Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 24STCP04079, Date: 2025-06-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCP04079    Hearing Date: June 12, 2025    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

            Background

            Petitioner J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC (“Petitioner”) requests that the Court approve the transfer of structure settlement payment rights by and between Shawn Becerrada (“Payee”) and Petitioner pursuant to Insurance Code Section 10134, et seq.

            Discussion

Under the transfer agreement entered into on March 26, 2025, Payee agreed to transfer 236 monthly payments of $719.00 each, beginning on March 1, 2044 and ending on October 1, 2063, in exchange for a purchase price of $16,000.00. (Pet., ¶7, Ex. A.) The effective equivalent interest rate is 8.98% per year. (Ibid.)

Under Insurance Code Section 10136, subdivision (b), ten or more days before the payee executes a transfer agreement, the transferee shall provide the payee with a separate written disclosure statement, accurately completed with the information that applies to the transfer agreement in at least 12-point type. Petitioner complied. (Pet. at 3:25-26, Ex. B.) The disclosure complies with Insurance Code section 10136, subdivision (b) by stating all the information and other disclosures required by this section. The transfer agreement also complies with Insurance Code section 10136, subdivision (c) by containing the required information and further disclosures. (Pet., ¶7, Ex. A.)

Under Insurance Code Section 10137, a transfer of structured settlement payment rights is void unless a court reviews and approves the transfer and finds the following conditions are met: (a) the transfer of the structured settlement payment rights is fair and reasonable and in the best interest of the payee, taking into account the welfare and support of his or her dependents; (b) the transfer complies with the requirements of this article, will not contravene other applicable law, and the court has reviewed and approved the transfer as provided in Insurance Code Section 10139.5.

Under Insurance Code Section 10139.5, factors to consider include (1) the reasonable preference and desire of the payee to complete the proposed transaction, taking into account the payee’s age, mental capacity, legal knowledge, and apparent maturity level; (2) the stated purpose of the transfer; (3) the payee’s financial and economic situation; and (4) the terms of the transaction, including whether the payee is transferring monthly or lump sum payments or all or a portion of his or her future payments.

Payee is over the age of 18. (Amended Declaration of Payee in Support of Petitioner’s Petition for Approval for Transfer of Payment Rights (“Becerrada Decl.”) ¶ 1.) Payee is not married, and has 1 minor child, S.B., who is 17 years old. (Becerrada Decl., ¶8.) Payee works approximately 40 hours per week earning $4,000.00 per month and has child support obligations with Los Angeles County under Case No. 200000000907375. (Id.) Payee completed a previous transaction on September 3, 2024, through Case No. 23STCP04324, wherein Payee transferred 240 monthly payments of $1,719.00 beginning March 1, 2024, through and including February 1, 2044, to Bentzen Financial, LLC in exchange for $164,000.00. (Becerrada Decl., ¶9.) Payee used the funds to purchase a vehicle to continue working as a Door Dasher, help pay college tuition for his 18-year-old daughter, help pay private school for his 17-year-old son, pay off two bank loans in the amount of $20,000.00, and paid off $10,000.00 in medical debt. (Id.) Payee also attempted previous transactions involving his structured settlement payment that were denied, dismissed, or withdrawn: (1) Case No. 24STCP00623, denied on April 10, 2024; (2) Case No. 24STCP01148, dismissed on June 18, 2024; and (3) Case No. 24STCP02550, dismissed on October 1, 2024. (Becerrada Decl., ¶10.) When the original settlement was completed, the future period payment(s) that are the subject of the proposed transfer were not intended to pay for the future medical care and treatment relating to the incident that was the subject of the settlement, and were not intended to provide for necessary living expenses. (Becerrada Decl., ¶¶6-7.) Payee is currently experiencing a financial hardship, and if approved, Payee will use the money received from the proposed settlement to help pay for his son’s college tuition after he graduates and catch up on bills. (Becerrada Decl., ¶11.)

Insurance Code Section 10138 prohibits certain provisions. The transfer agreement in this proceeding does not contain any of the prohibited provisions. The transfer agreement also complies with provisions set forth in Insurance Code Section 10139.3.

Under Insurance Code Section 10139.5, subdivision (a)(2), the petitioner is required to advise the payee in writing to seek independent professional advice regarding the transfer and payee must either obtain such advice or waive, in writing, the opportunity to receive such advice. Petitioner indicates that Payee has been advised in writing to seek independent professional representation regarding the transfer and has waived the opportunity to seek and receive such representation. (Pet. at 4:21-23, Ex. E.)  

Insurance Code Section 10139.5, subdivision (f)(2) requires that a notice of the proposed transfer and the application for its authorization be filed with the court and served on all interested parties not less than 20 days prior to the scheduled hearing on any petition for approval of a transfer of structured settlement payment rights. The notice includes the required elements. The transfer agreement complies with the other required elements in Insurance Code Section 10139.5.

Nonetheless, Payee does not specify the names, addresses, telephone numbers of any individual, entity, or agency that is receiving child support from Payee pursuant to Case No. 200000000907375. (Ins. Code, § 10139.5, subd. (c)(5).) Furthermore, Payee fails to explain how much of the previous transaction funds are leftover since they were not used to pursue opening a health juice bar or franchise with his friend.

Thus, the Court finds that the transaction is not fair and reasonable and in the best interest of Payee. 

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, Petitioner J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC’s Petition for Approval of Transfer of Structured Settlement Payment Rights is DENIED without prejudice.

Petitioner is ordered to provide notice of this ruling.

DATED:  June 12, 2025                                

________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court