This article is a work in progress. If you have any questions, thoughts, or corrections, contact us.

Playbooks

Selecting your law firm

OriginatorCapital Provider

Selecting your law firm

Legal costs on a first warehouse facility typically run $75K-$200K for the originator alone, representing 20-40% of total deal costs. Choose the wrong counsel and you get slower execution, missed issues, avoidable renegotiation, and occasionally blown deals. This guide covers how to evaluate and select legal counsel for ABF transactions, with specific guidance for both originators and capital providers.

Why this choice matters

ABF documentation is highly specialized. A general corporate attorney or M&A partner will struggle with the interlocking agreements, bankruptcy remoteness analysis, true sale opinions, and UCC perfection requirements that define these transactions. You need counsel who have done dozens of ABF deals, not lawyers learning the structure on your time and your bill.

The relationship also extends beyond a single deal. Your law firm will likely represent you on facility amendments, refinancings, and future structures. Getting this right at the outset saves significant cost and friction over a multi-year relationship.

For originators, the stakes are particularly high on a first facility. You’re simultaneously learning the ABF market, negotiating with a sophisticated capital provider, and building operational infrastructure. Your counsel should be a guide through this process, not just a document producer.

For capital providers, efficiency matters most. You have form documents and established processes. The question is whether outside counsel can execute quickly, flag real issues without over-lawyering, and maintain the relationships that enable repeat business.

Bulge bracket firms

Firms like Mayer Brown, Sidley, Latham, Orrick, and Chapman have full-service structured finance practices with deep benches. They maintain relationships with all major rating agencies and have closed hundreds of term ABS transactions.

Typical rates: $1,000-$1,800/hour for partners; $400-$700/hour for associates

Best for: Rated deals, large facilities ($100M+), complex or novel structures, transactions requiring coordination across multiple jurisdictions

Trade-offs: Higher cost, potential for junior staffing on smaller deals, less flexibility on fee arrangements

Mid-market firms

Firms like Katten, Blank Rome, Husch Blackwell, and Alston & Bird have strong structured finance groups that focus on the middle market. They offer more flexible pricing and often provide more senior attention to mid-sized deals.

Typical rates: $700-$1,200/hour for partners; $350-$550/hour for associates

Best for: Middle-market deals ($25M-$150M), warehouse facilities, originators seeking balance of expertise and cost

Trade-offs: Thinner bench than bulge bracket, may need to bring in specialists for highly complex structures

Boutique specialists

Smaller firms with concentrated ABF expertise, often regional or founded by partners who left larger firms. Lower overhead translates to lower rates and often more responsive service.

Typical rates: $500-$900/hour for partners

Best for: Smaller deals, cost-conscious originators, transactions where relationship and attention matter more than brand name

Trade-offs: Limited capacity for multiple simultaneous deals, may lack rating agency relationships for term ABS

General corporate counsel will miss issues that ABF specialists handle routinely:

True sale and bankruptcy remoteness. The legal foundation of any ABF structure rests on whether the asset transfer constitutes a true sale for bankruptcy purposes. Getting this wrong exposes capital providers to originator bankruptcy risk and can collapse the entire structure.

UCC Article 9 perfection. Security interests must be properly perfected across multiple asset types and jurisdictions. Specialists know the filing requirements, priority rules, and common pitfalls.

Regulatory overlay. State lending licenses, federal consumer protection rules, and industry-specific regulations create compliance requirements that general counsel often overlook.

Servicer issues. The servicing agreement governs ongoing portfolio management, backup servicer arrangements, and termination events. These provisions have significant economic and operational implications.

Interplay of documents. The credit agreement, security agreement, servicing agreement, and account control agreements must work together seamlessly. Gaps or inconsistencies create risk.

Selection criteria that actually matter

ABF and structured finance experience

Ask prospective firms for a deal list. You want to see:

  • Number of ABF transactions closed in the past 2-3 years
  • Asset class familiarity matching your portfolio (consumer loans, equipment, receivables, specialty)
  • Structure experience matching your deal type (warehouse, forward flow, term ABS)
  • Rating agency relationships if you’re pursuing rated execution

A firm that closed 50 equipment finance warehouses may not be the right choice for a consumer loan facility with complex regulatory requirements. Asset class matters.

Deal size fit

Match your deal size to the firm’s typical transaction size. Avoid being:

  • The smallest deal at a big firm: You’ll get junior staffing and slow response times as partners prioritize larger mandates
  • The largest deal at a small firm: Bench depth issues arise when you need surge capacity

The sweet spot is when your deal represents 50-150% of the firm’s median transaction size. You’re important enough to get attention but not so large that you overwhelm their capacity.

Partner attention vs. associate staffing

Request a staffing proposal before engagement. Ask specifically:

  • Which partner will be primarily responsible?
  • How much of the work will that partner personally handle?
  • Who are the associates, and what is their ABF experience?

Beware the bait-and-switch: a named partner sells the engagement, then an unknown associate does 90% of the work. Partners should handle negotiations, key documents (credit agreement, servicing agreement), and legal opinions. Associates can handle ancillary documents and due diligence support.

ABF associates with 3+ years of experience are particularly valuable. They know the documentation well enough to work efficiently and flag issues without constant partner supervision. Ask about the specific associates who will staff your deal.

Responsiveness and availability

Dealmaking is unpredictable. A capital provider may send a markup at 5pm on Friday that needs response by Monday morning. Your counsel must be available when the deal requires it.

Ask references specifically about turnaround times. Good questions:

  • How quickly do they typically turn around document markups?
  • Were they available for calls when you needed them?
  • Did they ever delay the deal timeline?

For deals spanning time zones, consider geographic logistics. A West Coast firm may struggle with real-time negotiation when your capital provider’s counsel is in New York.

Conflicts and relationships

Conflicts take several forms:

Direct conflicts are disqualifying. A firm cannot represent you if they represent your capital provider on the same deal.

Relationship conflicts are subtler. If a firm represents your direct competitor on other deals, they may unconsciously share market intelligence or negotiating positions. At minimum, they’re developing expertise you’re paying for on someone else’s transaction.

Standing relationships with major lenders can work for or against you. A firm that regularly represents a particular capital provider knows their form documents and process, which can accelerate execution. But if the relationship is too close, their advice may subtly favor the lender’s position.

Ask directly: Who else do you represent in this space? Have you worked with our prospective capital provider before, and in what capacity?

The selection process

Getting recommendations

The best recommendations come from people who have actually worked with the firm on ABF transactions:

Ask your capital provider. Even before engagement, most ABF lenders will suggest law firms they’ve worked with successfully. They have an interest in efficient execution and will often recommend counsel who can navigate their form documents effectively.

Ask other originators. Peers in your asset class or stage have recent experience and can share both positive and negative feedback. Industry conferences, ABF working groups, and investor intros are good sources.

Avoid cold outreach. Warm introductions work better than website contact forms. Ask for a specific partner introduction rather than going through the firm’s intake process.

The evaluation conversation

In your first meeting with prospective counsel, cover:

  • Deal list: Ask for specific transactions, including asset class, structure, size, and year
  • Approach: Are they aggressive or conservative? How do they approach negotiation?
  • Staffing: Who will work on your deal, and what is their specific experience?
  • Conflicts: Who else do they represent in your space?
  • Interest: Is your deal a priority for them, or are you filling gaps in their calendar?

Gauge their engagement level. Partners who ask detailed questions about your business and suggest proactive approaches are more valuable than those treating the conversation as a sales pitch.

The deeper evaluation questions to ask counsel are covered in Questions to ask your legal team.

RFP process for larger mandates

For deals above $100M or when selecting a firm for an ongoing relationship, a formal RFP process makes sense.

Include in your RFP:

  • Transaction description and structure overview
  • Expected timeline
  • Staffing expectations and partner involvement requirements
  • Request for fee proposal with multiple structures (hourly, capped, fixed)
  • Request for relevant deal experience

Evaluate proposals on value, not just cost. A firm that quotes $150K with appropriate staffing and relevant experience may be better value than one quoting $100K with junior associates and limited ABF background.

Fee negotiation

Standard hourly billing is common but not the only option:

Capped fees provide predictability. You agree on a maximum for defined scope, with hourly billing up to the cap. This works well when scope is reasonably clear. Typical caps for a first warehouse: $90K-$130K for originator’s counsel.

Fixed fees require very clear scope definition. Any scope expansion triggers additional fees. Works better for routine transactions than first-time facilities.

Volume discounts apply when committing to multiple transactions or an ongoing relationship. Typical discounts: 10-20% off standard rates.

Success fees are rare in ABF but occasionally appear on term ABS transactions where legal costs can exceed $500K.

Typical fee ranges

Deal typeOriginator counselCapital provider counsel
Forward flow$25K-$50K$30K-$75K
First warehouse ($25M-$75M)$75K-$150K$75K-$125K
Warehouse ($75M-$200M)$100K-$200K$100K-$175K
Term ABS (unrated)$150K-$300K$150K-$250K
Term ABS (rated)$300K-$600K$250K-$500K

These ranges assume standard complexity. Novel structures, difficult negotiations, or regulatory issues can push costs higher. Simpler transactions with experienced parties can come in lower.

Borrower’s counsel vs. lender’s counsel

Most ABF transactions have separate counsel for each party. Each side typically pays its own legal fees, though the originator often indirectly bears higher costs when capital provider counsel fees are built into deal economics.

Choosing originator/borrower counsel

Your counsel should:

  • Have experience negotiating against the major ABF lenders and their law firms
  • Understand which points are worth fighting for and which are market standard
  • Explain trade-offs in business terms, not just legal terms
  • Know when to push back and when to concede gracefully

First-time originators particularly need counsel who can guide them through the process, not just react to the other side’s drafts. Ask prospective counsel: How do you help first-time borrowers understand what’s negotiable?

Choosing capital provider/lender counsel

If you’re a capital provider selecting counsel:

  • Do you need form documents drafted, or will you use in-house forms?
  • Does the firm have experience with your asset class and risk tolerance?
  • Can they get deals done efficiently without over-lawyering?
  • For term ABS: Do they have established rating agency relationships?

Some capital providers maintain one or two firms on retainer who know their documentation and process. This efficiency benefit is real but requires periodic market-testing to avoid cost creep.

When capital provider counsel drives the process

In most warehouse deals, the capital provider’s counsel drafts the documentation suite. The originator’s counsel role becomes primarily review and negotiation rather than drafting.

This dynamic affects how you should think about your counsel:

  • Focus on negotiating skill over drafting skill
  • Prioritize familiarity with capital provider’s form documents
  • Look for counsel who can identify the five issues worth fighting versus the fifty that are market standard

Geographic considerations

NY law and deal documentation

Most ABF credit documentation is governed by New York law, regardless of where the parties are located. This reflects New York’s well-developed commercial law and experienced courts.

SPV formation typically uses Delaware for its favorable entity laws and efficient court system.

State law matters for:

  • True sale analysis (depends on originator’s state of incorporation)
  • UCC perfection (depends on debtor location and collateral type)
  • Consumer protection (depends on borrower location)

For complex multi-state issues, you may need local counsel opinions in addition to primary deal counsel. Your lead firm should coordinate this efficiently.

Remote work and geographic flexibility

Most ABF legal work is now conducted remotely. Firm location matters less than it did historically. Video calls, electronic signatures, and shared document platforms enable efficient execution regardless of where your counsel sits.

Exceptions where in-person matters:

  • Complex negotiations where reading the room accelerates resolution
  • Closing logistics for deals requiring physical signatures
  • Relationship building for long-term counsel partnerships

Time zone remains relevant. Real-time document negotiation becomes difficult when parties are more than 3-4 hours apart.

Worked example: selecting counsel for a first warehouse

Scenario: A consumer lending fintech is seeking a $30M warehouse facility. This is their first ABF transaction. The prospective capital provider is a mid-market ABF lender with established form documents. Target closing: 90 days.

The selection process:

The originator evaluated three firms:

  1. Bulge bracket firm with extensive term ABS experience
  2. Mid-market firm with 15+ consumer warehouse deals
  3. Boutique with lower rates but limited consumer lending experience

Evaluation criteria weighting:

  • ABF experience in consumer space: 40%
  • Cost: 30%
  • Responsiveness and availability: 20%
  • Conflicts: 10%

Selection: Mid-market firm #2

Key factors:

  • Partner had closed 8 deals with this specific capital provider’s form documents
  • Fee estimate: $75K-$100K (capped at $110K)
  • Staffing: senior partner (20% of hours), senior associate with 4 years ABF experience (60%), junior associate (20%)
  • No conflicts with competitors

Why the others didn’t work:

The bulge bracket firm quoted $180K-$250K for the same scope. Their consumer lending experience was concentrated in term ABS, not warehouses, and the partner who would lead the deal was clearly treating this as a small matter.

The boutique had attractive rates but no experience with this capital provider’s documentation, meaning a longer learning curve and likely more negotiation cycles.

Outcome: Deal closed in 87 days. Final legal cost: $98K. The relationship continued through two facility upsizes and eventually a term ABS transaction.

← All Topics