Hi. My brother in law has received a settlement offer on behalf of his
son for the wrongful death of his son's mother (auto accident). He
resides in IL. As currently described to him 50% would go into a court
monitored cash account (CDs with max term of 6 months) and 50% into a
structured settlement.

He was presented with three different annuity options for the structured
settlement. He was never offered an independent financial planning
advice. I did not know he was involved in this lawsuit until he came for
me for advice about the annuities.

I have recommended he get advice from a financial planner; however, his
lawyer has stated that the court will not go for payment of financial
planner fees, even if these are minimal (i.e. fee only for basic advice
on offers).

I find this hard to believe. I can't imagine that he is expected to make
this type of decision without the advice of a (financial) expert.

Also, it seems he is locked into annuities offered by the plaintiff
insurance company's broker.

So here are my questions?

1) Is it common/possible for him to get paid financial advice and have
that cost covered in the settlement (perhaps taken out of the cash
component since they obviously have agreed on numbers).

2) Is he generally locked into some type of annuity? I.e. this tends to
not be negotiable and he just needs to find the one that works best for
his son and his current and projected needs? The lawyer indicated that
the courts want to see low-risk investments.

3) Shouldn't his attorney have recommended he get some independent
financial advice? My brother in law doesn't have any investments and so
this is all very new. It all seems very rushed to me so that the lawyer
can "close the deal" and get his 33% contingency fee.

4) Any other questions he should be asking? Things to consider?

5) Any articles, books, or Websites for the layman you might recommend?

Thanks in advance,
-Mike

--
Mike Orb
mike _at_ orb dreamhost com

"Mike Orb" <_remove_everything_but__mike__@orb.dreamhost.com> wrote in
message news:ab44a09kl203ar1cvah3m5cb1l45uj7hc5@4ax.com... I find this hard to believe. I can't imagine that he is expected to make this type of decision without the advice of a (financial) expert.

It sounds as if nothing is stopping him from consulting a financial expert,
as long as he pays the consultant himself.

Mike Orb <_remove_everything_but__mike__@orb.dreamhost.com> wrote:
[OP's brother-in-law received a settlement offer over an auto
accident. Nominal plaintiff is his (minor?) son.He was presented with three different annuity options for the structuredsettlement. He was never offered an independent financial planningadvice. I did not know he was involved in this lawsuit until he came forme for advice about the annuities.I have recommended he get advice from a financial planner; however, hislawyer has stated that the court will not go for payment of financialplanner fees, even if these are minimal (i.e. fee only for basic adviceon offers).
[snip]2) Is he generally locked into some type of annuity? I.e. this tends tonot be negotiable and he just needs to find the one that works best forhis son and his current and projected needs? The lawyer indicated thatthe courts want to see low-risk investments.

I'm not sure what options he has. If he doesn't trust his lawyer, he
should get another to advise him!
3) Shouldn't his attorney have recommended he get some independentfinancial advice? My brother in law doesn't have any investments and sothis is all very new. It all seems very rushed to me so that the lawyercan "close the deal" and get his 33% contingency fee.

Here's the most important thing. Your b-i-l does *not* have to accept
the settlement offer if he thinks it's not in his son's best interest.
He can insist on going forward with the suit, and take his chances;
the eventual award might be more than or less than the settlement
offer.

He can also make a counter-offer, asking for some of the settlement to
be paid as a "trustee fee" (or whatever the right term is) to cover
the cost of getting some _good_ financial advice.

The chance of getting any more total money out of defendant (or his
insurance) is pretty low, but it should be possible to structure it in
almost any form a court will permit. And I can't see any reason why
your b-i-l shouldn't be allowed something to get expert advice, just
as he would if he hired (frex) a bank to administer the money.

This is for discussion purposes only, and is not legal advice. I'm
not a lawyer. If you want legal advice, hire a lawyer.
--
I pledge allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America, and
to the republic which it established, one nation from many peoples, promising
liberty and justice for all.
Feel free to use the above variant pledge in your own postings.