"Unlike an annuity, which allows for similar cash out options in lieu of a future fixed payment option, a structured settlement has its roots in the court, and the monies involved are typically representative of a cash settlement that is derived from a court case".
A lay person reading the aforementioned cash for settlement baloney might deduce:
- A structured settlement is unlike an annuity.
- So a structured settlement is a plant and has roots?
- Those roots are able to thrive in a faceless, sunlight deficient concrete "garden" that traditionally has columns?
- And the "monies involved" in a structured settlement is a cash settlement?
Another "dingleberry of wisdom" from Cash for Settlement Payments (dot) com in a feckless effort to discuss the "best interest test":
"Again, this stems from the notion that the money that was awarded to a person in a structured settlement situation was done so in the wake of a litigious situation"
- A "structured settlement situation" is a scenario where a certain character from The Jersey Shore "rocks" a structured annuity on the Seaside Heights Boardwalk. And what JG Wentworth offers is "CNowww".
- Structured settlements are not awards. By definition a settlement is a compromise. Structured settlements are the result of a compromise and part of the compromise.. Hence the term " structured settlement". If it were awarded by the court it might be called a "structured award" or "structured judgment", right?
- Structured settlements are a tool that is used to resolve litigation. Litigious is an adjective that might be used to describe someone who likes to say "I'm gonna sue your ass", and who has had history of doing so.