How Do Intercreditor Agreements Work in Texas Law?

In Texas, the lending landscape is intricate, involving senior lenders, mezzanine financiers, and sometimes junior lienholders, all converging on a single borrower and their assets. When multiple creditors have a claim, an intercreditor agreement becomes the essential guidebook, defining the rules of engagement and the pecking order of who gets paid when things go south. From a Texas lawyer's perspective, these agreements are not merely boilerplate documents; they are critical instruments that require careful drafting and a nuanced understanding of Texas law to protect a client’s position.

The primary function of an intercreditor agreement is to establish lien priority and payment subordination. Texas recognizes the concept of "first in time, first in right" when it comes to liens on real property, but an intercreditor agreement allows creditors to contractually alter this default rule. For instance, a senior lender financing the purchase of commercial real estate will want ironclad assurance that their debt is repaid before a junior lender sees a dime. The agreement makes this explicit, preventing a drawn-out legal battle in a Texas courthouse during a foreclosure or bankruptcy proceeding.

However, the complexities extend beyond simple payment order. A well-crafted Texas intercreditor agreement also dictates control over collateral and the ability to exercise remedies. The senior lender will typically negotiate for "standstill" provisions that temporarily, or sometimes permanently, prevent junior creditors from foreclosing on the collateral or accelerating their debt during a default. This control is vital to the senior lender as it allows them time to work through the default, potentially find a buyer for the assets, or conduct an orderly liquidation without the junior lender rushing in and disrupting the process.

For a Texas attorney representing a junior creditor, the focus shifts to negotiating a fair "standstill" period and ensuring the junior lender receives adequate notice of any default by the borrower. The junior lender wants to be in a position to monitor the situation closely and potentially cure the default to protect their own investment. The agreement must also clearly define "permitted actions" for the junior creditor, ensuring they are not completely muzzled in their ability to monitor the borrower's compliance with their loan covenants.

Another crucial Texas consideration is how intercreditor agreements interact with the state’s non-judicial foreclosure laws. Texas permits a relatively quick, efficient non-judicial foreclosure process for deeds of trust with a "power of sale" clause. The intercreditor agreement must be clear about which creditor controls this process and how the proceeds are to be distributed, ensuring a smooth transition from default to liquidation without legal ambiguity under Texas Property Code.

From a Texas lawyer's perspective, an intercreditor agreement is a risk allocation tool. It mitigates uncertainty for all parties by contractually defining their rights and obligations long before a dispute arises. Whether representing a major bank in Dallas or a private equity firm in Houston, a Texas attorney's role is to ensure their client’s interests are robustly protected within the framework of state law, navigating the delicate balance of power between competing creditors in a structured and legally binding manner.

Need to learn more? Get in touch.