Monthly Archives: December 2014

  • -

Structured Settlements and California Residents

Category : IPA

Structured Settlements and  California Residents

By AFG Newswire Nov.30, 2014 2:10 p.m. Block 15.6  Article 2.3 Transfers of Structured Settlement Payment Rights

Part 13 California Residents:  What the Transfer Company Can’t Make You Do

 

They Can’t Lock You Into Selling They Rest of Your Payments With Them!

 

  • 10138(a)(12) “Any provision that creates a “buyer’s first right of refusal” to purchase any remaining structured payment rights that the payee may desire to sell in the future.”

 

“Buyer’s first right of refusal” means any provision or condition in the transfer agreement or related documents that obligate the payee (you) to give to the buyer (transfer company) the first choice or option to purchase any remaining structured settlement rights belonging to the payee (you).

 

It’s a free world out there.  You can sell to whomever you want.  Just because you sold to Company “A” years ago, doesn’t mean you have to sell to Company “A” again.  You can sell to Company “X” if you’d like!

 

There used to be a time where some, not all, transfer companies would put a clause in the transfer agreement or related documents, making the seller of structured settlement payment rights only do business with them in the future if the seller wanted to sell off the rest or more of their payment rights.

 

Since the onset of §10138(a)(12), that kind of language and wording can no longer be placed in any of the documents for contracting the payee.  Why would it matter any way?  Not all transfer companies offer the same amount of money for your dollar.  Some transfer companies offer more money, some offer less; and it is best to shop around.

 

The best way to shop around is with an independent professional adviser.  Someone who can play hardball with these transfer companies; someone who can go to bat for you; someone who already knows the rules to the game and can negotiate a better rate for your dollar.

 

 http://eahtirski.com

Independent Professional Advisors – IPA

IPA Services

Andres Financial Group is a highly professional group in Independent Professionals providing advice in the transfer of structured settlements. Associates across the US, with the ability to pool all our resources in your best interest.

IPA services include but are not limited to; best interest advice, fair market analysis, court document review, & court appearance.

We pride ourselves on getting 90% of our cases approved the first time in front of the judge. We do not accept a denial as a possible decision, and will seek to keep the case open should the judge attempt to deny.

 

 

Structured Settlement Advisor
Andres Financial Group
Independent Professional Advisors
(855)313-3327  Toll-Free
 

There are 10 States that require Independent Professional Advice. Approximately half of the other States require notice of the right to obtain Independent Professional Advice. The rest mention your right for independent professional advice.

It is part of the global consumer protection aspect of the structured settlement protection acts. With none stating how to obtain IPA services. They do in fact tell you how you may not receive an IPA, through the purchase.

Which then leaves the payee to fend for themselves in finding an IPA, it’s not like you can open the yellow pages and find one. Or even what to search for on the internet to find one. Especially since the minute you type in the structured settlement you end up with a list of companies trying to buy structured settlements.


  • -

California Residents

Category : IPA

By AFG Newswire Nov.30, 2014 12:46 p.m. Block 15.5  Article 2.3 Transfers of Structured Settlement Payment Rights

Part 12 California Residents:  What the Transfer Company Can’t Make You Do

 

They Can’t Make You Enter Into a Security Interest Agreement that Exceeds the Actual Dollar Amount of Your Transfer.

 

  • 10138(a)(11) “A provision that provides the transferee (any person receiving structured settlement payment rights resulting from a transfer) with a security interest or collateral interest in any structured settlement payment rights that exceed the actual dollar amount of the structured settlement payment rights being transferred.”

 

The transfer company wants to know you’ll make good on your obligation, so they attach a “security interest”.  This practice happened a lot between 1988-2002 when transfers weren’t ordered to go through the Court Process.  During this time period, security interests amounts got out of hand, and exceeded the transfer amount, leaving the consumer penniless, and unable to sue the transfer company because of other indemnification, hold harmless, and defend clauses in the transfer agreement.

 

Now,   §10138(a)(11) still stands, and security interests can still occur in California, however they cannot exceed the amount of the transfer itself.

 

Some states, like Virginia do not allow security interests at all.  Concerned about how much the security interest could be?  Contact an independent professional adviser right away.  Not just any attorney, or tax person.  Contact a professional well versed in this industry.  They are here to help.


  • -

California Residents

By AFG Newswire Nov.30, 2014 11:53 a.m. Block 15.4  Article 2.3 Transfers of Structured Settlement Payment Rights

Part 11 California Residents:  What the Transfer Company Can’t Make You Do

 

They Can’t Change California as Your Court Venue if You’re from California, and the Original Incident Happened in a Different State, and/or Other Involved Parties are from a Different State.

 

  • 10138(a)(10) “If the payee is domiciled in California at the time that the transfer agreement is signed by the payee, any choice-of-law provision that provides for controlling law to be other than California law in any action arising under the contract.”

 

“Choice-of-law”, or “conflict-of-law” means that body of law by which the court in which the action is maintained determines or chooses which law to apply where a diversity [people from different states] exists between the applicable law of that court’s state [the forum or host state] and the applicable law of anther jurisdiction interested in the controversy.

 

The conflict of which state law is to be applied, is not for the transfer company to decide.  This “conflict” is settled by §10138(a)(10) clearly stating that if the payee has residency in California at the time of signing the transfer agreement, all California laws have power over the transfer.

 

There was a time, before §10138(a)(10) existed that some transfer companies exercised some muscle and decided for the California payee where their case was going to be heard.

 

This won’t happen anymore because of §10138(a)(10).  If you have any questions about jurisdiction, contact an independent professional adviser today.


  • -

Transfer Company

Category : IPA

By AFG Newswire Nov.30, 2014 9:59 a.m. Block 15.3  Article 2.3 Transfers of Structured Settlement Payment Rights

Part 10 California Residents:  What the Transfer Company Can’t Make You Do

 

They Can’t Choose Which State Your Court Proceedings Will Be Heard and Decided!

  • 10138(a)(9)”If the payee is domiciled in California at the time that the transfer agreement is signed by the payee, any forum selection provision providing for jurisdiction to be in a court outside of California for any action arising under the contract.”

 

California has the most consumer protection laws in place regarding transfers of structured settlement payment rights.  California also places fines and other punishments on transfer companies and parties that act fraudulently in Court Proceedings.  Most states don’t punish businesses, or individuals assisting consumers.

 

Some, not all, transfer companies have tried in the past to change states in which court proceedings are heard, by including a clause in the transfer agreement stating so.  Other states don’t have as stringent laws regarding the transfer of structured settlement payment rights; therefore, it would be easier for the transfer company to make more money off the consumer.  This is now illegal since §10138(a)(9) has been established.

 

If you are living, or if you believe your residence is in California where you can establish a minimum contact, in other words, you travel a lot (domestically, or internationally); don’t really have a home in one place, but you wish to fall under the jurisdiction of California what you would have to establish at the time of signing the transfer agreement is:

  • transaction of business
  • ownership of real estate
  • commission of a tortious (unlawful) act
  • or other reasonable relationship

California is a most desirable state to transfer your structured settlement payment rights for consumers because of all the protection afforded to the consumer.  To find out more information on residency contact an independent professional adviser today.

 

Even if you know you are a resident, jurisdiction issues come up all the time.  Sometimes other parties involved in your case are from other states; how does this effect your case?  Contact an independent professional adviser today to get all of your questions answered.


  • -

What the Transfer Company Can’t

Category : IPA

By AFG Newswire Nov.22, 2014 2:52 p.m. Block 13.4  Article 2.3 Transfers of Structured Settlement Payment Rights

Part 2 California Residents:  What the Transfer Company Can’t Make You Do

 

  • 10138(a)(1) “Any provision that waives the seller’s right to sue under any law, or in which the seller agrees not to sue, or that waives jurisdiction or standing to sue under the contract.”

 

You have a lot of rights as the seller of structured settlement payment rights.  One of them is your right to sue the transfer company if need be; or not to sue.  Either way  §10138(a)(1) tells the transfer company they cannot include a condition in the transfer agreement that restricts the seller from suing them under any condition.

 

This code was created because somewhere down the line millions of consumers were unable to sue the transfer company-for whatever reason-because of a clause written in the contract by the transfer company binding the consumer not to sue the transfer company.

 

As a U.S. citizen with no felonies, it is your right to sue.  This kind of wording, or provision in a contract is what we call oppressive, and unjust.

 

Clearly the transfer company is the dominant party with the upper hand:   they are in charge of drafting the contract,  they have several attorneys working for them, and they are the corporation, not you.  You are a private person probably not well versed in contract law, let alone the California Code of Insurance 10134-10139.5.

 

One way you can get an upper hand is to hire an independent professional adviser that can provide insight on what to expect in the court proceedings.  Call today for a consultation.  We can walk you through the steps.