Does J G Wentworth Forum Shop Until It Gets Approval?

by John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC RSP CLTC

 

I received this letter today from a Ms. SB Cheek of California. Read it! I think it says a little something about the enforcement of the California Structured Settlement Protection Act. Apparently the judge reviewing the case determined that selling the structured settlement payments rights was not in the payee's best interest and denied the transfer application. Ms. Cheek's letter suggests that JG Wentworth (321 Henderson) proceeded, or attempted, to find a judge that would agree to the sale. Is this forum shopping happening in other states?

 

I'm interested in hearing from readers, members of the public and other factoring companies with what they may have experienced in this regard. Opinions are always welcome as well.

 

 "Dear Mr. Darer,

Woa, my child's dad , a 95% burn victim ,complusive gambler, has called the JG Wentworth folks on the TV, after losing all of his worker's compensation money to gambling.  I searched and searched for an attorney to help us.  Finally after, being taken for money from some attorneys and NOT represented, I went to the courts myself with all evidence.  Needless to say the judge did deny him the right to cash in this income.  I was relieved for a few moments, but now find that he is being advised to seek another judge in the matter; not cease what he is trying to do. 

This seems so unethical of J G Wentworth (321 Henderson Co.).  They have not one care about the dependent problems. 

I understand that criminal charges can be lodged for the mishandling of the Ca. Workers Compensation Income that was clearly marked for hospital bills never paid and I understand, also for the dependents care.  But as a burn victim he feels the law would not punish him.

Any advice is welcome to get this monster off our backs.

S B Cheek

you have permission to reprint this."

Comments

[Jason]

Let's look at this from a couple different angles.

We know baby daddy wanted to cash in payments for a discounted lump sum. We don't know why or for what.

We know the request was denied. We don't know why.

Baby daddy comes to JG says he wants a lump sum. They say ok, take it to court. It isn't approved. Are they doing the right thing by looking for another judge?

Maybe. They are doing the best they can to fulfill their side of the deal. That's what they get paid to do.

Should they take a parent role and decide what is morally best for their client?

Should they take a financial advisor role and decide what's best financially for their client?

Or do they take the role of cashflow discounter and let their client make his own financial and moral decisions?

Shopping for a judge? That's not something we would do. Once a judge says no, why would another judge want to overrule the previous one? And in some cases judge shopping might involve some ethical (or even legal) conflicts.

Then again, so does speeding.

On the other side, we have plenty of clients who need the money. Many of them are paying back child support, saving their homes, turning their financial and emotional lives around. Yes, at a discount.

If the money was for child support that he hadn't paid in 5 years, then would it be ok for him to try another judge?

Big companies can afford those kinds of risks.

JG is very big, and like a major retail chain, can be hit or miss when it comes to service and quality. A specialty store on the other hand, must have a higher commitment to service and reputation.

Of course, that's just my opinion ;)