Before defining the term securitization, we need to distinguish between the terms securitization and disintermediation. Gardener and Revell (1988) stated that they have a huge area of ​​intersection as each is interested in a diverse phenomenon. Disintermediation is the opposite of direct financing in which the facilities of an intermediary are abandoned and borrowers and investors transact directly with each other. The connection between the two terms appears when direct financing is carried out in terms of marketable securities. A notable feature of securitization is the excessive increase in the issuance of all types of securities, traditional and new. As a distinction, what falls under the term securitization rather than disintermediation, for example, is loan debt that is traded from one institution to another and known as asset-backed financing. It is important to note that there are many securities markets where the securitization technique has helped to introduce new securities and markets, satisfying the missing types; or as it is called filling the gaps. Generally, the impact of securitization is to separate serious credit risk into credit risk devoted to numerous notes to be passed to a buyer. However, the bank is usually left with some sort of obligation (Gardener and Revell, 1988). An essential element of the original distribution model (OTD model/securitization model) is that securities are rated by rating agencies. Regardless of the sophistication of the securitization activity, the main idea is that if the bank fails, the SPV will not be affected. In other words, the SPV will not go bankrupt like the bank goes bankrupt. This is called remote bankruptcy. Therefore, the medium of asset-backed paper......accessibility to credit, borrowing costs and alternative products (Taylor, 2009: 144). Furthermore, it is essential to keep in mind that for this entire process to work fully, the SPV must be remote from the bank and vice versa. On the other hand, if this does not appear to be the case, it means that the risk has not been completely displaced and that the bank nevertheless finds itself with some form of liability. However, in times of financial crisis, the case was that an SPV could fail at a distance from the bank, and the bank could decide to secure its status by supporting the vehicle either by repurchasing the securitized assets or by extending its loans by during a financial crisis. This could be a wise choice in situations where the bank decides to over-securitize in the near future with the aim of maintaining the securitization approach..