UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-D

ASSET-BACKED ISSUER

DISTRIBUTION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the monthly distribution period from April 1, 2018 to April 30, 2018

Commission File Number of issuing entity: 333-188672-05

Central Index Key Number of issuing entity: 0001621121

TOYOTA AUTO RECEIVABLES 2014-C OWNER TRUST

(Exact name of issuing entity as specified in its charter)

Commission File Number of depositor: 333-188672-01

Central Index Key Number of depositor: 0001131131

TOYOTA AUTO FINANCE RECEIVABLES LLC

(Exact name of depositor as specified in its charter)

Central Index Key Number of sponsor (if applicable): 0000834071

TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION

(Exact name of sponsor as specified in its charter)

Katherine Adkins, Esq., (469) 486-6577

(Name and telephone number, including area code, of the person to contact in connection with this filing)

Delaware

(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization of the issuing entity)

38-7113063

(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

6565 Headquarters Drive, Plano, Texas 75024

(Address of principal executive offices of the issuing entity) (Zip Code)

(469) 486-9020

(Telephone number, including area code)

Not Applicable

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)

Registered/reporting pursuant to (check one):


Title of class	Section 12(b)	Section 12(g)	Section 15(d)	Name of exchange (If Section 12(b))
Class A-1	☐	☐	☒	☐
Class A-2	☐	☐	☒	☐
Class A-3	☐	☐	☒	☐
Class A-4	☐	☐	☒	☐
Class B	☐	☐	☒	☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐

PART I – DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION

Item 1.

Distribution and Pool Performance Information.

Distribution and pool performance information with respect to the receivables that constitute the assets of Toyota Auto Receivables 2014-C Owner Trust for the distribution period commencing on April 1, 2018 and ending on April 30, 2018 is set forth in the Monthly Servicer’s Certificate that is attached to this report as Exhibit 99.1, which Certificate is incorporated by reference herein.

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

Item 2.

Legal Proceedings.

The following seven paragraphs are disclosures received from Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (“DBTCA”), which serves as the indenture trustee under the indenture for the Toyota Auto Receivables 2014-C Owner Trust transaction.

DBTCA and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“DBNTC”) have been sued by investors in civil litigation concerning their role as trustees of certain residential mortgage backed securities (“RMBS”) trusts.

On June 18, 2014, a group of investors, including funds managed by Blackrock Advisors, LLC, PIMCO-Advisors, L.P., and others, filed a derivative action against DBNTC and DBTCA in New York State Supreme Court purportedly on behalf of and for the benefit of 544 private-label RMBS trusts asserting claims for alleged violations of the U.S. Trust Indenture Act of 1939 (the “TIA”), breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty and negligence based on DBNTC and DBTCA’s alleged failure to perform their duties as trustees for the trusts. Plaintiffs subsequently dismissed their state court complaint and filed a derivative and class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of and for the benefit of 564 private-label RMBS trusts, which substantially overlapped with the trusts at issue in the state court action. The complaint alleges that the trusts at issue have suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $89.4 billion, but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion to dismiss, and on January 19, 2016, the court partially granted the motion on procedural grounds: as to the 500 trusts that are governed by Pooling and Servicing Agreements, the court declined to exercise jurisdiction. The court did not rule on substantive defenses asserted in the motion to dismiss. On March 22, 2016, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in federal court. In the amended complaint, in connection with 62 trusts governed by indenture agreements, plaintiffs assert claims for breach of contract, violation of the TIA, breach of fiduciary duty, and breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest. The amended complaint alleges that the trusts at issue have suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $9.8 billion, but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On July 15, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On January 23, 2017, the court granted in part and denied in part DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss. The court granted the motion to dismiss with respect to plaintiffs’ conflict-of-interest claim, thereby dismissing it, and denied the motion to dismiss with respect to plaintiffs’ breach of contract claim (except as noted below) and claim for violation of the TIA, thereby allowing those claims to proceed. On January 26, 2017, the parties filed a joint stipulation and proposed order dismissing plaintiffs’ claim for breach of fiduciary duty. On January 27, 2017, the court entered the parties’ joint stipulation and ordered that plaintiffs’ claim for breach of fiduciary duty be dismissed. On February 3, 2017, following a hearing concerning DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss on February 2, 2017, the court issued a short form order dismissing (i) plaintiffs’ representation and warranty claims as to 21 trusts whose originators and/or sponsors had entered bankruptcy and the deadline for asserting claims against such originators and/or sponsors had passed as of 2009 and (ii) plaintiffs’ claims to the extent they were premised upon any alleged pre-Event of Default duty to terminate servicers. On March 27, 2017, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the amended complaint. On January 26, 2018, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification. As of April 16, 2018, plaintiffs’ motion for class certification has been briefed and is awaiting decision by the court. On April 6, 2018, the court entered the parties’ joint stipulation to dismiss the claims of Sealink Funding Limited and ordered that Sealink’s claims be dismissed with prejudice. On April 24, 2018, the court entered the parties’ joint stipulation to dismiss the claims of Kore Advisors, LP and ordered that Kore’s claims be dismissed with prejudice. Discovery is ongoing.

On March 25, 2016, the BlackRock plaintiffs filed a state court action against DBTCA in the Superior Court of California, Orange County with respect to 513 trusts. On May 18, 2016, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint with respect to 465 trusts, and included DBNTC as an additional defendant. The amended complaint asserts

three causes of action: breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; and breach of the duty to avoid conflicts of interest. Plaintiffs purport to bring the action on behalf of themselves and all other current owners of certificates in the 465 trusts. The amended complaint alleges that the trusts at issue have suffered total realized collateral losses of U.S. $75.7 billion, but does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On August 22, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA filed a demurrer as to plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary duty cause of action and breach of the duty to avoid conflicts of interest cause of action and motion to strike as to plaintiffs’ breach of contract cause of action. On October 18, 2016, the court granted DBNTC and DBTCA’s demurrer, providing plaintiffs with thirty days’ leave to amend, and denied DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to strike. Plaintiffs did not further amend their complaint and, on December 19, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the amended complaint. On January 17, 2018, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification. As of April 30, 2018, plaintiffs’ motion for class certification has been briefed and is awaiting decision by the court. Discovery is ongoing.

On September 27, 2017, DBTCA was added as a defendant to a case brought by certain special purpose entities including Phoenix Light SF Limited in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which plaintiffs previously alleged incorrectly that DBNTC served as trustee for all 43 of the trusts at issue. On September 27, 2017, plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint that names DBTCA as a defendant in addition to DBNTC. DBTCA serves as trustee for one of the 43 trusts at issue. DBNTC serves as trustee for the other 42 trusts at issue. Plaintiffs’ third amended complaint brings claims for violation of the TIA; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence and gross negligence; violation of the Streit Act; and breach of the covenant of good faith. However, in the third amended complaint, plaintiffs acknowledge that, before DBTCA was added to the case, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ TIA Act claims, negligence and gross negligence claims, Streit Act claims, claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, and certain theories of plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims, and plaintiffs only include these claims to preserve any rights on appeal. Plaintiffs allege damages of “hundreds of millions of dollars.” On November 13, 2017, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the third amended complaint. Discovery is ongoing.

On November 30, 2017, DBTCA was added as a defendant to a case brought by Commerzbank AG (“Commerzbank”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, in which Commerzbank previously alleged incorrectly that DBNTC served as trustee for all 50 of the trusts at issue. On November 30, 2017, Commerzbank filed a second amended complaint that names DBTCA as a defendant in addition to DBNTC. DBTCA serves as trustee for 1 of the 50 trusts at issue. DBNTC serves as trustee for the other 49 trusts at issue. Commerzbank’s second amended complaint brings claims for violation of the TIA; breach of contract; breach of fiduciary duty; negligence; violation of the Streit Act; and breach of the covenant of good faith. However, in the second amended complaint, Commerzbank acknowledges that, before DBTCA was added to the case, the court dismissed Commerzbank’s TIA claims for the trusts governed by pooling and servicing agreements, as well as its Streit Act claims and claims for breach of the covenant of good faith, and Commerzbank only includes these claims to preserve any rights on appeal. The second amended complaint alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA caused Commerzbank to suffer “hundreds of millions of dollars in losses,” but the complaint does not include a demand for money damages in a sum certain. On January 29, 2018, DBNTC and DBTCA filed an answer to the second amended complaint. Discovery is ongoing.

On December 30, 2015, IKB International, S.A. in Liquidation and IKB Deutsche Industriebank A.G. (collectively, “IKB”), as an investor in 37 RMBS trusts, filed a summons with notice in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, New York County, against DBNTC and DBTCA as trustees of the trusts. On May 27, 2016, IKB served its complaint asserting claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of duty to avoid conflicts of interest, violation of New York’s Streit Act, violation of the TIA, violation of Regulation AB, and violation of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. IKB alleges that DBNTC and DBTCA are liable for over U.S. $268 million in damages. On October 5, 2016, DBNTC and DBTCA, together with several other trustees defending lawsuits by IKB, filed a joint motion to dismiss. On January 6, 2017, IKB filed a notice of discontinuance, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to three trusts. As of January 17, 2017, DBNTC and DBTCA’s motion to dismiss has been briefed and is awaiting decision by the court. On June 20, 2017, the parties filed a stipulation, voluntarily dismissing with prejudice all claims as to four additional trusts. Certain limited discovery is permitted to go forward while the motion to dismiss is pending.

It is DBTCA’s belief that it has no pending legal proceedings (including, based on DBTCA’s present evaluation, the litigation disclosed in the six immediately preceding paragraphs) that would materially affect its ability to perform its duties as indenture trustee under the indenture for the Toyota Auto Receivables 2014-C Owner Trust transaction.

Item 9.

Other Information.

There is no activity to report under Rule 15Ga-1(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with respect to Toyota Auto Receivables 2014-C Owner Trust for the distribution period commencing on April 1, 2018 and ending on April 30, 2018. Toyota Motor Credit Corporation (Central Index Key Number: 0000834071), as securitizer, most recently filed a Form ABS-15G on February 13, 2018 with respect to all asset-backed securities sponsored by it, including those securities issued by Toyota Auto Receivables 2014-C Owner Trust.

Item 10.

Exhibits.


Exhibit 99.1.		Monthly Servicer’s Certificate for the distribution period commencing on April 1, 2018 and ending on April 30, 2018.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.


	Toyota Auto Finance Receivables LLC (Depositor)

Date: May 25, 2018		/s/ Wei Shi
		Wei Shi
		President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
		(Senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)

Toyota Auto Receivables 2014-C Owner Trust 10-D