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.
The STRUCTURED SETTLEMENTS 4REAL® Blog is a highly regarded source for structured settlement news, information, and commentary, led by structured settlement and settlement planning subect mater expert John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT RSP CLTC. With two decades of operation, the blog and 4structures.com are recognized as comprehensive resources, offering detailed guides and specialized insights. Established in 2005, the blog caters to a broad audience, including legal professionals, injured individuals, families, and various stakeholders, providing reviews and opinions on settlement planning. John Darer, President of 4structures.com LLC, is a seasoned structured settlement expert with over 40 years of financial services experience and 31 years specializing in structured settlements. Based in Stamford, CT, he is a Certified Financial Transitionist and Registered Settlement Planner, holding insurance licenses in 45 states and the District of Columbia. John Darer is dedicated to transparency and advocacy, he emphasizes the importance of engaging trained and licensed professionals for settlement planning, offering valuable insights through his investigative journalism and professional commentary.
On July 28, 2025, a Washington federal judge granted final approval to a $2.175 million settlement in a 5 year old class-action
A “dead giveaway”
lawsuit against Symetra Life Insurance Co. and Symetra Assigned Benefits Service Co. over internal structured settlement factoring practices.
What was the Symetra Structured Settlement Payee Lawsuit about?
The lawsuit, which began in December 2020, saw Renaldo White and Randolph Nadeau accusing Symetra entities of charming personal injury settlement recipients into swapping their future payouts for what amounted to a thrift store lump sum. The plaintiffs alleged Symetra used its inside scoop to rake in “outsized and undisclosed profits,” leaving the victims with little more than figurative pocket change.
Jesper Hansen’s title of “Sales Specialist” truly speaks volumes to this day, doesn’t it? Not “Customer Support Representative” or “Client Relations Manager,” but boldly, “Sales Specialist”?! And the pièce de résistance? The letter was sent a whopping 14 years before the lawsuit againt Symetra was even filed. It was an iconic blunder by Symetra, in my opinion. Obviously, Hansen didn’t crown himself that title. He was just doing his job. Who thought that title would just slip by unnoticed?
Early coverage of Symetra Structured Settlement Class Action
Although a class was initially certified, the Ninth Circuit reversed the certification in June 2024, concluding that individual issues of causation and variations in state law would outweigh common questions. The court highlighted the challenges of applying multiple state laws to the subclass, particularly concerning the enforceability of anti-assignment clauses.
How Much Compensation will Eligible Symetra Structured Settlement Class Action Claimants Receive?
The settlement will dish out an average of nearly $7,300 for each of the 299 transactions involved. A Symetra spokesperson expressed delight over the “mutually beneficial” resolution that dodges courtroom drama and lets them focus on clients—while politely reminding everyone this doesn’t mean they’re admitting guilt.
This resolution comes after a Ninth Circuit decision last year that overturned a lower court’s class certification ruling, sparking settlement talks soon after.
Symetra structured settlement claimants can contact the Symetra Structured Settlement Payee Lawsuit Administrator by phone at 1-866-274-4004 or by email at info@strategicclaims.net.
Aon plc, a global professional services firm specializing in risk, retirement and health solutions, has been conducting the Ward’s 50 analysis for over three decades
The list is a product of Aon’s Ward benchmarking service, which evaluates nearly 3,600 insurance companies nationally and selects those that meet stringent safety, consistency, and financial performance criteria. This service helps insurers improve profitability by comparing operational practices and metrics.
The 2025 Ward’s 50 Life & Health list was published in July 2025. Unsurprisingly, several life insurers that offer structured settlement annuities featureon this year’s list. This marks the 35th year of the Ward’s 50. AON’s analysis includes nearly 700 companies, according to the report,
Life insurers with structured settlement annuity units that made the 2025 Wards Life & Health Top Performers
Corebridge Financial (which includes structured settlement annuity issuers American General Life Insurance Company and United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York)
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Mutual of Omaha (which includes structured settlement annuity issuer United of Omaha Life Insurance Company)
The Prudential Insurance Company of America
All of the life insurance companies named in the 2025 Wards 50 that issue structured settlemant annuities have been in the insurance business since the 19th Century!
With respect to Corebridge and Mutual of Omaha, this statement expressly refers to noted subsidiaries in brackets.
Describe the Testing Performed for AON Ward’s Benchmarking
Safety and Consistency Tests Each company must pass primary safety and consistency tests, including:
• Surplus and premiums of at least $50 million for each of the five years analyzed
• Adjusted net income in at least four of the last five years
• Compound annual growth in premiums between -10 percent and +40 percent
Performance Measurements Companies that pass the safety and consistency tests are measured and scored on the following: elements:
• Five-Year Average Return on Average Equity
• Five-Year Average Return on Average Assets
• Five-Year Average Return on Total Revenue
• Five-Year Growth in Revenue • Five-Year Growth in Surplus
It’s important to consider information from a variety of credible and trustworthy sources
Ward’s 50 benchmarking is among several key benchmarks in the insurance industry. Others include A.M. Best, Standard & Poor’s, Fitch, Moody’s, and additional Tier One rating services, along with Weiss Research. Peer reviews such as Fortune’s Most Admired Companies and the Ethisphere offer further valuable insights. Supplementary studies, including those by Newsweek/Statista, can also provide helpful perspectives.
by John Darer CLU ChFC MSSC CeFT RSP CLTC Updated April 17, 2026
Longevity Rocks!
The insurers who issue structured settlement annuities have deep roots
One corner of the structured settlement industry feels like a history museum, with annuity issuers as its prized artifacts. Six of these distinguished institutions have survived across three centuries, boasting over 120 years of experience each. Two of them could double as ancient monuments—New York Life clocking in at an impressive 181 years and US Life trailing slightly at 176. And if that doesn’t make you want to pop a champagne cork, two more insurers are aging like fine wine in the vaults of insurance history join the other centenerians in 2026!
New York Life Insurance Company (1845) 181+ years
United States Life Insurance Company in the City of New York, founded in 1850 and originally called Nautilus Insurance Co., was acquired by AIG as part of its Life and Retirement Division. This division was rebranded to Corebridge Financial when it spun off from AIG in 2022 176+ years. In March 2026 a merger with Equitable was announced.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (1868) 158+ years
American National Insurance Company (1905) 121+ years
American General Life Insurance Company (1926) 100 years
United of Omaha Life Insurance Company (1926) 100 years
One of those companies, The Prudential Insurance Company of America, recently launched its “Here, Then, Now and Tomorrow” marketing campaign, highlighting its 150+ years of history and resilience since its founding in 1875.
Dive into 4structures’ Pinterest Board, where history meets quirk in a curated collection of ads, architecture, and ephemera from insurance companies that issue out structured settlement annuities today. It’s like a time machine, but with pins!
The resurgence of structured settlement annuities as a settlement planning solution was underscored in July 2025 production which was the structured settlement industry’s 3rd best July in history.
Ranking of Structured Settlement Annuity Issuers in the Insurance subsection of the the 2026 Newsweel/Statista America’s most trustworthy companies poll
3. Mutual of Omaha (United of Omaha Life Insurance Company)
12. MetLife (Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company)
15. American National (American NationalInsurance Company)
16. New York Life (New York Insurance Company)
24. Prudential (The Prudential Insurance Company of America)
39. Pacific Life (Pacific Life Insurance Company; Pacific Life & Annuity Company (New York cases)
Note that Newsweek abbreviated the names/brand as consumers often do. I’ve added the names of the structured settlement annuity underwriting companies within those names for accuracy
Newsweek partnered with market reasearch firm Statista to identify America’s Most Trustworthy Companies 2025 edition
This year’s ranking includes 700 companies in 23 industries ranging from aerospace and health care to retail and consumer goods. Rankings were determined through an independent survey of 25,000 U.S. respondents, resulting in over 100,000 evaluations that reflected the perspectives of consumers, employees and investors. The analysis also considered online media sentiment, and any company facing significant scandals or lawsuits was excluded.
Further detail about the methodology used in the market research by Newsweek/Statista
1. Market definition: All companies headquartered in the US with a revenue over $500 million were considered in the study. Public as well as private companies were eligible.
2. Extensive survey: The core of the analysis was an independent survey of approximately 25,000 U.S. residents, who rated companies they are familiar with across the three dimensions of trust. In total, 102,000 evaluations of companies were submitted. The field period ran from CW 43 to CW 45 2024.
3. Social Listening: For each company that received a sufficient number of evaluations, a Social Listening analysis was conducted. This involved researching what was said about a company, across various media segments to determine whether the public sentiment towards a company was positive, neutral or negative. In total, over 304,000 mentions were gathered. Additionally, all companies that were involved in any recent scandals or lawsuits relevant to trust were excluded from the analysis.
The overall score was composed of, 80% from the survey results, and 20% from social listening analysis. The 700 companies with the highest score have been awarded as Most Trustworthy Companies in America 2025. The final list is categorized by industries.
I then broke out the insurers that include structured settlement annuity issuers.
The Newsweek/Statista survey is one of several surveys that consumers can use to help evaluate insurers prior to making decisons about structured settlements, or insurance purchases
Rating Agencies such as A.M. Best, Moodys, Standard & Poors, Weiss Ratings. Fitch and other Tier One rating agencies.
Ethisphere, which annually rates the World’s Most Ethical Companies.
Wards Top 50 Life & Health Insurers
Fortune Magazine Corporate Reputations Life & Health Insurers
Comdex ratings.
Some insurers appear in multiple surveys, while other highly reputable insurers appear in only one or two
Some insurance companies that appear in the Newsweek/Statista survey do not issue structured settlement annuities.
Personal Injury Law Gurus boasts about being “dedicated to providing clear and straightforward answers” and empowering you to make informed decisions. However, with a penchant for quantity over quality, painfully awkward headers, an overuse of the same four or five stock photos, and computer-generated narrators as convincing as a mule in an orchestra, they dive headfirst into a comedy of errors right from the start.
Tale of the Tape
Personal Injury Law Gurus established April 16, 2025.
As of August 15, 2025
Number of videos 2218
Number of views 2201
Average views per video in 4 months 1.007 (Views Trend No Growth. Declining)
Defining traits: Personal Injury Law Gurus use of the same five stock photos Viewership desclining, to same photo stock models models, popping up like uninvited guests at every visual party. The bowl is overflowing with content chaos.
As of November 22, 2025 UPDATE
8,764 videos and 14,902 views
Average 1.7 views per video
Let’s Take a “School Sample”
For a “school sample” let’s explore the comedy of errors in the Personal Injury Law Gurus video, which ambitiously claims to address structured settlement documentation
1. Personal Injury Law Gurus states that the Settlement Agreement and Release is a foundational document, but misses the crucial point that the Settlement Agreement and Release is a contract and the critical part of ANY contract is the consideration. It is especially important in the Settlement Agreement and Release when a structured settlement is in the mix, because the obligation to make future periodic payments must be part of the consideration
2. “Next the structured settlement agreement is crucial” say Personal Injury Law Gurus. The periodic payments are explicitly stated in the Settlement Agreement and Release. In some cases the terms are set forth in an incorprated Exhibit.
3. In many cases, a court approval order is necessary, especially when minors or individuals are unable to make decisions involved. This order validates the structured settlement confirming it is fair and in the best interest of the claimant
4. THEN THIS… An assignment agreement is important if a third party like an insurance company is transferring payment obligations to an annuity issuer. This formalizes the transfer of responsibility. If that were the case (and it isn’t), if the annuity issuer assumed payment obligations then would the annuity issuer buy an annuity from itself as Personal Injury Law Gurus states it does , or would it buy an annuity from another entity?
The owner of the Personal Injury Law Gurus YouTube channel is not explicitly identified in the provided web results or general web information. The channel’s content focuses on personal injury law, offering educational videos none of which are convincing enough to be characterized as worthy of being characterized as guru, but no specific individual or firm is named as the owner in the available data.
Why am I interested? Why take the time to comment? I have a longstanding keen interest to see that consumers have the clearest path to accurate information about structured settlements. Sometimes it can be challenging for consumers, particularly injury victims or survivors. Seek information from credible sources that are licensed, possess relevant credentials and practical experience. Here are mine John Darer Structured Settlement Expert Settlement Adviser NY|CT|NJ|USA.
A qualified assignment is the assignment of a liability to make future periodic payments that complies with the requirements of Internal Revenue Code IRC §130.
The future periodic payments must constitute damages owed by the defendant, its liability insurer, or from a Qualified Settlement Fund (QSF), and must be excludable from income
Qualified Assignment — The Statutory Transfer of Liability Mechanism Behind Structured Settlements
A qualified assignment is the statutory transfer of a defendant’s, liability insurer’s, or QSF’s obligation to make future periodic payments in a structured settlement, to a qualified assignment company under IRC §130. When the defendant or responsible party assigns its liability, the assignment company becomes legally responsible for making the payments and typically funds that obligation by purchasing a qualified funding asset — usually a structured settlement annuity issued by a licensed life insurer.
To qualify under §130, the assignment must meet specific requirements:
The underlying claim must involve physical injury, physical sickness, or workers’ compensation;
The periodic payments must be fixed and determinable;
The assignment company must assume the liability without the right to accelerate, defer, increase, or decrease the payments;
The claimant must receive payments tax‑free under IRC §104(a)(2) or §104(a)(1).
Qualified assignments are the backbone of modern structured settlements. They allow defendants to close their books, transfer long‑term payment obligations, and ensure claimants receive secure, tax‑advantaged periodic payments funded by highly regulated insurance products. They also prevent the claimant from “owning the annuity,” a point frequently misunderstood or misrepresented by secondary‑market actors.
This canonical clarifies the statutory architecture of qualified assignments and distinguishes them from non‑qualified assignments and factoring‑world terminology that misuses the word “assignment.”
🔗 Further Reference on 4structures.com®🚀
For a comprehensive explanation of qualified assignments — including statutory requirements, tax treatment, funding assets, and the role of assignment companies — see the authoritative reference page on 4structures.com®: What is a Qualified Assignment?
This page provides the full legal and technical context that underpins the canonical definition presented
A qualified assignment is a critical component of the structured settlement value proposition. A qualified assignment enables the combination of the tax exclusion with one or more customized payment streams
In a structured settlement agreement, the original obligor (the defendant, insurance carrier for the defendant, or the trustee of a qualified settlement fund, assigns its obligation to make the future periodic payments called for in the settlement agreement to a “qualified assignee”.
Generally, a qualified assignment company is a special purpose company, which does little more than hold an annuity as a qualified funding asset to back up the obligations it assumes from Defendants, Insurers or qualified settlement fund trustees.
A qualified assignment company may actually be an insurance company itself. The qualified assignment company is usually related to the life insurance company issuing the structured settlement annuity.
The qualified assignment company typically purchases an annuity from the related life insurance company to fund the liability to make future periodic payments it assumes.
The annuity purchased to fund the the future perioidc payment liability assumed is known as a qualified funding asset and is subject to the terms of IRC §130(d).
A qualified assignment requires the plaintiff’s consent. Judicial approval of the settlement may alos be required depending on the type of case (minor cliamants, death cases).
Common Misstatements About Qualified Assignments
Industry folks sometimes play wordsmith, claiming a qualified assignment means “to a financially stable insurance company” or “an assignment to the life company.” Nice try — but nope.
From the plaintiff’s perspective, some believe an assignment to a “financially secure insurance company” gives assurance of future payments. Others think it means the life company itself is taking the assignment.
The truth: among companies offering structured settlements, only the qualified assignee of New York Life (New York Life Insurance and Annuity Corporation) is an actual life insurance company.
Many annuity issuers provide a wraparound guarantee for the periodic payment obligations assumed by their affiliated qualified assignment companies.
MJ Settlements latest ” Offering Sheet” is promoting investments in structured settlement receivables that they call annuities, but are not annuities, and link to non-existent companies
These so-called “unique” opportunities from MJ Settlements are pitched as annuities and supposedly “carefully vetted” and offered on a first-come, first-served basis. But honestly, how “carefully vetted” can they be if MJ Settlements can’t even manage to get the underlying insurer names correct? Let’s examine why our baloney detector is going bonkers.
Deal 2998
Issuer is listed as Hartford Life Insurance Company, however The Hartford sold that business in 2017, the company became Talcott Resolution Life Insurance Company and that company was acquired by Sixth Street in 2021.
Wow! Deal 860 mentions Talcott Life Insurance Company. So close, yet no cigar!
And the “razz-berry” on top with respect to this for Todd Lesk can be found in the records of the Florida Department of Financial Services Licensee Detail which shows the proper names of the Talcott Resolution entities.
Deal 903
Issuer is listed as MetLife Insurance Company
Here are a list of MetLife Affilates. MetLife Affiliates | MetLife.Investors will not find the purported entity that Lesk and MJ Settlements are misrepresenting to potential investors.
MetLife issues structured settlement annuities through MetLife Tower Life Insurance Company and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.
If MJ Settlements and Todd Lesk, were advertising annuities to New York state residents (Lesk grew up in New York and held a New York license until late 2024) advertising would need to comply with New York Insurance law 2122(b) N.Y. Insurance Law Section 2122 – Advertising by insurance producers (2025)“Every agent of any insurer and every insurance broker shall, in all advertisements, public announcements, signs, pamphlets, circulars and cards, which refer to an insurer, set forth therein the name in full of the insurer referred to and the name of the city, town or village in which it has its principal office in the United States”.
Deals 14441, 3041, 796-2, 4407, 14441-2
Issuer is listed by MJ Settlements as Prudential Life Insurance Company. No such entity exists.
The Prudential Insurance Company of America is the only issuer of strucured settlement annuities.
According to Prudential “Annuities and Life Insurance are issued by Prudential Financial companies; The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“PICA”) or Pruco Life Insurance Company (“PLAZ”) (in New York, by Pruco Life Insurance Company of New Jersey (“PLNJ”)), all located in Newark, NJ (main office), or an unaffiliated third-party issuer: Fortitude Life Insurance & Annuity Company (“FLIAC”), located in Jersey City, NJ. Fortitude Re has retained PICA as an unaffiliated Third-Party Administrator. Variable Annuities and Variable Life Insurance are distributed by Prudential Annuities Distributors, Inc. (“PAD”), Shelton, CT (main office)”.
Deal 3047
MJ Settlements lists issuer as Allstate Life Insurance Company.
Investors are not buying an annuity with any of the sampled listings. Investors are buying a receivable. Make sure you clearly understand the difference before you commit investment or retirement funds.
Coal Creek Law recently announced the filing of a show cause motion and motion to compel production in the Wyoming District Court against the Town of Glenrock, WY (Glenrock).
“All public records shall be open for inspection by any person at reasonable times, during business hours of the state entity or political subdivision . . . .”” W.S. 16-4-202
Agencies may make rules and regulations reasonably necessary for the protection of records and prevention of unnecessary interference with the regular discharge of agency duties.
Like similar laws in other states, the Wyoming Public Records Act ensures public access to government records to promote transparency and accountability in state and local government operations.
The legal action stems from Glenrock’s alleged improper refusal to fully comply with a Wyoming Public Records Act (WPRA) request, including the inappropriate assertion of attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine to withhold documents related to Glenrock’s interactions with Flatirons Bank and Flatirons’s “Justice Escrow” Qualified Settlement Fund.
The WPRA requests , submitted earlier in 2025, sought all communications, contracts and records pertaining to Glenrock’s involvement and interactions in establishing or facilitating Qualified Settlement Funds (QSFs) utilizing Justice Escrow, a service offered by Flatirons Bank. QSFs are specilaized accounts used to manage settlement funds in legal cases
Despite repeated demands, Glenrock, represented by Williams, Porter, Day, and Neville (WPDN), has produced only a fraction of the requested documents.
Specifically, it has improperly sought to redact and withhold communications and contracts with third parties under the auspices of attorney-client privilege and work product. The complaint argues that these materials are public records under Wyoming statutes and are thus subject to disclosure under establish law because such communications involve third parties to Glenrock and its counsel such as Flatirons Bank.
The Complaint alleges that, based on information and belief, the Town of Glenrock WY improperly withheld documents that contain information that reveals Glenrock’s involvement with Flatirons Bank and an agreement to sponsor QSFs through Glenrock
Government transparency is the cornerstone of democracy, and the Wyoming Legislature has codified the public’s right to information in the WPRA,” said Caleb Wilkins, lead attorney for Coal Creek.
Quoting a recent court opinion, Mr. Wilkins noted, “The Wyoming Supreme Court has held ‘the WPRA creates a presumption that the denial of inspection of public records is contrary to public policy.’” He continued, “Wyoming Courts have vigorously upheld the public’s right to governmental transparency under the WPRA, are we are confident that the Court will order disclosure in this case.”
The motion to compel seeks a court order for the immediate release of all withheld documents and other remedies under the WPRA. Additionally, the motion to show cause requires that officials of the Town of Glenrock, WY, explain why they should not be held in contempt for failing to fulfill their statutory duties under the WPRA.
Wyoming legislators are eyeing tougher fines for officials who play hide-and-seek with public documents, according to a Cowboy State Daily report from May 2025.
Despite being permanently barred by FINRA, Lesk’s LinkedIn profile, both at the time of posting and still as of the latest update, lists under Licenses and Certifications the FINRA Series 24, 6, 7, and 63, along with Lesk’s FINRA reference number 2788300, which confirms that Lesk is indeed permanently barred. As the Latin phrase goes, res ipsa loquitur.
If you followed the above link on the date of publication of this post, you would see that there was a still pending FINRA Claim dating from 2024
“Statement of Claim alleges RR ( full name is Todd Michael Lesk) used his position of trust to provide a false layer of legitimacy to structured settlement activities”.
Although structured settlement annuities are off-limits for sale, safely tucked away under the watchful eye of a qualified assignment company, MJ Settlements boldly trumpets the sale of structured settlement receivables as “annuities” (spoiler: they’re not) with a whopper so big it practically does cartwheels across its website.
They claim “SSAs are backed by prominent insurance companies with high ratings, providing a reliable level of security. safety and predictability, especially valuable in a volatile investment environment. The only difference is that with MJ Settlements, you’ll get higher yields.”
Seen on July 20, 2025
The former name of MJ Settlements was MJ Structured Settlement Annuities (MJSSA).
20pt;”>Lesk and/or MJ Settlements still does not and cannot sell structured settlement annuities to investors today, just like they have not sold over the last 15 years under either entity, despite his/its bogus marketing. Investors beware.
What if MJ Settlements were selling an annuity? How does the MJ Settlements FAQ align with Florida’s Anti-Rebating Statute?
. Hint: It wouldn’t
Claim that it’s a structured settlement annuity (as per FAQ above)
MJ Settlements CEO has a Florida insurance license (Florida DFS)
Claim that with MJ Settlements you will get a higher yield (as per FAQ above)
Florida law regulates rebating to maintain fairness and prevent unethical sales tactics. The primary statute governing this practice is Florida Statute 626.572, which outlines the conditions under which rebating is permitted. This law is part of the broader Florida Insurance Code, enforced by the Florida Department of Financial Services (DFS) and the Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR). These agencies ensure compliance and protect consumers from deceptive practices.
“Any rebate program must be filed with the insurer and consistently applied to all qualifying policyholders. Insurers cannot prohibit agents from offering legally compliant rebates. This ensures transparency and prevents companies from imposing internal policies that contradict state law”.
So if Todd Lesk as CEO is ginning up investors with the promise of higher yield for ” Structured Settlement Annuities”, has Lesk filed the rebate schedule in compliance with Florida statute 626.572?
OR
Is it really not an annuity?
Lesk is not even appointed with many of the annuity issuers underlying the receivables per Florida DFS; and
Is MJ Settlements is engaging in false and misleading advertising?
Todd Lesk and MJ Settlements can’t have it both ways.
The State of Florida may need to examine this issue, along with every state in the United States where Lesk and MJ Settlements operate. Currently, Todd Lesk, the CEO of MJ Settlements, who holds an active insurance license in Florida, appears to be disregarding Florida statutes (and similar statutes in other states) by advertising and misrepresenting structured settlement receivables to consumers as annuities.
(2) b) “Annuity” means an insurance product under state law which is individually solicited, whether classified as an individual or group annuity.
What Lesk and MJ Settlements are selling is not an insurance product. In addition to Florida, see the National Association of Insurance Commissioners Statutory Issue Paper No.160 (finalized April 6, 2019). Also see 2017 Revisions to the Life & Health Guaranty Associations Model Act, adopted by the majority of US states, including Florida.
Lesk and MJ have been exposed for using insurer names and logos to gin up investors. Following is yet another recent example
Outrageous MJ Settlements Tweet of April 16, 2025 (still posted)
MJ Settlements posted and maintains the following advertising, without any disclaimer, that falsely implies that “US Life Insurance Comp” has had a rate hike. The use of a Bank Vault and pallet of cash also present a mischaracterization of the risk profile of the receivable. The investor would have no contact with US Life. There is no disclosure that there is any payment servicing which would be the case for any such receivable. Several words come to mind ” SuttonPark” and “NIghtmare”.
The Florida Department Financial does not show that Lesk is appointed with the insurer who being used to attract investors. Nevertheless what is on offer by MJ Settlement is not an annuity no matter what Todd Lesk or MJ Settlements is representing it is in their tweet or any other marketing materials such as their buyers guide imaged above.
Consumers deserve the clearest path to accurate information about structured settlements. They should not be subjected to misleading advertising about potential investments.
The three images in the body of this post captured between 7-20-2025 and 7-23-2025 were used solely for reference purposes for critical commentary provided in the public interest and no independent rights are claimed.
Last updated August 6, 2025
Crap on Crapola
“When an original structured settlement annuity is sold, either partially or in full, it then becomes known as a Secondary Market Structured Settlement Annuity. MJ Settlements offers their investors the safety and guarantee of high yield Secondary Market Structured Settlement Annuity”
How is Lesk Spreading the Crap Here?
Remember that a structured settlement annuity is generally owned by a qualified assignment company. This fact is set forth in the terms of a Settlement Agreement and Release and applicable aulified assignment agreement. The qualified funding asset cannot be sold by the annuitant to Lesk, MJ Settlements or anyone who else marketing receivables to investors. It’s a receivable not an annuity.
“How Safe are Structured Settlement Annuities” appears in the FAQ section of the MJ Settlements website
Todd Lesk holds an active life insurance license in Florida*; however, Todd Lesk is not appointed with any structured settlement annuity issuer.
*Todd Lesk is appointed with two annuity issuers in Florida according to public records See Lesk Licensee Detail. None of the two annuity issuers that Lesk is appointed with issue structured settlement annuities.
Key Takeaways
MJ Settlements, led by CEO Todd Lesk, falsely claims to offer structured settlement annuities but faces scrutiny due to Lesk’s permanent bar from FINRA as of October 2023.
Despite his bar, Lesk inaccurately represents his licensing on LinkedIn, claiming to hold multiple FINRA certifications.
MJ Settlements misrepresents structured settlement receivables as annuities, which they are not according to legal definitions.
Structured settlement annuities are generally owned by a qualified assignment company, not the annuitants. The annuitants cannot sell something don’t own to MJ Settlements, Lesk, or their investors. Investors take note.
Although Lesk holds a life insurance license in Florida, he is not associated with any issuer of structured settlement annuities.
Robocallers pretending to be “from Medicare” managed to trip over their own scam in spectacular fashion
Robocallers from India and Pakistan inundate American phone lines claiming to be calling from Medicare.
When I’m in the mood to engage, I respond “So you’re calling from CMS, eh?”
The invariable response is ” no I’m calling from Medicare”.
Their script doesn’t contemplate that Medicare is part of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services and their charade is thwarted in less than a half a minute.
Surname is purportedly “Wilson”, Mark, Mike, Tom (it’s a grab bag).
Did You Know?
Eight of the top 15 last names in 1790, 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2020 have stayed in the top 15 since the first census in 1790. The names are Brown, Davis, Johnson, Jones, Miller, Smith, Williams and Wilson. Source: Census.gov