Thoughts on NASP

April 22, 2016

Written by Rhonda Bentzen

I was shocked that we recently got an invitation to join the National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP), the factoring industry’s trade group. After all, I’ve been a pretty vocal critic of their members’ shenanigans for years. I admit that the prospect of being given the opportunity to voice my ideas to the group on needed industry ethics reforms was quite enticing. Plus, I support the fact that factoring definitely needs a trade association to deal with industry issues that crop up. I’m also appreciative of the fact that NSSTA actually cooperates with NASP to address many of these issues, particularly when it comes to state statutes. I’d like to work on making that cooperation even greater. I even agree with NASP’s code of ethics and what they’ve been saying lately about the need for transparency and doing right by annuitants.

Now, for reasons, I’m not prepared to join just yet. To start, contrary to all the positive statements in their press releases lately, I believe almost everything NASP says and does these days is just lip service: rhetoric they think the structured settlement and legal communities, investors, the media, and government regulators want to hear. I haven’t seen any evidence to the contrary. Adherence to their code of ethics, along with consequences for its violation, are a complete joke. If they actually enforced their code of ethics, I believe few to none would be left in the organization. Members are currently being sued for alleged forum shopping and coercion. Another was implicated in the recent Baltimore lead paint scandal. Another recently settled a lawsuit involving the claimed falsification of an annuitant’s signature to initiate extra lottery transactions. A different firm was recently sued for allegedly calling an annuitant nearly 50 times in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection ACT (TCPA). Yet another is now involved in a class action suit for alleged violations of the TCPA. One firm is even involved in a whistleblower suit alleging money laundering and serious breaches of banking laws. Even our survey of past clients found that most complaints related to incessant telemarketing harassment and deceptive sales tactics were directed at NASP members.

My other pause at joining the organization is that it’s not really inclusive, like NSSTA. I was easily able to be a NSSTA member even though I was a small producer in a tertiary market. Not with NASP. The cost to join NASP is prohibitively high, making it more of an exclusive cabal of the big “cash now” operators. This means that the few referral-driven, client-focused firms that actually do a good job of factoring are priced out of the association. As such, we have no say or vote whatsoever in planning and deciding the direction of the industry; however, based on their record, I honestly believe that NASP has no interest in hearing our input on best business practices anyway.

Done right, factoring can be a legitimate option for some annuitants in need of liquidity, and judging by their code of ethics and recent press releases, NASP members actually do know what they should be doing to treat annuitants fairly. Getting their members to actually do it is the hard part. Ultimately, annuitants simply need the facts and options to make informed decisions about their money, even if it means no transaction at all. They don’t need pressure, they don’t need harassment, they don’t need coercion, and they definitely don’t need to be endlessly solicited into repeat transactions…all of which are in the playbook of most NASP members today.

The Pollyanna in me says that I can’t affect change without joining; however, the realist in me says that I’d be naïve to think that I could make the slightest difference at this juncture when I can’t see any sign that NASP members are actually serious about reform and adherence to their code of ethics. I’ve spent 14 years in this business doing things differently; therefore, I concluded that my firm simply cannot be associated with a group that that approves of, or turns a blind eye to, everything I oppose. So, if you’re referring clients to any of these NASP-affiliated firms listed below, maybe it’s time to reach out to them and ask why nothing seems to change within their organization? Better yet, perhaps it’s time to stop supporting members of an organization which apparently refuses to effectively deal with questionable ethics and shady business practices?

123 LUMPSUM, LLC – 3625 Broward Blvd, 2nd Floor, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33312

Annuity Transfers Ltd . – 1800 Preston Park Blvd., Suite 115, Plano, TX 75093

BofI Federal Bank – 4350 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 140, San Diego, CA 92109

CBC Settlement Funding – 181 Washington Street, suite 375, Conshohocken, PA 19428

Client First Settlement Funding – 301 Yamato Road, Suite 3200, Boca Raton, FL 33496

DRB Capital – 1625 South Congress, Suite 200, Delray Beach, FL 33445

J. G. Wentworth – 201 King of Prussia Rd, Suite 200, Wayne, PA 19087

Liberty Settlement Funding, LLC – 16 NE 4th Street, Suite 210, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301

MyLumpsum LLC – 1400 Centrepark, Blvd, Suite 960, West Palm Beach, FL 33401

Northeastern Capital – Empire State Building, 59th Floor, New York, NY 10118

Novation Capital – 1641 Worthington Road, Suite 410, West Palm Beach, FL 33409

Patriot Settlement Resources – 2799 NW Boca Raton Blvd, Suite 111, Boca Raton, FL 33431

Peachtree Settlement Funding – 201 King of Prussia Road, Suite 320, Radnor, PA 19087

Seneca One, LLC – 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Suite 300, Bethesda, MD 20814

Settlement Capital Corporation – 14755 Preston Road, Suite 610, Dallas, TX 75254

Singer Asset Finance Company, L.L.C. – 2255 Glades Road, Suite 118E, Boca Raton, FL 33431

Stone Street Capital, LLC – 7316 Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 500, Bethesda, MD 20814

Strategic Capital, LLC – 100 Sheppard Ave East, Suite 720, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

***This list was compiled from the NASP website .

The post Thoughts on NASP appeared first on Bentzen Financial.

< Older Post Newer Post >

Our Recent Blogs

The Loan = Factoring Transaction Myth

October 11, 2022

Myth: You will lose money by factoring, so take out a loan instead. Reality: Whether you factor annuity payments or take a loan, there is a cost to obtaining money, but many people believe that factoring involves “losing” money. This misconception comes from comparing the cumulative future payments with the present value lump sum payment offered by the factoring company. For instance, if an annuitant has 200 monthly payments of $1,000 , the cumulative payments would be $200,000 . In this case, a factoring transaction might net the annuitant approximately $100,000 or 50% of the cumulative total. This is not “losing” money, it is the result of obtaining future payments early at a 10% discount rate. If instead the annuitant took a $100,000 loan at 10% and paid it back over 200 months , the total cost including interest would also be $200,000 (assuming the annuitant had sufficient credit to get the loan). A loan requires credit, collateral, origination fees, and carries the risk of late fees and foreclosure if payments are not made when due. In the factoring scenario, the annuitant would need to wait 200 months (almost 17 years) to collect the full $200,000 , during which time the equivalent present value of the payments is continually diminishing due to inflation. A dollar will not have the same purchasing power in 17 years as it has today.

One Simple Step to Stop Abuse!

September 20, 2022

The foundation of abuse in the factoring industry is cracking! South Carolina’s supreme court as well as its senate are readying for reform in response to the most recent expose (see here , here and here ). Both the court and the legislature are intent on fixing a clearly broken system. Despite the natural inclination to copy what other states have done (MN, GA, LA, etc.), whose reforms ironically ended up benefiting the worst abusers of the industry, we suggest a simpler reform that will solve the absolute majority of abuse: Keep the personal identification information (PII) protected for all structured settlement recipients from here on out. This way, the companies guilty of these abuses won’t be able to find new victims. More: make such protection retroactive. This is already standard practice for minors receiving structures, and it works, at least until they turn 18. Extending this protection would do wonders for structure health. What predatory companies can’t find, they can’t chase. Keep people safe and their identification information secure. Advocate for smart reforms.

Something's Hitting the Fan with the 11th Circuit

June 27, 2022

Another day, another question of abusive cash now transactions. Another lead paint victim, too. See here for more details. It all begs the question: why do the big cash now companies prey on the head injured? Is it a delicacy? Or are they just hoping no one will notice? Ladies and gentlemen, this is why we harp on brokers needing to educate their annuitants on how factoring is useful in some situations, and completely inappropriate in others. It’s why brokers are the referral gatekeepers, or at least, they should be. Anyone with a severe personal injury, especially one affecting their judgment, requires greater aid in both pre and post structure environments. Even if a factoring transaction might have addressed the legitimate needs of the man in the article, was factoring the whole thing really necessary? Probably not. It’s why consultation is required, not just telemarketing. As for the court and its involvement in the issue of whether insurers have a duty to question factoring transactions, full stop. Requiring insurers to question factoring transactions would increase their liability, as well as the fact that while courts must apply the best interest standard, an ethical factoring company uses the annuitant’s best interest as its guiding light. Furthermore, it is the duty of the court to determine whether a factoring transaction is in the best interest of the seller and serves as final gatekeeper. That’s the whole purpose of going to court in the first place. If not the courts, then the legislatures in whatever state is affected by abusive or exploitative practices. We’ve seen this throughout the country in the past few years, such as in Louisiana, Georgia, and Minnesota. It’s cumbersome to add additional requirements upon the companies involved in a potential transaction when the issue isn’t whether the company’s sought to conduct business as usual, but whether the court authorized it in the circumstances they are meant to scrutinize. Factoring transactions can and should be done according to set rules. No forum shopping, no poaching, no scraping, no “gotcha!” checks, no flagrant flouting of the TCPA and other applicable state consumer protection laws. There’s a right way and a wrong way. Promote the right way. Educate. Consult. Refer. We’ll be here.

Cam Mears on Factoring with Dan Finn

November 22, 2021

We're thrilled to see that others are contributing to the factoring expose by the Minnesota Star Tribune . This time, structured settlement consultant Dan Finn. You can read his take on factoring and the Star article here . What's more, you can see Cam Mears delve into the details on factoring in his one-on-one interview with Finn here on YouTube! Factoring doesn't have to be the boogeyman. Make sure it's done right by referring only to those you trust to offer proper consultation.

SEE ALL ARTICLES