Posted by jojo_MN on 7/5/13 1:21am
Msg #475674

Structured Settlements - Not JP - we are enabling these

This topic has been brought up; however, I have a hard time believing that there are companies out their virtually raping victims of accidents etc of their money. The hard part is that it is legal.

How many of you have facilitated these signings (such as myself) only to follow thru just because we were hired as third non-affilitated party to the transaction. I have in the past helped clients that would have had $35,000 had they waited 13 months settle for $10,000. $100,000 settle for $55,555 and others settle for as little as 20% of the total.

The one I am doing in the morning took my breath away. I am not giving names of companies, or clients so not giving any confidential information; however, I want others to see what it happening.
This "seller" is selling her monthly payments of $583.06 from 6/9/25 thru 5/9/2038 for $133,077.36 for a measly $7,500. In no way is this in the best interest of the seller.

Is there no way that these companies can be stopped? Yes, they do bring us income, but most of these people have been victims of car accidents etc. They sued and got judgements to help make the lives of these victims better. When the victims contact the structured settlement company, the only ones being helped are the "attorneys" handling the case. The victim in my example is totally being raped. Harsh word; however, it is my honest opinion.

I feel this law needs to be changed and people should not be able to sell these awards to others just to make a quick buck to help get quick money for something such as illegal drugs etc. Not all people do this however, I personally saw what the money was being used for and it makes me sick.

Reply by Susan Fischer on 7/5/13 1:41am
Msg #475675

Hear! Hear! Elizabeth Warren has been a voice for all

Borrowers. Give teeth to the regs that root out these scamaramas and put to rights the likes of these predators.

Reply by ReneeK_MI on 7/5/13 5:01am
Msg #475676

I share your disgust, Jojo

I've only done a half a handful of these for that same reason. What I simply can't believe is that the courts approve sales at such predatory prices - and according to Fed law, all Structured Settlement sales have to be court approved. The court/trustee is charged with a fiduciary duty to the seller.

I now refuse to participate. I did some research - fueled by my disgust - and the advice out there from financial-types was that 'going rate' was 50%. Of the few I did, none were near that. What we never really know is IF these end up getting approved by the courts, but I tend to think they are. If the courts weren't approving the ones we consider predatory - there wouldn't be buyers even attempting it.

Here is a pretty informative Blog, and includes the Fed law:

http://solidfunding.com/news/tag/federal-law-on-structured-settlement-payments/

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/6/13 9:38am
Msg #475770

Re: I share your disgust, Jojo

*What I simply can't believe is that the courts approve sales at such predatory prices*

True.

The other thing that I cannot believe is that they do not order that the notary fees be paid just like any costs of distribution of funds or settlement be paid in the settlement agreement. They could do that as easy as pie.

Reply by Notarysigner on 7/5/13 8:03am
Msg #475677

I also refused to do them anymore after last one I did!

Disgusting!

Reply by 101livescan on 7/5/13 8:26am
Msg #475678

Strongly agree with you. The last one I did was

for a young man who couldn't wait to get his money is hand to purchase real estate, he forfeited a huge chunk up front to this Bank of the Internet in La Jolla, CA. It was the first and only one like it I've done, and it was my last.

Reply by Carolyn Bodley on 7/5/13 8:29am
Msg #475679

The saddest one I ever had was for a 17-year old girl -- her dream was going to college. I show up at the house and was greeted by the daughter, her Mom and Grandmother. I got the feeling there had never been a Father in the picture. The house was clean, only you could tell they had never had anything, and will probably never have anything.

I don't remember the financial details, but the girl was to have gotten a pretty large chunk of money when she turned 25 that would have more than paid for a 4-year college education. Her lump-sum payout ended up being around $7,500 -- with tuition, books and housing, *maybe/barley* lasting one year, and then what? The family was excited over this *large* windfall they were receiving -- and I couldn't say a thing. I cried all the way home.

Reply by MW/VA on 7/5/13 8:41am
Msg #475681

I can agree you with you that concept of selling for pennies

on the dollar is disgusting. I've done them, because it's their choice to sell their annunity for cash up-front. IMO these companies are predators. I've seen many situations, and most of what I've seen is poor people who got awards in class action suits, etc. It's money they never had in the first place, and want the cash NOW. It's not a lot different from people who pay the fees to get their tax refund money the next day.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 7/5/13 8:49am
Msg #475684

In my experience with structured settlements and

personal injury settlements, these forms of settlement, rather than lump sum up front, tend to give the awarded person more money in the long run - settlement is for $XX, but they opt for annual, biennial, monthly payments of the settlement funds. The balance not taken is invested and grows interest so the beneficiary ends up with more after all is said an done.

The problem comes in when the people decide the periodic payments they agreed to are not sufficient, or they have an immediate need for a chunk of money - instead of communicating with the current holder of the settlement, they shop it around to these "funding" outfits, who buy out their interest for an up-front payment. THAT second shopping/selling is where the garbage comes out. I had one (my last one in fact, they're all too much trouble as far as I'm concerned) - lady kept telling me "please don't ever let my son find out about this" - I guess I looked puzzled cuz she said "I'm selling these $95,000 annuities for $45,000". Guess she missed the stunned look on my face.

Yes, structured settlements initially have to be approved by the Courts, and as such are not bad and can be a benefit to the person getting the money. If they weren't beneficial the Courts wouldn't approve them. It's later on down the line where need or greed outweighs benefit. I'm not sure if subsequent selling has to be approved by courts or not - I'd guess that's something that the courts should address in the initial approval process.

JMO and JME

Reply by VT_Syrup on 7/5/13 9:28am
Msg #475686

Refuse and if there is a signing service, blacklist it

If a signing service chooses to associate with this legal form of cheating, I blacklist the signing service.

Reply by Lee/AR on 7/5/13 9:42am
Msg #475690

While I agree that these 'seem' to suck, often

they do help the person seeking them. Haven't done many, granted, but every one I have done had to be court-approved. I'm won't go into chapter & verse about the ones I've done, but in every case, getting a sufficient chunk NOW did solve a serious problem for the person seeking it.
I know of only one case where the court did approve what I thought was a terrible deal. Whether the court approved the others I've done? I just don't know.

Reply by Pam/NM on 7/5/13 10:07am
Msg #475694

We are not privy to the reasoning behind

someone deciding to cash in their structured settlement. I remember when ARM's were all the rage when I started back in 2006. My second signing ever was an ARM that STARTED at 11.25%. I was stunned...actually even thought to myself if he paid his mortage with a Master Card at least he'd get flight miles. The borrower was in extreme dire straits and this was the only way in his mind that he could save his home from foreclosure. While what we see on the outside looks grim, and indeed it might be, it could be a lifeline for these folks. Unfortunately, I feel like many of them are poorly educated. It's not our job to judge why they are doing this. Sadly, they may not be in their own best interest, but we don't know the circumstances.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 7/5/13 10:26am
Msg #475698

Re: While I agree that these 'seem' to suck, often

Geez, I agree with everyone (how can that be?)

I've only been asked to do one of these in 7 years and yes, I did it. An elderly lady in very poor health, she was a doll! We had tea, went outside and walked through her garden, I helped her get her dishes put up. She was so wonderful, truly a diamond. She shared with me the situation, I won't go into the details but in my heart I could understand her thought process. For us we never really know what's going on in anyone's financial decisions. What's unthinkable for us is a life line for them.

Reply by VT_Syrup on 7/5/13 12:04pm
Msg #475708

signer should get lawyer

For a transaction that is more likely to have a bad outcome than not without the help of a lawyer, I for one won't get involved. If a lawyer working for the person who wants the lump sum is protecting the person's interest, the lawyer can easily take care of the notarization part; if the lawyer can't notarize it, the legal secretary can.

Reply by SueW/Tn on 7/5/13 1:36pm
Msg #475713

Re: signer should get lawyer

That's what is so great about being a mobile NP, you can work for SS, TC OR...an attorney. My little lady wouldn't travel down the hill to the attorney so I got the assignment. Luv being mobile, lots of folks to work for.

Reply by JanetK_CA on 7/5/13 4:49pm
Msg #475731

Re: signer should get lawyer

If people are in dire enough circumstances where they believe they need to sell a structured settlement, they probably also believe that a lawyer would be prohibitive. In some cases, it could be a person's poor judgment that got them into the situation they're in to begin with. But there could be many other possibilities, as well, like Illness or an accident - which could have been the source of the settlement to begin with. If they're unable to work, that settlement might be the only way they can see to take care of their basic needs. Bottom line is we just don't know.

Having said that, though, I think it's a shame (and feels like it should be a crime) for those vultures to offer so little in exchange for the settlement. But I'm not an economist (or even close) and couldn't begin to calculate things like net present value of future dollars in a payout. Inflation is undoubtedly a factor that is calculated into those decisions by the companies that buy these settlements.

Reply by BobtheElder on 7/5/13 10:05am
Msg #475692

I've never done one, but is it really any of our business what another operson does with their money? How many of us have had refi signings that were equally outragous? I don't aprove of the process or anyone being taken advantage of, but it really isn't any of my business what they do with their own property or money... just my two cents...

Reply by jba/fl on 7/5/13 10:16am
Msg #475696

I agree. This could be a vehicle that enables what we can not see as we have no clue what is going on. I saw people during 05 and 06 getting risky mortgages to start a business and have been witness to many a wife wringing her hands on the possibilities of being homeless, but taking the risk because otherwise they would have no shot at possible success. I just add them to my prayers at the end of the day, hoping with them and then seldom thinking of it again.

I have to recognize that I cannot be mother to the world, and that since my advice is free, it is worth nothing.

Reply by Louisiana33 on 7/5/13 10:16am
Msg #475697

I totally agree. These are adults and it is their responsibility to read the fine print. If someone does not want to participate, then refuse the signing.

Reply by Philip Johnson on 7/5/13 10:30am
Msg #475700

Too much sense Bob.

Some people on this list view themselves as notary nannies who know what's best for everyone they pull their stamp out for.

They cannot understand that maybe behind the backdoor is the wolf, and he is demanding his rightful due, and if it means to sacrifice future gain for present safety, the nannies say no. Even though the nannies collect their fee and go blissfully about their business, indignant that the person they just worked with was not as in tune as they are.

Reply by Luckydog on 7/5/13 11:31am
Msg #475704

Re: Too much sense Bob.

In my opinion and from a working point of view, I enjoy doing these assignments. They are small packages, the person involved knows what they are getting into, they take approx. 15 minutes, and pay pretty well. It is not my duty to judge or "blacklist" these assignments because in "my opinion" ethical or not, and I cannot and will not form an opinion. The client can seek out an attorney if they so chose, everything is legal and spelled out clearly for them prior my arrival. Every situation is different, we have to remain unbiased.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 7/5/13 11:49am
Msg #475705

You're lucky, Luckydog...I can't stand them

because I've done 3 - two were horror stories...

#1. My first - was told it paid ONLY for notarizations - no travel - dummy me said okay (to get my foot in door) - well, no paperwork filled out, signer had to fill it out, didn't know how and wasn't sure he wanted to do it as other companies were offering him more - 1 hour travel out - 2 hours at the table - 1 hour travel back - 4 hours for $100.

#2 The lady I mentioned above - had nothing ready for me - no info to refer to - had to go look stuff up - finally finish up and go back to fax - I get a call from her "don't drop those docs I told my attorney and he said I was nuts" - then attorney calls - then lady calls a couple more times and then attorney again - I finally put attorney in touch with hiring party and went and dropped package.

For me these just aren't worth the grief.

JMO

Reply by Luckydog on 7/5/13 11:52am
Msg #475706

Re: You're lucky, Luckydog...I can't stand them

Sorry Linda,
Never had that experience. They always were ready and willing to go with me. Nothing to fill out, nothing to collect, Peice of cake. Hardest part is faxing back the package before shipping it off, about 30 pages.
I guess each company has it's own thing...so far, mine have been great.

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 7/5/13 2:13pm
Msg #475716

Re: You're lucky, Luckydog...I can't stand them

J.G Wentworth called me for one several years ago (2002). I told them I charge $10 for each notarization and a travel fee of $35 to that area and they agreed. I went out and there were 12 notarizations, plus it took the client a while to find information that he had to complete on the forms. I invoiced them for $120 and a $35 travel fee but gave them a $35 discount, so the invoice was for $120.
They called me several days later wanting me to go out again as the client had some problems with the first paperwork. I advised them that I would need invoices for both trips being paid and it would still be the same as the first, $10 for each notarization and the travel fee. They said no problem.
So, went out again, this time there were 11 notarizations, so I invoiced them as before with the discount. So now they owe me $230.
Never got paid. A few weeks later I get a call from Peachtree Settlements and it was for the same client. I told them I had been to this particular client twice before and he didn't have the info either time which made it a longer time I was there. They said they had already gone over the paperwork with the client and everything should be OK. So, went out again, the client went ranting on about what crooks J.G Wentworth were. I sat there and didn't comment on J.G Wentworth.
I tried contacting Matthew Urban (he was the one who hired me) several times at J.G. Wentworth and never heard back.
Peachtree paid promptly.

Reply by Linda_H/FL on 7/5/13 3:44pm
Msg #475719

LOL Sylvia - probably just a coincidence but might

want to check on Matt Urban - the Matt Urban I knew was Yellow Pages rep for the law firm I worked at recently!! LOL

Reply by Sylvia_FL on 7/5/13 5:29pm
Msg #475734

Re: LOL Sylvia - probably just a coincidence but might

I just googled Matthew Urban and there are several in the USA

Reply by LKT/CA on 7/5/13 7:04pm
Msg #475743

I agree with Luckydog

Same experience - small packages that don't take longer than 30 minutes and the pay is good. If I remember correctly, there's a form amongst the docs that the client signs that essentially says they acknowledge the option of seeking legal counsel. I haven't done a structured settlement signing in over a year. All of the people I've dealt with knew what they were signing and freely and eagerly signed the paperwork. I am not privy to any signer's needs or situation and make no assumptions as to such.

In doing GNW, last year, I was notarizing a LOT "hardship" loans from 401Ks - people were getting chunks of money from their retirement accounts and their spouse had to sign the doc and have their signature notarized. Did a lot of those.........people want/need their money *now*. I'm not one to judge them.

Reply by CinOH on 7/5/13 12:27pm
Msg #475709

Agree 100% Bob. I've seen many questionable loan deals that I did not personally agree with. Especially when they were pushing the ARMs like crazy.

Most states have a Structured Settlement Protection Act. All the ones I've done require the seller to seek the advice of a professional financial advisor and the approval of the court before they can actually sell.

Reply by Frank/NC on 7/5/13 12:51pm
Msg #475711

I don't think the issues are that we are enabling these. I fully agree that most of these are rather disgusting when we read the terms. However, if we think of them in that we are hired to do a job, then the end result is that the job gets done and we get paid. It's the person's decision to take the settlement and that has no bearing on my thoughts. For that matter, I closed some of the sub prime mortgages and those that I thought would end up in foreclosures. Of course the banks and lenders were looked at as the predators and of course there was good reason to do so. However, the final decision to sign the documents rested with the borrowers. If they chose to do so, it was their problem. Getting back to the structured settlements, my view is that if they spend it on drugs or whatever, that is their problem. Personally I have no problems in that the decision to do it was theirs.

Reply by ikando on 7/5/13 1:16pm
Msg #475712

I have done several of these over the years. In fact, I have handled paperwork for the same person three different times. He just kept drawing on his further in the future payments.

The process of receiving current dollars for future monies is called present value calculation. If the person in the OP scenario had done anything to figure out what she was selling, and losing out on, she could have likely negotiated. However, it's been my experience that even though they sign a form that says they've talked to a counselor about what they're doing, they only want the money now. (Thanks JG Wentworth commercials.) Several of the cases I've seen are people who are on SSI disability, and even though they could be drawing more of these funds over time, they want cash now.

As others have said, we have no idea why they are following this path, but whether it's to buy a car (as I've seen several times) or whatever, it IS their money.

The settlement services must wait until the payment time according to the annuity contract, so they are basically buying those future funds for an agreed to amount. I also cringe when I see what they're giving away, but they are adults and it is their decision.

Reply by dexter/nc on 7/5/13 2:31pm
Msg #475718

I am not giving you any advice, but I just decided that I did not want to be a party to the structured settlement or debt settlement issue . It is legal if they follow the law, the pay is good but I did not like how I felt after being a party to those arrangements.So I routinely decline all offers I get to do signings for structured settlement or debt settlement. I decided that I did not need the money that bad. Good luck !

Reply by BossLadyMD on 7/6/13 8:30am
Msg #475765

This borders on UPL. Not our job to broker the 'best' deal. n/m

Reply by VT_Syrup on 7/6/13 9:37am
Msg #475769

Re: This borders on UPL. Not our job to broker the 'best' deal.

As independent contractors, nothing is our job unless we accept the job. I choose to not accept jobs where I think a bad outcome is more likely than a good outcome. Something else that would fit into this category is notarizing wills.

Reply by BrendaTx on 7/6/13 9:34am
Msg #475768

I don't like them, BUT...not our place to decide

what someone does with their children or money.

As a legal asst., I have notarized many, many documents to facilitate a deadbeat parent giving up parental rights...and, I notarized one in which an accused father (molestation of daughter) gave up his rights to the child, although, I am not sure he was guilty of it. The molestation accusation is more common than you would think to get rid of a perfectly good father.

I have notarized documents that I did not agree with in divorce suits.

The attorney I worked for at one time was the trustee of a settlement for a young girl...and, I notarized the papers to get him off the paperwork because she had turned 18 and was going to get a structured settlement out of it right after that.

So, as a notary, we can personally decide not to do certain things and we can have a personal opinion, but, if the notarization with which we are presented is okay, I don't see how we say no just because we don't like the result of the transaction.

But, yes, we can sure choose not to work for certain companies!

Reply by SueW/Tn on 7/6/13 10:03am
Msg #475773

Well said Bren, definitely our choice

Too bad we all didn't have those same second thoughts when we were signing those ARM's for Countrywide, boy that would have changed the landscape and probably saved alot of heartaches.