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

DOJ Releases 2024 Annuity Broker List

by John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT RSP CLTC

The Department of Justice published its most recent list of Annuity Brokers on June 17, 2024. 

Section 11015(b) of the 21st Century Department of Justice Appropriations Authorization Act provides that “[i]n any structured settlement that is not negotiated exclusively through the Civil Division of the Department of Justice, the United States Attorney (or his designee) involved in any settlement negotiations shall have the exclusive authority to select an annuity broker from the list of such brokers established by the Attorney General, provided that all documents related to any settlement comply with Department of Justice requirements.” 

The appearance of an annuity broker’s name on the list does not signify that the annuity broker actually meets the minimum qualifications or is otherwise competent to provide structured settlement brokerage services to the United States. Title 28 C.F.R. § 50.24 provides the following disclaimers:

(c) Disclaimers.

(1) The inclusion of an annuity broker on the list signifies only that the individual declared under penalty of perjury that he or she meets the minimum qualifications required by the Attorney General for providing annuity brokerage services in connection with structured settlements entered into by the United States. Because the decision to include an individual annuity broker on the list is based solely and exclusively on the Declaration submitted by the annuity broker, the appearance of an annuity broker’s name on the list does not signify that the annuity broker actually meets those minimum qualifications or is otherwise competent to provide structured settlement brokerage services to the United States. No preferential consideration will be given to an annuity broker appearing on the list except to the extent that United States Attorneys utilize the list pursuant to section 11015(b) of Public Law 107–273.

(2) By submitting a Declaration to the Department of Justice, the individual annuity broker agrees that the Declaration and the list each may be made public in its entirety, and the annuity broker expressly consents to such release and disclosure of the Declaration and list.

Accordingly, any broker being considered for selection should be required to verify at the time of selection that he or she meets the minimum qualifications set forth in 28 C.F.R. §50.24(a) and is otherwise competent to provide structured settlement brokerage services to the United States.

The 2024 Calendar-Year List, published June 17, 2024, can be found at 2024 Calendar Year Broker List (justice.gov) in PDF format and is available to the public.

Here is the Declaration each broker on the list signed under penalty of perjury

Annuity Broker Declaration for Appendix to Section 50.24 (justice.gov)

Think about it. 

28 U.S. Code § 1746 - Unsworn declarations under penalty of per­jury | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)

 

Certified Settlement Consultant is a Phony Credential

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

A settlement planner "being duly sworn, deposes and says he is "the founder of a comprehensive settlement planning and management firm, and am a certified settlement consultant". 

Certified Settlement Consultant is a phony designation. There is no such professional designation as Certified Settlmeent Consultant. 

One could dismiss it as a typo if it were made only once, but the subject settlement planner reiterated the phony credential twice in the same April 2, 2018 affidavit addressed to the Surrogate's Court of the State of New York Court in Erie County.

In March 2020, the same Buffalo New York based settlement planner used Qualified Settlement Fund Planner, another phony "credential".  We're speaking of someone who in March 2020, was in the business two decades, someone one would hope knows the proper terms, not a newbie.

End Distracted Driving of Phony Credentials on the structured settlement information highway!

The Pension Company Jailbird Joe Gargan Begins Serving Sentence at Western PA Prison

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

Convicted felon Joseph E. Gargan, a disgrace to the structured settlement industry, reported to prison to begin serving his sentence for millions of dollars Gargan embezzled in crimes against the United States government as well as a New York State Hospital (that impacted a severely disabled child).  According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locater, Joseph Gargan, 60, has been given inmate number 02366-509. The Bureau of Prisons website shows that Gargan is in custody and  incarcerated at FCI Loretto, a minimum security facility located in in Loretto, Cambria County in Western Pennsylvania.

The PACER record for the case shows no entries since October 9, 2020. In addition to his criminal case, several other legal cases against Gargan reveal that Gargan was a rotten apple who left a trail of bad debts in his wake, shafting former Pension Company brokers for hundreds of thousands in commissions after he acquired The Pension Company from Frank Pension in 2014.

Joe Gargan, inmate 02366-509 ripped off the United States  for millions and money from a New York hospital meant for a severely disabled child's settlement. (image not of Joe Gargan)

 

Structured Settlement Brokers and the United States Department of Justice

by John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT RSP CLTC

Despite advertising they are plaintiff exclusive, some structured settlement brokers have declared under penalty of perjury to the United States government that they have had substantial experience in each of the past 3 years, providing structured settlement brokerage services to or on behalf of defendants or their counsel. This raises a serious question of integrity at the same time some settlement planners have a mutually exclusive public marketing message.

Structured settlement brokers providing structured settlement brokerage services to the United Sates government must meet the minimum qualifications set

A question of integrity

forth in 28 C.F.R. §50.24(a). Each year anyone who wishes to get on the list or remain on the list must submit a declaration under penalty of perjury that 

a. I am currently licensed by at least one State, the District of Columbia, or a Territory of
the United States as a life insurance agent, producer, or broker;
b. I am currently licensed or appointed by at least one life insurance company to sell its
structured settlement annuity contracts or to act as a structured settlement consultant or
broker;
c. I am currently covered by an Errors and Omissions insurance policy, or an equivalent
form of insurance;
d. I have never had a license to be a life insurance agent, producer, or broker revoked,
rescinded, or suspended for any reason or for any period of time;
e. I have never been convicted of a felony; and
f. I have had substantial experience in each of the past three years in providing structured
settlement brokerage services to or on behalf of defendants or their counsel.

By submitting this Declaration to the Department of Justice, I am agreeing that this
Declaration and the list of brokers each may be made public in its entirety, and I expressly
consent to the release and disclosure of the Declaration and the list.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true, accurate, complete, and
correct. 28 U.S.C. 1746.  NOTE: Perjury is a crime under federal law as well as state law.

Over the years since the regulation was established, it has on occasion not been treated seriously by a number of plaintiff exclusive practitioners have signed this declaration and submitted it and their names have appeared on the list.  For example:

A current name on the 2020 Calendar year DOJ list is described on a settlement company website as "_______is the founder of ______, LLC providing comprehensive financial planning exclusively for settlement recipients and their attorneys.

Zero wiggle room there eh?

Playing with Fire?

Whether or not this constitutes perjury is for legal experts to decide. However anyone signing such declaration under penalty of perjury and the insurance agencies they are appointed with should be mindful of the fact that a person convicted of perjury under federal law may face up to five years in prison and fines. The punishment for perjury under state law varies from state to state, but perjury is a felony and carries a possible prison sentence of at least one year, plus fines and probation.  A perjury conviction might need to be noted on an insurance or securities license renewal and might impact the ability to main professional credentials such as CFP, ChFC, CLU, CPA etc.  

If a settlement planner or annuity broker is tempted to act in hypocrisy and commit the crime of perjury, consider this, which is expressly stated in 28 C.F.R. § 50.24 :

The appearance of an annuity broker’s name on the list does not signify that the annuity broker actually meets the minimum qualifications or is otherwise competent to provide structured settlement brokerage services to the United States. Title 28 C.F.R. § 50.24 provides the following disclaimers:

(c) Disclaimers.

(1) The inclusion of an annuity broker on the list signifies only that the individual declared under penalty of perjury that he or she meets the
minimum qualifications required by the Attorney General for providing annuity brokerage services in connection with structured settlements entered into by the United States. 

1 This 2020 Calendar-Year List also appears at www.justice.gov/civil/structuredsettlement-brokers in PDF format and is available to the public.
2 list is based solely and exclusively on the Declaration submitted by the annuity broker, the appearance of an annuity broker’s name on the list does not signify that the annuity broker actually meets those minimum qualifications or is otherwise competent to provide structured settlement brokerage services to the United States. No preferential consideration will be given to an annuity broker appearing on the list except to the extent that United States Attorneys utilize the list pursuant to section 11015(b) of Public Law 107–273.

(2) By submitting a Declaration to the Department of Justice, the individual annuity broker agrees that the Declaration and the list each may be made public in its entirety, and the annuity broker expressly consents to such release and disclosure of the Declaration and list.

Accordingly, any broker being considered for selection should be required to verify at the time of selection that he or she meets the minimum qualifications set forth in 28 C.F.R. §50.24(a) and is otherwise competent to provide structured settlement brokerage services to the United States.

 

Settlement Planners Who Sell Protected Information About Annuitants to Factoring Companies

by John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT RSP CLTC

It has come to my attention that certain settlement planners entrusted with the stewardship of protected information about injury victims with structured settlements, have sold that information to structured settlement factoring companies for financial gain. So that it is perfectly clear,  I'm not speaking of a single referral for someone with a genuine need. I'm referring to settlement planners trafficking hundreds or even thousands of names of annuitants, details of their annuities, annuity issuer, payment streams and contact information in exchange for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars. Information that these folks did not have the authority to sell and may even have lied in the placement of the structured settlement by saying that the information was confidential.  They may have also misrepresented to the buyer of the protected information, that the settlement planner had the authority to sell the protected information from each and every one of the parties to the deals.

The motivation for the people who sell protected data to structured settlement factoring companies and investors can be nothing more than pure greed, perhaps desperation, with reckless disregard for how the data will be used, possibly resold and used again, as well as and obligations they may have under the law. Those going down this rotten path abrogate the trust in them by clients and their lawyers and placing them like fish to shoot within a barrel despite that it being known that:

• Today structured settlement factoring has devolved from justification as a source of liquidity to one of endless documented cases of systemic destruction of a stable source of income for annuitants, with the aid of shady lawyers and certain inattentive judges not up to the task. 
• There is no regulation of sales practices or licensing (with the exception of Maryland and Louisiana) despite the endless documented cases of systemic destruction of a stable source of income. 
• Factoring companies are collectively going for every last penny.
  
• The structured settlement factoring industry has included denizens who are convicted felons, tax dodgers, Ponzi schemers, forgers, none of whom would be permitted to operate in the primary market.
  
• There is no accountability for bad behavior. Scams and false advertising abound as representatives with no credentials,  groom and participate in financial rape over and over again.
• Hedge funds, private equity and others backing bad actors have endless amounts of money to fight victims of fraud, including victimizing those with extreme mental retardation.
• There is endless documentation of fraud on the Courts, induced by structured settlement factoring companies.
• There have been more than two hundred instances of forgery of Court documents related to structured settlement transfers in the last 6 years that have been made public.
• There are notary publics who take bribes from structured settlement factoring companies to help them find deals.

In my opinion it may be time to blow the whistle on these "ethical skunks", who gained the trust of their clients and likely made millions in placing the structured settlements in the first instance and now a mere disgrace to the structured settlement and settlement planning industry. They deserve to be outed and punished for disseminating protected information for profit. 

At the time of posting, my company, 4structures.com LLC is the one of the only companies in the structured settlement industry that has published a transparent written policy on structured settlement factoring. Why is that?

Every affidavit that I sign in conjunction with the placement of a structured settlement bears the following:

"Neither I, nor my firm, will: (a) provide any information about this settlement to any factoring company for any purpose; b) solicit the plaintiffs or plaintiffs’ family on behalf of any factoring company for any purpose, including, but not limited to, the proposed sale of plaintiff’s future periodic payment rights, nor will I or my company participate, assist, promote, or aid in such solicitation by any person, firm, corporation or entity; or (c) seek or accept any consideration financial or otherwise, directly or indirectly from a factoring company, with respect to the proposed structured settlement."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is a Factored Structured Settlement a Qualified Funding Asset?

by John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT RSP CLTC

Are Factored Structured Settlement Receivables a Qualified Funding Asset?

Do you have a structured settlement or structured attorney fee sold to you by a settlement planner, sourcing the money from a qualified settlement fund, using the settlement planner's qualified assignment company and funded with someone else's structured settlement payments? If so you may want to check the papers and perhaps speak with your accountant.

The Apparent Steps in the Purported Qualified Assignment

• Defendant, or its Insurer, has paid money in to a qualified settlement fund in exchange for a general release. 
• A periodic payment obligation is created based on the availability of other people's structured settlements offered for sale in the structured settlement secondary market.
• A Qualified Assignment and Release is executed by the Plaintiff/Payee or Attorney/Payee, the settlement planner's Delaware based qualified assignment company and the qualified settlement fund (related, unrelated or possibly administered by the plaintiff's settlement planning firm)
• The Qualified Assignment Release represents that the" Qualified Funding Asset" is Annuity
• The Qualified Assignment and Release  represents that the "Issuer of Qualified Funding Asset" is a Life Insurance Company that issues structured settlement annuities that the settlement planner's firm holds an agency appointment with.
• The Qualified Assignment and Release states  "In exchange for "legal payment rights" pursuant to 5891 of the IRC, to the Periodic Payments specified in Paragraph ____, Claimant hereby  releases and forever discharges the defendant/s and/or the Respondents with regard to the Periodic Payments and agrees only to look to (Name of Settlement Planner's Delaware qualified assignment company) for satisfaction of the obligation to pay periodic payments.
• But the Qualified Assignment and Release also states " In the event of notice of an application to any court for the transfer of payment rights established under this agreement, (Name of Settlement Planner's Delaware Qualified Assignment Company) reserves the right to effectuate a transfer of ownership of the " Qualified Funding Asset(s) to the Claimant/Payee. Upon the transfer of ownership to Claimant and/or Payee, this contract shall terminate.

My first reaction was "Holy Conflated Musical Chairs Batman!" If you have entered into one of these agreements, perhaps you should simply be asking "What the F*** is going on?"

Before we dig deep into that, let's get into the background of qualified assignments and what should be happening when there is a qualified assignment.

What is a Qualified Funding Asset?

Background

For the purpose of this discussion let's assume that we are speaking about a structured settlement which represents payment of damages for personal physical injury or physical sickness. [i.e. qualifies for the income tax exclusion under IRC 104(a)(2)]. Most structured settlements are created via what is known as a qualified assignment. The following chart displays the sequence of events that take place when a typical structured settlement is created.

The term "qualified funding asset", is defined at Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 130(d), which states:

"For purposes of this section, the term “qualified funding asset” means any annuity contract issued by a company licensed to do business as an insurance company under the laws of any State, or any obligation of the United States, if—

• such annuity contract or obligation is used by the assignee to fund periodic payments under any qualified assignment,
• the periods of the payments under the annuity contract or obligation are reasonably related to the periodic payments under the qualified assignment, and the amount of any such payment under the contract or obligation does not exceed the periodic payment to which it relates,
• such annuity contract or obligation is designated by the taxpayer (in such manner as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe) as being taken into account under this section with respect to such qualified assignment, and
• such annuity contract or obligation is purchased by the taxpayer not more than 60 days before the date of the qualified assignment and not later than 60 days after the date of such assignment".

Why I Am Concerned About the Settlement Planner's Methodology. Should You Be?

• The settlement planner's own assignment company's  Qualified Assignment and Release document referred to releasing the Defendants  or Respondents. For defendants, an important element of a qualified settlement fund is that it can remove them and their insurers from decisions that must be made post settlement [the "resolve or satisfy rule"]. The qualified settlement fund allows for the defendants to pay cash into the fund in exchange for a general release. Thus, post General Release,  why would they need to be released again in the Qualified Assignment and Release?
• Internal Revenue Code Section 5891 refers to structured settlement payment rights not "legal payment rights". Structured settlement payment rights are defined at IRC 5891(c)(2) as "rights to receive payments under a structured settlement". The term "legal payment rights" appears nowhere in IRC 5891.
• A structured settlement factoring transaction does not involve the sale of an annuity.
• A structured settlement factoring transaction is defined at IRC 5891(c)(3)(A) as a "transfer of structured settlement payment rights (including portions of structured settlement payments) made for consideration by means of sale, assignment, pledge, or other form of encumbrance or alienation for consideration"
• Structured settlement payment rights are also known as " factored structured settlement payment streams". Acquired structured settlement payment rights  are not an annuity according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners in Statutory Issue Paper 160. 
• Beside the NAIC exclusion of acquired structured settlement payments as not being a covered annuity contract, none of the cash flows are filed with the Department of Insurance in your state. The Departments of Insurance specifically don't regulate factoring because the purchase and sale of cash flows is not the business of insurance.
• If the settlement planner's Delaware qualified assignment company, the taxpayer intended by the statute, has "designated" such factored structured settlement payment stream "an annuity contract" when it isn't, as appears to the case here "(in such manner as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe) as being taken into account under this section with respect to such qualified assignment", then wouldn't, or shouldn't, there' be an IRS concern? 

A 2017 legal decision in Delaware, the domicile of the settlement planner's qualified assignment company, supports an opinion that the settlement planner's representation of factored structured settlement payment streams as an annuity is a bald- faced lie:

In a March 29, 2017 decision in Greenwald v Caballero-Goehringer, Delaware Superior Court C.A. No. K14C-04-027 JJC. a Delaware Superior Court judge rejected an attempt to portray structured settlement payment rights as an annuity in a minor's prove up hearing, stating. "The proposed "structured settlement" was described in the Third Petition as a structure to be purchased through a third party to be facilitated by a Houston, Texas law firm. The "annuity" proposed by the Petitioner was in fact a "receivable purchase agreement" which involved purchase of the rights of payment of a structured personal injury settlement from a California injured party having nothing to do with this case. In other words, the annuitant in the proposed plan facilitated by the Texas law firm was the California claimant, not the Minor. Furthermore, despite the Petitioner describing The Hartford as providing the annuity, the seller of the receivable purchase agreement was Genex Capital. No rating was provided for that entity in the petition. The Court denied the Third Petition, without prejudice" .  Also see my post Greenwald v Caballero-Goehringer | Judge KOs Portrayal of Structured Settlement Derivatives as Structured Settlement

Is March 2010, Thomas D. Begley, Esq. of the Begley Law Group in Morristown, NJ wrote "The companies do not buy the structured settlement annuity itself, but rather buy the right to the income stream". 

If structured settlement payment rights are not an annuity (or an obligation of the United States), then they cannot be a "qualified funding asset". 

Then the prongs of IRC 130(d) ALL potentially fail.

For purposes of this section, the term “qualified funding asset” means any annuity contract issued by a company licensed to do business as an insurance company under the laws of any State, or any obligation of the United States FAILS because a factored structured settlement payment stream is not an annuity contract, but a receivables purchase agreement under Caballero--Goehringer. Settlement Planner's qualified assignment company is not a company licensed to do business as an insurance company. , if—

1. 
   such annuity contract or obligation is used by the assignee to fund periodic payments under any qualified assignment, FAILS because a  factored structured settlement payment stream is not an annuity contract, but a receivables purchase agreement under Caballero--Goehringer. Settlement Planner's qualified assignment company is not a company licensed to do business as an insurance company.
   2,.the periods of the payments under the annuity contract or obligation are reasonably related to the periodic payments under the qualified assignment, and the amount of any such payment under the contract or obligation does not exceed the periodic payment to which it relates, (FAILS because a factored structured settlement payment stream is not an annuity contract, but a receivables purchase agreement under Caballero--Goehringer. Settlement Planner's qualified assignment company is not a company licensed to do business as an insurance company.
   3. such annuity contract or obligation is designated by the taxpayer (in such manner as the Secretary shall by regulations prescribe) as being taken into account under this section with respect to such qualified assignment, FAILS because a factored structured settlement payment stream is not an annuity contract, but a receivables purchase agreement under Caballero--Goehringer. Settlement Planner's qualified assignment company is not a company licensed to do business as an insurance company. and
   4. such annuity contract or obligation is purchased by the taxpayer not more than 60 days before the date of the qualified assignment and not later than 60 days after the date of such assignment". FAILS because a factored structured settlement payment stream is not an annuity contract, but a receivables purchase agreement under Caballero--Goehringer. Settlement Planner's qualified assignment company is not a company licensed to do business as an insurance company

Now lets go back to IRC Section 130  (if IRC 130(d) fails,  is there a greater tax issue of an attempt to characterize factored structured settlement payments streams as qualified funding asset?

IRC 130(a) In general  Any amount received for agreeing to a qualified assignment shall not be included in gross income to the extent that such amount does not exceed the aggregate cost of any qualified funding assets.  Does this now FAIL because there has been no purchase of a qualified funding asset?  Was the settlement planner's qualified assignment company entitled to a tax exclusion under IRC 130, or did they report the income on its tax return?

IRC 130 (b)Treatment of qualified funding asset In the case of any qualified funding asset—

(1)the basis of such asset shall be reduced by the amount excluded from gross income under subsection (a) by reason of the purchase of such asset, and
(2)any gain recognized on a disposition of such asset shall be treated as ordinary income.

But what about the term "obligation" as  a "qualified funding asset"under Internal Revenue Code 130(d)? 

Reading the express language of the statute one can clearly see that It refers solely to an obligation of the United States.

This is Qualified Assignment 101 folks. One wonders how many qualified assignments were done this way and what an IRS audit of the books  and tax records of the qualified assignment company would turn up?

2. Securities and Exchange Commission/ FINRA investor alert 2013-86 also warns investors who might be attracted to the yield offered by buying the rights to someone else’s pension or structured settlement to be aware that:

• Investors may encounter commissions of seven percent or higher. [Our note:  the fees/mark up may or may not be disclosed. There are places to hide fees. Always ask to avoid a steep mark up] "Not surprisingly, the amount paid by the second plaintiff for the recycled payment stream is much greater than what the factoring company paid to the original payee. The factoring company markets the recycled payment stream based on its apparently attractive yield. However, because the recycled payment stream is taxable and also fraught with risk, the deal is not as good as advertised" -Stephen R. Harris, Esq.  Cozen O'Connor " Recycled Annuities" a Bad Alternative for Funding a Structured Settlement American Bar Association Journal December 17, 2018. 
• Pension and structured settlement income-stream products may or may not be securities and likely are not registered with the SEC.  
• These products could be difficult to sell if you need money and want to sell the product.
• Your “rights” to the income stream you purchased could face legal challenges

To jury rig the Qualified Assignment and Release document and misrepresent acquisition of someone else's structured settlement payment stream as a "Qualified Funding Asset(s) is outrageous, to say the least!

• "The settlement planner recently promoted a glossy attorney fee deferral brochure which also refers to these instruments by the tertiary market scam label " secondary market annuities.
• On the one hand, the same glossy brochure cites the seminal case of Childs v Commissioner, in which "the Petitioners never had the right to receive immediate payment, and non fund or property was set aside for petitioners which they could draw on at a time of their choosing", yet the glossy brochure says  "Change your investment at any time during deferral". Ohhhhkay.....
• Without the IRC 130 exclusion, If the attorney fee deferral is for more than one year and the factored structured settlement payments were an annuity, which they are not, is there any adverse consequence to the qualified assignment company?
• Again what the settlement planner is peddling as an annuity is not an annuity/ are not annuities.

Worth Reading ‘Recycled Annuity’: A Misleading Phrase For A Risky Investment That No One Should Confuse With A Structured Settlement by Pete Vodola.  Vodola is a Connecticut attorney who is intimately familiar with structured settlement factoring tranactions having consulted with and litigated on behalf of annuity issuers on compliance issues related to structured settlement protection acts thrroughout the United States for more than 15 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Bagging the Structured Settlement" , An Awful Socially Unaware "Dumbtoon" Ad by Chronovo

by Structured Settlement Watchdog®

Good god. For all the good they think they are doing, Chronovo has today published a truly awful, socially unaware advertisement that kills the structured settlement message and, in my opinion, is an embarrassment to the mission of the structured settlement industry. 

Millions of Animals Are Dying and Chronovo Shows No Sensitivity With "Smartoon"

At a time when millions of animals are being killed by wildfires in Australia and when Facebook postings of poseurs standing in front of magnificent elephants killed for sport are widely met with the highest disdain, Chronovo has presented what they call a "Smartoon" that:

1. Presents an elephant as an  "evil beast" in a caricature by New Yorker cartoonist Pat Byrnes that is reminiscent of Saddam Hussein in his pomp, but is a "large tasty prize"
2. "Bagging the Settlement" rhymes with elephant. No wiggle room there.  The settlement in the image is a hairy evil beast with ivory tusks. A mammoth is an extinct elephant. There are only 7 two-syllable words in the English language that rhyme with mammoth.
3. The giant image places the emphasis on animal killing will offend vegans and people offended by cruelty to animals at a time when millions of animals are suffering, at the expense of a message which is relegated to the small print at the bottom of the page.
4. Bagging the structured settlement is targeted to plaintiffs, a significant segment of which may find the use of "Spearchuckers" to be racist, even though the people in the "Dumbtoon" are white.
5. On the other hand it may also conjure the thought of cavemen with “useless tools” to the task at hand. Maybe that's a self-inflicted wound.
6. The caption to the image of bagging the elephant, implies that the better alternative to killing an elephant is killing a rabbit "because you can get it fresh everyday".  "Bunny boilers" that's all the industry needs.
7. Chronovo says "Seen through this fresh perspective, structures are a win-win for all parties.  Begs the question of the fate of the elephant and the bunny.

In my opinion Chronovo needs to demonstrate more social awareness of what is happening in the world today and better judgment than is on display in publishing the Bagging the Stuctured Settlement "Dumbtoon". 

Postscript

I received a response from the CEO of Chronovo  on January 21, 2020 which I'd publish but for the fact that it was laced with an ad hominem attack. Chronovo's ad remains posted. Chronovo's choice.  That's the original point.  They chose the ad and chose to publish it, leaving them open for criticism. Some will be offended and perhaps some not.  My readers are mature enough to consider the talking points and judge for themselves. I even offered to proof read Chronovo ads before publishing.

In 4 Cross Cultural Marketing Flops You Wont Forget in a Hurry,  you will find a fascinating history of major companies who have paid millions to ad agencies whose message bombed in translation. It comes from a company called Kwintessential which takes take professional “translation” to the next level. They have an extensive team of native language copywriters that specialize in advertising and promotional translation, to ensure that your company’s key marketing and business messages are accurately localized for your target market. When our copywriters ‘Transcreate’ these messages, they take into consideration not just the language, but also the culture, political and economic climate, hyper-local colloquialisms and local perceptions of the market.

Symbolism represented by elephants in Asian culture

Hinduism & Elephants: The elephant is a very powerful and significant symbol in the Hindu faith as one of their favorite gods, Ganesha, is depicted in the form of an elephant. Ganesha is thought to be the remover of obstacles, as well as the god of luck, protection and fortune.

Chinese Culture & Elephants: In Chinese culture, the elephant is believed to be a symbol of good luck and happiness. In Feng Shui, elephants can also symbolize good luck, wisdom, protection and fertility, depending on the position they're depicted in. An elephant with its trunk raised up represents good luck, while fertility is symbolized when the trunk is down. It's notable the Chronovo elephant's trunk is down. Killing the symbol of fertility misplaced metaphorically, figuratively or whatever, as a value proposition for a structured settlement? No thanks.

According to Univerrsalsymbolism.com. rabbit, the "fresh" meat alternative depicted in the caption of the Chronovo ad, is a sacred symbol of good luck, radiating all of the energies of good luck. It is as if good luck and fortune seem to blossom upon, surround and bless the path of the Rabbit spirit animal. Rabbit appears on the horizon as a messenger that something new is on it's way to you. "Killing your luck" misplaced metaphorically, figuratively., or whatever, no thanks.

Do injured claimants of these cultures or claims adjusters come from these cultures?  You bet they do.

And finally Genesis edited out a helicopter from its Super Bowl ad in the wake of the helicopter accident that took the lives of 9 people in Calabasas CA on January 26th out of sensitivity to its victims.

  

 

Have Lessons Been Learned Or Are Structured Settlement Brokers Going Retro in Pay to Play?

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

Back in the day, pay to play schemes were part of the regular cost of doing business for certain brokerage firms whe interacting with certain national accounts

Is Pay to Play Rearing Its Ugly Head Again?

So called "3 and 1" deals involved 25% of the commission being funneled back to the insurer or a subsidiary in exchange for an agreement to work exclusively with a particular structured settlement brokerage firm, or a group of firms. This sort of business practice of a few led to class action lawsuits against The Travelers in the 1990s and The Hartford (ending in 2010 with a $72.5MM settlement). The shortsighted self-serving actions of a few did nothing to instill confidence in structured settlement industry. Years after this nonsense went on a long hiatus, plaintiff lawyers were still skeptical about undisclosed kick backs. Undisclosed "kickbacks" also defraud excess insurers when the primary paid its limits but received the financial incentives on the back end.

In 2000, my firm and several others began voluntarily using a Structured Settlement Affidavit, a form of which is required in Bronx County New York and the 5 boroughs of New York City and Westchester County. It was out of a sense of pride in what we do and how we do it that led to this differentiator.

Deja Vu All Over Again?

Now, years after carriers that were participating in such practices abolished them, sources say that at least one NSSTA member brokerage firm is offering similar financial incentives to insurers and to service providers such as TPAS as an inducement to cop an exclusive brokerage agreement. At least one carrier has refused them. It begs the question about how many other insurance carriers have been offered financial incentives by the NSSTA member firm, how many insurers have accepted them in exchange for those financial incentives and whether or not those deals have been disclosed  in negotiations with plaintiffs. This is shortsighted, self serving and not in the best interest of the industry and those that it serves and serves an investigation.

New York Department of Insurance Office of General Counsel Opined in 2007 that Advertising Contributions to Trial Lawyer Associations Was Also Unlawful

Pay to play schemes and shake downs, including the solicitation of national, state and local level trial lawyer associations for massive donations by structured settlement brokers and settlement planners, heavy handedly encouraging lawyers to give work to the big donors, without disclosure of such contributions to their plaintiff clients, are arguably not doing their clients any favors either. The New York Department of Financial Services, in a legal opinion letter by the Insurance Department's Office of General Counsel in September 2007, in response to a Buffalo structured settlement firm's full page advertising that it was the largest non law firm contributor to the ATLA (now AAJ) endowment), emphasized it was unlawful to advertise contributions to trial lawyer associations. Yet some big donors that are structured settlement brokers often do, even in New York.

In a 2002 article which quotes officers of Creative Capital entitled "Structured Kickbacks: The Fraud Within Structured Settlements"  it was said "There are defense oriented brokers such as CCI who don't play funny games with the numbers and give both sides a square deal,” added (Jeff) Borow. “It would be a shame if CCI and other honest brokers kept quiet just as the rebating scandal became public knowledge.” CCI's stated position, however, is that such commission/kickback arrangements amount to transparent and feeble attempts to thwart the anti-rebating laws on the books in most states...The Alleged Abuses: Rebating of commissions Illegal as it might be for an insurance broker, agent or company to provide a financial incentive to the purchaser of an insurance product, such arrangements do exist and in effect reduce the cost of the premium paid for that annuity. (Marty)Jacobson pointed out that a partial return of the premium paid, or the payment of some of the commission earned on the placement of a structured settlement annuity from the broker placing the annuity to the casualty company paying the premium, amounts to the payment of a rebate. Labeling the rebate as a “service fee” or as an “administrative fee” is legally ineffective, he observed. Paying the rebate to a subsidiary of the carrier is also improper. “Remember, if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is a duck, regardless of what someone tries to convince you it is,” added Jacobson".

 

 

 

 

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?

 

 

 

 

The "Best Thing Since Sliced Bread" is not Michael Woodyard's Sentencing

by Structured Settlement Watchdog

The sentencing of Wesley Michael Woodyard, the former Dallas structured settlement broker turned fraudster, has been moved to July 7, 2017, the day that sliced bead was introduced. 

On the theme of sentencing and punishment, in

• 1456  Joan of Arc acquitted of heresy 25 years after her death;
• 1865 The 4 conspirators in the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln are executed by hanging;
• 1980 Iran institutes Sharia Law

Other notable happenings on July 7th:

• 1863  First military draft.  $300 would get you an exemption
• 1898 Hawaii is annexed
• 1906  Baseball player Satchel Paige is born and in 1948 made his MLB debut
• 1907 The Ziegfield Follies staged for the first time
• 1940 Beatle Ringo Starr is born
• 1946 Francesca Cabrini becomes the first American to be canonized
• 1947 Alleged and disputed Roswell UFO incident occurred
• 1954 Elvis Presley makes his radio debut with " That's Alright"
• 1958 Alaska becomes a US state
• 1964 Shea Stadium hosted its one and only All Star Game.
• 1981 Sandra Day O'Connor is the first woman to be appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States
• 1985 At age 17, Boris Becker becomes the youngest person to win Wimbledon tennis.
• 2005 Coordinated terrorist bomb blasts strike London's public transport system during the morning rush hour killing 52 and injuring 700

Woodyard defrauded ACE Insurance Company in a highly irregular sequencing of funding that would never happen with structured settlements.

Unfortunately Ringler Associates was sued by the insurers. The matter was subsequently settled.  Woodyard went AWOL for about a year before getting pinched in Minnesota last year.