The following article is part of an ongoing column titled ‘Investor Insights.’  Brought to you by Ed Truant, founder and content manager of Slingshot Capital, ‘Investor Insights’ will provide thoughtful and engaging perspectives on all aspects of investing in litigation finance.  EXECUTIVE SUMARY

• Survey suggests the litigation finance industry has experienced an increase in demand due to the Covid-related financial crisis
• Law firm portfolio financings are a particular active sector of the market
• Defendant collectability risk is top of mind for most respondents
• Covid-19 related cases are predominant in the contract and insurance case types

INVESTOR INSIGHTS

• 2020 should be a good vintage for new litigation finance opportunities
• Generally, there is a feeling that the current economic crisis will put some pressure on IRRs or MOICs of existing portfolios
• Additional diligence on unrealized portions of litigation finance portfolios is warranted in the current environment when assessing fund manager performance

Slingshot Capital and Litigation Finance Journal recently undertook a survey of commercial litigation finance participants to obtain a deeper understanding of the extent to which demand for financing had changed as a result of the current Covid-related financial crisis. Editor’s note– the following contribution appears with illustrative graphs and charts here.  Demand for Litigation Finance during Economic Crises It has been thought that crises breed litigation, and while that appears to be the case in the current crisis, that may not have been the case in the Great Financial Crisis of 2008/9, as pointed out by Eric Blinderman in an article he contributed to Law360 in 2019, also referenced in a recent article in Litigation Finance Journal.  The reason for the ultimate lack of litigation, Eric argued, was fear. In the current environment it appears as though people are less fearful (of litigation, that is) as the number of Covid-specific cases is clearly on the rise, and I suspect that will continue for the foreseeable future as the crisis increases its impact on businesses and forces business owners to react in ways previously thought unthinkable, but in the current context are deemed necessary. When the data is analyzed with respect to case type, it is evident that the volume of cases is focused on contract and insurance claims, which should come as no surprise. Issues of Force Majeure and breaches of contract are likely the majority of the volume of contract claims.  Business owners have been placed in an unprecedented position in that they are likely being forced to breach contracts to save their businesses.  While business owners and executives may regret their actions and would not have acted in a similar way under normal circumstances, they are no doubt acting in the best interests of the business to avoid insolvency and will deal with the repercussions (litigation) once they have ‘righted the ship’.  The insurance sector has also been particularly negatively impacted, and much of this likely stems from denial of payouts under policies, with business interruption insurance being particularly active. In fact, the UK insurer, Hiscox, is being sued in a class action-style litigation in the UK with Harbour Litigation Funding providing the litigation finance to pursue the case.  Accordingly, litigation finance has and will continue to be a beneficiary of this activity. Covid Survey Results Let’s now take a look at the Covid Survey results to see how the broader commercial litigation finance industry has been impacted by the Covid-induced financial crisis. The survey was distributed globally.  Of the respondents, the vast majority were funders with dedicated litigation finance funds. Overall, the industry has been positively impacted by the financial effects of Covid-19 with 64% of respondents experiencing an increase in origination activity. In some cases, the increase in origination activity has been dramatic, with originations in excess of 25% being experienced by approximately half of respondents. The largest impact in terms of the type of activity is equally split between law firm portfolio financings and single case financings.  However, since portfolio financings are inherently larger, it stands to reason that a much larger dollar volume of financing will be required for these financing types. In terms of the source of originations, it appears to be a combination of existing relationships, mainly from law firms, and new relationships, mainly from law firms and directly from plaintiffs. It is encouraging to see new relationships continuing to be formed at this stage of the evolution of the industry. A natural consequence of demand for litigation finance is a demand for capital commitments by the litigation funders.  Accordingly, it appears that the demand impact of Covid will have the effect of accelerating plans for new fundraisings, with about half of respondents indicating their fundraising plans have been accelerated.  Accordingly, investors in search of good risk-adjusted and non-correlated returns should expect to see more opportunities in the marketplace.  As always, diversification is critical to successful and prudent investing in the litigation finance marketplace. As it relates to the impact that the current financial crisis will have on the expected return profile, almost 50% of respondents suggested it is too early to tell.  However, for those who did have some visibility or were confident in making an estimate, it appears that the expectation is that their existing portfolios may be negatively impacted, which is consistent with what I would have expected given the extent of this economic crisis. I was personally forecasting that durations would be longer, simply due to the effect that court closures would have on existing cases, where the timing of settlement discussions are ultimately impacted by the timing of the court process.  In this light, I would expect to see portfolios maintain longer durations which may equate to lower internal rates of return, but this depends on the escalator clauses within their funding agreements, which may see funders obtain larger multiples of invested capital if the delay breaks through timing thresholds.  I would also expect that the threat of collectability risk might put pressure on plaintiffs to accept lower settlement amounts, and defendants will use liquidity concerns to their advantage by low-balling settlement offers. However, this phenomenon could be situation-specific, and more prevalent in certain industries.  As previously stated, one of the reasons I would have expected return expectations to be increasingly negative is due to defendant collectability risk.  In this vein, it seems that most managers are focused on the impact this risk will have on their portfolios, with most managers indicating that collection risk has increased, which is expected given the impact the crisis has had on certain industries, and the impact it has had on corporate liquidity.  Looking forward, managers are focusing on credit risk more than they have in the past, and this is mirrored in their focus on the industries in which their defendants operate.  Interestingly, despite the significant impact the crisis has had on the demand for legal services, few managers are concerned about the impact on the solvency of the plaintiff law firm.  This may be explained by the fact that the law firm can be substituted by the plaintiff should it run into solvency issues, and so managers may view this as an acceptable risk. The Bonus Question  And now the moment you’ve all been waiting for…. When asked whether Covid-induced isolation has caused respondents to think about the benefits of boarding school, the majority confirmed that their children are angels and that they would like to spend as much time with them as possible.  Although, there were a few who noted an interest in boarding schools, and one did attempt to sell his child to the highest bidder. This brings to a close the results of our second commercial litigation finance survey.  Slingshot Capital and Litigation Finance Journal would like to thank those that participated in the survey for their time and feedback. Our next survey will cover fundraising initiatives by fund managers in the commercial litigation finance sector. We anticipate making the fundraising survey an annual survey, so we can track fundraising activities over time. If you would like to participate in future surveys, please contact Ed Truant here to register your interest.

AIM-listed Litigation Capital Management Limited (LCM), a leading international provider of disputes financing solutions, notes the announcement on 22 May 2020 by the Federal Treasurer of Australia, Josh Frydenberg, that litigation funders operating in Australia will be subject to new regulation requiring them to obtain and maintain an Australian Financial Services Licence (AFSL). LCM believes it is the only litigation financier in Australia that currently holds and maintains an AFSL. Currently the supply of litigation finance is exempt from the requirement to hold an AFSL and such exemption is likely to be removed by August 2020. This places LCM in an advantageous position against its peers operating in Australia. As part of the new regulatory process, LCM has been asked by the Australian Federal Government to assist in a parliamentary inquiry into whether any further regulation of litigation finance is required in the context of class actions, the findings and recommendations of which will be made public. LCM has anticipated for some time that class actions in Australia would be the subject of further regulation and expressed its support for such an initiative while assisting in two prior inquiries, one by the Australian Federal Government and one by a State Government. LCM actively manages its portfolio of investments with its objective of spreading investment risk to ensure that no industry sector or type of claim dominates its portfolio. Specifically, LCM limits the number of class actions that it is prepared to invest in depending upon the size of its overall portfolio. LCM remains firmly focused on the provision of disputes financing solutions in the areas of insolvency, commercial disputes, arbitration and corporate portfolio funding. Patrick Moloney, CEO of LCM, comments: “LCM anticipated changes to regulation and as a result already holds an Australian Financial Services Licence. LCM fully supports the move to increase regulation in our industry. Regulation of litigation funding insofar as it concerns class actions is something that is not only welcomed by LCM but could provide it with a strategic advantage as the cost and compliance issues are likely to create further barriers to entry and restrict the numbers of financiers that can fund class actions.” In April, LCM appointed Mary Gangemi as its new Chief Financial Officer and James Foster as an Investment Manager, both based in London. Their appointments follow the March close of a new US$150m third-party fund backed by significant global blue-chip investors. The fund marks LCM’s return to managing third-party funds, following its building of a permanent source of balance sheet capital through the equity markets. Contact:\ Angela Bilbow Global Head of Communications abilbow@lcmfinace.com +44 (0)20 3955 5271 About LCM Litigation Capital Management (LCM) is a leading international provider of litigation financing solutions. This includes single-case and portfolios across; class actions, commercial claims, claims arising out of insolvency and international arbitration. LCM has an unparalleled track record, driven by effective project selection and robust risk management. Headquartered in Sydney, with offices in London, Singapore, Brisbane and Melbourne, LCM listed on AIM in December 2018, trading under the ticker LIT.

The following article is part of an ongoing column titled ‘Investor Insights.’  Brought to you by Ed Truant, founder and content manager of Slingshot Capital, ‘Investor Insights’ will provide thoughtful and engaging perspectives on all aspects of investing in litigation finance.  EXECUTIVE SUMARY

• There has been an unprecedented & swift fluctuation in currency markets globally
• Currency fluctuations can have a significant impact on litigation finance funds with currency exposures
• Impartial currency advisors will provide market transparency and specific solutions geared towards your specific situation

INVESTOR INSIGHTS

• Currency hedging is an important risk mitigation strategy to consider for portfolios exposed to multi-currencies without hedging
• Hedging cannot eliminate currency risk entirely but can mitigate its impact
• When assessing manager returns, ensure the effects of currency gains/losses are removed to understand the actual return profile of the portfolio

Editor’s note– the following contribution appears with illustrative graphs and charts here.  The recent unprecedented and rapid strengthening in the US dollar has created a significant 8% swing in currency rates in a matter of days. Such abrupt swings can have significant implications for businesses or financial instruments that are exposed to currency.  As an example, in 2014, the owners of the famous ‘Gherkin’ building in the city of London were forced to sell the building, which was 99% occupied and performing exceptionally well. The only problem was, the debt the owners had used to acquire the building was denominated in multiple currencies, including Swiss francs.  As a consequence of the financial crisis of 2008, the Swiss Franc appreciated against the British pound by almost 60% over a few years, which increased the debt by £100 million.  This was compounded by interest rate swaps that ended up £140 million out of the money. Consequently, the owners were forced to sell their investment in order to repay the higher level of debt, as expressed in British pounds. Similarly, there are global concerns related to the domestic currency obligations of US dollar denominated debt of developing countries (US bond holders did not want to accept currency risk and insisted on US dollar denominated bonds).  These developing countries have seen their dollars depreciate relative to an appreciating US Dollar, which makes their US dollar denominated debt that much more expensive in terms of their domestic currency, exacerbating their debt obligations in the middle of a global financial crisis. All of that is to say that currency fluctuations can happen quickly, and have a material impact on the value of the underlying instrument to which they relate. Implications for Litigation Finance Investing In a previous article, I made reference to the fact that the commercial litigation finance marketplace has quickly become a global marketplace.  Typically, we would see alternative asset managers toil away in their backyards for a number of years until they achieve sufficient scale to justify replicating infrastructure worldwide, in order to expand operations into less familiar but potentially less efficient markets – ‘pursuing greener pastures’ one might say. Commercial litigation finance, on the other hand, has been a rather global marketplace right from its origins. Some of the larger funders, including hedge funds, have been focused on major opportunities that have taken them into international markets for specific cases (international arbitration, investor-state arbitration, intellectual property or class action cases) with sufficient size to justify their due diligence efforts and costs.  Other funders have specialized in particular case types (e.g. intellectual property) which have enabled them to apply their expertise and networks into vast geographic locales. The globalization of the industry has implications for the return profile of those managers that invest globally in multiple currencies.  Some fund managers, like Omni Bridgeway (formerly IMF Bentham), have raised country-specific private partnership funds which directly address the currency issue.  As an example, Omni Bridgeway has a US private partnership that was denominated in US dollars and only invests in US cases, thereby negating the impact of currency fluctuations on returns.  Other funders have decided that the currency fluctuations are either immaterial relative to their expected returns, or are too difficult or too expensive to effectively hedge, and hence have left investors with the exposure. As an investor in a fund, it is easy to enter into currency hedges to deal with currency fluctuations inherent in a portfolio of homogeneous currencies relative to one’s reference currency. However, the problem becomes difficult to solve when the fund manager invests across multiple geographies (and hence multiple currencies) within a portfolio.  In those instances, it is virtually impossible to perfectly hedge the underlying currency exposure unless one is privy to information regarding the date the commitment was provided, the dates of the various funding contract draws, and the amount and date of the expected outcome.  Of course, if I knew the answer to these questions on a case-by-case basis, I probably wouldn’t need to hedge (although I may choose to do so to maximize my profits). As if the quantum of case proceeds wasn’t difficult enough, litigation finance is equally uncertain as it relates to case duration, due to the high degree of variability between the date of the commitment and the date of receipt of the ultimate settlement/award, if any. So, in order to shed some light on the issues inherent in currencies, as well as potential solutions as relates to the commercial litigation finance asset class, I have reached out to a large, publicly-listed currency management solutions expert with the following questions: Questions and Answers: Q1. Is currency hedging fairly common in the alternative investment asset market? Market volatility since 2009 has heightened peoples’ awareness on hedging currency risk, with downturns in sentiment seemingly occurring on a more frequent basis. Currency hedging has certainly been more common in assets classes with lower expectations on IRR, such as the private credit market where volatility can remove the return expectations entirely, but in comparison, the unknown exit dates of Private Equity or Real Estate assets have meant hedging currency risk is far less common. However, as mentioned before, volatility from events such as Brexit, the US/China trade war, and now the COVID-19 Pandemic, has meant an increasing number of enquiries about hedging across all asset classes, including Litigation Finance. Q2. What advice do you have for fund managers who invest their funds across multiple currencies? I think the most important thing to consider is whether the GP is undertaking a non-biased opinion on whether to hedge or not. Using an advisor or non-bank allows a GP further insight into hedging risk, where they perhaps haven’t looked, ensuring LP’s are receiving the best possible product or strategy in the fund. Often, a banking counter-party will offer a product to solve an issue, without understanding/knowing the risks behind that problem. A non-bank counterparty has teams of analysts who work with industry-focused partners on fully exploring all risks within each investment fund, not to mention what the competition is doing. The one piece of advice I would give, is to not follow confirmation bias on hedging, and instead explore all avenues to ensure the best policy is being implemented by the GP. Q3. Given that managers typically raise capital on a ‘blind pool’ basis and may invest across multiple-currencies, what are some of the currency management strategies that managers should be thinking about? A3.  The four key risk areas where we engage with our clients on currency management strategies are:

• Deployment and Exit Risk
• Portfolio Risk
• Share-Class Hedging – it is becoming more common for fund managers to offer currency nominated sleeves to attract a wider investor base.
• Fee Income Risk – if the base currency of the fund differs from the main operating countries of the GP, it may be prudent to look into hedging FX risk on forecastable income.

Q4. Instead of trying to eliminate all currency movements, is there a way to offset ‘black swan’ situations related to large currency fluctuations (similar to what we have seen with the GBP volatility in the context of Brexit), using perhaps a ‘collar’ type strategy? A collar allows you to participate up to a certain level, however, if the market exceeds that level, you may not be able to participate. It is important to get the best advice on an option if you feel that is the best strategy for your requirement. Again, utilising a non-bank counter-party is key to ensuring your LPs receive the most effective strategy for the fund to which they are committing. Q5. Can you comment on the cost of hedging and how those costs can vary based on the solutions applied (options vs. forward purchases vs. other)? Q5.  The present interest rate environment across most G10 countries allows for a significantly reduced cost in hedging risk both on the forward and options market. This means funds can now actively hedge tenures of 5yrs+ via relatively low-cost hedging solutions, where previously they could not, particularly against USD and EM currencies. The cost of hedging differs per the product used, of course. And one thing that’s important to note, is an advisor will not only ensure you receive transparent pricing, but will also allow you to explore unique solutions, which in turn could reduce cash drag to the fund. To the extent readers of this article would like to be connected with the currency management solutions provider referenced above, please email me and I will make an introduction. Investor Insights For investors that are invested in the sector or considering making an investment in the litigation finance market, currency may be an important consideration in risk assessment.  Litigation Finance managers may hedge at the fund level, which would be the most appropriate level at which to hedge, given their direct knowledge of the underlying cases and their cashflow requirements, duration and the expected returns. However, it is also possible to hedge at the investor level (albeit less accurately). Given the heightened level of volatility in currency markets, hedging is more appropriate now than ever before, and in certain jurisdictions where there is country specific risks (i.e. UK - Brexit), it remains important.  In assessing a manager’s portfolio that invests in various currencies, you must remove the effects of currency when assessing returns, as currency-driven returns lack persistence (positive and negative) to determine the true return profile of the fund. Edward Truant is the founder of Slingshot Capital Inc., and an investor in the consumer and commercial litigation finance industry.  

The UK Legal Industry generated revenues of £9.34bn in the first calendar quarter of 2020, down 6.6% on the final quarter of 2019. And while there are usually falls between Q4 and Q1 due to seasonal factors, the drop this quarter was the highest in four years, a full one percentage point greater than the drop in the same period in the prior year. The final weeks of March cover the period when Covid-19 was beginning to impact the economy. To put this in context, overall Q1 2020 UK Services Industries turnover was £53.49bn, down 7.6%. Both Legal and Services had however reached record highs in Q4 2019. Legal Industry Woes  Augusta recently published analysis of 40 of the UK’s leading law firms which shows that before the crisis hit, 55% had insufficient cash on their balance sheets to cover one month’s bills and 38% could not even fund one months’ staff salary’s from reserves. Louis Young, Managing Director at leading litigation funder Augusta commented on the ONS data: “The Legal Industry in the UK had already started to see growth fall off before the pandemic hit. UK law firms have seen significant revenue falls since lockdown began, Q2 will unfortunately be well below past quarters. Many firms are seeking support for their businesses - the provision of finance from external sources will be incredibly important to their survival as time progresses.” Andrew O’Connor, Investment Manager at Augusta and author of the law firm research said: “Before the crisis, Law firm’s lean approaches to cash management were hailed as improving operating efficiency. However this has also left balance sheets undercapitalised to deal with the prolonged financial shock that is currently unfolding”. Louis Young and Andrew O’Connor are available for interview as required. About The Augusta Research:

• In May 2020, Augusta published research based on analysis of the top 40 UK LLPs published accounts.
• Data on financial health and stability was analysed to identify potential issues.
• The full research report is available on request.

About The ONS Data:

• Office of National Statistics publishes regular data on the UK services industry – the Monthly Business Survey
• The chart below shows UK turnover for Legal Services (JQ3O) by quarter since 2015. About Augusta Ventures:- Established in 2013, Augusta is the largest litigation and dispute funding institution in the UK by # cases. Augusta’s scale enables us to make decisions in market-leading timeframes and fund cases of any size. - Augusta is organised into specialist practice groups: Arbitration, Class Action, Competition, Consumer, Intellectual Property and Litigation, and sectors: Financial Services and Construction & Energy. - By the end of 2019, Augusta had funded 227 claims.   Contact: Leor Franks, Chief Marketing Officer, leor.franks@augustaventures.com, +44 20 3510 2100, www.augustaventures.com

Baker Street Funding, LLC (Baker Street), a legal funding company located in New York and South Florida, is committing to increasing their litigation funding efforts on settled cases. This type of legal funding provides contingency fee based attorney and their clients with immediate liquidity to help bridge the gap between settlement and payment distribution.

Daniel DiGiaimo, CEO of Baker Street, said, “It is important during these trying times to help our clients get the money they need as quickly as possible. This is why we are not only committed to funding settled case applications the same day that they apply, but to increase our focus and funding efforts on these claims to help plaintiffs and attorneys get immediate liquidity. We have seen settlements delayed all across the country due to the disruption of the court system and we are committed to help both plaintiffs and attorneys find a solution.”

Baker Street is one of the largest funders in the legal finance industry, which consists of companies that provide plaintiffs and their attorneys access to capital throughout the different procedural stages of litigation. Some companies specialize in pre-settlement funding or case-cost financing but Baker Street is one of the only companies that provides a vast array of services to their clients including pre and post-settlement funding, case cost funding and institutional case funding.

Because of Baker Streets access to multiple streams of capital, they can provide funding from as little as $5,000 all the way up to $50mm+, to the applicant, in some cases as quickly as the same day.

To apply for funding, please visit their application page at www.bakerstreetfunding.com/application or call 888-711-3599. Questions can also be emailed to info@bakerstreetfunding.com.

URL: www.bakerstreetfunding.com

Media Contact Company Name: Baker Street Funding Contact Person: Daniel DiGiaimo Email: Send Email Phone: 888-711-3599 Country: United States Website: https://bakerstreetfunding.com/ Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/pr/4678997#ixzz6MHRWKR1b

CALDWELL, N.J., May 11, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Legal-Bay LLC, the Lawsuit Settlement Funding Company, announced that they have launched a new legal funding division for commercial litigation, lawsuit loans or advances, and attorney loans for law firms. Commercial litigation cases can be extremely complex and require expansive resources for both plaintiffs and law firms to fight properly. Legal-Bay sees this as an under-served market and has built a new division to accommodate the needs of this market. Commercial litigation loans were created to assist plaintiffs level the playing field against deeper-pocket defendants who can simply outspend them. Legal-Bay's experience gives hope to plaintiffs seeking lawsuit settlement loans and ease the process of obtaining legal funding. Chris Janish, CEO of Legal-Bay, commented, "We're seeing an immediate increase in large commercial litigation requests in our new division. Many of our new clients are individuals who normally wouldn't need capital from their suit. However, in this unprecedented time of work layoffs and business closures, funding is at an all-time high.  We have recently raised additional capital and hired new sales representatives to handle our influx." If you're looking for pre-settlement cash from your commercial litigation lawsuit, large lawsuit loan for general working capital, or to inquire about specific case costs, please apply now at: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com Legal-Bay has always been a leader in the commercial litigation arena, and have been expanding their traditional personal injury and mass tort litigation to the much larger commercial litigation market involving complex cases that need hefty funding amounts. Typically, these cases have minimum requests of anywhere from $100K to $20MM and take more time to evaluate. Their network of experienced underwriters and investment bankers have over twenty years' worth of experience to handle your commercial litigation funding needs. Legal-Bay offers case funding for all types of commercial lawsuits, including appellate funding and financing, judgement on appeal loans, verdict loans, verdict financing, whistleblower funding, Qui-tam loans, patent infringement funding, copyright infringement loans, law firm loans, case expenses, law firm lines of credit, and more. To learn more, please visit: http://lawsuitssettlementfunding.com or call: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to hear about your specific case.   Contact: 60 Roseland Ave., Suite 101, Caldwell, NJ 07006
Email: Info@Legal-Bay.com
Phone: (973) 857-1000
https://goo.gl/maps/epBeCtMoevG1vreC9 SOURCE Legal-Bay

ARDMORE, Pa., May 7, 2020 /PRNewswire/ -- Balanced Bridge Funding, LLC ("Balanced Bridge") now offers a special financing program for plaintiffs involved in settled sex abuse cases, who have awards and are interested in receiving a portion of their award upfront. In cases like USC George Tyndall and Larry Nassar, plaintiffs are placed in categories in accordance to their level of abuse. Once they receive notification of their award, they may want to access a portion prior to the anticipated distribution. Balanced Bridge can give them the option to do that. "Our past experience dealing with plaintiffs in these kinds of cases has given us the confidence to move forward with this specially designed program," says Joseph Genovesi, CEO of Balanced Bridge. As a direct funder, Balanced Bridge is able to communicate and coordinate funding to plaintiffs with awards in a matter of days. Rogue gynecologists like Larry Nassar, George Tyndall, and Nikita Levy are well known because of the abuse they rendered to their patients. Each of them was accused of sexual abuse, and because of that, the institutions they worked for were also sued. USC, Michigan State, U.S. Olympics, and John Hopkins University eventually settled with the plaintiffs, costing these institutions millions of dollars. However, with such settlements, the monetary awards the plaintiffs are slated to receive can take a long time to payout. Plaintiffs who have received notification of their award for their settled case and are interested in receiving a portion upfront can complete an application on Balanced Bridge's website. They can also contact the company via email at info@balancedbridge.com or call 267-457-4540.

Balanced Bridge Funding, LLC (“Balanced Bridge”), a specialty finance firm based outside Philadelphia, is ramping up their legal funding efforts to provide capital to plaintiffs and attorneys working on a contingency fee basis. Balanced Bridge’s post-settlement funding product is specifically designed to help bridge applicants from the time of settlement to final distribution of payment. Joseph Genovesi, CEO of Balanced Bridge, said, “It’s during these difficult times that our services are needed more than ever. This is arguably the biggest upheaval the world economy has ever faced, but we stand ready to help those individuals and law firms waiting for payment from settlement agreements now delayed due to disruption of the courts.” Balanced Bridge is one of the premier direct funders in the legal finance space, which consists of firms that provide financing to plaintiffs and plaintiffs’ attorneys at different stages of litigation. Some offer pre-settlement funding, others provide case-cost financing, and very few specialize in providing post-settlement funding, which is Balanced Bridge’s flagship product. Many companies in the legal funding space are not direct funders, rather brokers who receive a commission for arranging financing between the plaintiff, their attorney, and the funder. Because Balanced Bridge is a direct funder backed by institutional investors, they are equipped to advance funds between $10,000 and $10 million directly to the applicant within a matter of days. Among the current settled case awards and fees Balanced Bridge can finance include the Route 91 Festival Shooting, Larry Nassar, USC George Tyndall, Roundup, and many more. Balanced Bridge is prepared to fund plaintiffs with settlement awards from a variety of settled cases. Qualifying plaintiffs would receive a portion of their award upfront. In addition, plaintiffs’ attorneys can obtain financing on their fees tied to settled cases. SSDI, Veterans’ Disability, and court appointed attorneys can also secure funding from Balanced Bridge based on their delayed fees. To apply for funding, please fill out this quick form. For more information about their funding process, please call 267-457-4540 or email info@balancedbridge.com. URL : https://www.balancedbridge.com