by Structured Settlement Watchdog
Poaching is the undercutting of a price offered by a competing structured settlement factoring company to the chagrin of the gazumped
Poaching is the undercutting of the price offered by a competing structured settlement factoring company to the chagrin of the gazumped . The poached company tends to get all “Magoo-ey”, because they found the annuitant and stand to lose possibly thousands of dollars invested in marketing, hiring counsel and filing fees only to be dumped at the last minute by a competing offer from a competitor, who has laid back stalking the court records for recent filings. Some say its fair competition. Others are vehemently against it.
Houston TX is “Poach-E-Min City in a Harris County decision featuring Gazumper RSL Funding in the White Trunks over Peachtree, The Gazumped, in the Fuzzy Peach
Houston is “Poach-E-Min City” in a Harris County Structured Settlement Decision as Gazumper RSL Funding poached a structured settlement factoring deal from Peachtree.
The long standng standing structured settlement buyout poaching case, has ended with a judgment in favor of RSL Funding over JG Wentworth Originations LLC, Peachtree Settlement Funding and Settlement Funding LLC that supports poaching of structured settlement transfer cases in Texas [ Cause No. 2006-23366]
No “Sunny Side Up” for Settlement Funding, LLC and Peachtree Settlement Funding, LLC
On March 6, 2019, Judge Rabeea Sultan Collier issued a final judgment in a home town decision that:
- Pursuant to the agreement of the parties’ counsel entered on the record on February 20, 2019, Settlement Funding, LLC and Peachtree Settlement Funding LLC dismiss with prejudice their tortious interference with prospective relations claim against RSL Funding.
- Pursuant to the Court’s November 21 Summary Judgment Order, the claims of Settlement Funding, LLC and Peachtree Settlement Funding LLC for tortious interference with existing contract were dismissed with prejudice.
- The Court, having considered the evidence, arguments, and applicable law, entered the following declaration under the Texas Declaratory Judgment Act (“TDJA”): RSL Funding has a right to make a competing offer to purchase the same structured settlement payment rights that are the subject of pending transfer agreements with the Peachtree Entities, prior to court approval of those transfer agreements.
- The Court, having considered the evidence, arguments, and applicable law, finds and orders that it is equitable and just for RSL Funding to recover its reasonable fees for its attorneys’ necessary services in the amount of $651,463 for representation through trial. The Court enters judgment in RSL Funding’s favor against the Peachtree Entities, jointly and severally, for $651,463. Interest runs at 5%.
- The Court also assigned further costs to the losers, if they choose to appeal and lose.