Valuation
Judicial expert costs in Moroccan NPL recovery
A cost line often missing from downside cases.
- Author
- Serenor Capital
- Published
- Read
- 2 min read
This note isolates judicial expert costs as an analytical object distinct from the published pillars on market, valuation and servicing. The aim is to stop a buyer importing an ass This note details the operating reading before price.
Scope and definition
This note isolates judicial expert costs as an analytical object distinct from the published pillars on market, valuation and servicing. The aim is to stop a buyer importing an assumption from another segment without saying so.
The starting point remains the loan tape and data room, not a sector ratio. At end-2025 Bank Al-Maghrib published an NPL stock of MAD 102.3 billion, an 8.3% social-basis NPL ratio (8.8% consolidated) and 68% coverage. Those aggregates frame the market; they do not replace analysis of the sold book.
What the tape and file must establish
Before monetising an assumption, document the fields that make judicial expert costs observable: dates, statuses, security, proceedings, settlement authorities and costs already incurred. Missing fields on a material share of the book force a more conservative assumption.
Sample diligence must be stratified. An unstratified draw on a heterogeneous book produces false precision.
Impact on the recovery scenario
In a cash-flow model, judicial expert costs acts on recovery probability, timing or costs — sometimes all three. The exact channel must be explicit in the assumptions file, or credit committee cannot challenge the price.
Downside cases should break the base assumption on this specific point rather than apply an opaque blanket haircut.
Limits and claims discipline
No recovery rate, median timeline or market price is asserted here as a national standard. Draft Law 02-26 is not promulgated and must not be treated as an in-force regime.
Serenor Capital publishes a method of reading. It does not buy claims for its own account, manage a fund, or carry on collection.
In this series
- NPL valuation Morocco
- Morocco NPL market
- Collateral vs recovery
- Third-party opposition in Moroccan foreclosure
- Orphan collateral in Moroccan NPL portfolios
This note is a method of reading a file or a published series. It is not legal, tax or investment advice, and it is not an opinion on a particular exposure. Serenor Capital does not buy claims for its own account, manage a fund, or carry on collection.
Sources and references
- Bank Al-Maghrib, Annual Report on Banking Supervision, financial year 2025 — PDF
- Bank Al-Maghrib, Circular No. 19/G/2002 of 23 December 2002 on the classification of claims and their provisioning, as amended — PDF
- Circular No. 1/W/2025, adopted on 5 December 2025, effective 1 January 2027. It does not restate the 2012–2025 figures discussed here.
- Dahir forming the Code of Obligations and Contracts (DOC); Commercial Code, Book V, as amended by Law 73-17, where relevant.
- Serenor public series — Morocco NPL Monitor and methodology
Frequently asked questions
- Does this note publish a market rate?
- No. It fixes a method of reading. Parameters remain those of the analysed portfolio.
- Does draft Law 02-26 change this analysis?
- Not while it remains unpromulgated. It must not be treated as an in-force regime.
Evaluating an NPL Portfolio
Serenor Capital supports financial institutions and investors in the analysis and valuation of non-performing loan portfolios in Morocco.
Serenor Capital publishes research on non-performing loans, distressed-credit valuation and the development of Morocco’s secondary credit market.
This note is general commentary on method and market structure. It is not investment advice, legal advice, or a recommendation in relation to any portfolio, transaction or financial asset.