Structured Settlements 4Real®Blog 2026
Structured settlements expert John Darer reviews the latest structured settlements and settlement planning information and news, and provides expert opinion and highly regarded commentary. that is spicy, Informative, irreverent and effective for over 20 years.
Recent Posts
- 🌿 THE PLANTIFF HEDGE — Q2 2026
- Bad Faith Structured Settlements
- Most Trustworthy Structured Settlement Annuity Companies 2026 by Newsweek/Statista
- The Counsel-Managed QSF: A Structure That Cannot Stand Up Under Banks Doctrine
- Unparalleled Access to NSSTA Members is Unparalleled Baloney from Mailing List Broker
about
Category: Spencer v Hartford
-
There are more than two ways to operate successfully in the structured settlement business going forward. There are opportunities in multiple business models if one has the vision to see them. Why fight over the same wooden nickel?
-
While Tulsa attorney Dick Risk seems to imply to visitors to the Risk Law Firm website that he was responsible for Hartford Life leaving the structured settlement business in 2009, today’s Hartford press release suggests otherwise
-
The owner of the structured settlement annuity is the party obligated to pay you. The annuity is a “qualified funding asset”. The settlement documents that you entered into when you settled your case will likely have expressly stated that you only have the right to receive the payments.
-
If you’ve ever been curious of the amount of work that goes in to a class action and the fascinating way that attorney compensation is determined in such cases, you need look no further than the August 16, 2010 Declaration of one of the attorneys involved in the Hartford class action settlement
-
Let’s recognize that the $72.5 million settlement represents a compromise. The plaintiffs, represented by skilled attorneys, made allegations of wrongdoing and worked to substantiate their case. After years of litigation and a mediation, the parties, for their own reasons, chose to settle.
-
Hindert’smiscalculation of the amount of damages (as a scare tactic) in Spencer v Hartford, “made” professor Adam Scales “a household name”, and now emboldened by a proposed settlement to suggest that such case be “prostituted” and used as a threat to scare defendants into 468B trusts.
-
The class action lawsuit Spencer v Hartford resulted in a settlement amounting to only 10% of projections made by Patrick Hindert in 2009. The plaintiffs alleged damages under RICO related to structured settlement premiums, but the settlement reflects a mere fraction of the potential damages, highlighting persistent issues in the industry.
-
Up until a certain point following the commencement of litigation in Spencer v Hartford, those fundings were allegedly at a discount to that offered to claimant and litigants who were not litigating against Hartford insured tortfeasors.
-
Dick Risk and his crew are about as responsible for Hartford Life’s antics as Aviva, AEGON, Mass Mutual, and Genworth are for ghosting the structured settlement game during the great industry reshuffle.
-
Why wouldn’t the Spencer litigants be interested in enhanced financial security? What about the millions of other owners or beneficiaries of Hartford insurance products?