by Structured Settlement Watchdog
I wonder how Woodbridge Investments, LLC and Scott Schwartz are able to get away with a soliciting structured settlement receivables investors that states they can earn 8% to 10% AND appears to guarantee zero defaults?
Should members of the National Structured Settlement Trade Association and its leadership be appalled that Woodbridge Investments includes in its latest INVESTOR due diligence packet*, an Adobe Acrobat mash up of a June 4, 2009 NSSTA web page that includes the NSSTA logo and mast head to solicit money from investors? The NSSTA web page in question, reports of a Wall Street Journal article about Moodys Investors Services report on the life insurance industry.
Some points for discussion:
-
Woodbridge had the opportunity to but did not elect to chase down the actual Wall Street Journal article Woodbridge did not use the actual NSSTA web page Download NSSTA web site June 4, 2009_ Moody’s Repor.. , which as you can see includes a copyright notice.
-
Here is the Woodbridge mash up of the NSSTA web page included in cash now pusher Woodbridge Investments due diligence packet Download Woodbridge Mash Up of NSSTA web page for due diligence packet 6-18-2009 of.
-
The NSSTA web page mash up appears in a Woodbridge created document which our investigation has concluded was created on June 18, 2009 at 2:03pm entitled woodbridge.pdf
Does Woodbridge Investments have the imprimatur of the NSSTA as its inclusion in the due diligence packet suggests?
The possibility might not be as far-fetched as it seems. Former NSSTA President and current Legal and Public Benefits Committee member Patrick Hindert has frequently suggested, without substantial evidence, that factoring is essential for the growth of the structured settlement industry. At the Society of Settlement Planners annual meeting in Washington in April 2009, Hindert reportedly claimed that "the NSSTA position on factoring has softened." However, NSSTA has not made any significant public statements about factoring aside from disavowing "the structured settlement transparency initiative."
Nevertheless this author believes that Woodbridge's actions draw the logical conclusion that Woodbridge did not chase down the Wall Street Journal article because it wanted to create the illusion that NSSTA gives its imprimatur to Woodbridge Investments' business practices and to take advantage of NSSTA goodwill.
Woodbridge's business tactics involve the classic "cash now" pitch, paired with lavish "party favors" for potential annuitants—because who wouldn’t trade (commence ever so subtle roll of the eyes) their structured settlement for some deluxe swag and instant gratification?
Download Woodbridge Investments 21st Century Toaster Incentives to Factor Structured Settlements
Will NSSTA be issuing a public statement denying association with Woodbridge Investments or will it allow its foes to to draw the negative inference as the result of indifference?
Leave a Reply