract date occurs.

                     About Quotient Limited

Quotient is a commercial-stage diagnostics company committed to
reducing healthcare costs and improving patient care through the
provision of innovative tests within established markets.  With
an initial focus on blood grouping and serological disease
screening, Quotient is developing its proprietary MosaiQ
technology platform to offer a breadth of tests that is unmatched
by existing commercially available transfusion diagnostic
instrument platforms.  The Company's operations are based in
Edinburgh, Scotland; Eysins, Switzerland and Newtown,

As of June 30, 2016, US$102.08 million in total assets, US$74.22
million in total liabilities and US$27.85 million in total
shareholders' equity.

Quotient Limited reported a net loss of US$33.87 million for the
year ended March 31, 2016, a net loss of US$59.05 million  for
the yera ended March 31, 2015, and a net loss of US$10.16 million
for the year ended March 31, 2014.

Ernst & Young LLP, in Belfast, United Kingdom, issued a "going
concern" qualification on the consolidated financial statements
for the year ended March 31, 2016, citing that the Company has
recurring losses from operations and planned expenditure
exceeding available funding that raise substantial doubt about
its ability to continue as a going concern.


Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers'
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than US$3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look
like the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell
short.  Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at
historical cost net of depreciation may understate the true value
of a firm's assets.  A company may establish reserves on its
balance sheet for liabilities that may never materialize.  The
prices at which equity securities trade in public market are
determined by more than a balance sheet solvency test.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book
of interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through  Go to order any title today.


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter-Europe is a daily newsletter co-
published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Valerie U. Pascual, Marites O. Claro, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez,
Joy A. Agravante, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Ivy B. Magdadaro, and
Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2016.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1529-2754.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The TCR Europe subscription rate is US$775 per half-year,
delivered via e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for
members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription
or balance thereof are US$25 each.  For subscription information,
contact Peter Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at

                 * * * End of Transmission * * *