To prevent having to deal with the issue of substitution, we modified our agreements with client and custodian to provide for a "quiet period". After close of business each day until next business morning no securities held as collateral may be traded. That way we won't have to worry about substitution issues on overnight repos.
I don't think you have properly addressed the issue of control and in the scenario described, you don't seem to have a properly executed sweep. Consider this info from ABA guidance:
"Properly executed sweeps generally involve a third-party custodian for the assets who takes direction to effect the transfer of funds or securities only from the repo customer. By contrast, “improperly executed” sweeps typically involve repos for which the bank retains control over the security or a pool of securities and simultaneously serves as the repo buyer’s custodial agent. This type of repo is often called a hold-in-custody, or HIC repo. Even though the assets are segregated in accordance with the Treasury Department’s rules under the Government Securities Act and the assets may be held at a correspondent bank or other third party, FDIC’s position is that a HIC repo gives the bank too much control over the securities for the customer to have a perfected security interest."
regarding the 3rd section within this quote. I don't see anywhere were the FDIC eludes to an HIC as being an improperly executed sweep. Can someone point me to this? We use the language contained in 17 CFR 403.5(d) which specifically spells out the requirements for when the FI retains custody of the security and a counterparty. However, I'm removing the substitution clause.
Also, the Q&A #16 eludes that the simple fact of having an HIC isn't prohibitive, so long as it's covered inthe agreement. Any arguments?
Also, what are they considering a separate account. If they are held within our entire portfolio with a correspondent, for instance, but specifically described in the daily confirmation according to the rules...what do they deem "separate"?