by Structured Settlement Watchdog
Those in the structured settlement and settlement planning industry aiming to leverage the Spencer v. Hartford case for marketing purposes should reflect on their own actions
A specific class carved out of the class action lawsuit included those who settled with Hartford insureds with a Hartford Life structured settlement BUT, were represented by a plaintiff structured settlement broker or settlement planner.
You 
can definitely count me among those who rolled their eyes at The Hartford's old "all or nothing" approach to structured settlements, but now I have to wonder—what's with the pitchfork-wielding crowd eager to roast The Hartford and its fellow insurers over a bonfire?
Inconvenient Questions
- How many of those now using Spencer v Hartford as a tool with plaintiff lawyers accepted a share of commission on structured settlements from Hartford insured cases THEN, when they had knowledge that there was "deal" in place?
- How many of them were affiliated, at any relevant time covered in the lawsuit, with general agents who signed agreements with The Hartford to accept a lower rate of commission on cases settled with Hartford insureds?
Ironically, one of the plaintiff attorneys in the class action, Richard B Risk, Jr. (" Dick Risk"), who was recently given a lifetime achievement award by the Society of Settlement Planners ("SSP"), in part due to the result of the suit, was a licensed insurance agent and structured settlement broker for the early portion of the relevant times covered by the suit.
It's disheartening to see some in my industry take this path. However, there's a certain irony in considering that eventually, the link will be made between these excessive marketers and their own lack of transparency.
"Reality Is Only Seen When The Mirror Is Clean"-Unknown
Leave a Reply