UNITED STATES
                       SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                             Washington, D.C.  20549

                                    FORM 10-K

     [X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
         EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

     For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007

     [ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
     EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

     For the transition period to __________ from _______________

     Commission file number of issuing entity: 333-138183-06

            Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC Trust 2007-NC2
          (Exact name of Issuing Entity as specified in its Charter)

                   Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC
           (Exact name of depositor as specified in its Charter)

                            Sutton Funding LLC
             (Exact name of sponsor as specified in its Charter)

                                           Pooling Tier REMIC 1  20-8658987
                                           Pooling Tier REMIC 2  20-8659022
                                                Lower Tier REMIC 20-8659070
                                              Upper Tier REMIC   20-8659101
                    New York                      Grantor Trust  20-7314529
           (State or other jurisdiction                  (I.R.S. Employer
         incorporation or organization                Identification Number
               of issuing entity)                        of issuing entity)

          c/o Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
          1761 East St. Andrew Place
          Santa Ana, California                                  92705
 (Address of principal executive offices                     (Zip Code of
         of issuing entity)                                issuing entity)

            Issuing Entity's telephone number, including area code:
                               (714) 247-6000

          Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
                                     None.

          Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
                                     None.

     Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned
     issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes [ ]  No[X]

     Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
     reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  Yes[ ] No[X]

     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 [X]  No [ ]

     Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to
     Item 405 of Regulation S-K (Section 229.405 of this chapter) is not
     contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the
     registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
     incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment
     to this Form 10-K.                         Not Applicable.

     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated
     filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer or a smaller
     reporting company.  See definitions of "large accelerated filer,"
     "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2
     of the Exchange Act.  (Check One):

      Large accelerated filer [  ]  Accelerated Filer [  ]
      Non-accelerated Filer [X] (Do not Check if a smaller reporting company)
      Smaller reporting company [  ]

     Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as
     defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).  [  ] Yes  [X] No

     State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common
     equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at
     which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked
     price of such common equity, as of the of the last business day of
     the registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter.

     Not Applicable.

     DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

     See Item 15(a).

                                     PART I

     ITEM 1.  Business.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 1A.  Risk Factors.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 1B.  Unresolved Staff Comments.

     None.

     ITEM 2.  Properties.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 3.  Legal Proceedings.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 4.  Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.

     Not Applicable.

                                    PART II

     ITEM 5.  Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Stockholder
     Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 6.  Selected Financial Data.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 7.  Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
     Results of Operations.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 7A.  Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 8.  Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 9.  Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
     Financial Disclosure.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 9A.  Controls and Procedures.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 9A(T).  Controls and Procedures.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 9B. Other Information.

     None.

                                    PART III

     ITEM 10.  Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 11.  Executive Compensation.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 12.  Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
               and Related Stockholder Matters.

     Not Applicable.

     ITEM 13.  Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and
               Director Independence.

     Not Applicable.


     ITEM 14.  Principal Accounting Fees and Services.

     Not Applicable.

              ADDITIONAL ITEMS REQUIRED BY GENERAL INSTRUCTION J(2)

     Item 1112(b) of Regulation AB, Significant Obligor Financial Information.

     No single obligor represents 10% or more of the pool assets held by the
     issuing entity.

     Item 1114(b)(2) of Regulation AB, Significant Enhancement Provider
     Information.

     No entity or group of affiliated entities provides any external credit
     enhancement or other support for the certificates within this
     transaction as described under Item 1114(a) of Regulation AB.

     Item 1115(b) of Regulation AB, Certain Derivative Instruments.

     Barclays Bank PLC provides an interest rate swap derivative instrument
     and an interest rate cap derivative instrument for the issuing entity.
     No additional disclosure is necessary because the aggregate
     significance percentage for the interest rate swap and interest rate
     cap is less than 10%.

     Item 1117 of Regulation AB, Legal Proceedings.

Legal Proceedings Regarding Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a
HomEq Servicing

In  November  2007,  the  Attorney General of the State of Ohio
("Attorney  General") and the Ohio Department of Commerce, Division of
Financial  Institutions ("DFI") (collectively, "Ohio Regulators")
issued to Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq Servicing
("HomEq") a Joint Subpoena/Investigative Demand ("Subpoena"), captioned
No. PL-HMS-01.  This Subpoena was issued to HomEq and a number of other
financial institutions as part of a preliminary inquiry by the Ohio
Regulators into the mortgage lending and servicing practices of these
companies as they relate to the securitization of residential mortgages
in Ohio and the rating of securities created by the same.  The Subpoena
states that the Regulators are investigating potential violations of
Ohio's Consumer Sales Practices Act, Ohio's Second Mortgage Loan Act,
and/or Ohio's Valentine Act.

The Subpoena requests the production of certain responsive documents
and information generated between January 1, 2003 and November 9, 2007
as well as responsive documents generated outside the relevant time
period, but which contain information concerning the relevant time
period. HomEq is fully cooperating with the Ohio Regulators in this
inquiry. HomEq has reached an agreement with the Regulators that it
will produce responsive documents and information on a rolling basis,
and has begun to do so.  Given the preliminary status of the matter,
HomEq is unable, at this point, to evaluate whether any claim will be
Made against HomEq or HomEq's likelihood of successfully defending any
such action or the potential exposure in such an action.

Legal Proceedings Regarding NC Capital Corporation

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on February 21, 2007 (the "February 21st 8-K")
by New Century Financial Corporation ("NCFC") (Commission File No. 001-32314;
CIK No. 0001287286), the parent of NC Capital Corporation, one of the original
loan sellers, NCFC stated that on February 14, 2007, NCFC was served with the
complaint for a purported securities class action (the "Original Complaint")
filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California against NCFC and certain of its officers and directors. NCFC
stated that the complaint alleges that NCFC and the other named defendants
violated federal securities laws by issuing false and misleading statements
and failing to disclose material facts about NCFC, which resulted in
artificially inflated market prices of NCFC's common stock, and that the
plaintiff and the purported class members purchased the registrant's stock at
these artificially inflated market prices between April 7, 2006 and
February 7, 2007.  NCFC stated that the complaint seeks money damages in
favor of its purported class of purchasers of NCFC's securities, the costs
and expenses of the action and other relief that may be granted by the court.

In addition, pursuant to the February 21st 8-K, NCFC stated that nine
additional purported class actions were filed in the United States District
Court for the Central District of California between February 8, 2007 and
February 20, 2007.  NCFC stated that these complaints present in large
degree the same legal and factual issues as the Original Complaint and
allege various class periods, the longest of which is from April 7, 2006 to
February 7, 2007.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed by NCFC on March 13, 2007 (the "March 13th 8-
K"), NCFC stated that on February 28, 2007, NCFC received a letter from the
United States Attorney's Office for the Central District of California (the
"U.S. Attorney's Office") indicating that it was conducting a criminal
inquiry under the federal securities laws in connection with trading in
NCFC's securities, as well as accounting errors regarding NCFC's allowance
for repurchase losses.  NCFC stated that it has subsequently received a
grand jury subpoena requesting production of certain documents.  NCFC stated
that it intends to cooperate with the requests of the U.S. Attorney's
Office.

In addition, pursuant to the March 13th 8-K, NCFC stated that on March 12,
2007, it received a letter from the staff of the Pacific Regional Office of
the Securities Exchange Commission stating that the staff was conducting a
preliminary investigation involving NCFC and requesting production of
certain documents.  NCFC stated that the staff of the SEC had also
previously requested a meeting with NCFC to discuss the events leading up to
NCFC's previous announcement of the need to restate certain of its
historical financial statements.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed by NCFC on March 14, 2007 (the "March 14th 8-
K"), NCFC stated that on March 13, 2007, NCFC and certain of its
subsidiaries received cease and desist orders from regulators in the States
of Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey and New York (the "March 13
Orders").  NCFC stated that the cease and desist orders contain allegations
that certain of NCFC's subsidiaries have engaged in violations of applicable
state law, including, among others, failure to fund mortgage loans after a
mortgage closing, failure to meet certain financial requirements, including
net worth and available liquidity, and failure to timely notify the state
regulators of defaults and terminations under certain of its financing
arrangements.  NCFC stated that the cease and desist orders seek to restrain
the subsidiaries from taking certain actions, including, among others,
engaging in further violations of state law, taking new applications for
mortgage loans in the relevant jurisdiction, and paying dividends or bonuses
to officers, directors or shareholders of the applicable subsidiaries.  NCFC
stated that the cease and desist orders also seek to cause the subsidiaries
to affirmatively take certain actions, including the creation of escrow
accounts to hold fees relating to pending mortgage applications, the
transfer to other lenders of the outstanding mortgage applications and
unfunded mortgage loans held by the subsidiaries, and the provision of
regular information to the state regulators regarding the subsidiaries'
activities in the applicable state, including the status of all outstanding
mortgage applications and unfunded mortgage loans in that state.  NCFC
stated that certain of the cease and desist orders also require one or more
of the subsidiaries to show cause why their license should not be revoked or
why administrative penalties should not be assessed.  NCFC stated that the
cease and desist orders generally become permanent if not promptly appealed
by the applicable subsidiaries.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on March 19, 2007 (the "March 19th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that on March 14 and 15, 2007, NCFC received additional cease and
desist orders from the States of Connecticut, Maryland, Rhode Island and
Tennessee (collectively, the "March 14-15 Orders"). NCFC stated that
consistent with the March 13 Orders, the March 14-15 Orders contain
allegations that certain of NCFC's subsidiaries have engaged in violations
of applicable state law, including, among others, failure to fund mortgage
loans after closing. Additionally, pursuant to the March 19th 8-K, NCFC
stated that on March 14, 2007, New century Mortgage Corporation ("NCMC") and
Home123 Corporation, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of NCFC
("Home123"), entered into a Consent Agreement and Order, dated March 14,
2007, with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Banking, Bureau of
Supervision and Enforcement (the "Consent Agreement").   NCFC stated that
consistent with the March 13 Orders, the March 14-15 Orders and the Consent
Agreement seek to restrain NCFC's subsidiaries from taking certain actions,
including, among others, engaging in alleged violations of state law and
taking new applications for mortgage loans in the relevant jurisdiction.
NCFC stated that the March 14-15 Orders and the Consent Agreement also seek
to cause the subsidiaries to affirmatively take certain actions, including
the creation of escrow accounts to hold fees relating to pending mortgage
applications, the transfer to other lenders of the outstanding mortgage
applications and unfunded mortgage loans held by the subsidiaries, and the
provision of regular information to the state regulators regarding the
subsidiaries' activities in the applicable state, including the status of
all outstanding mortgage applications and unfunded mortgage loans in that
state.  NCFC stated that certain of the March 14-15 Orders also seek to
revoke the licenses of one or more of NCFC's subsidiaries or assess
administrative penalties. NCFC stated that the March 14-15 Orders generally
become permanent if not promptly appealed by the applicable subsidiaries.

Additionally, pursuant to the March 19th 8-K, NCFC stated that in connection
with a civil action filed against NCFC, NCMC and Home123 (collectively, the
"Defendants") in an Ohio state court (the "Complaint") by the Attorney
General of Ohio and the Ohio Division of Commerce, Division of Financial
Institutions on March 14, 2007, that Ohio state court issued a temporary
restraining order, which was subsequently modified by the court on March 16,
2007, against the Defendants (as modified, the "TRO").  NCFC stated that the
Complaint and the TRO contain allegations that the Defendants have engaged
in violations of applicable state law, including, among others, failure to
fund mortgage loans after closing.  NCFC stated that the TRO restrains the
Defendants from taking certain actions, including, among others, (i)
engaging in violations of state law, (ii) soliciting applicants and taking
new applications for mortgage loans in Ohio and (iii) initiating,
prosecuting or enforcing foreclosure actions in Ohio.  NCFC stated that the
TRO also requires the Defendants to confer with the Ohio Attorney General
and Division of Commerce by March 22, 2007 regarding the treatment of Ohio
loans that are more than 60 days delinquent and are held for sale.  NCFC
stated that the restraints imposed by the TRO could further harm NCFC's
business.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on March 20, 2007 (the "March 20th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that as disclosed above, NCFC has received cease and desist orders
from several states and entered into a consent agreement with one state (the
"Previous Orders and Consent Agreement").  NCFC stated that on March 16,
2007, NCFC received additional cease and desist orders from the State of
California (the "California Orders") and certain of NCFC's subsidiaries
entered into consent agreements with the State of Florida's Office of
Financial Regulation and the State of Washington's Department of Financial
Institutions, respectively, each dated March 16, 2007 (the "March 16
Agreements" and together with the California Orders, the "March 16 Orders
and Consent Agreements").

Pursuant to the March 20th 8-K, NCFC stated that consistent with the
Previous Orders and Consent Agreement, the March 16 Orders and Consent
Agreements contain allegations that certain of NCFC's subsidiaries have
engaged in violations of state law, including, among others, failure to fund
mortgage loans after closing.  NCFC stated that consistent with the Previous
Orders and Consent Agreement, the March 16 Orders and Consent Agreements
seek to restrain NCFC's subsidiaries from taking certain actions, including,
among others, engaging in alleged violations of state law and taking new
applications for mortgage loans in the relevant jurisdiction.  NCFC stated
that the March 16 Orders and Consent Agreements also seek to cause the
subsidiaries to affirmatively take certain actions, including the creation
of escrow accounts to hold fees relating to pending mortgage applications,
the transfer to other lenders of the outstanding mortgage applications and
unfunded mortgage loans held by the subsidiaries, and the provision of
regular information to the state regulators regarding the subsidiaries'
activities in the applicable state, including the status of all outstanding
mortgage applications and unfunded mortgage loans in that state.  NCFC
stated that the California Orders become permanent if not promptly appealed
by the applicable subsidiaries.

In addition, NCFC stated that on March 16, 2007, Home123 received a suspension
order (the "Suspension Order") from the State of New York Banking Department.
NCFC stated that the Suspension Order contains allegations similar to those
included in the March 13 Order and further provides that Home123's mortgage
banking license in the State of New York has been suspended for a period not
exceeding 30 days, pending investigation.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on March 22, 2007 (the "March 22nd 8-K"), NCFC
stated that on March 20, 2007, certain of NCFC's subsidiaries entered into a
consent agreement with the State of Maine's Office of Consumer Credit
Regulation (the "March 20 Consent Agreement").  NCFC stated that consistent
with the Previous Orders and Consent Agreements, the March 20 Consent
Agreement contains allegations that certain of NCFC's subsidiaries have
engaged in violations of state law, including, among others, failure to fund
mortgage loans after closing.  NCFC stated that consistent with the Previous
Orders and Consent Agreements, the March 20 Consent Agreement seeks to
restrain NCFC's subsidiaries from taking certain actions, including, among
others, engaging in alleged violations of state law and taking new
applications for mortgage loans in the relevant jurisdiction.  NCFC stated
that the March 20 Consent Agreement also seeks to cause the subsidiaries to
affirmatively take certain actions, including the creation of escrow
accounts to hold fees relating to pending mortgage applications, the
transfer to other lenders of the outstanding mortgage applications and
unfunded mortgage loans held by the subsidiaries, and the provision of
regular information to the state regulators regarding the subsidiaries'
activities in the applicable state, including the status of all outstanding
mortgage applications and unfunded mortgage loans in that state.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on March 28, 2007 (the "March 28th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that on March 27, 2007, NCFC signed consent agreements with the State
of Idaho's Department of Finance, the State of Iowa's Superintendent of
Banking, the State of Michigan's Office of Financial and Insurance Services
and the State of Wyoming's Banking Commissioner (the "Additional Consent
Agreements").  NCFC stated that although NCFC has signed the Additional
Consent Agreements and expects to comply with their terms, NCFC has not yet
received counterpart signatures from the respective states and accordingly
such Additional Consent Agreements may not be binding on the respective
states.  NCFC stated that consistent with the Previous Orders and Consent
Agreements, the Additional Consent Agreements contain allegations that
certain of NCFC's subsidiaries have engaged in violations of state law,
including, among others, failure to fund mortgage loans after closing.  NCFC
stated that consistent with the Previous Orders and Consent Agreements, the
Additional Consent Agreements restrain NCFC's subsidiaries from taking
certain actions, including, among others, engaging in alleged violations of
state law and taking new applications for mortgage loans in the relevant
jurisdiction.  NCFC stated that The Additional Consent Agreements also
compel the subsidiaries to affirmatively take certain actions, including the
creation of escrow accounts to hold any up front fees collected in
connection with pending mortgage applications, the transfer to other lenders
of the outstanding mortgage applications and unfunded mortgage loans held by
the subsidiaries, and the provision of regular information to the state
regulators regarding the subsidiaries' activities in the applicable state,
including the status of all outstanding mortgage applications and unfunded
mortgage loans in that state.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on March 30, 2007 (the "March 30th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that as disclosed above, on March 14, 2007, the Attorney General of
Ohio and the Ohio Department of Commerce, Division of Financial Institutions
(together, the "State") filed a lawsuit against NCFC and certain of its
subsidiaries (collectively with NCFC, the "Defendants") in Ohio state court
(the "Ohio Complaint").  NCFC stated that the Ohio Complaint alleges that
NCFC has engaged in violations of applicable state law, including, among
others, failure to fund mortgage loans after closing.  NCFC stated that on
March 14, 2007, the court granted the State's motion to enter a temporary
restraining order, which was subsequently modified by the court on March 16,
2007, against the Defendants (as modified, the "TRO").  NCFC stated that the
TRO restrained the Defendants from taking certain actions, including, among
others, (i) engaging in violations of state law, (ii) soliciting applicants
and taking new applications for mortgage loans in Ohio and (iii) initiating,
prosecuting or enforcing foreclosure actions in Ohio.  NCFC stated that the
TRO required the parties to confer with respect to restrictions regarding
foreclosure action and the sale, transfer or assignment of loans more than
60 days delinquent.

In addition, pursuant to the March 30th 8-K, NCFC stated that on March 26,
2007, the Defendants filed a Motion for Dissolution of Modified Temporary
Restraining Order and Motion for an Emergency Hearing, and Opposition to a
Preliminary Injunction.  NCFC stated that on March 28, 2007, the Defendants
and the State reached agreement on a Stipulated Preliminary Injunction
effective for 90 days, which was entered by the court. NCFC stated that the
Stipulated Preliminary Injunction replaces the TRO and provides for a stay
of the litigation for 90 days. NCFC stated that the Stipulated Preliminary
Injunction restrains the Defendants from taking certain actions, including,
among others, engaging in alleged violations of state law and taking new
applications for mortgage loans.  NCFC stated that the Stipulated
Preliminary Injunction also compels the Defendants to take certain actions,
including the transfer to other lenders of any outstanding mortgage
applications and unfunded mortgage loans, the placement in escrow of any
upfront fees collected in connection with pending mortgage applications, and
the provision of regular information to the State regarding NCFC's
activities in Ohio, including the status of all outstanding mortgage
applications and unfunded mortgage loans.  NCFC stated that the Stipulated
Preliminary Injunction also requires the Defendants to submit certain
categories of loans (and related information) as to which it intends to
foreclose to the State for the State to review.  NCFC stated that the State
may object for cause to NCFC proceeding with a particular foreclosure and if
NCFC is unable to convince the State to permit it to proceed, the
foreclosure will not proceed for the duration of the Stipulated Preliminary
Injunction.  NCFC stated that the Stipulated Preliminary Injunction also
provides for the State to review and object for cause to the Defendants
selling, transferring or assigning certain categories of loans that are more
than 60 days delinquent.

In addition, pursuant to the March 30th 8-K, NCFC stated that in the event
that the State or the Defendants believe the other is not acting in good
faith, the Stipulated Preliminary Injunction provides that the complaining
party should notify the other of such concern and if the concern is not
resolved, then either party may notify the other of their intent to file a
motion with the court to terminate the Stipulated Preliminary Injunction and
request to reschedule the previously canceled preliminary injunction
hearing.  NCFC stated that the Stipulated Preliminary Injunction provides
that in such event neither party will object to the scheduling of a prompt
preliminary injunction hearing or the termination of the Stipulated
Preliminary Injunction at such a preliminary injunction hearing.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on April 6, 2007 (the "April 6th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that on April 2, 2007, NCFC announced that it and several of its
subsidiaries, including New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., NCMC, NC Capital
Corporation, Home123 Corporation, New Century Credit Corporation, NC Asset
Holding, L.P., NC Residual III Corporation, NC Residual IV Corporation, New
Century R.E.O. Corp., New Century R.E.O. II Corp., New Century R.E.O. III
Corp., New Century Mortgage Ventures, LLC, NC Deltex, LLC and NCoral, L.P.
(collectively, the "Debtors") filed voluntary petitions (the "Bankruptcy
Filings") under chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the
"Bankruptcy Code") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of
Delaware (the "Bankruptcy Court").  NCFC stated that these bankruptcy cases
(the "Bankruptcy Cases") are being jointly administered in the Bankruptcy
Court under the caption "In re New Century TRS Holdings, Inc., et al., Case
No. 07-10416" before the Honorable Kevin J. Carey, United States Bankruptcy
Judge. NCFC stated that the Debtors will continue to operate their business
as "debtors-in-possession" under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court
and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and
orders of the Bankruptcy Court.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on April 16, 2007 (the "April 16th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General
issued a Civil Investigation Demand to NCFC, which requests certain
documents relating to NCFC's loan origination business practices in
connection with an investigation conducted pursuant to the Attorney
General's authority to enforce consumer protection statutes.

Pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on July 5, 2007 (the "July 5th 8-K"), NCFC
stated that on June 21, 2007 the staff of the Pacific Regional Office of the
Securities Exchange Commission (the "Commission") orally advised NCFC's
outside counsel that the Commission had issued a formal order of
investigation with respect to its investigation of NCFC.

In addition, pursuant to the July 5th 8-K, NCFC stated that on June 29,
2007, NCFC was served with a complaint for declaratory judgment and other
equitable relief (the "Complaint") that was filed on June 20, 2007, in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Bankruptcy
Court") against NCFC, certain of its subsidiaries and certain of its
directors. NCFC stated that the Complaint seeks a declaratory judgment on
behalf of a purported class consisting of beneficiaries (the
"Beneficiaries") of the New Century Financial Corporation Deferred
Compensation Plan and the New Century Financial Corporation Supplemental
Executive Retirement/Savings Plan (collectively, the "Plans") that, among
other things, the Beneficiaries are a class, that the Plans' assets are held
in trust for the exclusive benefit of the Beneficiaries, that the Plans'
assets are not the property of NCFC's or any of its subsidiaries' bankruptcy
estates, and that the Plans' assets be distributed to the Beneficiaries.

In addition, pursuant to a Form 8-K filed on December 14, 2007 (the
"December 14th 8-K"), NCFC stated that the Bankruptcy Court entered an order
establishing August 31, 2007, as the last date (the "Claim Bar Date") for
all persons and entities holding or wishing to assert bankruptcy claims
against NCFC and certain of its debtor-in-possession subsidiaries
(collectively with NCFC, the "Debtors") to file a proof of claim form.
According to the December 14th 8-K, NCFC stated that through the Claim Bar
Date, the dollar amount of claims filed against the Debtors exceeded $32
billion.  NCFC stated that the Debtors are in the preliminary stages of
their review of these claims and based on their preliminary review believe
that certain of these claims will be subject to objection as being
duplicative, overstated, based upon contingencies that have not occurred, or
because they otherwise do not state a valid claim.  NCFC stated that the
foregoing amount does not include claims that were filed without a specified
dollar amount, referred to as unliquidated claims, and claims that were
filed after the claim bar date.

     Item 1119 of Regulation AB, Affiliations and Certain Relationships and
     Related Transactions.

     The information regarding this Item has been previously filed in a
     424(b)(5) filed on February 26, 2007 (Commission File No. 333-138183-06).

     Item 1122 of Regulation AB, Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria.

     See Exhibits 33 and 34.

     Material Instances of Noncompliance.

     Foreclosure was not initiated in accordance with the timeframes
     established by Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq
     Servicing's servicing agreements and the servicing criteria
     set forth in 1122(d)(4)(vii) of Regulation AB and therefore represents
     an instance of material noncompliance.

     Item 1123 of Regulation AB, Servicer Compliance Statement.

     See Exhibit 35.

                                     PART IV

     ITEM 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

     (a) Exhibits.

        (1) Not Applicable.

        (2) Not Applicable.

        (3)

        Exhibit 4 was filed as part of the Registrant's Current Report on Form
        8-K filed on March 15, 2007 (Commission File No. 333-138183-06) and is
        incorporated by reference herein.

        Exhibit 4 Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2007,
        by and among Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC, as depositor,
        NC Capital Corporation as responsible party, Barclays Capital Real
        Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq Servicing, as servicer, and Deutsche Bank
        National Trust Company, as trustee.

        (31) Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

        (33) Reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
             for asset-backed securities.

             Exhibit 33.1 Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq
             Servicing's Annual Report on Assessment of Compliance for Year
             End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 33.2 ZC Real Estate Tax Solutions Ltd's Annual Report
             on Assessment of Compliance for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 33.3 ZC Sterling Insurance Agency Inc's Annual Report
             on Assessment of Compliance for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 33.4 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company's Annual
             Report on Assessment of Compliance for Year End
             December 31, 2007.

        (34) Attestation reports on assessment of compliance with
             servicing criteria for asset-backed securities.

             Exhibit 34.1 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc.
             d/b/a HomEq Servicing's Report (Exhibit 33.1) for Year End
             December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 34.2 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for ZC Real Estate Tax Solutions Ltd's
             Report (Exhibit 33.2) for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 34.3 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for ZC Sterling Insurance Agency Inc's
             Report (Exhibit 33.3) for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 34.4 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for Deutsche Bank National Trust
             Company's Report (Exhibit 33.4) for Year End December 31, 2007.

        (35) Servicer compliance statement.

             Exhibit 35.1 Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq
             Servicing's Annual Statement of Compliance for Year End
             December 31, 2007.

     (b) See (a) above.

     (c) Not Applicable.


                                      SIGNATURE

          Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.


                           By: Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC,
                               (Depositor)


                                      By:  /s/Paul Menefee
                                           Paul Menefee
                                           Vice President and
                                           Chief Accounting Officer
                                          (Senior Officer in Charge of
                                           Securitization of the Depositor)



     Date: March 28, 2008



     EXHIBIT INDEX

        Exhibit 4 was filed as part of the Registrant's Current Report on Form
        8-K filed on March 15, 2007 (Commission File No. 333-138183-06) and is
        incorporated by reference herein.

        Exhibit 4 Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of February 1, 2007,
        by and among Securitized Asset Backed Receivables LLC, as depositor,
        NC Capital Corporation as responsible party, Barclays Capital Real
        Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq Servicing, as servicer, and Deutsche Bank
        National Trust Company, as trustee.

        (31) Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certification.

        (33) Reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
             for asset-backed securities.

             Exhibit 33.1 Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq
             Servicing's Annual Report on Assessment of Compliance for
             Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 33.2 ZC Real Estate Tax Solutions Ltd's Annual Report
             on Assessment of Compliance for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 33.3 ZC Sterling Insurance Agency Inc's Annual Report
             on Assessment of Compliance for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 33.4 Deutsche Bank National Trust Company's Annual
             Report on Assessment of Compliance for Year End December 31,
             2007.

        (34) Attestation reports on assessment of compliance with
             servicing criteria for asset-backed securities.

             Exhibit 34.1 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc.
             d/b/a HomEq Servicing's Report (Exhibit 33.1) for Year End
             December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 34.2 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for ZC Real Estate Tax Solutions Ltd's
             Report (Exhibit 33.2) for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 34.3 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for ZC Sterling Insurance Agency Inc's
             Report (Exhibit 33.3) for Year End December 31, 2007.

             Exhibit 34.4 Attestation Report on Assessment of Compliance
             with Servicing Criteria for Deutsche Bank National Trust
             Company's Report (Exhibit 33.4) for Year End December 31, 2007.

        (35) Servicer compliance statement.

             Exhibit 35.1 Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc. d/b/a HomEq
             Servicing's Annual Statement of Compliance for Year End
             December 31, 2007.