Structured Settlements 4Real® Blog: Structured Settlements | Settlement Planning News and John Darer Reviews

Structured Settlement Social Media Wall of Shame | Ronnie Zelek's Annuity.Org

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

Annuity.org is registered to Ronnie Zelek of Orlando's Launch That, which shills leads for CBC Settlement Funding of Conshohocken PA, a member of the National Association of Settlement Purchasers.

They just don't give a crap because of the profit funnel

It seems that neither Ritchie, Annuity.org ownership , nor CBC Settlement Funding, the ultimate beneficiary of leads generated, nor the money behind CBC Settlement Funding, give a crap about the swill Annuity.org dish out to consumers. It seems to be only the matter of how deep it fills the sewer. Annuity.org's Alanna Ritchie has proven to be an absolute failure when it comes to writing accurate information about structured settlements. Her written work on the subject, which has been the subject of one or two other posts in the last year, is really incompetent, in my professional opinion. This is not a new problem, but a lingering , festering ongoing problem.  

Why doesn't Annuity.org want to accurately inform consumers?

There comes a point when an ongoing effluent of  "content diarrhea" stinks up the joint and that point is now. Annuity.org employs the least credible writers, and to what end?  What does Annuity.org stand to gain from Alanna Ritchie's abominable structured settlement research? The information is easily accessible.

Annuity.Org's "Prize Winning Entry" to earn Structured Settlement Social Media Road Kill.

On Structured Settlement Taxation...

A. Ritchie states, Ronnie Zelek registered Annuity.org publishes

"The IRS is barred from taxing structured settlement income – whether it’s paid all at once or in installments – under the federal Periodic Payment Settlement Act, which was passed in 1982.This was to ensure structured settlements continued to provide financial security to those who received them".

Why What Ritchie says is bogus

• The IRS not "barred", the income is exempt from taxation because of the type of damages being paid.
• Punitive damages can be structured as well and such damages are expressly carved out of the exclusion under IRC Section 104.

 B. Ritchie states, Ronnie Zelek registered Annuity.org publishes

Someone who wants to buy a replacement contract for their structured settlement annuity can do so tax-free under Section 1035 of the IRC. The code also says rollovers or direct transfers from one insurance company to another can be done tax-free.

For example, if you find an annuity contract with a higher interest rate, lower fees or want a contract issued by a more stable company, you’ll be able to exchange your current annuity contract without incurring any additional tax burdens.

Why what Ritchie says is bogus

IRC 1035 has nothing to do with structured settlements.

C. Ritchie says, Ronnie Zelek registered Annuity.org publishes

Section 104 (a)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code mandates that damages from on-the-job physical injuries or illnesses cannot be considered income, so they are not subject to taxation.

Why what Ritchie Says is bogus

IRC 104(a)(2) has absolutely nothing to do with workers compensation.

D. Ritchie Demonstrates a Lack of Understanding and Cannot Articulate Her Own Business When She States and Ronnie Zelek registered Annuity.org publsihes

For example, you could take $100,000 in a lump sum from a $300,000 structured settlement. Although the lump sum payment will be subject to taxation, the rest of the money can be left in the annuity account to grow tax-free.

Why what Ritchie Says is bogus

• An annuity is not an account, it's contract
• If one assumes that "take $100,000 in a lump sum" is a structured settlement transfer and the transaction involves the transfer of structured settlement payment rights that comply with IRC 5891 [e.g. damages excluded under IRC 104(a)(2)] then the " lump sum payment"  (i.e. net transfer proceeds)  are income tax free.

It doesn't take much to write accurate information. 

 

 

Secondary Market Annuity "Industry Standard" Scam Label Crumbling as SMA Hub Begins to Cave

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

SMA Hub has now admitted in writing that what it calls secondary market annuities are really derivatives. In referring to it as an "industry standard",  SMA Hub has thrown the tertiary market and those feeding off of it under the proverbial bus.

SMA Hub Throws Structured Settlement Tertiary Market Under the Bus by proclaiming what is a scam label as an "industry standard"

What SMA Hub Said Less Than a Year Ago

When the original owners of payment streams sell their future payments for cash today, a secondary market annuity is created. Furthermore, it is simply an existing payment stream, transacting in the secondary marked  [ source Wayback Archive screenshot 10/25/2016]

What SMA Hub Says Now

When the original owners of payment streams sell their future payments for cash today, a secondary market annuity derivative is created  { SMA HUB website retrieved September 26, 2017]

SMA also now says  "The payment stream is an existing, fixed receivable or derivative".

In my opinion, SMA Hub statements support a claim that certain intermediaries may have falsely promote derivatives as annuities to investors. Now that certain events unsettling to investors have occurred the claims may be coming home to roost.

SMA Hub claims that secondary market annuities "are an industry standard".  What industry?

• A secondary market annuity is not an annuity.
• A standard that uses a scam label is no standard. 
• A standard that uses the cachet of a legitimate insurance product to mask what is now admitted as a derivative so it sells well with investors is no standard.

It is time SMA Hub, Annuity Straight Talk and others, including settlement planners (you know who you are), who continue to use the scam label in light of recent unsettling events, to stop doing it if you truly value what the tertiary market offers.

Is a Morass of Front Page Worthy Litigation Inevitable?

Given the nature and substance of recent court filings, I predict that soon there will be litigation that pits owners of structured settlement derivatives  sold as annuities to injured parties, to personal injury lawyers and judges reviewing infant settlement as annuities, who have had payments suspended, lost money, and/or had to spend legal fees to assert their rights acquired in structured settlement transfers that they thought were safe, against structured settlement annuitants, the validity of whose structured settlement transfers have come into question due to a fraud.

Updates

• SMA | It Isn't This Convoluted If You Buy a Legitimate Annuity - Structured Settlements 4Real® Blog: Structured Settlements | Settlement Planning News and John Darer Reviews (typepad.com)
• Settlement Reached in Hansen Lawsuit vs. Settlement Planners, SMA Hub, NBA Player, Agent et al. - Structured Settlements 4Real® Blog: Structured Settlements | Settlement Planning News and John Darer Reviews (typepad.com)
• Disabled 65 y/o Arizona Man Sues Settlement Planners, SMA Hub and Others in Secondary Market "Annuity" Shit Show - Structured Settlements 4Real® Blog: Structured Settlements | Settlement Planning News and John Darer Reviews (typepad.com)

Structured Settlement Reporting Wall of Shame | Miami Herald and ABA Journal Epic Fails on Camacho Forgery Story

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

Putting shambolic journalism on the subject of structured settlements in its place. Despite a wealth of credible information about structured settlements at the ready, these two legal reporters really "flubbed their lines"-

• Miami Herald's David Ovalle's Epic Failure for lazy research and failure to report The Truth About Jose Camacho Jr. Forgery in a story about Camacho's August 2017 sentencing
• ABA Journal Reporter, Debra Cassens Weiss. who has a law degree, piggybacks Miami Herald and gets an F plus a raspberry for shoddy research and reporting on Jose Camacho Jr. Forgery In a story about Camacho's August 2017 sentencing

Miami Herald, a Shambles on Structured Settlement Reporting

The Miami Herald gets an F for publishing the inaccurate and lazy reporting of a convicted Miami lawyer's criminal acts in forging structured settlement transfer documents and publishing a false narrative about structured settlements, despite the fact that there was more than enough concrete information out there on the Internet and freely available Broward County court records, for over 22 months the court records, 19 months from this blog and 18 months from a rival newspaper's accurate rendition of the facts and those of other legal commentators, for the Miami Herald to publish something accurate.

The Miami Herald has an unfortunate recent history of incompetent reporting about structured settlements. In 2012, three years after Scott Rothstein's ponzi scheme was discovered, the Miami Herald published a story by Adam Beasley which misrepresented as structured settlements what Scott Rothstein himself said were not structured settlements in his deposition. The term "structured settlements" was not even in the criminal complaint against Rothstein as I reported here.

ABA Journal a Shambles on Structured Settlement Reporting

But the ABA Journal reporter, Debra Cassens Weiss, a graduate of Depaul University School of Law, whose bio on the ABA Journal website states that she is a senior writer/online, who joined the ABA Journal staff in 1986, who had worked as a news researcher for WMAQ-TV in Chicago, as a reporter and editor at the City News Bureau of Chicago, and as a newscaster at WMRO and WAUR radio (Aurora, Ill.), and therefore must be held to a higher standard, adopted what the Miami Herald published as fact, without apparently researching or checking any other sources and completely and irresponsibly flubbed her lines. The misinformation authored by Deb Cassens Weiss and published by the ABA Journal was then shared over and over again on LinkedIn and other social media.

The ABA Journal also has an unfortunate history of incompetent reporting about structured settlements. As I reported in 2011, Martha E. Neil, a legal affairs writer/online for Law News Now, could have simply read the criminal complaint against Scott Rothstein, in which there was no mention of structured settlements, instead of dredging up old and inaccurate information that the ABA Journal published.

What information was available about the Camacho forgeries if reporters from Miami Herald and ABA Journal made a minimal amount of effort?

When I learned about the Camacho forgeries on January 6, 2016, I was astounded that in the 90 days since Camacho was arrested and charged with multiple counts of forgery that not a peep occurred anywhere in the South Florida press. There was a story about a pizza delivery guy getting robbed, nothing but crickets on Camacho from the Miami Herald. Not only was it a great scoop for a reporter given that Camacho was a crook from Miami, the number of the forgeries was in excess of 100, but many of the companies that hired the convicted lawyer were from South Florida and there was an intentional cover up orchestrated by the structured settlement secondary market of the newsworthy story while wagons were circled. I personally broke the story on January 9, 2016, 44 days before any reporter anywhere broke the story, only days after Jason Sutherland on behalf of the National Association of Settlement Purchasers issued a public statement tantamount to "our poop does not stink"

Florida Structured Settlement Lawyer Allegedly Charged With for 14 Counts of Fraud/ Forgery January 9, 2016
Miami Structured Settlement Lawyer Scam | Corrupt Lawyer Forged Structured Settlement Transfer Orders January 11, 2016
Forgery and Structured Settlement Factoring | Q&As January 12, 2016
Forged Structured Settlement Transfer Orders Update | Which Structured Settlement Buyers Used Camacho? January 17, 2016
Forged Broward Order Was on Novation Funding LLC Case With 48% Discount Rate! January 21, 2016
Forger Miami Lawyer Jose M Camacho Jr. Done In By His Own Poor Caligraphy January 21, 2016
Camacho Structured Settlement Forgery Scandal in Broward | Who Whited Out Notary's Name? January 24, 2016
Lawyer for Florida Settlement Buyers Forgeries in Broward County Gets Mainstream Press February 23, 2016

In January 2016, I pitched the story all over South Florida,including the Miami Herald. The only newspaper with the balls to lead the story was the Sun Sentinel,  Sally Kestin, Investigative Reporter, and its court reporter Rafael Olmeda who was credited with the article. Olmeda and his colleagues took the time get their facts straight, namely that Jose Camacho forged structured settlement transfer orders. The Sun Sentinel story was published February 22, 2016 in its Crime section, 4 days later. They were the first, after me.

Here is an excerpt from the Sun Sentinel article "Lawyer accused of forging signatures of seven Broward judges"

"In structured settlement cases, someone expecting a large payout in installments over a period of time will negotiate a deal with a buyer who agrees to pay a lump sum immediately in exchange for the future payments. Judges have to sign off on the transactions and will reject them if they conclude the original recipient of the payments is not getting a fair deal. According to an arrest report, Camacho admitted forging the judges' signatures and filing the orders with the clerk of courts"

Of note on the debrief to Ms. Cassens Weiss, Joe Patrice, AC/DC fan and author of one of legal commentaries that followed in Above the Law, a member of the ABA Journal Blawg Hall of Fame, said this, 18 months before Ms. Cassens Weiss' errant commentary:

"Attorney Jose Manuel Camacho, a graduate of the University of Miami Law School, reportedly admitted (though he has since pleaded not guilty) to forging the signatures of a gaggle of judges on court orders approving structured settlement deals for his clients.

In Florida, judges have to approve this type of arrangement to guarantee it’s not a bum deal for the poor schmuck signing away their income stream for a lump sum of quick cash.

Assuming we believe his admission, Camacho apparently didn’t think the bench was going to see things his clients’ way. Now he faces 14 counts of forgery".

Putting poor journalism on the subject of structured settlements in its place. Let's try to do better in the future folks.

 

 

Law Suit Alleges "Annuity Fraud Enterprises" Involving VA Lawyer Stephen Heretick, JG Wentworth, Seneca One, Portsmouth VA Judges

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

A class action lawsuit filed September 14, 2017, alleges Portsmouth Virginia Circuit Court judges were complicit in an "Annuity Fraud Enterprise" scheme, in which a Virginia lawyer and 79th District delegate Stephen E. Heretick was the central figure, representing JG Wentworth, Seneca One, 321 Henderson Receivables and other settlement purchasers, that allegedly violated the rights of thousands of structured settlement annuitants.

According to the Complaint,  Heretick hatched the scheme, which was designed entirely to defeat the regulatory scheme (which was designed to protect structured settlement annuitants), and to enable sales of the income streams from SSAs on terms that:

a would never be accepted by a beneficiary of an SSA if the beneficiary had been advised by a well-informed and objective advisor; and
b. would never be approved after meaningful judicial review.

The scheme evaded the state and federal requirements identified above by creating what was, in name only, a judicial review process but which was, in reality, a rubber stamp for virtually every transaction brought before complicit judges by Defendant Heretick  (numbering in the thousands!).

The structured settlement secondary market faces its second blistering lawsuit in a week
This is the second blistering lawsuit filed about alleged bad business practices in the structured settlement secondary market in the space of one week that  includes allegation of forum shopping of annuitants to places where they allegedly did not live and representations to the courts that they did. There are a lot of issues being raised and some important commentary regarding the potential implications to sellers, individual investors and individual investors in structured settlement derivatives ( "secondary market annuities") so I am going to break this out over several posts.

Case Caption

Larry G. Dockery, On behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v Stephen E. Heretick, 321 Henderson Receivables, LLC, JG Wentworth Receivables, LLC,  Seneca One Finance, Inc., Structured Settlement Investments, LP,  Structured Settlement Purchaser John Doe Inc. Purchaser Defendants 1-100 and John Doe Individual Defendants 1-100 and  New York Life Insurance Company, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Symetra et al*.  United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania Case 2:2017:cv-04114-MMB

* note the life insurers are only listed and referenced as nominal parties in the complaint. A nominal party is a defendant included in a lawsuit because of a technical connection with the matter in dispute and who is necessary for the court to decide all issues and make a proper judgment. However nominal defendants have no responsibility, no fault, and no right to recover.

 

Class members in "Annuity Fraud Enterprises "Lawsuit

1. The proceeding occurred in the Portsmouth, Virginia Circuit
   Court;
2. The proceeding was presided over by one of the Complicit
   Judges;
3. The beneficiary waived his or her right to counsel, and was not
   represented by counsel;
4. The petition approving the sale was approved either on the
   same day it was filed or within two weeks thereafter, and
   without the court's meaningful review of any evidence;
5. The beneficiary was not present during the proceedings

Counts in the Class Action Complaint Dockery et al v Stephen E. Heretick et al. 

I  Violation of RICO  18 U.S.C. §1962(c) (the Annuity Fraud Enterprises)

The Purchaser Defendant acted to perpetrate the fraud by inducing each of the victim sellers to abandon the right each of them had to independent counsel or advice regarding the Purchase transactions. It did this, as alleged, by 

I. Instructing each victim to execute a document in which the victim stated that he or she had been advised that he or she had the right to independent advice or counsel, while 

ii Simultaneously, it also informed each and every victim that in fact they could not exercise this right in any way, because if they did the transaction would be either completely impossible to consummate or would take immeasurably longer to close.

Each Purchaser Defendant hired and paid Heretick to file these documents and to develop and operate the agreement with the Complicit Judges, pursuant to
which the court would accept and approve petitions even when they
i.  Were filed in bulk
ii. Waived each victim's right to counsel and to independent financial advice
iii.Were presented at hearings at which the victim seller was not
present and so could not be questioned by the court

iv. Included victims who were residents of and domiciled in other states, whom the Purchaser Defendants had arranged to travel to Virginia and make fraudulent representations that they were domiciled there

I FOR VIOLATION OF THE RACKETEER INFLUENCE AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) (the 321 Henderson Enterprise)

III FOR VIOLATION OF THE RACKETEER INFLUENCE AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) (the Wentworth Enterprise)

IV FOR VIOLATION OF THE RACKETEER INFLUENCE AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) (the Seneca Enterprise)

V. FOR VIOLATION OF THE RACKETEER INFLUENCE AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS ACT 18 U.S.C. §1962(c) (the SSILP Enterprise)

VI FOR CONSPIRACY TO VIOLATE RICO
UNDER 18 U.S.C. §1962(d)

VII FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT

VIII FOR DEPRIVATION OF PLAINTIFFS' RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS OF LAW
IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. §I983

IX FOR A CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND ALL NOMINAL DEFENDANTS

X. FOR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY AND AIDING AND ABETTING BREACH OF
FIDUCIARY DUTY

 

 

Structured Settlement Strategy To Help Maximize Social Security for Baby Boomers, GenX

by John Darer® CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT® RSP CLTC

There is a compelling reason to structure a settlement that some attorneys, plaintiffs and insurance adjusters may have overlooked.

Using structured settlement to help maximize Social Security

How a Structured Settlement Can Be Used to Help Maximize Social Security Retirement income

A structured settlement can be used to replace the payments that a plaintiff would receive from social security and give them the economic support to delay social security until age 70 when benefits are considerably higher.  Plaintiffs thinking of taking social security early, beginning at age 62 may want to think again when looking at these numbers compiled from the Social Security Administration website.

Percentage Social Security is reduced if you take early retirement at age 62, instead of at full retirement

• Born 1960 or later    30%
• Born 1955-1959        25.83%-29.17%

Percentage Social Security is increased for delaying receipt from full retirement age until age 70

• Born 1960 or later      32%   [ Note full retirement age is age 67 for those born 1960 or later]

The last time I checked for myself, there was an almost $9,000 annual difference in payments for life if I defer from full retirement at age 67 until age 70.

• For married couples, if the settlement is large enough, a structured settlement could be fashioned so that both spouses could afford to delay receiving social security.
• Plaintiff lawyers can use this strategy with structured attorney fees or attorney fee deferred compensation, even though payments are taxable.

Each person's decision should be taken after consideration of that person's unique set of facts.

 

Allstate Structured Settlement | Think You Are Missing a Payment? Read This!

by John Darer® CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT® RSP CLTC

If you have an Allstate structured settlement and think you are missing a payment you should read this.

I'm re-blogging this 2015 post (see link below) about the peculiar way Allstate Life used to issue structured settlement contracts to help annuitants and my industry colleagues and staff members who may not have been in business long enough to know.  Allstate stopped writing new structured settlements in early 2013. 

I am doing so after receiving a call from a Allstate Life annuitant who purportedly did not receive a payment on the life contingent part of a structured settlement that was established as part of a medical malpractice settlement in Pennsylvania when he was a minor. In searching on the internet he found the 2015 post, which was inspired by an annuitant with a similar issue.

Needless to say if you have sold Allstate structured settlement payments in the past please check to see if the missing payment is not one you have already sold.

via structuredsettlements.typepad.com

Novation Funding "Pledges" A Magnanimous Illusion To Help Annuitants With Hurricane Irma

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

Novation Settlement Solutions has mastered the art of the "magnanimous illusion". Novation Settlement Solutions, a DBA for Novation Funding LLC, "pledged" $250,000 in advances in anticipation of Hurricane Irma.  Here's the kicker. "Anyone in these states with a qualifying structured settlement or annuity can immediately receive up to $1500 to assist with their hurricane recovery, preparation and/or evacuation efforts. Novation is urging anyone in need of an advance to contact them as soon as possible, as the Florida-based company may also be impacted by Hurricane Irma.

First Stop on Illusion Road After a Natural Disaster, "Magnanimity" from Structured Settlement Cash Now Pushers

So it isn't really a pledge.  You need to have a structured settlement payments to sell at what may be a horrific discount (ask Cedric Martinez Thomas). And it is calculated to make Novation look good while you are getting fleeced of your structured settlement payment rights for pennies on the dollar. Novation gives advances all the time. So basically what's going down is a gimmick to hook you earlier, in a weakened state of panic over an impending storm that could devastate everything you own. Novation issued a do it yourself press release.

Magnanimous Illusion in the Structured Settlement Secondary Market | The Abridged History

Novation isn't even original.

• The original "composer" of the "magnanimous illusion" was Deborah Benaim, then of Peachtree Settlement Funding, who somehow got London newspapers to spin the BS that Peachtree funded Hurricane Katrina.   Press Release September 5, 2005 | Baffled the British Press March 2006
  
• It was followed by Imperial Structured Settlements Plays the Sandy Card  November 2012
  

 

Explosive Seneca One Lawsuit v US Annuity Services Should Give State Judges and SMA Investors Pause

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

An explosive new lawsuit filed in Maryland on September 1, 2017 gaslights questions on the risk profile of so called secondary market annuities or SMAs, a scam label for structured settlement derivative investments. The lawsuit filed by Seneca One Finance against US Annuity Services contains blistering allegations which, if true, should give state judges, attorneys general and the the legislators of structured settlement protection acts pause.

The structured settlement factoring industry is already reeling from two massive occurrences of forgery, one involving a former paralegal at a New York City personal injury law firm and another featuring a now disbarred and convicted Miami lawyer for settlement purchasing companies.

Now this...

Seneca One Finance , Inc. v Jeremy Wright and US Annuity Services, LLC and John Does 1-5*  Circuit Court Montgomery County MD Case 436464V

According to the Complaint in the Seneca One lawsuit against Jeremy Wright and Frederick, MD based US Annuity Services, among the allegations:

• USAS made a practice of having statutory disclosures signed at the same time as structured settlement transfer agreements and backdating the disclosure statements to make it appear as if the disclosure statement was prepared and delivered prior to the transfer agreement  [Complaint at 61 p 14]
  
• At least one USAS employee has created fake documentation about an annuitant's income in an effort to mislead a court into believing that the annuitant had other monthly income, thus increasing the chance that the transaction is approved [64 p 14]
• At least one USAS employee has altered a signed contract with an annuitant without the annuitant's permission  [ 66 p 15]
• Upon information and belief at least one USAS employee has paid a third party to pose as  a particular annuitant and falsely testify in court that she was the annuitant. [67 p 15]
• On more than one occasion USAS has created fake cancellation letters that were filed with the court in furtherance of cancelling an assignment transaction that on of USAS's  competitors had pending.  Upon information and belief, these cancellations were not signed by the customer, but rather contained a signature and notary stamp that were copied and pasted from another document that was executed by the customer.  [65 p15]
• USAS fraudulently used its affiliated entities to mislead consumers into believing that USAS entities were unaffiliated competitors competing for the consumers' business. USAS then fraudulently shepherded consumers to one of the affiliated entities with representation that the entity to whom the consumer was shepherded was  a more worthy competitor. [199 p36]
• USAS doctors, forges, or otherwise alters documents in an effort to evade industry regulations and expedite the process of funding assignment transactions  (structured settlement factoring transactions)  [201 p36]
• USAS creates fake documents in an effort to evade industry regulations, interfere with competitor's deals and expedite the process of funding assignment transactions (structured settlement factoring transactions) [ 202 p 36]
• USAS employees conceal their identities from potential customers through the use of aliases [203 p 36]  This prevents the potential customer from knowing who they are actually dealing with and hides any potential red flags that may exist. A criminal background check of at least one USAS employee would reveal enough information to give many potential customers pause. [48p 12]
• USAS often engages in forum shopping by filing a petition in a favorable jurisdiction where the customer does not reside. The forum shopping is done county by county and state by state. By engaging in forum shopping USAS avoids certain state (structured settlement protection) statutes and other regulations on the transfer of certain payment streams [56 and 57 p 13]
• Forum shopping a plaintiff to another jurisdiction after a judge in Cook County denied a petition for a woman with pending felony matter and from whom the judge wanted to see a 6 month proof of sobriety before approving the transfer. The ironically named Wise County Texas judge approved the transfer.
• Misrepresentations by Jeremy Wright in marketing materials and his LinkedIn profile as to his purported role in the founding of Seneca One.

Seneca One also names Brent Gardner, Corey Cannell, Stoney Morris and Chris Noblejas.

Have you invested in "Secondary Market Annuities" from ANY source of SMA Investments that were originated by US Annuity Services?

• You should certainly be following the outcome of the litigation. Perhaps it's time to do an audit.
• An structured settlement transfer order procured by fraud could lead to a vacated order if it is determined that the transaction failed to comply with the relevant structured settlement protection act. Check your paperwork. 
• If you have "vacated court order insurance" be aware that the policy has exclusions.

State Structured Settlement Protection Acts

• State attorneys general should monitor this case to see what proofs are supplied.
• Licensing or registration should be mandatory. Only licensed or registered individuals should be permitted to speak with consumers. Apparently this was brought to the State of Maryland and rejected.  How about now?

With Halloween on the horizon, it's "trick or treat for unique stuff" in the structured settlement secondary market. Unfortunately the deception is not so unique.

 

Structured Settlement Design For Minor is WTF With Habaneros

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

Things that make you go hmmm...

An average size structured settlement for an 8 year old was designed to pay only two lump sums, a larger lump sum at age 18 and another smaller "neither rhyme nor reason" lump sum, 35 years later,  at age 53. True story, I heard it from the annuitant's mother today.

If you are the structured settlement broker or settlement planner who slapped a structured settlement together with this plan design in 2007, please step forward and take your lumps.  Other than smoke and mirrors to make the numbers look better than they were at the time, how was this ever in the plaintiff's best interest, your client's best interest or the interest of the structured settlement industry?

Such a plan design encourages a young adult to sell their structured settlement for the figurative equivalent of a half eaten french fry composting on a landfill for 9 years, on the dollar. Such a structured settlement plan design has no place in the structured settlement industry.

My lump sum is only worth as much as THAT half eaten french fry?

 

 

 

 

Charles Nilosek Slammed in Securities Enforcement Action | Peddled Secondary Market Annuities "Just Like a CD"

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

I knew something was wrong when I critiqued a Massachusetts company in 2014 for outrageous daily tweets about structured settlement transfers that they fraudulently misrepresented as " just like a CD". The company was also using insurer logos without authorization, to peddle the structured settlement transfers. One of the founders was Charles N Nilosek and the peddled structured settlement payment rights were apparently sourced from Woodbridge Structured Funding, LLC (which is now known as Woodbridge Wealth)

Then in May 2015 Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,  William F. Galvin, charged Charles N. Nilosek of Position Benefits LLC of Plymouth,  with acting as unregistered investment advisers and selling risky unregistered securities to Massachusetts investors. In a related matter, Galvin ordered three mortgage investment funds known as Woodbridge Mortgage Investment Funds 1, 2, and 3, of Sherman Oaks, Calif., and the source of the commercial mortgages known as Secure Bridge Loans, to pay a $250,000 civil penalty, to offer to return money invested by Massachusetts residents and to accept censure by the state Securities Division [ see  IN THE MATTER OF: POSITION BENEFITS, LLC, and CHARLES N. NILOSEK,  Respondents   COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH SECURITIES DIVISION Docket No. E-2014-0103]

The administrative complaint against Nilosek and his firm stated that, despite their lack of registration in the commonwealth, they “hold themselves out as investment advisers while selling Massachusetts residents an unregistered risky security that they represent as a safe and secure investment.”

“Presenting these mortgages as guaranteed investments is a cruel hoax especially when older people are encouraged to move into them from retirement accounts or certificates of deposit,” Galvin said. “Investors need to check that the person presenting himself as an investment adviser is, in fact, registered to be one, not a salesman in investor adviser clothing.”

The complaint charged that Nilosek and Position Benefits employed heavy radio and television advertising, a substantial Internet and social media presence, as well as radio programs such as “Life is Great New England” and “Money Matters” to present the picture of a broad investment counseling service, although Position Benefits never had more than six employees at a time and the only product they offered was from Woodbridge. The two respondents were paid more than $607,000 over 19 months to solicit investors to purchase the Woodbridge instruments.

“In reality, Position Benefits and Nilosek lure Massachusetts investors into meetings with the promise of investment advice and pull a ‘bait and switch,’ offering guarantees and promises of safety on a product that offers neither,” the complaint stated.

In a settlement with the Massachusetts Securities Division, Woodbridge agreed to offer to return money to 144 Massachusetts residents who invested in Secure Bridge Loans between January 2012 and the present. Woodbridge also agreed to stop offering and selling the Secure Bridge Loans in Massachusetts until they

In April 2017 Woodbridge voluntarily entered into a consent order with Pennsylvania Securities regulators who based on the results of their investigation the concluded that Woodbridge operated in violation of the Pennsylvania Securities Act of 1972 , 70 P.S. §1-101 et seq. The violation was that Woodbridge employed at least one unregistered agent in violation of 70 P.S. §1-301(b). Woodbridge Structured Funding was fined $30,000.00. For more read

Structured Settlement Factoring Company Fined in Securities Enforcement Action