Judge Theresa M. Traber, Case 23STCP00083 2023-03-03 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 23STCP00083, Date: 2023-03-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCP00083 Hearing Date: March 3, 2023 Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE: March 3, 2023 TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE: In Re Petition of J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC (Payee: Cary Chapman)

CASE NO.: 23STCP00083

MOTION FOR ORDER APPROVING TRANSFER OF STRUCTURED SETTLEMENT PAYMENT RIGHTS

MOVING PARTY: Petitioner J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC

RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on eCourt as of 2/28/23

CASE HISTORY:

· 02/06/23: Petition for approval of transfer of structured settlement payment rights filed.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

On February 6, 2023, Petitioner filed its Petitioin for approval of a proposed transfer of structured settlement payments.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Petitioner seeks court approval of a proposed transfer of structured settlement payments.

A direct or indirect transfer of structured settlement payment rights is not effective unless the transfer has been approved by a court order finding:

(1) The transfer is in the best interest of the payee, considering the welfare and support of the payee’s dependents.

(2) The payee has been advised in writing by the transferee to seek independent professional advice regarding the transfer and has either received that advice or knowingly waived, in writing, the opportunity to receive the advice.

(3) The transferee has complied with the notification requirements pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (f), the transferee has provided the payee with a disclosure form that complies with Section 10136, and the transfer agreement complies with Sections 10136 and 10138.

(4) The transfer does not contravene any applicable statute or the order of any court or other government authority.

(5) The payee understands the terms of the transfer agreement, including the terms set forth in the disclosure statement required by Section 10136.

(6) The payee understands and does not wish to exercise the payee’s right to cancel the transfer agreement.

(Ins. Code § 10139.5(a).)

As a result of a personal injury settlement reached when he was a minor, Payee Cary Chapman became entitled to certain structured settlement payments. (Amended Petition, Exh. D.)

Cary Chapman, as Payee, and Petitioner J.G. Wentworth Originations, LLC, as Assignee, have entered into a Structured Settlement Payments Purchase Agreement, under which Payee is to sell future payments totaling $240,000 in exchange for a purchase price of $20,000. (Amended Petition Exh. A.)

The discounted present value of the amount being sold is $113,128.31, calculated by applying the 4.6% discount rate used by the Internal Revenue Service to value annuities in probate proceedings. The purchase price was calculated using a discount rate of 16.48%. If Payee did not sell the right to receive structured settlement payments but instead borrowed the net amount of $37,000 and paid that loan back in installments with each of the payments he is now selling, the equivalent interest rate would be 16.48%. (Ibid.)

All of this information has been properly disclosed to Payee by way of the disclosure form in compliance with Insurance Code § 10136, as required by section 10139.5(a)(3). (Amended Petition, Exh. B.) Payee was advised in writing to seek independent professional advice, both legal and financial. (Ibid.) Payee chose not to seek an independent professional’s advice. (Amended Petition, Exh. E.) Thus, Petitioner has complied with the statutory disclosure requirements. (Ins. Code § 10139.5(a)(2).)

The transfer agreement (Exh. A) also complies with Insurance Code §§ 10136 and 10138 as required by § 10139.5(a)(3). It does not contravene any applicable statute or order of any court or other governmental authority. (Ins. Code § 10139.5(a)(4).)

Copies of the relevant portions of the annuity contract, qualified assignment agreement, and underlying structured settlement agreement were submitted as required by Ins. Code § 10139.5(f)(2)(E)-(G). (Amended Petition ¶ Exhs. C-D.)

Information About Transferor

Payee is 45 years old. (Second Amended Declaration of Cary Chapman ISO Petition. ¶ 8).

Payee has indicated that he resides in Los Angeles County, California, but has not disclosed his address. (Chapman Decl. ¶ 8.) However, the annuity contract attached to the petition gives Payee’s address as 5464 Yarmouth Ave, #19, Encino CA 91316. (Amended Petition Exh. C.)

As required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(c)(2), Payee has provided his marital status, stating he is unmarried. (Chapman Decl. ¶ 8.)

Payee has stated that he has one minor child whom he claims as a dependent but has not identified the child as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(c)(3). However, the body of the petition identifies this child as J.F., who is 13 years old. (Amended Petition p. 4:16.) Further, the Court infers from Payee’s references to boarding schools for J.F. that J.F. resides with Payee. (See Chapman Decl. ¶ 11.) The Court therefore finds that Payee has substantially complied with section 10139.5(c)(3).

Payee has indicated that he is unemployed and has therefore attested as to the amount and his source of his monthly income as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(c)(4). (¶ 8.)

Payee has stated that he has no child support obligations, as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(c)(5). (Id.)

Payee has provided information regarding previous transfers, as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(c)(6). (¶ 9.)

In sum, Payee has provided all information required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(c).

Payee indicates how the proceeds would be used as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(b)(2): He intends to use the proceeds to pay $6,000 of outstanding credit card debt, invest $10,000 towards his son’s boarding school petition and costs over the next four years, and use the remainder to pay remaining medical bills associated with correcting Payee’s dental implants. (¶ 11.) He has indicated that he is currently experiencing a financial hardship, as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(b)(3). (¶ 11.)

Payee has indicated that the periodic payments were not intended for necessary living expenses nor medical expenses, as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(b)(5)-(7). (¶¶ 6-7.)

Given the foregoing, the Court finds that the transfer is fair, reasonable and in the best interest of Payee. (Insurance Code § 10139.5(a)(1) & (b)(1)-(15).) The Payee understands the terms of the transfer agreement, including those set forth in the § 10136 disclosure statement, as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(a)(5). In signing the California Disclosure Statement and in his declaration and affidavit in support of to the Petition, Payee has evidenced an understanding of the right to cancel and election not to cancel the transfer agreement, as required by Insurance Code § 10139.5(a)(6).

Thus, Petitioner has met all the procedural requirements under the Insurance Code. The Petitioner has also served a copy of the notice to all interested parties and the Attorney General.

Accordingly, the petition for approval of structured settlement payments is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice, unless waived.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 3, 2023 ___________________________________

Theresa M. Traber

Judge of the Superior Court

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.