by Structured Settlement Watchdog
When I asked John Bair "how do you resolve the conflict of interest?" in June 2018, John Bair insisted on a Non Disclosure Agreement, which included a multi-year non compete and a liquidated damages clause. I demurred.
Having noticed today the text of the Google Adwords solicitation from CrowFly (see image below), the company founded and for whom Bair serves as Director
and blogger, it seems reasonable to ask the same open question adding one word " How do you resolve the obvious conflict of interest?"
One Face to Structured Settlement Investors
CrowFly LLC purchased a Google Adword ad in which the copy says "Purchasing Structured Settlements as Investments CrowFly is Committed to acting in Your Best Interest, Because You Deserve a Better Deal"
Another Face to Sellers of Structured Settlement Payments
On the other side of the beak CrowFly says to Sellers "Expect a different experience with us. We believe our clients value a trustworthy, straight-forward, and transparent partner with their best interests in mind" [ Source: CrowFly website 5/25/2020]
Commitment v Belief
Isn't there a difference between being "committed to acting in your best interest and a "belief" in what sellers value?
Commitment "an engagement or obligation that restricts freedom of action", synonyms are devotion, allegiance, loyalty... [ Oxford English Dictionary]
Belief "an acceptance that a statement is true or that something exists". [Ibid.]
But then, the conflict surfaces...
One Face Two Face (To Both Buyers and Sellers)
"At CrowFly, we are committed to acting in your best interest. Always"
Whether you’re a seller or a buyer, you deserve a better deal".
If each person deserves a better deal, can you act in seller's best interest and squeeze every living "penny on the dollar" out of the buyer after you've committed to acting in the best interest of the buyer?