Canonical page: https://sequoia-research.com/writing/are-dst-investments-safe-in-2026-how-reserve-adequacy-changes-the-risk-discussion
Author: Sequoia Research
Published: 2026-10-18T09:25:14.005Z
Updated: 2026-10-18T09:25:14.005Z

# Are DST Investments Safe in 2026? How Reserve Adequacy Changes the Risk Discussion

## What Is This Article About?

This article examines reserve provisions in two 2026 Delaware statutory trust, or DST, offering documents. It compares the form, permitted uses, and timing of support with the needs described in those documents. Separate invented examples show why a large stated reserve can still leave a cash gap. The goal is to identify what must be known before calling a reserve adequate, without rating either offering as safe.

## Table of Contents

- [Reserve Adequacy Is a Question About Obligations and Dates](#reserve-adequacy-is-a-question-about-obligations-and-dates)
- [A Defined Sample of 2026 DST Reserve Provisions](#a-defined-sample-of-2026-dst-reserve-provisions)
- [Separate Cash, Notes, Restrictions, and Commitments](#separate-cash-notes-restrictions-and-commitments)
- [Put the Reserve on a Payment Calendar](#put-the-reserve-on-a-payment-calendar)
- [Match the Repair Forecast to the Review Period](#match-the-repair-forecast-to-the-review-period)
- [Check Inflation and Cost Assumptions Once](#check-inflation-and-cost-assumptions-once)
- [Reconcile the Reserve From Opening to Closing](#reconcile-the-reserve-from-opening-to-closing)
- [Distinguish Distribution Support From Operating Improvement](#distinguish-distribution-support-from-operating-improvement)
- [Follow Cash When Another Entity Uses the Reserve](#follow-cash-when-another-entity-uses-the-reserve)
- [Treat Future Support as a Conditional Source](#treat-future-support-as-a-conditional-source)
- [Test Changes Without Hiding the Trade-Off](#test-changes-without-hiding-the-trade-off)
- [Write a Reserve Conclusion That Can Be Updated](#write-a-reserve-conclusion-that-can-be-updated)
- [FAQ](#faq)

## Reserve Adequacy Is a Question About Obligations and Dates

A reserve is adequate only relative to a defined set of needs and assumptions. The useful question is: enough available money for which payments, by what dates, under whose control? A dollar amount alone cannot answer that question.

Start by identifying what the document calls a reserve. The label may cover operating cash, a lender-controlled account, a promise to fund money later, or funds assigned to future work. These items can support an investment in different ways. They should not automatically be added into one balance available for any purpose.

Next, identify the obligation being tested. A roof bill, a rent shortfall, and an investor distribution are different uses. A reserve might be large enough for the roof but too restricted to cover the rent gap. It could support distributions for a time while leaving less available for repairs.

The date matters as much as the amount. A payment expected in August cannot be treated as cash for a June bill unless a documented source covers the interval. A reserve that is adequate for a year's total expenses can still fail a monthly payment test.

This article uses two public offering documents to show what those distinctions look like in actual 2026 disclosures. The detailed cash models that follow are original teaching examples. They are not forecasts, estimates, or findings about either named offering.

The Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, describes limited disclosure, illiquidity, and possible total loss among private-placement risks. A reserve discussion addresses one part of that broader picture. It does not establish the value of the property, the quality of management, or the suitability of an investment for a particular owner. [SEC: Private Placements Under Regulation D](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin).

## A Defined Sample of 2026 DST Reserve Provisions

The sample consists of selected reserve and property-needs passages in two private placement memoranda, or PPMs. Both were retrieved on October 18, 2026. Their dates differ, and the review did not obtain current bank records, a complete amended contract set, or the underlying full condition assessments. Current offering availability was not verified.

### CS1031 Texas Active Living New Braunfels DST

The September 24, 2026 PPM describes planned capital expense reserves of $720,000 and investor reserves of $155,188. It summarizes a condition assessment recommending $188,639 of inflated replacement or repair reserves over twelve years, versus a stated ten-year holding period. The sponsor expresses confidence in the reserve amount but gives no assurance of sufficiency. The master-lease summary allows reserve uses beyond capital work, including costs assigned to the master tenant. Funds used for that tenant's obligations become a noninterest-bearing loan, repayable as soon as practicable and no later than lease termination. [New Braunfels PPM, pages 18, 30, and 66–67](https://anchor1031.com/api/files/marketplace/1791305392153-PPM---CS1031-Texas-Active-Living-New-Braunfels-DST.pdf).

### Passco Allure DST

The May 1, 2026 PPM describes $281,634 of operating reserves and a $3,279,229 reserve note. It states that fixed note payments are due over six months beginning when the trust entered the loan. Its needs-assessment summary recommends $1,003,568 of inflated capital reserves over twelve years. Separately, the loan terms show no initial replacement reserve, $4,667 monthly replacement deposits, a $112,000 lender-controlled reserve, and a $48,709 insurance impound. These are different funding forms and uses, not one unrestricted cash balance. [Allure PPM, printed pages 23, 49, and 76–77](https://qbkrvktefrncdppfqwyg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/investment-documents/rec2aJXhMpuVPqp2L/146296582c94da53/Passco%20-%20Allure%20DST%20-%20PPM.pdf).

The comparison supplies questions, not a ranking. What is cash today? What is still owed? Which costs can draw on each account? Does the forecast use the same period as the stated need? What obligations are outside the condition report?

A property-needs estimate is not a complete operating budget. It may not measure the cash needed during weaker leasing or the amount required to maintain a planned payment to investors. Conversely, a cash account described as operating support should not be assumed free of other demands.

The records reviewed here do not establish today's available balances or whether either reserve is sufficient. A current conclusion would require updated balances, permitted-use terms, funding receipts, commitments, and a dated cash forecast. That evidence gap is part of the result.

## Separate Cash, Notes, Restrictions, and Commitments

An amount can be an asset without being cash available for the next bill. A note is a claim against another party. A restricted account may hold cash that cannot be used for the payment under review. A commitment can reduce the practical room to act even before the money leaves the bank.

Consider an invented DST called Bay Meadow. It has $600,000 in bank accounts and a separate $300,000 note owed by a funding party. Its stated support totals $900,000, but only $600,000 is cash at the starting date.

Of that cash, $230,000 is restricted under assumed lender terms. The remaining $370,000 can be used for the trust's permitted needs. A $90,000 roof payment is already scheduled from this unrestricted account. That commitment does not overlap the restricted account. After setting it aside, $280,000 remains for other needs.

| Starting support in the invented case | Amount | Treatment for near-term bills |
|---|---:|---|
| Restricted cash | $230,000 | Unavailable for the bills tested here |
| Unrestricted cash assigned to the roof | $90,000 | Available for that planned payment |
| Other unrestricted cash | $280,000 | Available under the assumed terms |
| Note owed by the funding party | $300,000 | Separate claim; not yet received |
| Total stated support | $900,000 | Includes cash and a note |

This table does not subtract the roof twice. The cash is $600,000: $230,000 plus $90,000 plus $280,000. The roof commitment explains part of that cash; it is not an additional reduction from a balance already shown net of the commitment.

The $900,000 total may be useful when describing all support assets. It would be misleading as an answer to “How much can pay an unexpected bill today?” For the particular bills in this example, the restricted account and the unfunded note are excluded.

A reviewer should ask for the account owner, permitted uses, approval steps, and balance date. Those fields explain what a figure means. A large number without them may create more confidence than the evidence warrants.

## Put the Reserve on a Payment Calendar

The next step is to place receipts and payments in order. Bay Meadow's first three months show how a funding promise can arrive too late for a plan that works in total dollars.

Assume the $300,000 note is to be paid in three $100,000 installments in months four, five, and six. No note payment arrives in the first three months. The restricted $230,000 remains unavailable for the uses below.

The trust has a $40,000 monthly net cash gap after collected operating receipts, paid routine costs, and planned owner distributions. This supplied gap excludes the roof and an unexpected repair. The $90,000 roof is paid in month two. An unexpected $220,000 repair is due in month three.

| Month | Starting unrestricted cash | Note cash received | Ordinary net gap | Separate work due | Projected ending cash |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| One | $370,000 | $0 | ($40,000) | $0 | $330,000 |
| Two | $330,000 | $0 | ($40,000) | ($90,000) | $200,000 |
| Three | $200,000 | $0 | ($40,000) | ($220,000) | ($60,000) |

The negative $60,000 is an unmet funding need. It is not a claim that a bank account can simply pay money it does not have. At the start of month three, the trust has $200,000 for $260,000 of modeled net uses. A complete payment plan needs another source or a change in those uses.

Looking only at total stated support would miss this. The trust began with $900,000 of cash and a note, yet part of the cash was restricted and note cash had not arrived. The problem is the sequence and availability of funding.

In a separate timing variant, suppose a documented agreement brings the first $100,000 installment forward so it arrives before the month-three bills. The same calculation ends month three with $40,000. That result assumes actual receipt, not merely a request to accelerate payment.

The note's remaining face amount would fall to $200,000 in that variant. Bringing cash forward changes the timing of the support; it does not create an extra $100,000 asset. Keep the note balance and cash receipts connected so the payment is not counted in both places.

## Match the Repair Forecast to the Review Period

A long-term repair total is not necessarily spread evenly through time. The reserve needed before an intended exit depends on when the work is expected, what it includes, and whether the holding period changes.

Use a separate invented condition plan. It estimates $1.2 million of work over twelve years. The scheduled items total $480,000 in years one through eight and $720,000 in years nine through twelve. No inflation adjustment is added in this example.

If someone multiplies $1.2 million by eight-twelfths, the result is $800,000. That is $320,000 above the actual first-eight-year schedule. The simple fraction assumes an even pattern that the supplied schedule does not have.

That mistake does not prove the lower $480,000 is enough. It only shows that a calendar-based estimate should use the scheduled items. The plan may omit newly found damage, include uncertain timing, or depend on work being postponed. Those limitations need review rather than an arbitrary average.

The reverse problem can also occur. If costly work comes early, an average annual amount can understate the cash needed at the start. A reserve funded gradually may reach the full forecast total after the largest bill is already due.

Ask whether the forecast includes all components or only selected systems. Separate routine upkeep from major replacements if the source uses that distinction. Check whether tenant improvements, leasing costs, taxes, insurance, or operating shortfalls sit elsewhere in the budget.

A planned exit does not erase work needed before the sale. Nor does it guarantee that the next owner will accept a property with deferred work at an unchanged price. The reserve analysis should state its assumed holding period and what happens if that period grows longer.

For the invented twelve-year plan, a later exit would bring some of the $720,000 later work into the review window. The exact amount would come from the item schedule. It should not be guessed by extending an average that already failed the first test.

## Check Inflation and Cost Assumptions Once

A reserve comparison can go wrong when one side includes future price changes and the other does not. Read the labels before adding any cost growth.

In another separate example, a project is estimated to cost $200,000 in today's dollars. Assume it will be paid exactly five years later and costs rise by a chosen 4% each year. The future amount is $200,000 multiplied by 1.04 five times, or $243,330.58 when rounded to cents.

The $43,330.58 increase follows that chosen assumption. It is not a forecast for construction prices or either named property. Actual bids, timing, scope, and local conditions could produce a different result.

If the supplied forecast already shows $243,330.58 as the inflated year-five cost, applying the same growth again would count inflation twice. Keep the source's current-dollar and future-dollar columns distinct. The label should travel with the number into any summary.

Also check what the estimate excludes. A contractor's quoted work may differ from the total cash needed if permits, design fees, or other items are outside the price. Those costs should be added only when the evidence shows they are not already included.

Do not turn a contingency into a known bill. If a budget sets aside extra cash for uncertainty, identify that purpose and the chosen basis. A contingency can improve flexibility, but its size does not prove that every possible cost has been captured.

A useful update preserves the old estimate and explains the new one. Record whether the change came from price, scope, timing, or a corrected omission. That explanation is more useful than replacing one total with another and calling the reserve stronger or weaker.

## Reconcile the Reserve From Opening to Closing

A reserve review should explain how the ending balance was reached. Without that bridge, a stable balance can hide a large new funding receipt, while a decline can be blamed on the wrong use.

The following is a separate full-year scenario. It is not a continuation of Bay Meadow's three-month shortfall. At the start, the trust has $600,000 of reserve cash and a $300,000 funding note. During the year, the entire note is paid in cash. The trust also adds $80,000 from operations.

It pays $210,000 for capital work, $120,000 to support owner distributions, and $70,000 of other reserve-funded expenses. These uses are distinct, and no other cash movements occur.

| Annual reserve cash bridge | Amount |
|---|---:|
| Opening reserve cash | $600,000 |
| Funding note collected | $300,000 |
| Cash added from operations | $80,000 |
| Capital work paid | ($210,000) |
| Distribution support paid | ($120,000) |
| Other reserve-funded expenses paid | ($70,000) |
| Closing reserve cash | $580,000 |

The bank balance fell by only $20,000. Yet cash uses totaled $400,000. The $300,000 note collection and $80,000 operating addition offset most of those uses. Reporting only the small net decline would hide how the reserve was used.

The note is now fully collected, so its separate ending balance is zero. Opening support assets were $900,000, including the note. Add the $80,000 operating contribution and subtract the $400,000 of uses to reach the same $580,000 ending support. Counting the note again would overstate support by $300,000.

Suppose $250,000 of the closing cash is restricted and $100,000 is committed to separate upcoming work. The available remainder is $230,000. Those figures describe the closing cash; they are not new expenses to subtract from the annual cash bridge.

If the restricted balance rose through an internal transfer, that transfer does not reduce total cash by itself. It changes which cash is available. A good reconciliation distinguishes movement between accounts from money paid outside the trust.

## Distinguish Distribution Support From Operating Improvement

Reserve cash can help make a payment without showing that recurring operations funded it. The difference matters when an investor wants to know whether the payment can continue.

For a separate annual distribution illustration, assume $420,000 of cash is available from operations after the costs included in that model. Owner payments total $540,000. The $120,000 gap comes from reserves. There are no other funding sources in this example.

Operations supplied about 77.78% of the owner payments, and reserves supplied about 22.22%. These are cash-source shares, not investment returns, tax character, or a conclusion that a payment was improper. The figures describe where the cash came from under the stated assumptions.

If the recurring shortfall remains $120,000 a year, keeping the payment unchanged requires a source for the next year's gap. A reserve can cover it for a time. That does not make the underlying operating difference disappear.

The right follow-up is to ask what is expected to change. A forecast might assume more leased space, higher collections, lower costs, or a different payment level. Each proposed change needs an amount, a date, and a source. “The reserve is strong” does not explain how recurring cash improves.

Be careful with overlapping cash figures. The $420,000 in this illustration is already after its included costs. Do not subtract those same costs again when measuring support. Conversely, if major work is paid separately from reserves, it must still appear in the reserve plan.

An investor may prefer a lower payment that leaves more cash in the investment. Another may value current cash more highly. Neither preference resolves the property-level question. The documents and financial plan determine what uses are permitted and what choices the decision-maker can make.

A review should show both the payment received and the remaining support. A consistent monthly check is useful information, but it is not a substitute for knowing whether the reserve is being replenished or drawn down.

## Follow Cash When Another Entity Uses the Reserve

A reserve held by a trust may support costs elsewhere in the operating structure. If another entity must repay it, the trust may exchange cash for a receivable—a claim for money owed. The claim and the cash have different uses on a payment date.

Consider a separate invented arrangement. A trust has $350,000 of available cash. Under an assumed contract, it advances $90,000 to a master tenant for a permitted expense, and the tenant owes repayment. The trust then has $260,000 of cash and a $90,000 receivable.

Before considering collectability or other changes, the combined stated amount remains $350,000. But a $300,000 trust bill due before repayment cannot be paid from $260,000 alone. There is a $40,000 timing gap despite the unchanged total of cash plus the claim.

In one variant, the tenant pays back $45,000 before the bill is due. Cash rises to $305,000 and the receivable falls to $45,000. Paying the $300,000 bill then leaves $5,000 in cash. The receipt is counted once, and the unpaid half of the claim remains separate.

The obligation to repay is an assumption in this example. In an actual review, examine who owes the money, when it is due, what conditions apply, and what supports collection. An affiliated name does not answer those questions.

Also check whether repayment can occur through a reduction in future rent. A contractual offset may change future cash receipts rather than producing a bank transfer. The forecast should reflect the actual mechanism. Do not count a promised repayment and the unreduced rent as two full sources when the terms link them.

This is why permitted-use language matters to reserve adequacy. A fund that can support several entities or purposes may have more competing demands than its short label suggests. That observation calls for a clearer map; it does not, by itself, establish misuse or a loss.

## Treat Future Support as a Conditional Source

Future funding should have a place in the plan, but its conditions must stay visible. A note payment, insurance recovery, lender release, or possible new contribution is not interchangeable with unrestricted cash already received.

For each source, record the party responsible, amount, due date, conditions, and evidence of receipt. If the source is disputed or depends on another event, show that separately. A reviewer should be able to see which payment needs can be met without the conditional source.

Do not assume owners can simply send more money if the reserve runs low. The Internal Revenue Service's Revenue Ruling 2004-86 analyzes a specified trust whose powers include limits on accepting additional contributions and other actions. Its tax conclusion is conditional on the described facts and other requirements. An actual funding response needs review of the governing terms and tax consequences. [IRS Revenue Ruling 2004-86](https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-04-86.pdf).

Likewise, a lender-controlled balance requires review of its release terms. Evidence that cash exists does not establish that a request will be approved before the bill. A plan should distinguish submitted, approved, and received amounts.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, or FINRA, discusses primary records and investigation of material claims in its private-placement guidance for covered firms. That supports asking for the actual documents behind an important funding claim. It does not establish that any particular reserve has been independently verified. [FINRA Regulatory Notice 23-08](https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/23-08).

Where evidence is missing, use an unresolved status. Assigning a zero can imply that no source exists; assigning the full amount can imply that it is available. Neither conclusion follows from a missing document alone.

## Test Changes Without Hiding the Trade-Off

A stress test is most useful when it identifies what must change to avoid a gap. It should also show the cost of that change to investors or the property.

Return to the invented three-month Bay Meadow plan. Its modeled deficit is $60,000. Suppose the decision-maker is permitted to reduce planned owner payments by $20,000 in each of the three months. All other receipts and costs stay the same. The ordinary net gap falls from $40,000 to $20,000 per month.

The revised cash path ends at $350,000 after month one, $240,000 after month two and its roof payment, and zero after month three and its unexpected repair. The change closes the modeled gap because owners receive $60,000 less. It does not create new property income or restore a cushion above zero.

Consider a different alternative: postponing the $90,000 roof payment until after month three while keeping the original owner payments. Ending unrestricted cash would be $30,000. The roof obligation would still be $90,000, leaving a $60,000 gap relative to that upcoming commitment. A later payment date is not a permanent cost saving.

These alternatives replace the original plan; they are not added together. The article does not establish that either action is legally available, physically sensible, or acceptable to investors. Those questions require the actual contracts and work requirements.

Stress assumptions also need clear limits. A chosen repair bill is not the largest possible repair. A selected period of lower cash does not set the maximum duration. Record why the scenario matters and what the calculation leaves out.

A nonnegative modeled balance means only that the included cash flows fit those assumptions. It does not establish investment safety, a sufficient contingency, or a likely result. The value of the exercise is showing which facts and choices drive the answer.

## Write a Reserve Conclusion That Can Be Updated

A useful reserve conclusion is narrow enough to check later. It should identify the balance date, accounts, restrictions, included commitments, funding receipts, forecast period, and stress assumptions.

For example, a reviewer might conclude that documented cash covers the listed payments through a certain date, excluding a pending release. That is more informative than saying the reserve is adequate without naming the period or obligations. If the release arrives or a cost changes, the conclusion can be revised.

Keep the original forecast beside the latest one. A change in timing should not be described as a cost reduction. Collection of a note should not be described as new investment profit. Moving cash to a restricted account should not be described as spending it.

The review also needs a person responsible for each unresolved item. One question may require an account statement. Another may require a contract clause, paid invoice, or revised repair schedule. A general assurance cannot close every type of gap.

The two 2026 documents in this article illustrate why reserve language deserves a closer read. Their selected provisions do not establish current adequacy. A defensible risk discussion connects each stated source to specific needs, dates, and access conditions, then preserves what remains unknown.

## FAQ

### Does a larger DST reserve mean the investment is safer?

Not by itself. Compare its form, permitted uses, restrictions, funding dates, and competing demands. A larger stated amount may include a note or money assigned to a specific purpose. Different properties can also have different needs. This article does not rank the two named offerings by reserve size.

### Is a reserve note the same as reserve cash?

No. A note is a claim for payment under its terms. Cash arrives only when payment is received. A forecast can include expected note collections, but it should also test what happens if a bill is due first. Reduce the note balance as cash is collected to avoid counting the same support twice.

### Can a condition report prove that the reserve is adequate?

It can support analysis of the items and period it covers. It does not necessarily include operating shortfalls, distribution support, or every other demand on cash. Check the full scope and dated schedule. The named PPM summaries reviewed here were not substitutes for obtaining the underlying complete assessments.

### Why do restricted accounts matter if the trust owns the cash?

Ownership does not establish permission to use money for every bill. The account may have a specific purpose or approval requirement. Show restricted cash separately and examine the release conditions. The invented model excludes restricted funds only because its stated assumptions make them unavailable for the tested uses.

### Does a distribution paid from reserves prove a loss?

It identifies a cash source, not the full investment result or tax character. The important follow-up is what remains available and how future needs will be funded. A payment can arrive as planned while support falls. A total-return calculation would also need the owner's other cash flows and ending value or exit proceeds.

### Should I divide the reserve by annual expenses?

Only if the definition and purpose of that ratio are clear. The calculation can hide uneven bills, restricted cash, competing uses, and changing income. A dated cash schedule usually answers a more specific question. It still depends on the quality and completeness of its inputs and does not predict a safe holding period.

### What evidence is needed for a current reserve review?

Request dated account balances, permitted-use terms, outstanding notes and receipts, committed costs, and the cash forecast. Match each item to the correct legal entity and period. Keep missing evidence unresolved. Selected 2026 offering disclosures alone do not establish today's cash, current availability, or a complete amended funding arrangement.

## About Sequoia Research

Sequoia Research, LLC provides independent research on DSTs and other real estate investment offerings. This educational library examines offering evidence, investment risks, and practical questions investors can discuss with their advisers.

## Sources

- [CS1031 Texas Active Living New Braunfels DST PPM](https://anchor1031.com/api/files/marketplace/1791305392153-PPM---CS1031-Texas-Active-Living-New-Braunfels-DST.pdf). September 24, 2026. Selected pages 18, 30, and 66–67; reserve forms, stated physical needs, and permitted uses.
- [Passco Allure DST PPM](https://qbkrvktefrncdppfqwyg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/investment-documents/rec2aJXhMpuVPqp2L/146296582c94da53/Passco%20-%20Allure%20DST%20-%20PPM.pdf). May 1, 2026. Selected printed pages 23, 49, and 76–77; reserve funding, stated needs, and lender accounts.
- [SEC: Private Placements Under Regulation D](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/general-resources/news-alerts/alerts-bulletins/investor-bulletins/private-placements-under-regulation-d-updated-investor-bulletin). August 17, 2022; updated September 21, 2026. General disclosure, liquidity, and loss risks.
- [IRS Revenue Ruling 2004-86](https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-04-86.pdf). 2004. Selected facts and holdings; conditional tax treatment and specified trust powers.
- [FINRA Regulatory Notice 23-08](https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/notices/23-08). May 9, 2023. Covered firms' investigation of material private-placement claims.

All sources were accessed October 18, 2026. Both PPMs were freshly retrieved, and the cited page images were inspected. All detailed cash models are invented and separate from the named offerings; no current bank records or complete amended private package was reviewed.


## Related Reading and Tools

- [Are DST Investments Safe? Reserve Runway Calculator](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/are-dst-investments-safe-reserve-runway-calculator)
- [Delaware Statutory Trust Returns: Exit Assumption Sensitivity Grid](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/delaware-statutory-trust-returns-exit-assumption-sensitivity-grid)
- [Delaware Statutory Trust Horror Stories (2026): How to Separate Documented Facts From Online Claims](https://sequoia-research.com/writing/delaware-statutory-trust-horror-stories-2026-how-to-separate-documented-facts-from-online-claims)