Today a growing trend in litigation has more than its fair share of controversy in fact there appears to be a gridlock and at the center is a financial service called "lawsuit loans" or "non recourse lawsuit funding".
For opponents their position is clear; "lawsuit loans are usurious and they exploit litigants in a time of extreme financial hardship, at a time when a litigant is most vulnerable". Opponents use "usury" and "champers" to describe exploitation. So the question remain do opponents have merit in their argument? Are lawsuit loans exploitations?
Supporters accept that in an unregulated industry there are "loan sharks" yet as a whole the industry is self regulated and is actually quite concerned with not exploiting injured plaintiffs . To assert such is like "throwing the baby out with the bath water" as the old adage goes and supporters state "lawsuit loans provide a never before window of opportunity, a window where a plaintiff whose trying to survive vexatious insurance delays now has the ability to survive".
One supporter interviewed states, "When opponents blanket lawsuit loans with emotional words like "exploitations or illegal" they do so because of a serious lack of information". In fact it appears the same misinformation about what lawsuit loans are and how they afford the plaintiff and their attorney with the needed time to fight the litigation process is what opponents fail to assess before making assumptions. And the debate continues....
Now while both sides agree that exploiting hardship is nothing new, and is certainly not limited to the lawsuit loan industry, the industry have its fair share of opposition. Despite well meaning intentions of opponents what are the facts about lawsuit loans and how do these facts affect your decision and opportunity to obtain a lawsuit loan if you needed such? Consider the facts, and then make an informed decision.
Fact Attorneys are legally barred from assisting clients financially no matter how severe the financial hardship a client is enduring.
Fact ONLY disinterested 3rd parties are LEGALLY permitted to issue a loan to a plaintiff and any attorney who violates this issue risks their career.
Fact According to the American Bar Association, the State Bar and the Attorney Generals Offices only 3rd parties who are disinterested are to provide financial resources to litigants.
Fact Delayed settlements create financial hardships which then are used to coerce plaintiffs into accepting reduced settlement offers out of necessity.
Fact Few individuals have the financial resources to endure delayed settlements and other insurance games played in litigation.
Fact Every lawsuit is unique and each lawsuit has its own nuances. There are no guarantees of success on any given case no matter the liability
Fact Risk is present on each lawsuit loan made and risk and interest are directly related.
Fact Not all lawsuit loan interest rates are the same.
When interviewing opponents the problem comes in not over the service of providing assistance to injured plaintiffs, but with the fact that a lawsuit loan investor accrues interest for the money they advance. Ironically though when the same opponents where questioned about the amount of return they would expect if it was their money being put out on cases and only repayable on the security of a lawsuit's success, all readily admitted if it was their "money they would want the same or more interest for the risk they would be assuming". Ironic indeed.....
Why though do some attorneys go so far as to even refuse to allow their clients the opportunity to obtain a lawsuit loan? Attorney's interviewed say they "fear losing control of their case". How could a lawsuit loan cause the attorney to loose control of a case? Opponents cite such factors as "the interest may prevent the case from settling because the investor seeks to recapture the advance with accrued interest. The settlement offer may not cover the liens on the case and may prevent settlement".
While sounding convincing to the unaware, to supporters the allegations are unsubstantiated because the investor never interferes with a potential success, nor do they prevent settlement from occurring. Both allegations undermine the investors ability to recapture their investment as well as the interest that investment may return.
So the question remains; Are clients being exploited with a lawsuit loan? To answer let's look at 1st Choice Funding www.lawsuitloansfundings.com and the lawsuit loan program "No Win...No Pay...No Risk" Lawsuit Loans at [www.lawsuitloansfundings.com]. Since lawsuit loans are most often compared to traditional loans in interest rates let's fairly compare not just rates, but program qualifications. Lets see if there's a difference in the services provided. Ask yourself when was the last time you were loaned money under these terms;
Money without credit
Money with bad credit
Money without collateral
Money without employment
Money without monthly payments
Money without a repayment obligation outside of a litigation cases success
Money I only pay back if I win a lawsuit
While this would be unrealistic under traditional loans these are the terms of a "No Win...No Pay...No Risk" Lawsuit Loan. Now when hastily comparing 'No Risk Lawsuit Funding" to "traditional bank loans" your not making an "apples to apples" comparison, but rather are making an "apples to oranges" comparison. So if you're interest rate sensitive a "No Risk" lawsuit loan may not be for you because rates vary from 3-5% monthly, however if not being strapped with another monthly debt, and being waived a repayment obligation if your case is lost, is more to your liking, then a "no credit- no monthly payments- no risk lawsuit loan" is your preferred option.
Today thousands of litigants every month are on the proponent side of this issue by adding their names to the swelling list of supporters who not only have benefited from a lawsuit loan but who are determined others should have the right to benefit from a lawsuit loan as well. Thus the question remains: "Are litigants being exploited"? Let the facts speak for themselves:
1. Plaintiffs are provided with a lawsuit loan contract disclosing all repayment costs before signing.
2. Attorney's are provided with full disclosure of lawsuit loan cost and terms before client signs contract.
3. Clients hold no financial responsibility for repayment on cases unsuccessfully litigated.
Thus it appears from the facts that opponents need to recognize the advantages of a lawsuit loan. Today we have entered a new era in litigation, in fact its a much needed improved era as the "door of opportunity" has opened wide for innocent injured plaintiffs. Its a door which the scales of justice, scales where governed by the deep pockets of the wealthy insurance companies, companies who've been stacking in their favor for far too long the courts system. The Lawsuit Loans of today provide a place where the little guy stands a fighting chance against the "giants" who have controlled for far too long the system of financial recovery with no recourse, accountability or options.
For more information about lawsuit loans visit 1st Choice Funding online at: http://www.lawsuitloansfundings.com
No comments:
Post a Comment