Beyond Structured Settlements

NSSTA and NASP 2010 Educational Conferences - 2

The National Structured Settlement Trade Association ( NSSTA ) and the National Association of Settlement Purchasers ( NASP ) have announced agendas and speakers for their 2010 educational conferences scheduled concurrently and coincidentially next week (November 10-12, 2010) in Las Vegas.

S2KM has published an introductory report for these conferences plus historical reporting about past NSSTA and NASP educational conferences. S2KM's Managing Director, Patrick Hindert, will attend portions of the NSSTA conference (as a member) and participate at the NASP conference (as a moderator and speaker).

S2KM recommends both the NSSTA and NASP educational conferences to all structured settlement stakeholders and offers this preliminary comparative analysis.

Topics

NSSTA and NASP will both address several similar issues:

• Ethics - NSSTA and NASP could enhance their discussions by addressing "business practices" including the "Standards of Professional Conduct" adopted by the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) on March 7, 2008.
• Legal update - NSSTA's legal committee represents a strategically important structured settlement industry knowledge resource. That said, NASP's structured settlement legal updates are equally diverse and valuable - especially when you include NASP's related "Industry Updates".
• Legislative update - Eric Vaughn is NSSTA's Executive Director, federal lobbyist and legislative guru. NSSTA lobbying weaknesses (especially state lobbying) play to NASP lobbying strengths and suggest collaborative opportunities.
• Marketing - Try a Google search for "structured settlement". Where are NSSTA, SSP and other primary market  participants?

With some important differences:

• NSSTA
  • Medicare/Medicaid - NASP is expected to address these issues as part of NASP's "Industry Analysis".
  • Certification - NASP does not have a certification program.
  • Life care planners - NSSTA, NASP (and SSP) educational programs historically have ignored this important settlement consulting professional community.
  • In force structured settlements - a strange attempt by NSSTA to educate its members about secondary market issues.
  • Wrongful imprisonment - a narrow focus compared with NASP's anticipated tax analysis.
  • Life expectancy - hopefully, NSSTA will link this discussion with related Medicare and Medicaid issues. Whatever happened to the structured settlement industry's life expectancy study initiated by Roger Harbin and Steve Smith?
• NASP
  • Industry analysis - NSSTA's educational programs typically provide limited strategic analysis with only one perspective and no outside critics. NASP features more open discussion of strategic industry issues featuring critics and alternative perspectives.
  • Taxation life cycle - Both NASP and SSP have previously featured Jeremy Babener as a speaker. Why not NSSTA? Babener's NASP presentation promises to be one of the highlights of these two structured settlement educational conferences.
  • Capital markets - NSSTA's educational programs historically lack analysis of the financial markets. NASP's annual panel sets the industry standard.
  • Dodd Frank legislation - a good example of NASP analysis of federal legislation that impacts both the primary and secondary structured settlement markets.

Speakers

NSSTA and NASP speakers both include a mix of association members and non-members. Both associations typically feature judges, attorneys and legislators as speakers. NSSTA's legislative speakers are generally federal while NASP's legislative speakers are generally state.

NSSTA speakers do not include SSP or NASP members. NASP speakers include both NSSTA and SSP members and thereby generate more comprehensive and valuable strategic discussions.

NASP 2010 featured speakers who are members of NSSTA and/or SSP:

• NSSTA
  • Peter Vodola
  • John Darer
  • Patrick Hindert
• SSP
  • Richard Risk

Previous NASP speakers who are members of NSSTA and/or SSP

• NSSTA
  • Stephen Harris
  • Michael Upchurch
  • Patrick Hindert
• SSP
  • Jack Meligan
  • Richard Risk

For more comprehensive S2KM reporting about  NSSTA, NASP and SSP, see S2KM's structured settlement wiki.

25 Questions to Evaluate Pooled Trusts

Health care reform (Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act), enacted on March 23, 2010, has re-defined the structured settlement and personal injury settlement consulting marketplace: whether current participants realize it - or (more probably) do not.

Among the strategic consequences of health care reform:

• An estimated 16 million more Medicaid participants - and therefore:
• More special needs trusts;
• More special needs attorneys;
• More structured settlement annuities payable to trustees.

Without focusing specifically on health care reform (not then enacted), the ASNP 2010 Annual Meeting included valuable presentations and handout resources indirectly related to health care reform, structured settlements and settlement planning/consulting.

Among those valuable presentations was Evan J. Krame's analysis titled "Not Very Special Trusts: Fixing Trusts to be Special and Using Pooled Trusts". As part of his ASNP trust analysis, Krame introduced a document he wrote titled "25 Questions to Evaluate Pooled Trusts".

In addition to his legal practice and teaching activities, Krame serves as President of Shared Horizons, Inc. Shared Horizons is trustee of the Wesley Vinner Memorial Trust (a pooled trust) serving people with disabilities in the District of Columbia and Maryland.

Krame has granted permission for S2KM to re-publish his list of 25 Questions here in S2KM blog format.

Trust Structures

• Check the Trust Agreement and Joinder Agreement? What do the documents say? For example, what powers does the trustee have?
• Is the trust approved and monitored by any state agencies?
• Who/what is really serving as the trustee? Is it the non-profit organization that created the trust or is it a third party hired to administer the trust?

Is this Trust Right for You?

• What are the costs of participation? Is there an initiation fee, an annual fee or a termination fee?
• How are the disbursements approved? What is the ease and method of disbursements? Who signs disbursement checks?
• What is the availability of advocacy on behalf of the beneficiary?
• How do they manage public benefit issues?
• How do they monitor the beneficiaries?
• Will the trust own illiquid or uncommon assets such as cars or homes?

Trust Management

• What is the reputation of the non-profit and/or trust management organizations?
• What is the organizational structure? Check on staff, space and activities.
• Who are the officers of the non-profit? What are their skills and background?
• What is the function of the board of the non-profit trustee?
• How long has the trust been in existence? Is there any reason to believe it could fail? How appropriately is the pooled trust compensated?
• How are the trust assets invested? Is there an investment policy in force that is followed? Is there an independent investment adviser? Is there an investment review committee? Is there an allocation model?
• How do they maintain separate shares? Do they uphold the duty to segregate?
• Is there liability and casualty insurance in place?
• How do they meet their duty to inform? Are statements provided to beneficiaries and state agencies (as required)?
• How do they meet their duty to account?
• How do they maintain their records? Are they precise, complete and accurate?
• How do they meet their duty of confidentiality?
• Do they have and/or employ legal counsel?
• Are there termination procedures in place?
• What is the policy as to funds at the death of a beneficiary?
• How do they handle income tax reporting?

Additional S2KM resources about settlement trusts:

• Settlement trusts re-visited
• Settlement trusts
• Single claimant 468B funds
• Selecting a settlement trustee
• Settlement trust due diligence
• Special Needs Trusts X
• Richard Halpern

NASP 2009 Annual Meeting - 3

This blog post continues S2KM's summary and analysis of the NASP 2009 Annual Meeting. Prior S2KM blog posts about NASP are accessible on S2KM's structured settlement wiki.

NASP's 2009 strategic educational analysis occurred primarily during a two-hour panel discussion titled "Re-thinking Structured Settlements". S2KM assisted NASP in organizing this panel discussion. Jeremy Babener's NASP presentation titled "Factoring and the Structured Settlement Tax Subsidy" preceded and contributed to NASP's strategic discussions.

NASP Panel Discussion: "Re-thinking Structured Settlements".

Moderator: Earl Nesbitt, Executive Director of NASP.

Panelists: Jeremy Babener; Matthew Bracy; Daniel Hindert; Richard Risk; Andrew Savysky; Robin Shapiro; Michael Upchurch.

Format: S2KM identified and submitted to NASP a preliminary list of strategic structured settlement questions. NASP encouraged the panelists to identify and address S2KM questions that most interested them. NASP allocated time for audience questions and participation.

Primary S2KM questions addressed by the NASP panel:

• Which 2009 events and developments (legal; financial; political) will most significantly impact the future of structured settlements?
• What are the best and worst structured settlement business practices?
• Are factoring transactions good or bad for structured settlements?
• Does public policy support state court ordered structured settlement factoring transactions?
• How has the financial crisis changed the structured settlement market? Note: although NASP's strategic panel acknowledged the importance of this issue, the panel also recognized the related comprehensive discussion by the NASP "Capital Markets" panel.

2009 structured settlement developments - as sequentially identified and discussed by the NASP panel:

• Financial and credit crisis - addressing both primary and secondary market consequences;
• Election of President Obama - highlighting anticipated legislation including health care reform and tax reform;
• J.G. Wentworth bankruptcy - what it means for traditional secondary market business models;
• Primary market departures - why leading structured settlement annuity providers continue to leave the market;
• Diminishing annuity sales - why structured settlement annuity sales are down when fixed annuity sales generally are way up;
• Spencer v. Hartford - how the recent United States Second Circuit Court decision (denying Hartford's appeal) impacts the Hartford class action lawsuit and which other structured settlement programs are now at risk for potential RICO class action lawsuits?
• Revised California protection statute - viewed by the panel as a legislative victory for the structured settlement industry and featuring specific "best interest" criteria for state judges to consider in California settlement transfer cases.
• Fresno County cases - viewed by the panel as a judicial victory for the structured settlement industry with an appellate court ruling that public policy supports state court approved structured settlement factoring transactions.
• Rapid Settlement cases - viewed by the panel as a victory for the structured settlement industry with continuing judicial denial of arbitration alternatives to state court approved transfers pursuant to IRC 5891 and state structured settlement protection statutes.
• Scott Rothstein ponzi scheme - identified as a legal and public relations reminder that all participants in settlements featuring periodic payments with potential subsequent payment transfers would benefit from applicable legislation (protection statutes) and required state court approvals.

Best and worst business standards and practices - as identified and discussed by the NASP panel:

• Primary market
  • Best practices
    • SSP's "Standards of Professional Conduct for Settlement Planners" - including Rule 9 titled "Factoring Structured Settlements";
    • IRC 468B qualified settlement funds;
    • Full market quoting surveys;
    • Multiple (blended) product offerings, licensing and expertise.
  • Worst practices
    • Alleged RICO violations in the Spencer v. Hartford class action lawsuit;
    • Over-structuring the wrong cases and with the wrong periodic payments;
    • Lack of disclosure to injury victims - about compensation sharing; conflicts of interest; IRC 5891; and state protection statutes;
    • No applicable "best interest" legislation or standards;
    • Mischaracterization by and of "agents" (loyal to annuity providers) as "brokers" (loyal to injury victims);
    • Defendant "approved lists" of agents and funding companies;
    • Affiliated company funding programs;
    • "Pay for play" endorsements by professional associations.
• Secondary market
  • Best practices
    • Business practices required by IRC 5891 and NCOIL's model state structured settlement protection statute - including judicial approval; best interest standard; disclosure; notification;
    • Standards and business practices endorsed by NASP;
    • Competitive bidding fostered by the Internet.
  • Worst practices
    • "Cash now" advertising;
    • Non-competitive bidding fostered by television advertising;
    • Failure to fund (or delayed funding) of court ordered settlement transfers.

Is the secondary market good or bad for structured settlements? This question was discussed in detail during the NASP 2008 Annual Meeting with Jack Meligan and Michael Upchurch providing a primary market critique of the secondary market. NASP's 2009 Annual Meeting featured two published critics of secondary market business behavior: Judge Edward Burke of Arizona and attorney Daniel Hindert of Utah. In addition, Michael Upchurch participated on the NASP strategic analysis panel. If the NASP program reached any conclusion for this issue, it was: the secondary structured settlement market is a reality. Whether the secondary market is good or bad for structured settlements depends upon business behavior and business results in both the primary and secondary markets.

Does public policy support state court ordered structured settlement factoring transactions? Jeremy Babener discussed the public policy arguments for and against factoring transactions. Babener concluded that more information is needed to make a comprehensive public policy declaration. The recent California appellate court decision in Henderson v. Scioteco holds that public policy supports state court approved factoring transactions. Babener, acknowledged the importance of the decision, but disagreed with the California court's characterization of IRC 5891 as an "express sanction" of factoring. Richard Risk agreed with Babener that IRC 5891 does not contain a clear statement of public policy about factoring. Risk, however, pointed to examples of IRC 5891 legislative history that contradict any claim that public policy is against structured settlement factoring. As one example, Risk cited the Joint Committee on Taxation’s report released on March 18, 1999, “Tax Treatment of Structured Settlement Arrangements,” which Risk interprets as public policy support that structured settlements can co-exist with factoring.

S2KM applauds NASP for:

• Focusing much of its 2009 educational program on strategic structured settlement industry issues; and also for
• Inviting and featuring  structured settlement industry experts with diverse viewpoints and opinions.

NASP 2009 Annual Meeting - 2

The purpose of this S2KM blog post is to summarize educational discussions which occurred at the NASP 2009 Annual Meeting. In a prior post (NASP 2009 Annual Meeting-1), S2KM listed the discussion topics, moderators, speakers and panelists and also identified Van Tran as the winner of the NASP 2009 Alexander Hamilton award. In subsequent blog posts, S2KM will provide analysis and feature interviews with selected NASP educational program participants.

2009 Legislative Developments - Matthew Bracy summarized California Senate Bill 510 which Governor Arnold Swarzenegger signed into law October 11, 2009 and which becomes effective January 1, 2010. Among changes to the California structured settlement protection statute, SB 510 adds factors for the court to consider when determining whether a proposed transfer is fair, reasonable and in the payee's best interest. These factors now include the reasonable preference of the payee considering age and mental capacity. Bracy also summarized the new North Dakota structured settlement protection statute which generally follows the NCOIL Model Act. North Dakota becomes the 47th state to enact structured settlement protection legislation.

Legal Case Update - Tricia Laborde's legal case update focused primarily on the Fresno County cases and Rapid Settlement cases. Among other holdings in Scioteco v. Henderson, a California appellate court ruled that public policy supports state court approved structured settlement factoring transactions. In Allstate v. Rapid Settlements, which denied Rapid's appeal, U.S. Third Circuit Judge Joseph F. Weis, Jr. noted: "We are one of the many courts to face Rapid Settlements' transparent attempt to use this arbitration scheme to evade the legislatures' intentions to protect the recipients of structured settlement payments".

What Happened in California? - A panel of legal and political experts provided background and analysis of SB 510 and the Fresno County cases. NASP lobbyist Carl London summarized the collaboration between NASP and Consumer Attorneys of California (formerly the California Trial Lawyers), plus the role of California legislator Van Tran, in securing enactment of SB 510. Linda Morris, General Counsel for J.G. Wentworth, provided background information and strategic commentary about appellate decisions for the Fresno County cases which she characterized as an important victory for the structured settlement industry.

Transactional Structured Settlement Issues - A panel of attorneys discussed practical problems in securing judicial approval for proposed structured settlement transfers. Some of the issues discussed: difficulties in determining the domicile of transient payees; privacy issues including the impact of Pennsylvania Rule 229.2; difficulties in finding independent professional advisers; and what happens when judges attempt to re-negotiate agreed upon transfers.

Structured Settlement Capital Markets - A panel of factoring company executives discussed how the 2008-2009 capital market upheaval has changed the secondary structured settlement market.
The changes:

• The cost of funds today for factoring companies (8 to 9%) equals the best discount rates offered for transfers two years ago;
• Bundling purchases of individual payment rights into a security is financially less efficient and/or available today;
• Marketing and court costs for factoring companies remain high;
• Perceived financial risks for potential insurer failure have increased;
• The impact of a potential ELNY liquidation remains uncertain.

Structured Settlement Court Practices and Issues - Judges Edward Burke of Arizona and Christopher Marshall of Oregon joined a panel of attorneys in discussing settlement transfer court practices and issues including: prior transfers by the same payee; the roles of transfer attorneys and independent professional advisers; privacy concerns for transferring payees; the advantages of utilizing a single state judge for all transfer requests; plus other problems which cause continuing judicial concerns about factoring and factoring companies.

Factoring and the Structured Settlement Tax Subsidy - Jeremy Babener addressed the important role IRC 130 and 104 tax subsidies have played in the growth of structured settlements. He summarized the political and public policy attacks against, and defenses for, structured settlement factoring transactions and questioned whether:

• The tax subsidy prevents dissipation?
• The tax subsidy discourages factoring?
• Factoring undermines the tax subsidy?

Babener challenged NASP to develop better information about who actually sells structured settlement payment rights and why.

Structured Settlement Bankruptcies - Bruce Akerly summarized his recent paper titled "The Impact of an Annuity Servicer's Bankruptcy on the Annuitant and Structured Settlement Purchaser". Akerly's conclusions:

• "The annuity payments received by a structured settlement servicing company, as well as the servicing agreement itself, become property of the bankrupt estate"; and
• "It may be possible to draft provisions in the servicing agreement to anticipate some of the consequences of the servicing company entering bankruptcy and perhaps lessen the impact on all parties."

Re-thinking Structured Settlements - a multi-disciplinary panel of industry experts addressed strategic structured settlement issues:

• What developments in 2009 will most impact the future of structured settlements?
• What are the best (and worst) structured settlement standards and business practices?
• Which structured settlement myths are most out-of-line with reality?
• How will commutations change the structured settlement market?
• What knowledge and skill sets are most important for future success in the structured settlement industry?

For S2KM reports about prior NASP meetings, see the structured settlement wiki.

NASP 2009 Annual Meeting - 1

The National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP) hosted its 2009 Annual Meeting at the Mandalay Bay Hotel in Las Vegas November 12-13 almost one month following  NSSTA and SSP 2009 Fall meetings at the same location.

In comparison with traditional NSSTA and SSP meetings, the NASP 2009 educational program featured:

• More insightful and comprehensive strategic discussions;
• Broader perspectives from industry experts;
• Better analysis of legal and financial developments;
• Better analysis of structured settlement public policy;
• Better criticism of business standards and practices;
• Better recognition of industry leaders who are contributing to the growth and improvement of structured settlements.

Structured Settlement Wiki - for S2KM reports about prior NASP meetings, see the structured settlement wiki.

This S2KM blog post, the first in a series about the NASP 2009 meeting, highlights the NASP Alexander Hamilton honoree plus educational topics and speakers. Subsequent S2KM posts will summarize and analyze NASP discussions and provide interviews with some of the industry experts who spoke at the NASP meeting.

Alexander Hamilton Award - Van Tran was named 2009 recipient of NASP's Alexander Hamilton award. Van Tran is the California legislator who led the enactment of California SB 510 which amends and improves California's structured settlement protection statute.

NASP 2009 Educational Conference - Topics and participants:

• 2009 Legislative Developments - Matthew Bracy.
• Legal Case Update - Tricia Laborde.
• What Happened in California? - Michael Damore; Carl London; John Shafhi; Matt Eason; Linda Morris; Matt Bracy.
• Transactional Structured Settlement Issues - Tricia Laborde; Ken Barnett; Michael Green; Jim Klohn; David Barfield; Scott Topoloski; Kevin Mack; Joe Siegel.
• Structured Settlement Capital Markets - Jason Sutherland; Burt Kroner; John Ryan; Robin Shapiro; Josh Tobin.
• Structured Settlement Court Practices and Issues - Earl Nesbitt; Judge Edward Burke; Judge Christopher Marshall; Thomas Dixon; Roger Dunaway; Tricia Laborde; Amy Schwartz.
• Factoring and the Structured Settlement Tax Subsidy - Jeremy Babener.
• Structured Settlement Bankruptcies - Bruce Akerly.
• Re-thinking Structured Settlements - Earl Nesbitt; Jeremy Babener; Matthew Bracy; Daniel Hindert; Richard Risk; Andrew Savysky; Robin Shapiro; Michael Upchurch.

For additional information about structured settlements, see:

• "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments" (S2P2J) co-authored by Daniel Hindert, Joseph Dehner and Patrick Hindert;
• Wikipedia definitions for:
  • Structured settlement;
  • Structured settlement factoring transaction.

NASP 2008 Annual Meeting - 2

S2KM's prior NASP 2008 blog post (NASP 2008 Annual Meeting - 1):

• Summarizes the NASP presentations which S2KM attended;
• Highlights the questions S2KM addressed to NASP's structured settlement panel.

This S2KM blog post:

• Re-introduces the NASP structured settlement panelists;
• Re-confirms the panel structured settlement topic;
• Provides links to recommended learning resources;
• Outlines S2KM's summary format;
• Highlights the underlying issues.

S2KM's next NAMSAP 2008 blog post will summarize the panel's responses to:

• S2KM's questions; and
• Questions and comments from NASP attendees.

The NASP structured settlement panelists:

• Jack Meligan, President of Settlement Professionals, Inc.;
• Michael Upchurch, President of Delta Settlement Solutions; and
• Matthew Bracy, General Counsel of Settlement Capital Corporation.

Panel topic: How to Improve and Grow the Structured Settlement Market

Recommended S2KM resources:

• S2KM blog series titled "How to Grow the Structured Settlement Market"
• Additional S2KM blog posts
  • NASP 2007 Annual Meeting - 3 posts
  • 2006 NASP Annual Meeting - multiple posts including
    • Overview of the Structured Settlement Market
    • How the Primary Market Views Factoring
  • Structured Settlement Thought Leadership Conference
  • Fresno County Factoring Cases - see Pullman & Comley Structured Settlement Insights - 2
• S2KM public wikis
  • Structured settlement wiki
  • Structured settlement public policy wiki
  • AIG structured settlement wiki
  • Web 2.0 for lawyers wiki
    

In addition, for those readers interested in a more detailed review of the secondary structured settlement market from a legal perspective: see hardcopy "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments" (S2P2J). Co-authored by Daniel Hindert, Joseph Dehner and this author, S2P2J includes Chapter 16 titled "Transfers of Structured Settlement Payment Rights". S2P2J Release 44 will be available in December 2008.

Summary format - S2KM's third 2008 NASP blog post:

• will not attempt to summarize individual panel member responses to specific questions;
• will summarize, from the moderator's perspective and notes, the conversation that took place between moderator, panelists and audience.

Underlying issues - The NASP structured settlement panel topic prioritizes three issues:

• Are settlement transfers (IRC 5891 and the state protection statutes) good or bad for the structured settlement industry?
• What is the future of the structured settlements industry?
• How can the primary and secondary structured settlement markets collaborate to improve and grow the structured settlement market?

Who is Michael Upchurch?

Earlier this week, David and Dorothy Snyder announced that Michael A. Upchurch had purchased The Delta Group of Settlement Companies effective March 1, 2008.  As the new owner, Chairman and CEO of Delta Settlements, Michael Upchurch becomes a prominent stakeholder and participant in the structured settlement market. Upchurch agreed to provide S2KM with the following exclusive interview.  Upchurch responded in writing to S2KM's written questions:

What is your professional background?

After graduating with an MBA from Southern Methodist University, I began my professional career with IBM. At IBM, l specialized in the integration of advancing technologies into established business processes. This skill set appears to be increasingly important within the structured settlement and settlement planning industries.

In 2003, I entered the structured settlement industry with Ringler Associates. The following year, I decided to focus exclusively on helping injury victims and their attorneys. In 2004, I left Ringler and formed Upchurch Financial Services (UFS). During the past four years, UFS has enjoyed positive and productive relationships with Millennium Settlements and National Settlement Consultants. Throughout this learning process, I have attempted to distinguish myself as a leading structured settlement consultant. My focus has been on increasing the overall utility of the settlement and the efficiency of the settlement process.

Effective March 1, 2008, David Snyder and Dorothy Snyder have announced the sale of Delta Settlements to me. I am honored to be associated with Delta, Dave and Dorothy and excited about the future of Delta Settlements and structured settlements.

What are your interests outside of business?

My wife, Holly, is my college sweetheart from Emory University. We have three children Mick (10), Isabella (8) and William (5). Whatever personal time I have is devoted to my family.

What prompted you to enter the structured settlement industry?

My father, John J. Upchurch, introduced me to structured settlements. My father is a former judge who was instrumental in establishing the mediation legislation in the state of Florida. He retired from the bench and established a mediation practice that has become one of the most successful and respected mediation firms in the United States. As a mediator, my father helps resolve complex cases every day.

My father taught me the challenge and importance of meeting the medical needs of catastrophic injury victims - how to deal with ongoing medical expenses even before a case is settled. That planning challenge requires knowledge about Medicaid and Medicare. My father pointed out the disconnect that frequently occurs among the victims' legal and financial advisors, as well as the defendants, in addressing medical expenses.

My father recognized early the importance and opportunity for integrated analytics, financial services and care solutions. My father thought my business talents and interests would be a good match for the structured settlement and settlement planning industries.

What successes have you achieved in your structured settlement career to date?

I have been fortunate to have great teachers and mentors. I have learned from some of the most influential trial attorneys in the state of Florida. Specifically, E. Clay Parker has played a key role in my professional development. Clay taught me how to evaluate different insurance policies and understand the relationships between the different defendants and key insurance stakeholders. This type of analysis is extremely important when advising trial attorneys on settlement strategy. As a structured settlement professional who advises trial attorneys, I have the opportunity to communicate and practice Clay's lessons on a weekly basis.

Within the structured settlement industry, I have learned from some of the industry leaders. Scott Hoover taught me about the defense side of the business. Chris Diamantis taught me the challenges of building, managing and maintaining a multi-disciplined settlement firm. Most recently, Michael and Bill Goodman taught me about execution, organizational development and excellence. Michael and Bill have been exceptional friends and mentors.

My past successes are defined by my personal structured settlement production. Upchurch Financial and Delta Settlements will continue to be production leaders within the structured settlement industry. In addition to growing the structured settlement market, however, I want to improve the structured settlement industry. I want to do more for personal injury victims and their families.

What changes do you see occurring in the structured settlement market?

This is an exciting time to be part of the structured settlement industry. Many changes are creating new business opportunities. Obviously, the impact of government benefits is significant. Medicaid and Medicare legislation is re-defining structured settlements and settlement planning. Trusts and other banking products are important and those markets will continue to grow rapidly. The secondary markets are impacting all financial and estate planning - including structured settlements. I want Delta to become the most knowledgeable structured settlement company about the secondary markets. We need to help personal injury victims before and after the settlement. The Internet impacts everyone and every business. Delta will continue to be a technology leader within the structured settlement industry.

What opportunities do you see to grow the structured settlement market?

NSSTA published some market research last year that indicated we have hardly scratched the surface in developing the structured settlement market. Annuities are great products. We are fortunate to have excellent federal and state legislation for structured settlements. If we can develop the same type of rules for Medicaid and Medicare, structured settlements have a great future. It is important for all structured settlement stakeholders to understand the issues and to collaborate to develop the opportunities.

Why did you purchase Delta Settlements?

Delta Settlements is a fantastic company. Delta has wonderful owners, outstanding producers and employees. I am honored to be associated with Delta. Dave and Dorothy Snyder and my family share many of the same personal and business values. Delta has an important future. Delta is strategically positioned for success.

What role do you anticipate Delta will play in the structured settlement market?

Delta will continue to be a leader. We want to build upon the legacy and success that Delta has already achieved. We want to be the best structured settlement company - whatever positive performance metrics you apply.

How do you see the following developments impacting structured settlements?

• Government benefits - Medicaid and Medicare legislation have already revolutionized structured settlements. Any structured settlement leader who wants to remain a leader must offer knowledge, services and skill sets specific to government benefits.
• Secondary markets - The secondary markets are a legal and business reality. Unfortunately, our industry has not yet developed an adequate strategy to address the issues created by factoring. As an industry, we should be more proactive in developing best practices related to factoring. We should advise our clients before and following the settlement. Where factoring is appropriate, we should assist the original structured settlement recipient to obtain as much money as possible. Delta Settlements wants to play a leadership role in helping our industry develop a more enlightened, and more effective, factoring strategy. If done correctly, we can improve our sales growth as well as improve the secondary market.
• Internet technologies - As you might guess with my background at IBM, I am very focused on integrating technologies into the structured settlement market. Over the past three years, Upchurch Financial has built and tested a technology-based marketing and case management system. Over the coming year we will extend this platform to Delta and many of our clients. In addition, we anticipate using Delta's website as a platform to provide services and applications for our consultants and clients. Strategically, we expect our technology expertise to be an important differentiating advantage in the structured settlement marketplace.

For additional information about Delta Settlements, see S2KM's blog post titled "Michael Upchurch Purchases Delta Settlements".

Michael Upchurch Purchases Delta Settlements

David Snyder, owner, President and CEO of the Delta Group of Settlement Companies, and his wife Dorothy Snyder, have announced the sale of their company to Michael Upchurch of Jacksonville, Florida. Upchurch currently owns Upchurch Financial Services (UFS).

In his February 26, 2008 announcement to Delta Settlement employees, Snyder stated: "UFS will purchase the controlling stock of Delta Group on or about March 1, 2008.  Michael [Upchurch] wishes to maintain the Delta Group name and will retain the company brand. He will assume the position of Chairman of the Board/Chief Executive Officer, and I will retain my position as President of the company at least through the end of this year. Dorothy Snyder and her staff in the San Juan Capistrano Home Office of Delta Group have agreed to remain with the company to assist Michael with the transition."

In his communication, Snyder added: "One of the main reasons Dorothy and I selected Michael Upchurch to purchase our company is that we felt he will bring much needed "added value" to you, the Producers. ... We are confident that once you have had a chance to work with Michael, you too will feel comfortable with his honesty and integrity, and will help him grow the company to become the foremost plaintiff firm in the business."

Upchurch was equally positive about Delta Settlements and structured settlements: "Structured settlements is a great business with a great future.  Dave and Dorothy Snyder are structured settlement pioneers and visionaries. They deserve tremendous thanks from our industry for what they have contributed. Delta Settlements and the Snyders have mentored and launched many current structured settlement leaders.  I am honored and excited about my new relationship with Delta.  Delta Settlements and structured settlements have tremendous upside potential.  With support from Dave and Dorothy, as well as Delta's employees and Delta's product providers, Delta will continue to distinguish itself as a structured settlement industry leader."

The Delta Group was founded in 1990 by David and Dorothy Snyder and Charles Bradford. The Snyders purchased Bradford's share of Delta Group in 1995. The Delta Group has helped launch several structured settlement firms whose founders and owners began their structured settlement careers with the Delta Group including: Bradford & Associates of Atlanta Georgia; Millennium Settlements of Tallahassee Florida; and The James Street Group of Austin Texas.