Reasons a Claimant S Counsel Should Consider a QSF

Page 1

Risk Law Firm

Reasons a Claimant’s Counsel Should Consider a QSF

To avoid having an adversary handle what may be the largest financial transaction of the injury victim’s life, a conflict of interest that cannot be waived under an attorney’s canons of professional conduct;
To avoid a legal malpractice claim by the claimant against his or her own attorney for allowing the defense to commit fraud during the settlement process or cause unnecessary adverse tax consequences;
To make immediate partial distributions for costs, attorney fees and to claimants who are not interested in any form of periodic payment;
To select an annuity issuer from the free marketplace, taking advantage of free market competition, rather than being forced to accept an annuity from the liability insurer’s affiliate;
To preserve the option of the claimant to receive tax-free periodic payments, while allowing the defendant(s) to be dismissed;
To receive funds while preserving the structured settlement option for any and all claimants, and allowing the defendant(s) to be dismissed;
To receive and hold funds while other matters are being considered, such as the determination of liens and their amounts or the need to establish a supplemental needs trust under 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(d)(4)(A) to preserve Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) eligibility;
To receive funds for a gravely injured person while the defense’s accepted offer is still enforceable, since the death of the claimant changes the circumstances and likely would cause the defense to renegotiate for a reduced amount;
To receive funds immediately from a financially troubled defendant or insurer, while plaintiff’s options are considered, including preservation of all tax benefits of a structure; and
Because the cost of a QSF can be at no reduction of the damage recovery, by using interest earned on the growth of the funds while they are on deposit in the QSF, and from part of the compensation paid to a structured settlement consultant by a life insurance company when periodic payments are funded with a commissionable product such as an annuity. ■

©2006 Richard B. Risk, Jr., J.D. All rights reserved. This publication does not purport to give legal or tax advice and may not be used to avoid penalties that may be imposed under the Internal Revenue Code or to promote, market or recommend to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. An article that first appeared in Structured Settlements ™ newsletter, published by AMROB Publishing Company, is designated by year and issue number.

Risk Law Firm ■ 3417 East 76th Street ■Tulsa, Oklahoma 74136-8064 ■ 918.494.8025 ■