ING v 777 Partners, SuttonPark Capital et al. Complaint Filed 10/17/2024, A Month Before Hell

By Structured Settlement Watchdog

SuttonPark Capital and SuttonPark Servicing named Defendants in a lawsuit filed by ING Capital in October 2024

Less than a month before hell was wrought on the lives of souls forced to deal with SuttonPark many years ago, by virtue of selling a portion of their structured settlement payments, a complaint was filed on October 17, 2024, seeking to recover more than $28 million in  loan proceeds that ING Capital advanced to an entity named Sierra 2016, LLC, based on a fraud that the defendants have been alleged to have perpetrated in the following legal complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

ING CAPITAL LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
777 PARTNERS LLC, 600 PARTNERS LLC, SUTTONPARK CAPITAL LLC, SUTTONPARK SERVICING LLC, JOSH WANDER, STEVEN PASKO, and FREDERICK LOVE,  Defendants.

Civil Action No.1:24-cv-07913-JGK

The complaint against SuttonPark Capital LLC et al, by ING, includes the following counts:

I       Breach of the Credit Agreement Against SuttonPark Servicing;

II      Breach of the Servicing Agreement Against SuttonPark Servicing;

III     Indemnification Under the Servicing Agreement Against SuttonPark Servicing;

IV     Breach of the Origination Agreement Against SuttonPark Capital;

V      Fraud Against all Defendants;

VI     Aiding and Abetting Fraud Against the Individual Defendants and the 777 Defendants;

VII    Unjust Enrichment Against SuttonPark Capital, 777 Partners, 600 Partners, Pasko and Wander;

VIII   Failure to Provide Information Against SuttonPark Servicing;

IX     Intentional Fraudulent Transfer Against SuttonPark Capital and the 777 Defendants;

X      Constructive Fraudulent Transfer Against SuttonPark Capital and the 777 Defendants

Read the full ING Capital Complaint  Download Complaint ING Capital v 777 Partners,  SuttonPark Servicing, SuttonPark Capital et al.

Why is the ING Capital LLC lawsuit Important for Victims of the SuttonPark Nightmare to Know?

It is alleged that ING Capital transferred over $28 million to the Defendants in 2022, with the expectation of collateral linked to structured settlement receivables. Although it currently impossible to identify which receivables are associated with which payee experiencing delays, it is important to pay attention.

Can't You Just Call the Annuity Issuer or Qualified Assignment Company and Tell Them to Stop Making Payments to the Payment Servicing Company?

You can contact the annuity issuer or qualified assignment company, and reach a compassionate representative (such as one at American General, as reported by a caller to me yesterday), they may able to help you. However, they could be restricted by an Order that fixes the payee of the check that goes to SuttonPark, the payment servicer. Refer to the answer to the next question for more details.

Why Can't the Annuity Issuer or Qualified Assignment Company Just Stop Making Payments to SuttonPark?

Under state law in all states, a structured settlement transfer must be preceded by a Court Order approving the transfer of structured settlement payment rights, under which a judge must make a finding that the structured settlement transfer is in the best interest of the payee, the Transfer Order may also have directed the payments to a specific "assignee", for example a servicing company such as SuttonPark.  If a life insurance company simply stops payments it may be violating the court order.  This contributes to what making it complicated with the SuttonPark situation.  

The Genex Capital 2022 communication to payees on transfers originated by Genex, originally serviced by Security Title Agency, then Loancare and which ended up at SuttonPark, is an excellent example to illustrate the complexity of the issues with payment servicing when weighing potential solutions

Genex was concerned about the "poor state of STA historical recordkeeping have resulted in significant and chronic payment delays being experienced by our valued clients. In short,  Genex no longer has confidence in the servicing arrangement originally attached to your investment. Many of you have contacted us over the past several months expressing concern and seeking our assistance in obtaining your missing payments. The situation is not acceptable. To keep our clients out of harm's way, we considered three potential options

1. "Commence litigation against STA and Loancare seeking damages for breach of contract on your behalf (Downside-potential aggravated payment delays and costly protracted litigation)
2. Transfer the more than 478 active STA accounts to another Genex approved servicing company (Downside-potential further payment disruption while Genex obtains amended court orders naming a replacement servicing entity.)
3. Offer our value (sic) clients a one-time Genex subsidized Recall/Repurchase option to permanently eliminate this unforeseen risk and provide liquidity to you".

Underline and highlights added for emphasis.  

What is the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? 

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is a United States government agency dedicated to making sure you are treated fairly by banks, lenders and other financial institutions. The CFPB home page includes the following message which claims that the CFPB is:

"On your side through life’s financial moments"

Give it a spin!  

Submit a complaint | Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

#rohitchopra