by Structured Settlement Watchdog
Annuity Straight Talk, a company run by a licensed insurance agent and sells legitimate annuities in addition to structured
settlement derivatives using the scam label "secondary market annuities" gets it all wrong on Secondary Market Annuity(dot)net
Annuity Straight Talk Story Just Doesn't Hold Up
Annuity Straight Talk expects you to believe this...
"John Smith hits Jane Doe in a car accident, and the case goes to court.
John Smith loses in court, and Jane wins. Money is offered to Jane, either a lump sum, or a structured settlement making payments over her lifetime. Instead of taking the lump sum, Jane, who can’t go to work because of her injuries, elects a structured settlement.
Jane’s court ordered settlement reads “Jane Doe shall receive $1000 per month for life, with 20 years guaranteed.”
Why is Annuity Straight Talk not "talking straight" with consumers?
Annuity Straight Talk falsely implies that structured settlements are created after someone loses in court and the court orders a settlement. In reality, if a case "goes to court" (i.e. trial), a judge or jury will deliver a verdict. Settlement in legal terms refers to when parties to a lawsuit resolve their differences. Settlements are negotiated by their parties, usually through their attorneys and/or insurance adjusters, but final approval of a settlement offer must rest with the parties to the lawsuit {US Legal] Under some circumstances, a court may need to approve a settlement that the parties have negotiated, particularly settlements involving payments to minors or incompetents.
Annuity Straight Talk Is Selling You a Derivative Of a Product That It Does Not Accurately Explain
Says Annuity Straight Talk..."Now Jane doesn’t want John or Progressive, his auto insurance company, to be paying her, and the court doesn’t want this either. Progressive just wants to close the case and raise John’s premiums. To put closure on the case, Progressive purchases an annuity from a major life insurance carrier to pay Jane $1000 per month for life, with 20 years guaranteed. Let’s assume they purchase the annuity from MetLife.
Progressive Insurance is the owner, MetLife is the issuer, and Jane is the payee of this annuity contract. Jane can call up MetLife any time and they will tell her that she is entitled to $1000 a month for life, with 20 years guaranteed starting on the date the case was closed.
Comments: A structured settlement is not typically owned by the insurance company for the defendant, it is owned by a qualified assignment company for personal injury cases, for payment of damages qualifying under IRC 104(a)(1) or 104(a)(2) and in compliance with the requirements of IRC 130. In the alternative, where taxable damages, or non assignable tax exempt damages (e.g. wrongful imprisonment IRC 139F). Annuity Straight Talk would have you believe, erroneously, that Progressive shifts its liability by simply buying an annuity from MetLife.
Annuity Straight Talk Misrepresents Name of Insurer in SMA Inventory
Annuity Straight Talk lists an SMA from CNA Life Insurance Company at this post was published. By its own definition all "SMA" listed are derived from factored structured settlements. The structured settlement annuity issuer for CNA was Continental Assurance Company. Continental Assurance Company was sold in August 2014 to Wilton Re and the acquired company became Wilcac Life Insurance Company.
Annuity Straight Talk Misrepresents Statutory Protections
If MetLife goes out of business, and also the State Guarantee funds that guarantee Met and the other carriers operating in that state go out of business too, (Ummm Not very likely!) Jane can go back on Progressive and demand that they make good on the money owed to her under the court settlement.
Comment: It is unlawful under state insurance laws to use statutory protections to sell annuities. That being said what Annuity Straight Talk says is inaccurate. For a more detailed explanation please follow this link
Annuity Straight Talk and Conflict of Interest
"Factoring is a cutthroat business, and is primarily about marketing". I agree and I would add the word deception to that as the allegations in legal cases against originators of structured settlement payment rights have shown. Sooner or later some factoring company is going to get nailed for providing on unregistered investment advice.
Annuity Straight Talk claims it is a conflict of interest for an annuity issuer or a subsidiary to help out their annuitants if they run into hardship situations. It's a total canard created by the factoring industry which sees it as a threat. An insurer willing to help their customers out in a hardship situation is a good thing if they can bring about a better deal. It's certainly better than leaving them to be court scraped by rapacious vultures who regurgitate their finds to the structured settlement factoring companies. Maybe a Terrence Taylor or Cedric Martez Thomas case doesn't happen if there is an internal "hardship repurchase program"
Annuity Straight Talk Misrepresents Ratings of insurers
Annuity Straight Talk misrepresents Berkshire Hathaway (A++), MetLife (A+), New York Life (A++), Pacific Life (A+), Prudential (A+). All of these companies have AM Best Financial Strength ratings higher than "A". For the smarty pants out there Berkshire, New York Life, MetLife, Prudential and Pacific Life have better than " A" Standard & Poors ratings too.
Annuity Straight Talk Misrepresents a Structured Settlement Transfer as a Settlement
A structured settlement transfer or structured settlement factoring transaction is not a settlement.
Comments and Trackback Policy