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

123 Lump Sum: False Advertising Exhibit #1 For the Federal Trade Commission?

An open letter to Jon Liebowitz, The Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission in Washington DC

Please view this advertisement from 123 Lump Sum, the Florida company which solicits people nationally under the "cash now " scheme.

The company claims to be :

1. A leader in "fast cash now" for structured settlements in various advertising forums 
2. The above video ad states 123 Lump Sum can give you cash today for your structured settlement

We believe the claims of 123 Lump Sum to be grossly false and intentionally misleading considering:

1. The requirements under Internal Revenue Code Section 5891
2. The requirements of individual state structured settlement protection acts which refute the caims
3. The knowledge that the company has complaints on the website of the Better Business Bureau which eviscerate the claims of cash now, fast cash now or anywhere in between. http://www.trustlink.org/BusinessProfile.aspx?ID=206029806. Note that on 12/4/2009 the company has responded to the complaints on BBB and the responses further support the false advertising claim. The company says "the process of selling structured settlement payments is a very complicated financial and legal transaction with multiple parties involved and it requires filing a court order, procuring a hearing date and obtaining a signed court order approving the transfer". We agree with this statement which means that it isn't fast cash now
4. The explanation given for payment delays in the BBB report centers on a contractual defense, that it has met the conditions of the contract for sale that the annuitant signed. That being said, does it not seem disingenuous given that at the same time the company solicits consumers to sell their structured settlements, which are created pursuant to a contract,  on the suggestion that the payments are slow? The fact is that the underlying structured settlement payment amounts and times are exactly what the annuitant, or their legal representative contracted for.
5. This author has been contacted and has names and phone numbers of 123 Lump Sum customers who have not received the results that 123 Lump Sum claims to be able to deliver.

123 Lump Sum is the marketing name for Structured Asset Funding of Hallandale Florida, The company's "moral standards" include encouraging structured settlement annuitants to sell their structured settlement payment rights for depreciating assets.

Structured Asset Funding/ 123 Lump Sum is not alone in making questionable advertising claims, but  in this regard, they display among the worst business practices in the industry, in this author's personal opinion.

Note to Consumers:

As a consumer you can do something about it. You can write to us with your story by contacting this author by phone or email. We will publish your story so that others like you can learn from it.

You can also file a complaint with your state's Department of Consumer Affairs. If you do not know how to find them contact us and we will help you find them.

You can also file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC"). It is worth doing so because, based on the georgraphic diversity of calls received and belief the company is doing business across state borders. The FTC will not address your individual complaint but will accumulate complaints and then take action if the problem is deemed serious enough. You've heard of the 1,000,000 man man march or the 1,000,000 women march; this is the "fed up with false advertising consumers march"

 

File a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against Structured Asset Funding a/k/a 123 Lump Sum by following this link

Is Colonial Settlement Partners, LP Faking It?

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

The Sell Structured Settlements Blog posts a story dated June 25, 2009 entlitled " Hunkering Down With The Choice To Sell Annuity Payments Part I" which purports to be a true story written by an individual. Pardon my skepticism but one has to wonder how many souls in desperate need of cash would write a two part shaggy dog story instead of first searching in the Internet (or calling sultry siren Deborah Benaim at Imperial who issued a press release in anticipation of bacchanalia in South Beach during the height of the recent financial crisis). 

The dead giveaway is the "in text link" to cash now pusher Colonial Settlement Partners.

A topic of one of last week's posts was FTC Is Set To Tighten Rules On Paid Testimonials on The Internet. Enough said.

FTC Is Set To Tighten Rules on Paid Testimonials on The Internet

by John Darer CLU ChFC CSSC RSP

The US Government is considering a new requirement that those who write about products or services on the Internet must inform readers if they received compensation. It seems fair to me.

Apparently companies pay a staggering $1.6B annually to generate the buzz from paid reviewers.

The structured settlement industry has at times suffered an intermittent raft of what this author calls "pay per post crap". You get unlicensed writers with no bona fides from remote villages in the Philippines or India claiming to "have a friend who has a structured settlement" who "just happened to call" them for advice on what to do. The writers of course happen to know one of the cash now pushers and their posts conatin in-text links to them. Other submissions have content so poorly written it's a joke.

This author also believes that other "paid testimonials" deserve proper disclosure.

Forge Consulting developed an ad campaign centered around former Senator and Presidential candidate John Edwards' purported testimonial (in addition to other testimonials). From about October 2005 to July 2007 Forge Consulting posted a testimonial purportedly from John Edwards on its website. It also used the same "testimonial" in letters to lawyers soliciting structured settlement annuity business. The evidence available from public information suggests that it was mathematically impossible for John Edwards to have utilized the structured settlement services of Forge Consulting as implied in the testimonial and the way it was used by Forge to gain a competitive advantage over other licensed insurance agents in soliciting trial lawyers.  According to publicly available information John Bair, the President of Forge, was a known bundler for Edwards. Unfortunately, this was neither disclosed by Forge with the "testimonial" posted on the website nor in the solicitation letter.

The FTC will vote on the new marketing rules this summer, according to an article in the June 21, 2009 Parade magazine.

"Financial Crack" Dealer Now Offering FAST Cash Now

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

Now the folks who hatched the same "123 Lump Dumb" scheme are pushing a new scheme "FAST Cash Now". We have already established that cash now is a fraudulent advertising scheme perpetuated by a number of factoring companies and we have "video testimony" of the General Counsel of the National Association of Settlement Purchasers as well as a writing from an officer of that organization to support this.

To a reasonable person and most dictionaries, "NOW" means "immediately" or "at once". So does FAST Cash Now mean faster than immediately or faster than at once (a physical impossibility)? C'mon!  The question that the Federal Trade Commission should be asking is does Structured Asset Funding deliver what they advertise)? If I was a competitor of Structured Asset Funding (which I am not) I might ask the same thing.

 

Cash Now Question Should Go To Federal Trade Commission

The focal point of the cash now advertising fraud is the where the cash NOW emphasis is placed. Is the cash NOW emphasis placed on what the consumer needs versus the advertiser's promise and ability to deliver what they advertise?

I don't think there's any question that a consumer could be in a situation where they need cash NOW. When the consumer needs cash NOW, or perceives that he or she needs cash NOW don't they need it at once, today or yesterday? Otherwise why wouldn't they think I need cash tomorrow or I need cash in 90 days?  Cash NOW implies immediately or "at once" as is in the dictionary definition.

Looking at some examples of the use of NOW...

When your mother said to spit the gum out NOW, did she mean in 60 days?  When your mother said stop hitting your sibling NOW, did she mean you could continue whaling on him for a few more minutes? When the teacher said to hand in your test NOW, did she mean you could take it home and  let the dog eat it?  When on the way home from the party at 1am you get pulled over and  the policeman barks "step out of the car NOW and put your hands on the hood" (after you've been speeding at 80mph and weaving all over the road) does that mean when let's wait until the sun rises?

The cash now pusher's defense of the practice tends to be a weak  "depends on on what you mean by cash now". Most concede that even though they say "cash now" they cannot deliver "cash now" as the advertising would lead any person reading or watching the advertising to expect.  After they get 'em in the door with the false cash NOW claim some say they make the disclosure that it isn't actually delivered NOW. Where's the "fine print" in the advertisement?

If cash now pushers cannot do the right thing up front then there needs to be an "intervention". Shouldn't Cash NOW pushers  be put through their own form of rehab by enforcement action from the Federal Trade Commission.

It is high time for this issue to be escalated to the Federal Trade Commission so the FTC can determine if the advertising is misleading. We're talking about the majority of an industry that practices this abuse. I for one would like a front row seat to see what the FTC thinks about Peachtree Settlement Funding's outrageous claim that they can give you "ALL your money now"(in exchange for your structured settlement payment rights).