C & F FINANCIAL CORP - Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

or

For the transition period from              to             

Commission file number 000-23423

C&F FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

802 Main Street

West Point, VA 23181

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (804) 843-2360

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

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 whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ¨    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of 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.  ¨

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

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

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2010 was $52,766,298.

There were 3,125,416 shares of common stock outstanding as of February 25, 2011.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement dated March 15, 2011 to be delivered to shareholders in connection with the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held April 19, 2011 are incorporated by reference in Part III of this report.

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

PART I

General

C&F Financial Corporation (the Corporation) is a bank holding company that was incorporated in March 1994 under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The Corporation owns all of the stock of its sole operating subsidiary, Citizens and Farmers Bank (C&F Bank or the Bank), which is an independent commercial bank chartered under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. The Bank originally opened for business under the name Farmers and Mechanics Bank on January 22, 1927. The Bank has the following five wholly-owned subsidiaries, all incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia:

The Corporation operates in a decentralized manner in three principal business activities: (1) retail banking through C&F Bank, (2) mortgage banking through C&F Mortgage Corporation (C&F Mortgage) and (3) consumer finance through C&F Finance Company (C&F Finance). The following general business discussion focuses on the activities within each of these segments.

In addition, the Corporation conducts brokerage activities through C&F Investment Services, Inc., insurance activities through C&F Insurance Services, Inc. and title insurance services through C&F Title Agency, Inc. The financial position and operating results of any one of these subsidiaries are not significant to the Corporation as a whole and are not considered principal activities of the Corporation at this time.

The Corporation also owns two non-operating subsidiaries, C&F Financial Statutory Trust II (Trust II) formed in December 2007 and C&F Financial Statutory Trust I (Trust I) formed in July 2005. These trusts were formed for the purpose of issuing $10.0 million each of trust preferred capital securities in private placements to institutional investors. These trusts are unconsolidated subsidiaries of the Corporation and their principal assets are $10.3 million each of the Corporation’s junior subordinated debt securities (referred to herein as “trust preferred capital notes”) that are reported as liabilities of the Corporation.

Retail Banking

We provide retail banking services at the Bank’s main office in West Point, Virginia, and 17 Virginia branches located one each in Chester, Hampton, Mechanicsville, Midlothian, Newport News, Norge, Providence Forge, Quinton, Saluda, Sandston, Varina, West Point and Yorktown, and two each in Williamsburg and Richmond. These branches provide a wide range of banking services to individuals and businesses. These services include various types of checking and savings deposit accounts, as well as business, real estate, development, mortgage, home equity and installment loans. The Bank also offers ATMs, internet banking and credit cards, as well as travelers’ checks, safe deposit box rentals, collection, notary public, wire service and other customary bank services to its customers. Revenues from retail banking operations consist primarily of interest earned on loans and investment securities and fees related to deposit services. At December 31, 2010, assets of the Retail Banking segment totaled $756.3 million. For the year ended December 31, 2010, the net loss for this segment totaled $1.5 million.

Mortgage Banking

We conduct mortgage banking activities through C&F Mortgage, which was organized in September 1995. C&F Mortgage provides mortgage loan origination services through 15 locations in Virginia, four in Maryland, two in North Carolina and one each in Wilmington, Delaware; Moorestown, New Jersey; and York, Pennsylvania. The Virginia offices are located one each in Charlottesville, Chester, Fishersville, Fredericksburg, Glen Allen, Hanover, Harrisonburg, Lynchburg, Newport News and Williamsburg, two in Roanoke and three in Midlothian. The Maryland offices are located in Annapolis, Baltimore, Ellicott City and Waldorf. The North Carolina offices are located in Charlotte and Gastonia. C&F Mortgage offers a wide variety of residential mortgage loans, which are originated for sale generally to the following investors: Bank of America, N.A.; Wells Fargo Home Mortgage; Franklin American Mortgage Company; the Virginia Housing Development Authority; and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. C&F Mortgage does not securitize loans. The Bank also purchases lot and permanent loans from C&F Mortgage. C&F Mortgage originates conventional mortgage loans, mortgage loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (the FHA), mortgage loans partially guaranteed by the Veterans Administration (the VA) and home equity loans. A majority of the conventional loans are conforming loans that qualify for purchase by the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac). The remainder of the conventional loans are non-conforming loans that do not meet Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac guidelines, but are eligible for sale to various other investors. Through its subsidiaries, C&F Mortgage also provides

1

Table of Contents

ancillary mortgage loan origination services for loan settlement and residential appraisals. Revenues from mortgage banking operations consist principally of gains on sales of loans to investors in the secondary mortgage market, loan origination fee income and interest earned on mortgage loans held for sale. At December 31, 2010, assets of the Mortgage Banking segment totaled $78.6 million. For the year ended December 31, 2010, net income for this segment totaled $782,000.

Consumer Finance

We conduct consumer finance activities through C&F Finance, which the Bank acquired on September 1, 2002. C&F Finance is a regional finance company providing automobile loans throughout Virginia and in portions of Alabama, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, Georgia and West Virginia through its offices in Richmond and Hampton, Virginia, in Nashville, Tennessee and in Towson, Maryland. C&F Finance is an indirect lender that provides automobile financing through lending programs that are designed to serve customers in the “non-prime” market who have limited access to traditional automobile financing. C&F Finance generally purchases automobile retail installment sales contracts from manufacturer-franchised dealerships with used-car operations and through selected independent dealerships. C&F Finance selects these dealers based on the types of vehicles sold. Specifically, C&F Finance prefers to finance later model, low mileage used vehicles because the initial depreciation on new vehicles is extremely high. C&F Finance’s typical borrowers have experienced prior credit difficulties. Because C&F Finance serves customers who are unable to meet the credit standards imposed by most traditional automobile financing sources, C&F Finance typically charges interest at higher rates than those charged by traditional financing sources. As C&F Finance provides financing in a relatively high-risk market, it expects to experience a higher level of credit losses than traditional automobile financing sources. Revenues from consumer finance operations consist principally of interest earned on automobile loans. At December 31, 2010, assets of the Consumer Finance segment totaled $224.2 million. For the year ended December 31, 2010, net income for this segment totaled $9.4 million.

Employees

At December 31, 2010, we employed 544 full-time equivalent employees. We consider relations with our employees to be excellent.

Competition

Retail Banking

In the Bank’s market area, we compete with large national and regional financial institutions, savings associations and other independent community banks, as well as credit unions, mutual funds, brokerage firms and insurance companies. Increased competition has come from out-of-state banks through their acquisition of Virginia-based banks and expansion of community and regional banks into our service areas.

The banking business in Virginia, and in the Bank’s primary service area in the Hampton to Richmond corridor, is highly competitive for both loans and deposits, and is dominated by a relatively small number of large banks with many offices operating over a wide geographic area. Among the advantages such large banks have are their ability to finance wide-ranging advertising campaigns, efficiencies through economies of scale and, by virtue of their greater total capitalization, to have substantially higher lending limits than the Bank.

Factors such as interest rates offered, the number and location of branches and the types of products offered, as well as the reputation of the institution, affect competition for deposits and loans. We compete by emphasizing customer service and technology, establishing long-term customer relationships, building customer loyalty, and providing products and services to address the specific needs of our customers. We target individual and small-to-medium size business customers.

No material part of the Bank’s business is dependent upon a single or a few customers, and the loss of any single customer would not have a materially adverse effect upon the Bank’s business.

Mortgage Banking

C&F Mortgage competes with large national and regional banks, credit unions, smaller regional mortgage lenders and small local broker operations. As loan volumes have decreased over the past five years, the industry has seen a consolidation in the number of competitors in the marketplace. However, the competition with regard to price has increased tremendously as the remaining participants struggle to achieve volume and profitability benchmarks. The downturn in the housing markets related to declines in real estate values, increased payment defaults and foreclosures have had a dramatic effect on the secondary market. The guidelines surrounding agency business (i.e., loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) have become much more restrictive and the associated mortgage insurance for loans above 80 percent loan-to-value has continued to tighten. The jumbo markets have slowed considerably and pricing has increased dramatically. These changes in the conventional market have caused a dramatic increase in government lending and state bond programs. To operate profitably in this environment, lenders must have a high level of operational and risk management skills and be able to attract and retain top mortgage origination talent. C&F Mortgage competes by attracting the top sales people in the industry, providing an operational infrastructure that manages the guideline changes efficiently and effectively, offering a product menu that is both competitive in loan parameters as well as price, and providing consistently high quality customer service.

2

Table of Contents

No material part of C&F Mortgage’s business is dependent upon a single customer and the loss of any single customer would not have a materially adverse effect upon C&F Mortgage’s business. C&F Mortgage, like all residential mortgage lenders, would be impacted by the inability of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the FHA or the VA to purchase loans. Although C&F Mortgage sells loans to various intermediaries, the ability of these aggregators to purchase loans would be limited if these government-sponsored entities cease to exist or materially limit their purchases of mortgage loans.

Consumer Finance

The non-prime automobile finance business is highly competitive. The automobile finance market is highly fragmented and is served by a variety of financial entities, including the captive finance affiliates of major automotive manufacturers, banks, savings associations, credit unions and independent finance companies. Many of these competitors have substantially greater financial resources and lower costs of funds than our finance subsidiary. In addition, competitors often provide financing on terms that are more favorable to automobile purchasers or dealers than the terms C&F Finance offers. Many of these competitors also have long-standing relationships with automobile dealerships and may offer dealerships or their customers other forms of financing, including dealer floor plan financing and leasing, which we do not.

During 2008 and 2009, there was a significant contraction in the number of institutions providing automobile financing for the non-prime market. This contraction accompanied the economic downturn and the tightening of credit, which contributed to increasing defaults, a decline in collateral values and higher charge-offs. As these issues have abated, institutions with access to capital have begun to re-enter the market. To continue to operate profitably, lenders must have a high level of operational and risk management skills and access to competitive costs of funds.

Providers of automobile financing traditionally have competed on the basis of interest rates charged, the quality of credit accepted, the flexibility of loan terms offered and the quality of service provided to dealers and customers. To establish C&F Finance as one of the principal financing sources at the dealers it serves, we compete predominately through a high level of dealer service, strong dealer relationships, by offering flexible loan terms and by quickly funding loans purchased from dealers.

No material part of C&F Finance’s business is dependent upon any single dealer relationship, and the loss of any single dealer relationship would not have a materially adverse effect upon C&F Finance’s business.

Regulation and Supervision

General

Bank holding companies and banks are extensively regulated under both federal and state law. The following summary briefly describes the more significant provisions of currently applicable federal and state laws and certain regulations and the potential impact of such provisions on the Corporation and the Bank. This summary is not complete, and we refer you to the particular statutory or regulatory provisions or proposals for more information. Because federal regulation of financial institutions changes regularly and is the subject of constant legislative debate, we cannot forecast how federal regulation of financial institutions may change in the future and affect the Corporation’s and the Bank’s operations.

Regulation of the Corporation

The Corporation must file annual, quarterly and other periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC). The Corporation is directly affected by the corporate responsibility and accounting reform legislation signed into law on July 30, 2002, known as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the SOX Act), and the related rules and regulations. The SOX Act includes provisions that, among other things: (1) require that periodic reports containing financial statements that are filed with the SEC be accompanied by chief executive officer and chief financial officer certifications as to their accuracy and compliance with the law; (2) prohibit public companies, with certain limited exceptions, from making personal loans to their directors or executive officers; (3) require chief executive officers and chief financial officers to forfeit bonuses and profits if company financial statements are restated due to misconduct; (4) require audit committees to pre-approve all audit and non-audit services provided by an issuer’s outside auditors, except for de minimis non-audit services; (5) protect employees of public companies who assist in investigations relating to violations of the federal securities laws from job discrimination; (6) require companies to disclose in plain English on a “rapid and current basis” material changes in their financial condition or operations, as well as certain other specified information; (7) require a public company’s Section 16 insiders to make Form 4 filings with the SEC within two business days following the day on which purchases or sales of the company’s equity securities were made; and (8) increased penalties for existing crimes and created new criminal offenses. While the Corporation has incurred additional expenses in complying with the requirements of the SOX Act and related regulations adopted by the SEC and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, we anticipate that those expenses will not have a material effect on the Corporation’s results of operations or financial condition.

3

Table of Contents

When enacted in 2002, Section 404(b) of the SOX Act required public companies to include in their annual reports on Form 10-K an assessment from management of the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting, and required the company’s auditor to attest to and report on management’s assessment. From 2002 through 2010, the SEC had delayed implementation of Section 404(b) of the SOX Act for public companies with a public float below $75 million (i.e. companies that are smaller reporting companies or non-accelerated filers). In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act) permanently exempted smaller reporting companies and non-accelerated filers from Section 404(b) of the SOX Act, and the SEC made conforming amendments to certain of its rules and forms in September 2010. The Corporation has voluntarily provided an attestation by the Corporation’s auditor on management’s assessment of the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Corporation is also subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the Federal Reserve Board). The Federal Reserve Board has jurisdiction to approve any bank or non-bank acquisition, merger or consolidation proposed by a bank holding company. The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the BHCA) generally limits the activities of a bank holding company and its subsidiaries to that of banking, managing or controlling banks, or any other activity that is closely related to banking or to managing or controlling banks.

Since September 1995, the BHCA has permitted bank holding companies from any state to acquire banks and bank holding companies located in any other state, subject to certain conditions, including nationwide and state imposed concentration limits. Banks also are able to branch across state lines, provided certain conditions are met, including that applicable state laws expressly permit such interstate branching. Virginia permits branching across state lines, provided there is reciprocity with the state in which the out-of-state bank is based.

Federal law and regulatory policy impose a number of obligations and restrictions on bank holding companies and their depository institution subsidiaries to reduce potential loss exposure to the depositors and to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC) insurance funds. For example, a bank holding company must commit resources to support its subsidiary depository institutions. In addition, insured depository institutions under common control must reimburse the FDIC for any loss suffered or reasonably anticipated by the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) as a result of the default of a commonly controlled insured depository institution. The FDIC may decline to enforce the provisions if it determines that a waiver is in the best interest of the DIF. An FDIC claim for damage is superior to claims of stockholders of an insured depository institution or its holding company but is subordinate to claims of depositors, secured creditors and holders of subordinated debt, other than affiliates, of the commonly controlled insured depository institution.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the FDIA) provides that amounts received from the liquidation or other resolution of any insured depository institution must be distributed, after payment of secured claims, to pay the deposit liabilities of the institution before payment of any other general creditor or stockholder. This provision would give depositors a preference over general and subordinated creditors and stockholders if a receiver is appointed to distribute the assets of the Bank.

The Corporation also is subject to regulation and supervision by the State Corporation Commission of Virginia.

Capital Requirements

The Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC have issued substantially similar risk-based and leverage capital guidelines applicable to banking organizations they supervise. Under the risk-based capital requirements of these federal bank regulatory agencies, the Corporation and the Bank are required to maintain a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0 percent and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.0 percent. At least half of the total capital must be Tier 1 capital, which includes common equity, retained earnings and qualifying perpetual preferred stock, less certain intangibles and other adjustments. The remainder may consist of Tier 2 capital, such as a limited amount of subordinated and other qualifying debt (including certain hybrid capital instruments), other qualifying preferred stock and a limited amount of the general loan loss allowance. For the Corporation only, Tier 1 and total capital include trust preferred securities. At December 31, 2010, the total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of the Corporation was 16.5 percent and the ratio of the Bank was 16.3 percent. At December 31, 2010, the Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio was 15.3 percent for the Corporation and 15.0 percent for the Bank.

In addition, each of the federal regulatory agencies has established leverage capital ratio guidelines for banking organizations. These guidelines provide for a minimum Tier l leverage ratio of 4.0 percent for banks and bank holding companies. At December 31, 2010, the Tier l leverage ratio was 11.6 percent for the Corporation and 11.4 percent for the Bank. The guidelines also provide that banking organizations experiencing internal growth or making acquisitions must maintain capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels, without significant reliance on intangible assets.

On January 9, 2009, as part of the Capital Purchase Program (Capital Purchase Program or CPP) established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the EESA), as discussed below, the Corporation issued and sold to Treasury for an aggregate purchase price of $20.0 million in cash (1) 20,000 shares of the Corporation’s fixed rate cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series A, par value $1.00 per share, having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share (Series A Preferred Stock) and (2) a ten-year warrant to purchase up to 167,504 shares of the Corporation’s common stock, par value $1.00 per share (Common Stock), at an initial exercise price of $17.91 per share (Warrant). The Series A Preferred Stock has been treated as Tier 1 capital for regulatory capital adequacy determination purposes.

4

Table of Contents

In December 2010, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the Basel Committee) released its final framework for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulation, now officially identified by the Basel Committee as “Basel III.” Basel III, when implemented by the U.S. banking agencies and fully phased-in, will require bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain substantially more capital, with a greater emphasis on common equity. Implementation is presently scheduled to be phased in between 2014 and 2019, although it is possible that implementation may be delayed as a result of multiple factors including the current condition of the banking industry within the U.S. and abroad.

The Basel III final capital framework, among other things, (i) introduces as a new capital measure “Common Equity Tier 1” (CET1), (ii) specifies that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1 and “Additional Tier 1 capital” instruments meeting specified requirements, (iii) defines CET1 narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital and (iv) expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations.

When fully phased in on January 1, 2019, Basel III requires banks to maintain (i) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.5%, plus a 2.5% “capital conservation buffer” (which is added to the 4.5% CET1 ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7%), (ii) a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 6.0% Tier 1 capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.5% upon full implementation), (iii) a minimum ratio of Total (that is, Tier 1 plus Tier 2) capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0%, plus the capital conservation buffer (which is added to the 8.0% total capital ratio as that buffer is phased in, effectively resulting in a minimum total capital ratio of 10.5% upon full implementation) and (iv) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum leverage ratio of 3%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to balance sheet exposures plus certain off-balance sheet exposures (computed as the average for each quarter of the month-end ratios for the quarter).

Basel III also provides for a “countercyclical capital buffer,” generally to be imposed when national regulators determine that excess aggregate credit growth becomes associated with a buildup of systemic risk, that would be a CET1 add-on to the capital conservation buffer in the range of 0% to 2.5% when fully implemented (potentially resulting in total buffers of between 2.5% and 5%).

The aforementioned capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer (or below the combined capital conservation buffer and countercyclical capital buffer, when the latter is applied) will face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall.

The implementation of the Basel III final framework will commence January 1, 2013. On that date, banking institutions will be required to meet the following minimum capital ratios:

The Basel III final framework provides for a number of new deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets dependent upon future taxable income and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1.

Implementation of the deductions and other adjustments to CET1 will begin on January 1, 2014 and will be phased-in over a five-year period (20% per year). The implementation of the capital conservation buffer will begin on January 1, 2016 at 0.625% and be phased in over a four-year period (increasing by that amount on each subsequent January 1, until it reaches 2.5% on January 1, 2019).

The U.S. banking agencies have indicated informally that they expect to propose regulations implementing Basel III in mid-2011 with final adoption of implementing regulations in mid-2012. Notwithstanding its release of the Basel III framework as a final framework, the Basel Committee is considering further amendments to Basel III, including the imposition of additional capital surcharges on globally systemically important financial institutions. In addition to Basel III, the Dodd-Frank Act requires or permits the federal banking agencies to adopt regulations affecting banking institutions’ capital requirements in a number of respects, including potentially more stringent capital requirements for systemically important financial institutions. Accordingly, the regulations ultimately applicable to the Corporation may be substantially different from the Basel III final framework as published in December 2010. Requirements to maintain higher levels of capital or to maintain higher levels of liquid assets could adversely impact the Corporation’s net income and return on equity.

5

Table of Contents

Limits on Dividends

The Corporation is a legal entity, separate and distinct from the Bank. A significant portion of the revenues of the Corporation result from dividends paid to it by the Bank. Both the Corporation and the Bank are subject to laws and regulations that limit the payment of dividends, including requirements to maintain capital at or above regulatory minimums. Banking regulators have indicated that Virginia banking organizations should generally pay dividends only (1) from net undivided profits of the bank, after providing for all expenses, losses, interest and taxes accrued or due by the bank and (2) if the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. In addition, the FDIA prohibits insured depository institutions such as the Bank from making capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, if, after making such distribution, the institution would become undercapitalized as defined in the statute.

We do not expect that any of these laws, regulations or policies will materially affect the ability of the Corporation or the Bank to pay dividends. During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Bank declared $2.6 million in dividends payable to the Corporation, which were used to fund a portion of the Corporation’s debt service and dividends payable to common and preferred shareholders.

Payment of dividends is at the discretion of the Corporation’s board of directors and is subject to various federal and state regulatory limitations. The purchase agreement pursuant to which the Series A Preferred Stock and the Warrant were sold includes a limitation that prohibits, prior to the earlier of January 9, 2012 or the date on which Treasury no longer holds any of the Series A Preferred Stock, the payment of cash dividends in excess of the Corporation’s quarterly cash dividend at the time of issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock of $0.31 per share without the Treasury’s consent.

The Dodd-Frank Act

On July 21, 2010, financial regulatory reform legislation entitled the “Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act” (the Dodd-Frank Act) was signed into law. The Dodd-Frank Act implements far-reaching changes across the financial regulatory landscape, including provisions that, among other things, will:

6

Table of Contents

Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to rulemaking and will take effect over several years, making it difficult to anticipate the overall financial impact on the Corporation, its subsidiaries, its customers or the financial industry more generally. Provisions in the legislation that affect the payment of interest on demand deposits and interchange fees are likely to increase the costs associated with deposits as well as place limitations on certain revenues those deposits may generate. Provisions in the legislation that revoke the Tier 1 capital treatment of trust preferred securities and otherwise require revisions to the capital requirements of the Corporation and C&F Bank could require the Corporation and C&F Bank to seek other sources of capital in the future. Some of the rules that have been proposed and, in some cases, adopted to comply with the Dodd-Frank Act’s mandates are discussed further below.

Economic Emergency Stabilization Act of 2008 (EESA) and the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA)

In October 2008, the EESA was signed into law, which provided immediate authority and facilities that the Treasury could use to restore liquidity and stability to the financial system. Specifically, Section 101 of EESA established the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, troubled assets from any financial institution, on such terms and conditions as are determined by the Secretary of the Treasury, and in accordance with EESA and the policies and procedures developed and published by the Secretary of the Treasury. Section 111 of EESA provides that entities that receive financial assistance from Treasury under TARP will be subject to specified executive compensation and corporate governance standards to be established by the Secretary of the Treasury. The statutory language in EESA includes three limitations on executive compensation for TARP recipients involved in a direct purchase. On February 17, 2009, the President signed the ARRA into law. ARRA contains a number of restrictions on executive and highly-paid employee compensation for those institutions that have received, or will receive, government assistance under TARP that are considerably more restrictive and far-reaching than the limited restrictions included in EESA.

On June 10, 2009, the Treasury released regulations in an Interim Final Rule (IFR) that sets standards for complying with the executive compensation and corporate governance provisions for TARP recipients contained in EESA, as amended by ARRA. The standards for compensation and corporate governance established in the IFR: (1) prohibit the payment or accrual of bonus, retention award and incentive compensation (with the exception of limited amounts of restricted stock) for specified individuals, depending upon the level of government assistance received by the institution; (2) prohibit making any golden parachute payments to a senior executive officer (SEO) or any of the next five most highly compensated employees (MHCE); (3) prohibit tax gross-ups to SEOs and any of the next 20 MHCEs; (4) provide for the recovery of any bonus, incentive compensation, or retention award paid to a SEO or the next 20 MHCEs based on materially inaccurate statements of earnings, revenues, gains, or other criteria (clawback); (5) require the establishment of a compensation committee of independent directors to meet semi-annually to review employee compensation plans and the risks posed by these plans to the institution; (6) limit compensation to exclude incentives for SEOs to take unnecessary and excessive risk that threaten the value of the institution and eliminate features of employee compensation plans that pose unnecessary risks to the institution; (7) prohibit employee compensation plans that would encourage manipulation of earnings to enhance an employee’s compensation; (8) require the adoption of an excessive or luxury expenditures policy; (9) require compliance with federal securities laws and regulations regarding non-binding resolution on SEO compensation to shareholders; (10) require disclosure of perquisites offered to SEOs and certain highly compensated employees; and (11) require disclosures related to compensation consultant engagements.

Incentive Compensation

In June 2010, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC issued a comprehensive final guidance on incentive compensation intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The guidance, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the organization’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management, and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the organization’s board of directors.

The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of banking organizations, such as the Corporation, that are not “large, complex banking organizations.” These reviews will be tailored to each organization based on the scope and complexity of the organization’s activities and the prevalence of incentive compensation arrangements. The findings of the supervisory initiatives will be included in reports of examination. Deficiencies will be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the organization’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

7

Table of Contents

Regulation of the Bank and Other Subsidiaries

The Bank is subject to supervision, regulation and examination by the Virginia State Corporation Commission Bureau of Financial Institutions (VBFI) and the FDIC. The various laws and regulations administered by the regulatory agencies affect corporate practices, such as the payment of dividends, the incurrence of debt and the acquisition of financial institutions and other companies, and affect business practices, such as the payment of interest on deposits, the charging of interest on loans, the types of business conducted and the location of offices.

FDIA and Associated Regulations. Section 36 of the FDIA and associated regulations require management of every insured depository institution with total assets between $500 million and $1 billion at the beginning of a fiscal year to obtain an annual audit of its financial statements by an independent public accountant, report to the banking agencies on the institution’s compliance with designated laws and regulations and establish an audit committee comprised of outside directors, at least a majority of whom must be independent of management. The Bank is subject to the annual audit, reporting and audit committee requirements of Section 36 of the FDIA.

Community Reinvestment Act. The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) imposes on financial institutions an affirmative and ongoing obligation to meet the credit needs of their local communities, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and sound operation of those institutions. A financial institution’s efforts in meeting community credit needs are assessed based on specified factors. These factors also are considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open a branch or facility. In 2010, the FDIC issued C&F Bank’s 2009 Community Reinvestment Act Performance Evaluation (the 2009 CRA Evaluation). C&F Bank received “Satisfactory” ratings on the Investment Test component and the Service Test component evaluated as part of the 2009 CRA Evaluation. Based on issues identified at one of C&F Bank’s subsidiaries, C&F Mortgage, C&F Bank received a “Needs to Improve” rating on the Lending Test component, and as a result, a “Needs to Improve” rating on its overall rating. In its evaluation, the FDIC concluded that C&F Mortgage violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (the ECOA), Federal Reserve Regulation B, and the Fair Housing Act in connection with certain of its lending practices. While C&F Bank’s board of directors and management strongly disagree with the FDIC’s conclusion that C&F Mortgage violated the ECOA, Federal Reserve Regulation B or the Fair Housing Act, C&F Mortgage has strengthened and continues to strengthen its policies, procedures and monitoring of its lending practices to address the issues raised by the FDIC. C&F Mortgage is and will continue to be committed to fair lending.

By statute, a bank such as C&F Bank with a “Needs to Improve” CRA rating has limitations on certain future business activities, including the ability to open new branches and to make acquisitions, until its CRA rating improves. Management does not believe that these limitations will have a significant effect on C&F Bank’s current business plans. As also required by statute, the FDIC referred its conclusions regarding the alleged violations to the Department of Justice (DOJ), and the DOJ has notified C&F Mortgage that it is investigating the matter. Management has met with the DOJ regarding the investigation. At this time, it is not anticipated that the results of the investigation will have a material adverse impact on C&F Financial Corporation’s results of operations or financial condition.

Insurance of Accounts, Assessments and Regulation by the FDIC. The Bank’s deposits are insured up to applicable limits by the DIF of the FDIC. The FDIC amended its risk-based assessment system in 2007 to implement authority granted by the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005 (FDIRA). Under the revised system, insured institutions are assigned to one of four risk categories based on supervisory evaluations, regulatory capital levels and certain other factors. An institution’s assessment rate depends upon the category to which it is assigned. Unlike the other categories, Risk Category I, which contains the least risky depository institutions, contains further risk differentiation based on the FDIC’s analysis of financial ratios, examination component ratings and other information. Assessment rates are determined by the FDIC and, for calendar year 2008, assessments ranged from five to 43 basis points of each institution’s deposit assessment base. Due to losses incurred by the DIF in 2008 from failed institutions, and anticipated future losses, the FDIC adopted an across the board seven basis point increase in the assessment range for the first quarter of 2009. The FDIC made further refinements to its risk-based assessment that became effective April 1, 2009, and effectively made the range seven to 77.5 basis points. The FDIC may adjust rates uniformly from one quarter to the next, except that no single adjustment can exceed three basis points.

FDIRA also provided for a one-time credit for eligible institutions based on their assessment base as of December 31, 1996. Subject to certain limitations with respect to institutions that are exhibiting weaknesses, credits can be used to offset assessments until exhausted. The Bank’s one-time credit was $297,000, all of which was applied to offset assessments in 2008 and 2007. FDIRA also provided for the possibility that the FDIC may pay dividends to insured institutions if the DIF reserve ratio equals or exceeds 1.35 percent of estimated insured deposits.

The EESA temporarily raised the basic limit on federal deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000 per depositor. The legislation originally provided that the basic deposit insurance limit would return to $100,000 after December 31, 2009. The legislation did not change coverage for retirement accounts, which continues to be $250,000. In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act made permanent the $250,000 limit for federal deposit insurance.

8

Table of Contents

In November 2008, the FDIC adopted a final rule implementing the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) because of disruptions in the credit markets, particularly the interbank lending market, which reduced banks’ liquidity and impaired their ability to lend. The goal of the TLGP is to decrease the cost of bank funding so that bank lending to consumers and businesses will normalize. The TLGP is industry funded and does not rely on the DIF to achieve its goals. The TLGP consists of two components: a temporary guarantee of certain newly-issued senior unsecured debt (the Debt Guarantee Program) and a temporary unlimited guarantee of funds in noninterest-bearing transaction accounts at FDIC-insured institutions (the Transaction Account Guarantee Program). The Corporation is participating in both of these programs and will be required to pay assessments associated with the TLGP as follows:

In May 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule imposing a five basis point special assessment on each insured depository institution’s assets minus Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009. The assessment was part of the FDIC’s efforts to rebuild the DIF and help maintain public confidence in the banking system. The Corporation was assessed $391,000, all of which was expensed in 2009.

In November 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule requiring insured depository institutions to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009, and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012, on December 31, 2009, along with each institution’s risk-based deposit insurance assessment for the third quarter of 2009. The prepayment was based on an institution’s assessment rate and assessment base for the third quarter of 2009, assuming a five percent annual growth in deposits each year. While the FDIC plan would maintain current assessment rates through 2010, effective January 1, 2011, the rates would increase by three basis points across the board. The FDIC has elected to forgo this increase under a new DIF restoration plan adopted in October 2010 as discussed below. On December 30, 2009, the Corporation prepaid $3.2 million of FDIC assessments.

In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a new DIF restoration plan to ensure that the fund reserve ratio reaches 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the new restoration plan, the FDIC will forego the uniform three-basis point increase in initial assessment rates scheduled to take place on January 1, 2011 and maintain the current schedule of assessment rates for all depository institutions. At least semi-annually, the FDIC will update its loss and income projections for the fund and, if needed, will increase or decrease assessment rates, following notice-and-comment rulemaking if required.

In November 2010, the FDIC issued a final rule to implement provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that provide for temporary unlimited coverage for noninterest-bearing transaction accounts beginning January 1, 2011 and continuing through December 2012. For purposes of this extension, the definition of noninterest-bearing transaction accounts excludes negotiable order of withdraw consumer checking accounts (NOW accounts) and Interest on Lawyer Trust Accounts (IOLTAs). The extended program is not optional and will no longer be funded by separate premiums.

In February 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule that changes the assessment base from domestic deposits to average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity (defined as Tier 1 capital); adopts a new large-bank pricing assessment scheme; and sets a target size for the DIF. The changes will go into effect beginning with the second quarter of 2011 and will be payable at the end of September 2011. The rule, as mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, finalizes a target size for the DIF at 2 percent of insured deposits. It also implements a lower assessment rate schedule when the fund reaches 1.15 percent and, in lieu of dividends, provides for a lower rate schedule when the reserve ration reaches 2 percent and 2.5 percent.

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) of Atlanta, which is one of 12 regional FHLBs that provide funding to their members for making housing loans as well as for affordable housing and community development loans. Each FHLB serves as a reserve, or central bank, for the members within its assigned region. Each is funded primarily from proceeds derived from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB System. Each FHLB makes loans to members in accordance with policies and procedures established by the Board of Directors of the FHLB. As a member, the Bank must purchase and maintain stock in the FHLB. In 2004, the FHLB converted to its new capital structure, which established the minimum capital stock requirement for member banks as an amount equal to the sum of a membership requirement and an activity-based requirement. In 2009, the FHLB imposed a temporary suspension of repurchases of excess capital. At December 31, 2010, the Bank owned $3.9 million of FHLB stock.

9

Table of Contents

USA Patriot Act. The USA Patriot Act, which became effective on October 26, 2001, amends the Bank Secrecy Act and is intended to facilitate information sharing among governmental entities and financial institutions for the purpose of combating terrorism and money laundering. Among other provisions, the USA Patriot Act permits financial institutions, upon providing notice to the Treasury, to share information with one another in order to better identify and report to the federal government activities that may involve money laundering or terrorists’ activities. The USA Patriot Act is considered a significant banking law in terms of information disclosure regarding certain customer transactions. Certain provisions of the USA Patriot Act impose the obligation to establish anti-money laundering programs, including the development of a customer identification program, and the screening of all customers against any government lists of known or suspected terrorists. Although it does create a reporting obligation and there is a cost of compliance, the USA Patriot Act does not materially affect the Bank’s products, services or other business activities.

Reporting Terrorist Activities. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has sent, and will send, banking regulatory agencies lists of the names of persons suspected of involvement in terrorist activities. The Bank has been requested, and will be requested, to search its records for any relationships or transactions with persons on those lists. If the Bank finds any relationships or transactions, it must file a suspicious activity report with the Treasury and contact the FBI.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), which is a division of the Treasury, is responsible for helping to insure that United States entities do not engage in transactions with “enemies” of the United States, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC sends banking regulatory agencies lists of names of persons and organizations suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts. If the Bank finds a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, it must freeze such account, file a suspicious activity report with the Treasury and notify the FBI. The Bank has appointed an OFAC compliance officer to oversee the inspection of its accounts and the filing of any notifications. The Bank actively checks high-risk areas such as new accounts, wire transfers and customer files. The Bank performs these checks utilizing software that is updated each time a modification is made to the lists of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons provided by OFAC and other agencies.

Mortgage Banking Regulation. In addition to certain of the Bank’s regulations, the Corporation’s Mortgage Banking segment is subject to the rules and regulations of, and examination by, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the FHA, the VA and state regulatory authorities with respect to originating, processing and selling mortgage loans. Those rules and regulations, among other things, establish standards for loan origination, prohibit discrimination, provide for inspections and appraisals of property, require credit reports on prospective borrowers and, in some cases, restrict certain loan features and fix maximum interest rates and fees. In addition to other federal laws, mortgage origination activities are subject to the ECOA, Truth-in-Lending Act, Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, and Home Ownership Equity Protection Act, and the regulations promulgated under these acts. These laws prohibit discrimination, require the disclosure of certain basic information to mortgagors concerning credit and settlement costs, limit payment for settlement services to the reasonable value of the services rendered and require the maintenance and disclosure of information regarding the disposition of mortgage applications based on race, gender, geographical distribution and income level. As noted above under “Community Reinvestment Act”, the FDIC concluded that C&F Mortgage violated the ECOA with certain of its lending practices. C&F Mortgage is and will continue to be committed to fair lending and has strengthened its policies, procedures and monitoring of its lending practices to address the issues raised by the FDIC.

Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines. In December 2010, the Federal Reserve Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the FDIC, jointly with other federal regulatory agencies, issued the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines. This guidance, which updates guidance originally issued in 1994, sets forth the minimum regulatory standards for appraisals. The guidance incorporates previous regulatory issuances affecting appraisals, addresses advances in information technology used in collateral evaluation, and clarifies standards for use of analytical methods and technological tools in developing evaluations. The guidance also requires institutions to use strong internal controls to ensure reliable appraisals and evaluations and to monitor and periodically update valuations of collateral for existing real estate loans and transactions.

Consumer Financing Regulation. The Corporation’s Consumer Finance segment also is regulated by the VBFI and the states and jurisdictions in which it operates. The VBFI regulates and enforces laws relating to consumer lenders and sales finance agencies such as C&F Finance. Such rules and regulations generally provide for licensing of sales finance agencies; limitations on amounts, duration and charges, including interest rates, for various categories of loans; requirements as to the form and content of finance contracts and other documentation; and restrictions on collection practices and creditors’ rights.

Consumer Protection. The Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003, which amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act, requires financial institutions to implement policies and procedures that track identity theft incidents; provide identity-theft victims with evidence of fraudulent transactions upon request; block from reporting to consumer reporting agencies credit information resulting from identity theft; notify customers of adverse information concerning the customer in consumer reporting agency reports; and notify customers when reporting negative information concerning the customer to a consumer reporting agency.

10

Table of Contents

Other Safety and Soundness Regulations

Prompt Correction Action. The federal banking agencies have broad powers under current federal law to take prompt corrective action to resolve problems of insured depository institutions. The extent of these powers depends upon whether the institution in question is “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” or “critically undercapitalized.” These terms are defined under uniform regulations issued by each of the federal banking agencies regulating these institutions. An insured depository institution which is less than adequately capitalized must adopt an acceptable capital restoration plan, is subject to increased regulatory oversight and is increasingly restricted in the scope of its permissible activities. As of December 31, 2010, the Bank was considered “well capitalized.”

Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLBA). The GLBA implemented major changes to the statutory framework for providing banking and other financial services in the United States. The GLBA, among other things, eliminated many of the restrictions on affiliations among banks and securities firms, insurance firms and other financial service providers. A bank holding company that qualifies and elects to be a financial holding company is permitted to engage in activities that are financial in nature or incident or complimentary to financial activities. The activities that the GLBA expressly lists as financial in nature include insurance underwriting, sales and brokerage activities, financial and investment advisory services, underwriting services and limited merchant banking activities.

To become eligible for these expanded activities, a bank holding company must qualify as a financial holding company. To qualify as a financial holding company, each insured depository institution controlled by the bank holding company must be well-capitalized, well-managed and have at least a satisfactory rating under the CRA. In addition, the bank holding company must file with the Federal Reserve Board a declaration of its intention to become a financial holding company. As noted above under “Community Reinvestment Act” the Bank received a “Needs to Improve” rating on its latest CRA rating. As such, at this time, the Corporation is not eligible to be treated as a financial holding company under the GLBA.

The GLBA has not had a material adverse impact on the Corporation’s or the Bank’s operations. To the extent that it allows banks, securities firms and insurance firms to affiliate, the financial services industry may experience further consolidation. The GLBA may have the result of increasing competition that we face from larger institutions and other companies that offer financial products and services and that may have substantially greater financial resources than the Corporation or the Bank.

The GLBA and certain regulations issued by federal banking agencies also provide protections against the transfer and use by financial institutions of consumer nonpublic personal information. A financial institution must provide to its customers, at the beginning of the customer relationship and annually thereafter, the institution’s policies and procedures regarding the handling of customers’ nonpublic personal financial information. These privacy provisions generally prohibit a financial institution from providing a customer’s personal financial information to unaffiliated third parties unless the institution discloses to the customer that the information may be so provided and the customer is given the opportunity to opt out of such disclosure.

Future Regulation

From time to time, various legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and state legislatures, as well as by regulatory agencies. Such initiatives may include proposals to expand or contract the powers of bank holding companies and depository institutions or proposals to substantially change the financial institution regulatory system. Such legislation could change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Corporation in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, such legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other financial institutions. The Corporation cannot predict whether any such legislation will be enacted, and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any implementing regulations, would have on the financial condition or results of operations of the Corporation. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Corporation or C&F Bank, or any of its subsidiaries, could have a material effect on the business of the Corporation.

Available Information

The Corporation’s SEC filings are filed electronically and are available to the public over the Internet at the SEC’s web site at http://www.sec.gov. In addition, any document filed by the Corporation with the SEC can be read and copied at the SEC’s public reference facilities at 100 F Street, N.E., Room 1580, Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of documents can be obtained at prescribed rates by writing to the Public Reference Section of the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The Corporation’s SEC filings also are available through our web site at http://www.cffc.com under “About C&F/C&F Financial Corporation/SEC Filings” as of the day they are filed with the SEC. Copies of documents also can be obtained free of charge by writing to the Corporation’s secretary at P.O. Box 391, West Point, VA 23181 or by calling 804-843-2360.

11

Table of Contents

A continuation or further deterioration of the current economic environment could adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

A continuation or further deterioration of the current economic environment could adversely impact the Corporation’s performance, both directly by affecting our revenues and the value of our assets and liabilities, and indirectly by affecting our counterparties and the economy generally. Dramatic declines in the housing market that began during the recession have resulted in significant write-downs of asset values by financial institutions. The Corporation has recognized significantly higher loan loss provisions and write-downs and other expenses associated with foreclosed properties during 2008, 2009 and 2010 as the level of nonperforming assets increased throughout the period. The economic recovery has been less than robust and the continued high levels of unemployment coupled with the continued downward pressure in the housing market has and may continue to have an adverse impact on the Corporation’s results of operations.

Deterioration in the soundness of our counterparties could adversely affect us.

Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, and other institutional clients. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, could create another market-wide liquidity crisis similar to that experienced in late 2008 and early 2009 and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions. Our mortgage company would be negatively affected by the inability of the FHA, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to purchase loans or a material reduction in the volume of such purchases. Although we sell loans to various intermediaries, the ability of these aggregators to purchase loans would be limited if the FHA, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac cease to exist or materially limit their purchases of mortgage loans. There is no assurance that the failure of our counterparties would not materially adversely affect the Corporation’s results of operations.

Compliance with laws, regulations and supervisory guidance, both new and existing, may adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to numerous laws, regulations and supervision from both federal and state agencies. During the past few years, there has been an increase in legislation related to and regulation of the financial services industry. We expect this increased level of oversight to continue. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in financial, structural and operational penalties, including receivership. In addition, establishing systems and processes to achieve compliance with these laws and regulations may increase our costs and/or limit our ability to pursue certain business opportunities.

Laws and regulations, and any interpretations and applications with respect thereto, generally are intended to benefit consumers, borrowers and depositors, not stockholders. The legislative and regulatory environment is beyond our control, may change rapidly and unpredictably and may negatively influence our revenue, costs, earnings, and capital levels. Our success depends on our ability to maintain compliance with both existing and new laws and regulations.

We are subject to interest rate risk and fluctuations in interest rates may negatively affect our financial performance.

Our profitability depends in substantial part on our net interest margin, which is the difference between the interest earned on loans, securities and other interest-earning assets, and interest paid on deposits and borrowings. Changes in interest rates will affect our net interest margin in diverse ways, including the pricing of loans and deposits, the levels of prepayments and asset quality. We are unable to predict actual fluctuations of market interest rates because many factors influencing interest rates are beyond our control. We attempt to minimize our exposure to interest rate risk, but we are unable to eliminate it. We believe that our current interest rate exposure is manageable and does not indicate any significant exposure to interest rate changes. However, the interest rate cuts made by the Federal Reserve Board since September 2007 immediately reduced our yield on variable-rate loans without a corresponding immediate reduction in deposit costs, which resulted in a decline in our net interest margin during 2008 and early 2009. Net interest margin partially recovered during 2009 and 2010 as we were able to reprice fixed-rate deposits at lower rates as well as implement policies that established floors on variable rate loans. There is no guarantee we will continue to be able to reprice deposits as competition for deposits from both local and national financial services institutions is intense.

In addition, a significant portion of C&F Finance’s funding is indexed to short-term interest rates and reprices as short-term interest rates change. An upward movement in interest rates may result in an unfavorable pricing disparity between C&F Finance’s fixed rate loan portfolio and its adjustable-rate borrowings.

Weakness in the secondary residential mortgage loan markets will adversely affect income from our mortgage company.

One of the components of our strategic plan is to generate significant noninterest income from C&F Mortgage, which originates a variety of residential loan products for sale into the secondary market to investors. Significant disruptions in the secondary market

12

Table of Contents

for residential mortgage loans have limited the market for and liquidity of many mortgage loans. The correction in residential real estate market prices may not have reached bottom. We expect the ongoing effects of lower demand for home mortgage loans resulting from reduced demand in both the new and resale housing markets as well as fluctuations in mortgage rates to keep pressure on loan origination volume at C&F Mortgage. At the same time as market conditions were negatively impacting loan origination volume, efforts by the Federal Reserve Board to keep interest rates low and government initiatives, such as the homebuyer tax credits which expired in the second quarter of 2010, have caused some increase in loan originations and refinancing activity. There is no guarantee that the efforts by the Federal Reserve Board will have a positive impact on loan originations. These factors may cause our revenue from our mortgage company to be volatile from quarter to quarter.

In addition, credit markets have continued to experience difficult conditions and volatility. There have been significant increases in payment defaults by borrowers and mortgage loan foreclosures. These factors may result in potential repurchase or indemnification liability to C&F Mortgage on residential mortgage loans originated and sold into the secondary market in the event of claims by investors of borrower misrepresentation, fraud, early-payment default, or underwriting error, as investors attempt to minimize their losses. While we entered into an agreement with our largest purchaser of loans that resolved all known and unknown indemnification obligations related to loans sold to this investor through 2010, and while we mitigate the risk of repurchase liability by underwriting to the purchasers’ guidelines, we cannot be assured that a prolonged period of payment defaults and foreclosures will not result in an increase in requests for repurchases or indemnifications, or that established reserves will be adequate, which could adversely affect the Corporation’s net income.

Our business is subject to various lending and other economic risks that could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Deterioration in economic conditions, such as the recent recession, continuing high unemployment, and rate of further declines in real estate values, could hurt our business. Our business is directly affected by general economic and market conditions; broad trends in industry and finance; legislative and regulatory changes; changes in governmental monetary and fiscal policies; and inflation, all of which are beyond our control. A deterioration in economic conditions, in particular a prolonged economic slowdown within our geographic region, could result in the following consequences, any of which could hurt our business materially: an increase in loan delinquencies; an increase in problem assets and foreclosures; a decline in demand for our products and services; and a deterioration in the value of collateral for loans made by our various business segments.

Our level of credit risk is increasing due to the concentration of our loan portfolio in commercial loans and in consumer finance loans.

At December 31, 2010, 34 percent of our loan portfolio consisted of commercial, financial and agricultural loans, which include loans secured by real estate for builder lines, acquisition and development and commercial development, as well as commercial loans secured by personal property. These loans generally carry larger loan balances and involve a greater degree of financial and credit risk than home equity and residential loans. The increased financial and credit risk associated with these types of loans is a result of several factors, including the concentration of principal in a limited number of loans and to borrowers in similar lines of business, the size of loan balances, the effects of general economic conditions on income-producing properties and the increased difficulty of evaluating and monitoring these types of loans.

At December 31, 2010, 35 percent of our loan portfolio consisted of consumer finance loans that provide automobile financing for customers in the non-prime market. During periods of economic slowdown or recession, delinquencies, defaults, repossessions and losses may increase in this portfolio. Significant increases in the inventory of used automobiles during periods of economic recession may also depress the prices at which we may sell repossessed automobiles or delay the timing of these sales. Because we focus on non-prime borrowers, the actual rates of delinquencies, defaults, repossessions and losses on these loans are higher than those experienced in the general automobile finance industry and could be dramatically affected by a general economic downturn. In addition, our servicing costs may increase without a corresponding increase in our finance charge income. While we manage the higher risk inherent in loans made to non-prime borrowers through our underwriting criteria and collection methods, we cannot guarantee that these criteria or methods will ultimately provide adequate protection against these risks.

If our allowance for loan losses becomes inadequate, our results of operations may be adversely affected.

Making loans is an essential element of our business. The risk of nonpayment is affected by a number of factors, including but not limited to: the duration of the credit; credit risks of a particular customer; changes in economic and industry conditions; and, in the case of a collateralized loan, risks resulting from uncertainties about the future value of the collateral. Although we seek to mitigate risks inherent in lending by adhering to specific underwriting practices, our loans may not be repaid. We attempt to maintain an appropriate allowance for loan losses to provide for potential losses in our loan portfolio. Our allowance for loan losses is determined by analyzing historical loan losses, current trends in delinquencies and charge-offs, current economic conditions that may affect a borrower’s ability to repay and the value of collateral, changes in the size and composition of the loan portfolio and industry information. Also included in our estimates for loan losses are considerations with respect to the impact of economic events, the

13

Table of Contents

outcome of which are uncertain. Because any estimate of loan losses is necessarily subjective and the accuracy of any estimate depends on the outcome of future events, we face the risk that charge-offs in future periods will exceed our allowance for loan losses and that additional increases in the allowance for loan losses will be required. Additions to the allowance for loan losses would result in a decrease of our net income. Although we believe our allowance for loan losses is adequate to absorb probable losses in our loan portfolio, we cannot predict such losses or that our allowance will be adequate in the future.

Competition from other financial institutions and financial intermediaries may adversely affect our profitability.

We face substantial competition in originating loans and in attracting deposits. Our competition in originating loans and attracting deposits comes principally from other banks, mortgage banking companies, consumer finance companies, savings associations, credit unions, brokerage firms, insurance companies and other institutional lenders and purchasers of loans. Additionally, banks and other financial institutions with larger capitalization and financial intermediaries not subject to bank regulatory restrictions have larger lending limits and are thereby able to serve the credit needs of larger clients. These institutions may be able to offer the same loan products and services that we offer at more competitive rates and prices. Increased competition could require us to increase the rates we pay on deposits or lower the rates we offer on loans, which could adversely affect our profitability.

The recent repeal of federal prohibitions on payment of interest on demand deposits could increase interest expense.

As part of the Dodd-Frank Act, the prohibition on the ability of financial institutions to pay interest on demand deposit accounts was repealed. As a result, beginning on July 21, 2011 financial institutions may offer interest on demand deposits. The Corporation does not yet know what interest rates other institutions may offer. If we offer interest on demand deposit accounts to attract new customers or retain existing customers, our interest expense will increase and our net interest margin will decline, which could have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to restrictions and obligations as a participant in the Treasury’s Capital Purchase Program.

In January 2009, as part of the Capital Purchase Program, we issued and sold to the Treasury Series A Preferred Stock and a Warrant for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $20.0 million. Participation in the Capital Purchase Program subjects us to specific restrictions under the terms of the Capital Purchase Program, including limits on our ability to pay dividends (quarterly dividends on our common stock are limited to $0.31 per share or less) and repurchase our capital stock, limitations on executive compensation, and increased oversight by the Treasury, regulators and Congress under the EESA.

Many recipients under the Capital Purchase Program have repaid the Treasury and are no longer subject to the restrictions imposed under the Capital Purchase Program. Withdrawing from the Capital Purchase Program requires approval of banking regulators and we may not be able to obtain such approval, or a condition of obtaining such approval may require us to raise additional capital. Unanticipated consequences of participation in the Capital Purchase Program could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition, access to funding and the trading price of our common stock.

We rely heavily on our management team and the unexpected loss of key officers may adversely affect our operations.

We believe that our growth and future success will depend in large part on the skills of our executive officers. We also depend upon the experience of the officers of our subsidiaries and on their relationships with the communities they serve. The loss of the services of one or more of these officers could disrupt our operations and impair our ability to implement our business strategy, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The success of our business strategies depends on our ability to identify and recruit individuals with experience and relationships in our primary markets.

The successful implementation of our business strategy will require us to continue to attract, hire, motivate and retain skilled personnel to develop new customer relationships as well as new financial products and services. The market for qualified management personnel is competitive. In addition, the process of identifying and recruiting individuals with the combination of skills and attributes required to carry out our strategy is often lengthy. Our inability to identify, recruit and retain talented personnel to manage our operations effectively and in a timely manner could limit our growth, which could materially adversely affect our business.

Our corporate culture has contributed to our success, and if we cannot maintain this culture as we grow, we could lose the beneficial aspects fostered by our culture, which could harm our business.

We believe that a critical contributor to our success has been our corporate culture, which focuses on building personal relationships with our customers. As our organization grows, and we are required to implement more complex organizational management structures, we may find it increasingly difficult to maintain the beneficial aspects of our corporate culture. This could negatively impact our future success.

14

Table of Contents

The Dodd-Frank Act could increase our regulatory compliance burden and associated costs, place restrictions on certain products and services, and limit our future capital raising strategies.

A wide range of regulatory initiatives directed at the financial services industry have been proposed in recent months. One of those initiatives, the Dodd-Frank Act, was signed into law on July 21, 2010. The Dodd-Frank Act represents a sweeping overhaul of the financial services industry within the United States and mandates significant changes in the financial regulatory landscape that will impact all financial institutions, including the Corporation. The Dodd-Frank Act will likely increase our regulatory compliance burden and may have a material adverse effect on us, by increasing the costs associated with our regulatory examinations and compliance measures. The federal regulatory agencies, and particularly bank regulatory agencies, are given significant discretion in drafting the Dodd-Frank Act’s implementing rules and regulations and, consequently, many of the details and much of the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act will depend on the final implementing rules and regulations. Accordingly, it remains too early to fully assess the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act and subsequent regulatory rulemaking processes on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Among the Dodd-Frank Act’s significant regulatory changes, the Dodd-Frank Act creates a new financial consumer protection agency that could impose new regulations on us and include its examiners in our routine regulatory examinations conducted by the FDIC, which could increase our regulatory compliance burden and costs and restrict the financial products and services we can offer to our customers. This agency, named the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, may reshape the consumer financial laws through rulemaking and enforcement of the Dodd-Frank Act’s prohibitions against unfair, deceptive and abusive business practices, which may directly impact the business operations of financial institutions offering consumer financial products or services, including the Corporation. This agency’s broad rulemaking authority includes identifying practices or acts that are unfair, deceptive or abusive in connection with any consumer financial transaction or consumer financial product or service. Although the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has jurisdiction over banks with $10 billion or greater in assets, rules, regulations and policies issued by the Bureau may also apply to the Corporation or its subsidiaries by virtue of the adoption of such policies and best practices by the Federal Reserve and FDIC. The costs and limitations related to this additional regulatory agency and the limitations and restrictions that will be placed upon the Corporation with respect to its consumer product and service offerings have yet to be determined. However, these costs, limitations and restrictions may produce significant, material effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations

The Dodd-Frank Act also increases regulatory supervision and examination of bank holding companies and their banking and non-banking subsidiaries, which could increase our regulatory compliance burden and costs and restrict our ability to generate revenues from non-banking operations. The Dodd-Frank Act imposes more stringent capital requirements on bank holding companies, which could limit our future capital strategies. The Dodd-Frank Act also increases regulation of derivatives and hedging transactions, which could limit our ability to enter into, or increase the costs associated with, interest rate hedging transactions.

Our deposit insurance premiums could increase in the future, which may adversely affect our future financial performance.

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC insured financial institutions, including the Bank. The FDIC charges insured financial institutions premiums to maintain the DIF at a certain level. Economic conditions since 2008 have increased the rate of bank failures and expectations for further bank failures, requiring the FDIC to make payments for insured deposits from the DIF and prepare for future payments from the DIF.

During 2009, the FDIC imposed a special deposit insurance assessment on all institutions which it regulates, including the Bank. This special assessment was imposed due to the need to replenish the DIF, as a result of increased bank failures and expected future bank failures. In addition, the FDIC required regulated institutions to prepay their fourth quarter 2009, and full year 2010, 2011 and 2012 assessments in December 2009. Any similar, additional measures taken by the FDIC to maintain or replenish the DIF may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

On February 7, 2011, the FDIC adopted final rules to implement changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act with respect to the FDIC assessment rules that will be effective April 1, 2011. Once these changes are effective, a depository institution’s deposit insurance assessment will be calculated based on the institution’s total assets less tangible equity, rather than the previous base of total deposits. The Corporation expects that these changes will not increase the Corporation’s FDIC insurance assessments for comparable asset and deposit levels. However, if the Bank’s asset size increases or the FDIC takes other actions to replenish the DIF, the Bank’s FDIC insurance premiums could increase.

Changes in accounting standards and management’s selection of accounting methods, including assumptions and estimates, could materially impact our financial statements.

From time to time the SEC and the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of the Corporation’s financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how the Corporation records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, the

15

Table of Contents

Corporation could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in changes to previously reported financial results, or a cumulative charge to retained earnings. In addition, management is required to use certain assumptions and estimates in preparing our financial statements, including determining the fair value of certain assets and liabilities, among other items. If the assumptions or estimates are incorrect, the Corporation may experience unexpected material consequences.

The Corporation has no unresolved comments from the SEC staff.

The following describes the location and general character of the principal offices and other materially important physical properties of the Corporation.

The Corporation owns a building located at Eighth and Main Streets in the business district of West Point, Virginia. The building, originally constructed in 1923, has three floors totaling 15,000 square feet. This building houses the Bank’s Main Office and the main office of C&F Investment Services.

The Corporation owns a building located at 3600 LaGrange Parkway in Toano, Virginia. The building was acquired in 2004 and has 85,000 square feet. Approximately 30,000 square feet were renovated in 2005 in order to house the Bank’s operations center, which consists of the Bank’s loan, deposit and administrative functions and staff.

The building owned by the Corporation and previously used for the Bank’s deposit operations at Seventh & Main Streets in West Point, Virginia, which is a 14,000 square foot building remodeled by the Corporation in 1991, has been leased to the Economic Development Authority of the Town of West Point, Virginia (Development Authority) for the purpose of housing and operating incubator businesses under the supervision of the Development Authority. The building owned by the Corporation and previously used for the Bank’s loan operations at Sixth and Main Streets in West Point, Virginia, which is a 5,000 square foot building acquired and remodeled by the Corporation in 1998, has been retained as back-up facilities for the Toano operations center. Management has not yet determined the long-term utilization of these properties.

The Corporation owns a building located at 1400 Alverser Drive in Midlothian, Virginia. The building provides space for a branch office of the Bank and for a C&F Mortgage branch office, as well as C&F Mortgage’s main administrative offices. This two-story building has 25,000 square feet and was constructed in 2001. Also at the Midlothian location, the Corporation owns an office condominium that houses a regional commercial lending office.

The Corporation owns 15 other Bank branch locations and leases one Bank branch location and one regional commercial lending office in Virginia. Rental expense for these leased locations totaled $109,000 for the year ended December 31, 2010.

C&F Mortgage’s Newport News loan production office is located on the second floor of the Bank’s Newport News branch building. The Corporation has 21 leased loan production offices, 12 in Virginia, four in Maryland, two in North Carolina and one each in Delaware, Pennsylvania and New Jersey, for C&F Mortgage. Rental expense for these leased locations totaled $1.07 million for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Until December 30, 2010, the Corporation owned a building located at 4660 South Laburnum Avenue in Richmond, Virginia. The building was acquired in June 2005 and had approximately 8,800 square feet. The building has been sold to an unrelated third party and leased back under a short-term lease from the buyer. The building currently houses C&F Finance’s headquarters and provides space for its loan and administrative functions and staff. The Corporation has entered into a five-year lease agreement with an unrelated third party for approximately 15,000 square feet of office space in Richmond, Virginia. Upon completion of the improvements to the leased premises, which the Corporation expects to occur within the next three months, C&F Finance’s headquarters and its loan and administrative functions and staff will relocate from 4660 South Laburnum Avenue to this new leased location. The Hampton office of C&F Finance is located on the second floor of the Bank’s Hampton branch building. The Corporation has three leased offices, one each in Virginia, Maryland and Tennessee, for C&F Finance. Rental expense for these leased locations totaled $79,000 for the year ended December 31, 2010.

All of the Corporation’s properties are in good operating condition and are adequate for the Corporation’s present and anticipated future needs.

16

Table of Contents

The Corporation and its subsidiaries may be involved in certain litigation matters arising in the ordinary course of business. Although the ultimate outcome of these matters cannot be ascertained at this time, and the results of legal proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty, we believe, based on current knowledge, that the resolution of any such matters arising in the ordinary course of business will not have a material adverse effect on the Corporation.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

PART II

The Corporation’s Common Stock is traded on the over-the-counter market and is listed for trading on the NASDAQ Global Select Market of the NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol “CFFI.” As of February 25, 2011, there were approximately 2,000 shareholders of record. As of that date, the closing price of our Common Stock on the NASDAQ Global Select Stock Market was $22.65. Following are the high and low sales prices as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market, along with the dividends that were paid quarterly in 2010 and 2009.

Payment of dividends is at the discretion of the Corporation’s board of directors and is subject to various federal and state regulatory limitations. For further information regarding payment of dividends, including restrictions stemming from the Corporation’s participation in the Capital Purchase Program, refer to Item 1, “Business,” under the heading “Limits on Dividends” and Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” under the heading “Note 9: Shareholders’ Equity, Other Comprehensive Income and Earnings Per Common Share.”

In connection with the Corporation’s sale to the Treasury of its Series A Preferred Stock under the Capital Purchase Program, as previously described, there are certain limitations on the Corporation’s ability to purchase its Common Stock prior to the earlier of January 9, 2012 or the date on which Treasury no longer holds any of the Series A Preferred Stock. Prior to such time, the Corporation generally may not purchase any of its Common Stock without the consent of the Treasury. In the fourth quarter of 2010, the Corporation did not purchase any of its Common Stock.

17

Table of Contents

Five Year Financial Summary

18

Table of Contents

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This report contains statements concerning the Corporation’s expectations, plans, objectives, future financial performance and other statements that are not historical facts. These statements may constitute “forward-looking statements” as defined by federal securities laws and may include, but are not limited to, statements regarding profitability, liquidity, the Corporation’s and each business segment’s loan portfolio, allowance for loan losses, trends regarding the provision for loan losses, trends regarding net loan charge-offs, trends regarding levels of nonperforming assets and troubled debt restructurings and expenses associated with nonperforming assets, provision for indemnification losses, levels of noninterest income and expense, interest rates and yields, interest rate sensitivity, market risk, regulatory developments, capital requirements, growth strategy and financial and other goals. These statements may address issues that involve estimates and assumptions made by management and risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from historical results or those anticipated by such statements. Factors that could have a material adverse effect on the operations and future prospects of the Corporation include, but are not limited to, changes in:

These risks are exacerbated by the turbulence during 2008, 2009 and portions of 2010 in the global and United States financial markets. Continued weakness in the global and United States financial markets could further affect the Corporation’s performance, both directly by affecting the Corporation’s revenues and the value of its assets and liabilities, and indirectly by affecting the Corporation’s counterparties and the economy in general. While there are some signs of improvement in the economic environment, there was a prolonged period of volatility and disruption in the markets, and unemployment has risen to, and remains at, high levels. There can be no assurance that these unprecedented developments will not continue to materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as our ability to raise capital for liquidity and business purposes.

Although the Corporation had, and continues to have, diverse sources of liquidity and its capital ratios exceeded, and continue to exceed, the minimum levels required for well-capitalized status, the Corporation issued and sold its Series A Preferred Stock and Warrant for a $20.0 million investment from Treasury under the Capital Purchase Program on January 9, 2009.

Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, and other institutions. As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about defaults by, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, could create another market-wide liquidity crisis similar to that experienced in late 2008 and early 2009 and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by other institutions. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially adversely affect the Corporation’s results of operations.

19

Table of Contents

Further, there can be no assurance that the actions taken by the federal government and regulatory agencies will stabilize the United States financial system or alleviate the industry or economic factors that may adversely affect the Corporation’s business and financial performance. It also is not clear what effects the Dodd-Frank Act, the regulations promulgated thereunder or other future regulatory reforms may have on financial markets, the financial services industry and depository institutions, and consequently on the Corporation’s business and financial performance.

These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating the forward-looking statements contained herein. We caution readers not to place undue reliance on those statements, which speak only as of the date of this report.

The following discussion supplements and provides information about the major components of the results of operations, financial condition, liquidity and capital resources of the Corporation. This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The preparation of financial statements requires us to make estimates and assumptions. Those accounting policies with the greatest uncertainty and that require our most difficult, subjective or complex judgments affecting the application of these policies, and the likelihood that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions, or using different assumptions, are described below.

Allowance for Loan Losses: We establish the allowance for loan losses through charges to earnings in the form of a provision for loan losses. Loan losses are charged against the allowance when we believe that the collection of the principal is unlikely. Subsequent recoveries of losses previously charged against the allowance are credited to the allowance. The allowance represents an amount that, in our judgment, will be adequate to absorb any losses on existing loans that may become uncollectible. Our judgment in determining the level of the allowance is based on evaluations of the collectibility of loans while taking into consideration such factors as trends in delinquencies and charge-offs, changes in the nature and volume of the loan portfolio, current economic conditions that may affect a borrower’s ability to repay and the value of collateral, overall portfolio quality and review of specific potential losses. This evaluation is inherently subjective because it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available. For more information see the section titled “Asset Quality” within Item 7.

Allowance for Indemnifications: The allowance for indemnifications is established through charges to earnings in the form of a provision for indemnifications, which is included in other noninterest expenses. A loss is charged against the allowance for indemnifications under certain conditions when a purchaser of a loan (investor) sold by C&F Mortgage incurs a loss due to borrower misrepresentation, fraud, or early default, or underwriting error. The allowance represents an amount that, in management’s judgment, will be adequate to absorb any losses arising from indemnification requests. Management’s judgment in determining the level of the allowance is based on the volume of loans sold, current economic conditions and information provided by investors. This evaluation is inherently subjective, as it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available.

Impairment of Loans: We consider a loan impaired when it is probable that the Corporation will be unable to collect all interest and principal payments as scheduled in the loan agreement. We do not consider a loan impaired during a period of delay in payment if we expect the ultimate collection of all amounts due. We measure impairment on a loan by loan basis for commercial, construction and residential loans in excess of $500,000 by either the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, the loan’s obtainable market price, or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Large groups of smaller balance homogeneous loans are collectively evaluated for impairment. We maintain a valuation allowance to the extent that the measure of the impaired loan is less than the recorded investment. Troubled debt restructurings (TDRs) are also considered impaired loans. A TDR occurs when we agree to significantly modify the original terms of a loan due to the deterioration in the financial condition of the borrower. For more information see the section titled “Asset Quality” within Item 7.

Impairment of Securities: Impairment of securities occurs when the fair value of a security is less than its amortized cost. For debt securities, impairment is considered other-than-temporary and recognized in its entirety in net income if either (i) we intend to sell the security or (ii) it is more-likely-than-not that we will be required to sell the security before recovery of its amortized cost basis. If, however, we do not intend to sell the security and it is not more-likely-than-not that we will be required to sell the security before recovery, we must determine what portion of the impairment is attributable to a credit loss, which occurs when the amortized cost basis of the security exceeds the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected from the security. If there is no credit loss, there is no other-than-temporary impairment. If there is a credit loss, other-than-temporary impairment exists, and the credit loss must be recognized in net income and the remaining portion of impairment must be recognized in other comprehensive income. For equity securities, impairment is considered to be other-than-temporary based on our ability and intent to hold the investment until a recovery of fair value. Other-than-temporary impairment of an equity security results in a write-down that must be included in net income. We

20

Table of Contents

regularly review each investment security for other-than-temporary impairment based on criteria that includes the extent to which cost exceeds market price, the duration of that market decline, the financial health of and specific prospects for the issuer, our best estimate of the present value of cash flows expected to be collected from debt securities, our intention with regard to holding the security to maturity and the likelihood that we would be required to sell the security before recovery.

Other Real Estate Owned (OREO): Assets acquired through, or in lieu of, loan foreclosure are held for sale and are initially recorded at the lower of the loan balance or the fair value less costs to sell at the date of foreclosure. Subsequent to foreclosure, management periodically performs valuations of the foreclosed assets based on updated appraisals, general market conditions, recent sales of like properties, length of time the properties have been held, and our ability and intention with regard to continued ownership of the properties. The Corporation may incur additional write-downs of foreclosed assets to fair value less costs to sell if valuations indicate a further other-than-temporary deterioration in market conditions.

Goodwill: Goodwill is no longer subject to amortization over its estimated useful life, but is subject to at least an annual assessment for impairment by applying a fair value based test. In assessing the recoverability of the Corporation’s goodwill, all of which was recognized in connection with the Bank’s acquisition of C&F Finance Company in September 2002, we must make assumptions in order to determine the fair value of the respective assets. Major assumptions used in determining impairment were increases in future income, sales multiples in determining terminal value and the discount rate applied to future cash flows. As part of the impairment test, we performed a sensitivity analysis by increasing the discount rate, lowering sales multiples and reducing increases in future income. We completed the annual test for impairment during the fourth quarter of 2010 and determined there was no impairment to be recognized in 2010. If the underlying estimates and related assumptions change in the future, we may be required to record impairment charges.

Retirement Plan: The Bank maintains a non-contributory, defined benefit pension plan for eligible full-time employees as specified by the plan. Plan assets, which consist primarily of mutual funds invested in marketable equity securities and corporate and government fixed income securities, are valued using market quotations. The Bank’s actuary determines plan obligations and annual pension expense using a number of key assumptions. Key assumptions may include the discount rate, the interest crediting rate, the estimated future return on plan assets and the anticipated rate of future salary increases. Changes in these assumptions in the future, if any, or in the method under which benefits are calculated may impact pension assets, liabilities or expense.

Derivative Financial Instruments: The Corporation recognizes derivative financial instruments at fair value as either an other asset or other liability in the consolidated balance sheet. The derivative financial instruments have been designated as and qualify as cash flow hedges. The effective portion of the gain or loss on the cash flow hedges is reported as a component of other comprehensive income, net of deferred taxes, and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged transaction affects earnings.

Accounting for Income Taxes: Determining the Corporation’s effective tax rate requires judgment. In the ordinary course of business, there are transactions and calculations for which the ultimate tax outcomes are uncertain. In addition, the Corporation’s tax returns are subject to audit by various tax authorities. Although we believe that the estimates are reasonable, no assurance can be given that the final tax outcome will not be materially different than that which is reflected in the income tax provision and accrual.

For further information concerning accounting policies, refer to Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” under the heading “Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”

OVERVIEW

Our primary financial goals are to maximize the Corporation’s earnings and to deploy capital in profitable growth initiatives that will enhance long-term shareholder value. We track three primary financial performance measures in order to assess the level of success in achieving these goals: (i) return on average assets (ROA), (ii) return on average common equity (ROE), and (iii) growth in earnings. In addition to these financial performance measures, we track the performance of the Corporation’s three principal business activities: retail banking, mortgage banking, and consumer finance. We also actively manage our capital through growth and dividends, while considering the need to maintain a strong regulatory capital position.

Financial Performance Measures

Net income for the Corporation was $8.1 million in 2010, compared with net income of $5.5 million in 2009. Net income available to common shareholders for 2010 was $7.0 million, or $2.24 per common share assuming dilution, compared with $4.4 million, or $1.44 per common share assuming dilution for 2009. The difference between reported net income and net income available to common shareholders is a result of the Series A Preferred Stock dividends and accretion of the discount related to the Corporation’s participation in the Capital Purchase Program. The financial results for 2010 were affected by continued loan growth, lower net charge-offs and the effect of the low interest rate environment on variable rate borrowings in the Consumer Finance segment; higher net interest margin, higher provisions for loan and foreclosed properties losses, and higher general operating expenses associated with problem assets in the Retail Banking segment; and reduced loan production and higher provisions for indemnification losses in the Mortgage Banking segment. See “Principal Business Activities” below for additional discussion.

21

Table of Contents

The Corporation’s ROE and ROA were 9.74 percent and 0.78 percent, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to 6.60 percent and 0.50 percent for the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in these ratios during 2010 was a result of an increase in net income available to common shareholders primarily due to the performance of the Consumer Finance segment, which more than offset the results of the Retail Banking and Mortgage Banking segments that continue to be negatively affected by the challenging economic environment and issues facing the financial services industry in general. See “Principal Business Activities” below for additional information.

While management believes that the Corporation is well positioned to see earnings improvement in 2011, the following factors could influence the Corporation’s financial performance in 2011:

Principal Business Activities

An overview of the financial results for each of the Corporation’s principal segments is presented below. A more detailed discussion is included in the section “Results of Operations.”

Retail Banking: The Retail Banking segment, which consists of the Bank, reported a net loss of $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to a net loss of $2.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The results for 2010 included the effects of (1) improved net interest margins attributable to the establishment of interest rate floors on new loans and loans at renewal and lower rates paid on deposits as higher priced certificates of deposit repriced downward during the year, (2) a slightly higher provision for loan losses due to continued weakness in the economy and increases in nonaccrual loans, (3) a higher provision for losses on foreclosed properties and general operating expenses associated with problem assets as property values continued to be depressed and (4) higher personnel costs, including health care costs, due to slight increases in staffing levels to manage the complexity of routine compliance, regulatory and asset quality issues and the rising costs of employee benefits.

The Bank’s nonperforming assets were $18.1 million at December 31, 2010, compared to $17.2 million at December 31, 2009. Nonperforming assets at December 31, 2010 included $7.8 million in nonaccrual loans and $10.3 million in foreclosed properties. Troubled debt restructurings were $9.8 million at December 31, 2010 compared to $3.1 million at December 31, 2009. The increase in troubled debt restructurings is primarily a result of restructuring a note with one large commercial developer. Nonaccrual loans

22

Table of Contents

primarily consist of five relationships totaling $6.7 million secured by residential properties and commercial loans secured by non-residential properties. Specific reserves of $1.6 million have been established for these loans. Management believes it has provided adequate loan loss reserves for nonaccrual loans based on the current estimated fair values of the collateral. Foreclosed properties at December 31, 2010 consist of both residential and non-residential properties. These properties have been written down to their estimated fair values less selling costs. The Bank’s credit management team directed significant effort throughout 2009 and 2010 to real estate loan workouts and restructurings and, when necessary, foreclosures. We are continually evaluating the credit quality of the Bank’s loan portfolio and the carrying values of real estate acquired through foreclosure, and we have charged off loans, written down foreclosed properties and increased reserves as we considered necessary.

Mortgage Banking: The Mortgage Banking segment, which consists of C&F Mortgage, reported net income of $782,000 for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to net income of $3.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The reduced earnings in 2010 was primarily a result of a decline in gains on sales of loans to $18.6 million in 2010 from $25.0 million in 2009 and an increase in the provision for indemnification losses to $3.7 million in 2010 from $2.5 million in 2009. Loan origination volumes for 2010 declined to $748.3 million compared to $1.1 billion for 2009. The decrease in loan originations was a result of fluctuations in mortgage rates, a continued overall weakness in the housing market due to the challenging economic environment, the expiration of the home buyer tax credits during the first half of 2010 and loan officer turnover. Loans originated for new and resale home purchases in 2010 decreased to $493.9 million compared to $563.4 million in 2009. Loans originations for refinancings in 2010 were $254.4 million compared to $499.7 million for 2009.

Foreclosures and payment defaults have continued to remain elevated in the marketplace, resulting in increased demands for loan repurchases and indemnification requests. An indemnification obligation arises when a purchaser of a loan (an investor) sold by the Mortgage Banking segment incurs a loss due to demonstrated borrower misrepresentation, fraud, or early default, or underwriting errors. The increase in the provision for indemnification losses for 2010 was primarily due to an agreement reached during the second quarter of 2010 with C&F Mortgage’s largest investor that resolved all known and unknown indemnification obligations for loans sold to this investor prior to 2010. With this agreement in place, we expect a reduction in future indemnification obligations as the majority of our indemnification issues at the time involved the types of loans originated for and sold to this investor.

The decline in revenue from gains on sales of loans and the increase in the provision for indemnification losses were partially offset by (1) a decrease for 2010 in commission-based and profitability-based personnel costs and (2) a decrease in the provision for loan losses resulting from a decrease in loans held for investment, decreases in loan origination volume and lower net charge-offs, compared to 2009.

Consumer Finance: The Consumer Finance segment, which consists of C&F Finance, reported net income of $9.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to net income of $4.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. The Consumer Finance segment continues to benefit from sustained loan growth, lower net charge-offs and the current low interest rate environment. Long-standing productive dealer relationships, along with new relationships established in current and new markets, and a higher volume of auto sales in the markets we serve have resulted in increased loan production. Our underwriting policies, collection efforts and higher values received when repossessed vehicles are sold have all contributed to an annualized net charge-off ratio that has declined over the past two years. The sustained loan production has resulted in an increase in average loans of 15.0 percent for the year ended December 31, 2010 as compared to 2009, while lower delinquencies and lower net charge-offs resulted in a $3.2 million decrease in the provision for loan losses. In addition, the sustained low interest rate environment has resulted in lower funding costs on the Consumer Finance segment’s variable-rate borrowings. These items were partially offset by an increase in personnel costs of $879,000 for the year ended December 31, 2010 which was a result of an increase in personnel to generate and manage the growth in loans outstanding, as well as an increase in variable compensation. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of loans remained approximately the same, 7.90 percent at December 31, 2010 compared to 7.89 percent at December 31, 2009. Management believes that the current allowance for loan losses is adequate to absorb probable losses in the loan portfolio. If the economy continues to struggle in C&F Finance’s markets and unemployment worsens, we would expect more delinquencies and repossessions. Depending on the severity of any further downturn in the economy, decreased consumer demand for automobiles and a decline in the value of automobiles securing outstanding loans could result, which would weaken collateral coverage and increase the amount of losses in the event of borrower default.

Other and Eliminations The net loss for the year ended December 31, 2010 for this combined segment was $580,000, compared to a net loss of $534,000 for the year ended December 31, 2009. Revenue and expenses of this combined segment include the results of operations of our investment, insurance and title subsidiaries, dividends received on the Corporation’s investment in equity securities, interest expense associated with the Corporation’s trust preferred capital notes, other general corporate expenses and the effects of intercompany eliminations.

Capital Management

Total shareholders’ equity increased $3.9 million to $92.8 million at December 31, 2010, compared to $88.9 million at December 31, 2009. Earnings during 2010 principally contributed to this growth.

23

Table of Contents

We have continued to manage our capital through asset growth and dividends on common shares outstanding. The capital and liquidity positions of the Corporation remain strong. The Corporation continues to participate in the CPP, which was seen as an opportunity to inexpensively increase capital and to insure against unforeseen events given the turmoil in the financial markets. Even though the Corporation’s capital has continued to increase, and has and continues to exceed current regulatory capital standards for being well-capitalized, the Corporation has not yet repurchased these securities. We are currently analyzing the possibility of full or partial repayment in light of the Corporation’s overall financial condition, capitalization and liquidity. Our considerations include whether repayment will require raising new capital and the cost of that capital, our future capital needs and the potential sources of capital, and the likelihood of continued government shareholder and public scrutiny of compensation practices even after a potential Series A Preferred Stock redemption.

Another means by which we manage our capital is through dividends. The Corporation’s board of directors continued its policy of paying dividends in 2010. The dividend payout ratio for 2010 was 44.2 percent based on net income available to common shareholders. The board of directors continues to evaluate our dividend payout in light of changes in economic conditions, our capital levels and our expected future levels of earnings. However, in connection with the Corporation’s participation in the CPP there are limitations on the Corporation’s ability to pay quarterly cash dividends in excess of $0.31 per share or to repurchase its common stock prior to the earlier of January 9, 2012 or the date on which Treasury no longer holds any of the Series A Preferred Stock. For more information regarding restrictions imposed on the Corporation due to its participation in the CPP, see Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” under the heading “Note 9: Shareholders’ Equity, Other Comprehensive Income and Earnings Per Common Share.”

24

Table of Contents

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

NET INTEREST INCOME

The following table shows the average balance sheets for each of the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008. The table also shows the amounts of interest earned on earning assets, with related yields, and interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities, with related rates. Loans include loans held for sale. Loans placed on a nonaccrual status are included in the balances and are included in the computation of yields, but had no material effect. Interest on tax-exempt loans and securities is presented on a taxable-equivalent basis (which converts the income on loans and investments for which no income taxes are paid to the equivalent yield if income taxes were paid using the federal corporate income tax rate of 34 percent in all three years presented).

TABLE 1: Average Balances, Income and Expense, Yields and Rates

Interest income and expense are affected by fluctuations in interest rates, by changes in the volume of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, and by the interaction of rate and volume factors. The following table shows the direct causes of the year-to-year changes in the components of net interest income on a taxable-equivalent basis. We calculated the rate and volume variances using a formula prescribed by the SEC. Rate/volume variances, the third element in the calculation, are not shown separately in the table, but are allocated to the rate and volume variances in proportion to the relationship of the absolute dollar amounts of the change in each.

25

Table of Contents

TABLE 2: Rate-Volume Recap