Litigation

Some of those in the structured settlement and settlement planning industry who have aspirations to use the Spencer v Hartford case in their marketing schemes ought to look themselves in the mirror. A specific class carved out of the class action lawsuit included those who settled with Hartford insureds with a Hartford Life structured settlement BUT, were represented by a plaintiff structured settlement broker or settlement planner.

While you can count me as someone who had  disdain for The Hartford's erstwhile "all or nothing" structured settlement business decision, there are questions to be asked of those who now have aspirations to burn The Hartford and other insurers in effigy.

Inconvenient Questions

1. How many of those now using Spencer v Hartford as a tool with plaintiff lawyers accepted a share of commission on structured settlements from Hartford insured cases THEN, when they had knowledge that there was "deal" in place?
2. How many of them were affiliated, at any relevant time covered in the lawsuit, with general agents who signed agreements with The Hartford to accept a lower rate of commission on cases settled with Hartford insureds?

Ironically, one of the plaintiff attorneys in the class action, Richard B Risk, Jr., who was recently given a lifetime achievement award by the Society of Settlement Planners in part due to the  result of the suit,  was a licensed insurance agent and structured settlement broker for the early portion of the relevant times covered by the suit.

I find it pathetic that some in my industry have chosen to go down this road.  Yet I find it amusing to know that at some point the dots will be connected between these over the top marketers and their own failure to disclose.

"Reality Is Only Seen When The Mirror Is Clean"-Unknown