Trending Now

What is a better investment, Commercial or Consumer Legal Funding? (2 of 2)

Executive Summary

  • Consumer legal funding is a much more consistent and predictable asset class
  • Headline risks, while real in the earlier days of the industry’s evolution, are now consistent with more mature consumer finance asset classes
  • Consumer legal funding has a strong ESG component through the social benefits provided to the segment of society that relies on it the most

Slingshot Insights:

  • On a risk-adjusted basis, factoring in volatility and predictability of returns, the pre-settlement advance industry outperforms the commercial legal finance industry
  • Duration predictability, return rates and loss rates are the main factors for out-performance
  • Investors would be mistaken to overlook the consumer legal finance market in assessing various non-correlated investment asset classes
  • As with any asset class, manager selection is critical to investment success

In part 1 of this article, I provided some background on the consumer litigation finance market, with a focus on the pre-settlement advances sub-sector which is the largest segment of the consumer legal finance market.  Part I also discussed how the market has regulated, evolved and bifurcated.

In the second part of this two part series, I discuss the underlying economics of the pre-settlement advance subsegment, the status of regulation and some thoughts on how the market continues to evolve and why institutional investors are increasingly getting involved.

Underlying Economics

One of the first research reports that attracted me to the PSA market was a 2018 study that was undertaken by Professors Ronen Avraham and Anthony Sebok entitled “An Empirical Investigation of Third Party Consumer Litigant Funding”.  It was the first large scale empirical study of consumer legal funding in the United States which analyzed over 100,000 funding requests over a 12-year period provided by one of the largest consumer legal funders in the US.  While the analysis was inherently skewed because it came from a single funder, the large size of the data set is likely representative of the broader market, and hence many of the insights highlighted by the authors are likely true of the broader market to one degree or another, with certain insights being specific to the funder and its approach.

Without going into the details of the report (see highlights below), suffice it to say the report demystified much of the industry and debunked many of the criticisms that were levelled at the industry by naysayers and those with an economic incentive to ensure the industry was not successful. Perhaps “lying” is a bit harsh, but there were certainly many distortions being promulgated about the industry that were neither present in the data nor a reflection of the specific funder’s business.

Source: https://www.americanlegalfin.com/alfaresources/

On the plus side, the research discovered that while loss rates were relatively high at 12% (again, possibly a consequence of the risk & return threshold of this particular funder) there were numerous instances of the funder taking “hair cuts” (i.e. reducing their accepted returns to below contracted levels) for the benefit of the consumer.  In other words, the funders ‘have a heart’ and will proactively reduce their return expectations to leave the injured party in a position that is more equitable than if they stuck to their contracted terms.  On the negative side, the net return profile was 44% per annum, which suggests that even after losses and “hair cuts” this is an expensive form of financing. Keep in mind, this study was over a 12-year period prior to 2018, and the rates today are likely not as high as they were in the beginning of the industry due to competition and regulation.

A second explanation for the relatively high rates is that depending on the funder’s risk profile, the funder may be willing to take on more risk (i.e. accept more losses) than another funder in return for a higher rate of interest. Whereas another funder may be more conservative and have stricter underwriting standards, accepting fewer cases and lower loss rates, but also charging lower rates of return. Also keep in mind that given how litigious a society the US has become, we must appreciate that inherent in the personal injury system is a higher level of frivolous claims than you might fund in other jurisdictions which could also explain a higher loss rate.

For me, this report legitimized (i) the need for, and societal benefits of, this form of financing, (ii) the size of the total addressable market, and (iii) that the competitors in this market (while likely earning an oversized return in the early days of the industry) were flexible with consumers and willing to forego returns to make the outcome fair for all interested parties.

In other words, it appeared the market was functioning similar to other consumer-facing finance markets.

Benefits of Diversification, Loss Rates & Durational Certainty

As I looked at the PSA market, I looked at it through the lens of both the private equity market and the commercial legal finance (CLF) market, and there a few notable differences that make this a more attractive market than commercial legal finance.  First, the portfolios inherent in many funders’ businesses are highly diversified.  With an average financing size of $3,000, there are hundreds to thousands of claims in any given portfolio.  With diversification comes stability, and with the inherent low overall loss rates comes a predictability of returns – all music to the ears of an investor.

The one significant problem that appears to be persistent in the commercial legal finance market is the prevalence of overly concentrated portfolios and high concentration limits within fund documents. The consequence of high concentration is high volatility, and that is exactly what is present in most CLF portfolios, hence the increasing need to apply expensive insurance.  The other issue for most CLF investments is uncertainty about duration. The personal injury legal market is fairly predictable from a timing perspective, and because the financing is interest rate based (as opposed to tied to a fixed multiple of capital), time is not your enemy (with some exceptions) from an investor’s perspective. CLF on the other hand is very unpredictable from a duration perspective, varying from months to several years. As many commercial funding contracts cap returns to a multiple of drawn capital, time is initially your friend but ultimately your enemy.

The unpredictable nature is the bane of the existence for publicly listed commercial legal finance firms, as their shareholders want predictable case outcomes generating predictable returns and cashflows, but the portfolios are inherently unpredictable, and so many times the public shareholders are disappointed. Accordingly, their inherent cashflow volatility prevents their stock prices from reflecting true value (said another way, their stock prices reflect the true value of their businesses after adjusting for the unpredictability of their cashflows).

The PSA market, on the other hand, is very predictable, which is why it has been able to obtain risk ratings and thereby attract conservative institutional capital at a relatively low cost of capital.  As an investor, I would take a stable 10-15% return all day along in the face of a volatile return profile in the CLF market that can vary from -10% to +30%. They may (emphasis on “may”) both average out to the same return over the long run, one just allows you to sleep much better at night. Similarly, from a business owner’s perspective, stable and predictable returns will always be more highly valued than volatile returns, and so as a business owner, you are significantly better off aiming for predictability for a given return profile.  In addition, this will allow business owners to create equity value that they can later monetize through the sale of their business, which is something CLF managers will have difficulty doing due to the volatility of their portfolios.

Regulation

Another aspect of an industry’s underlying economics is the consistency of the regulatory regime and the potential impact changes in regulations could have on the industry and its economics. On this item, there was less certainty at the time I made my first investment, but as time has progressed, it is clear that more and more states are considering or implementing new regulations for the PSA industry. Legal doctrines of champerty and maintenance are generally being set aside, but not always. Some states view PSA as loans, and hence subject to usury limitations, whereas other states have determined they are not loans because they are non-recourse other than to the outcome of the case, which precludes them from the definition of loans.

Some states, like West Virginia, have placed onerous interest rate limitations which have essentially decimated the industry, whereas others have put in place more reasonable limitations.  Some states have come out against PSA and others believe it is a necessary part of a functioning economy and supportive of individual rights (Minnesota is still ruling on whether funding is a loan). The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) has been monitoring the PSA market since 2011, but it is not quite clear whether they have the authority to regulate the industry and attempts by the CFPB to do so have been rebuffed for the most part – the key distinction seems to be whether these are recourse loans or non-recourse advances. The first is a loan product arguably under the purview of the CFPB, and the second is not contemplated under the CFPB’s mandate. It appears to date the CFBP has only pursued post-settlement lenders and structured settlement providers, which are a different part of the consumer market.

Today, regulatory risk remains in the market as most states have not contemplated or implemented regulations, but no different than the payday loan market, done properly and without undue influence from interested parties but in the context of the market’s economic reality and keeping consumer rights in mind, a regulated marketplace brings stability to the market and standards that are ultimately beneficial for consumer and market participants who rely on stability.

A ’Feel Good’ Asset Class

Beyond the hard numbers, the risk profile and the cash-on-cash returns, lies the “feel good” nature of this asset class, which is what attracted me to the commercial legal finance market.  For all of the headline risk and the early profiteering that happens in every industry, PSA is a necessity in the market and becomes increasingly important as our societies become further economically stratified and the middle class continues to thin.

Despite its costs, and there are good economic reasons for its cost (within reason), it provides a strong societal benefit to allow those whose lives have been turned upside down as a result of an accident that has had health (mental & physical), financial and personal costs that most of us cannot imagine. The industry represents a ‘ray of hope’ for someone who may have lost hope due to their circumstances.  I would posit that the industry itself is not predatory (although I will admit there are profiteers), but in fact is a tool to be used against the predatory insurance companies who are not being held accountable by state regulators because it is impossible for the regulators to respond to every single personal injury claim.  If nothing else, insurance is designed to help the injured and the remediation should be swift and commensurate with the financial damage.  Having to wait 3-4 years for a settlement outcome and pay out of pocket for hospital bills is anything but swift or commensurate, and is merely a tactic by insurance companies to benefit from the time value of money (i.e. a dollar today is worth less in a year’s time).  Investors can take comfort in the fact that funders do not pursue frivolous claims because the risk/reward of doing so upsets the predictability of the industry’s cashflows.

Then there are Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) considerations…. 

In a world full of ‘ESG washing’, legal finance is perhaps one of the most ESG compliant asset classes that exist.  The underlying nature of the claim is rooted in justice, and pre-settlement advances allow for justice to prevail by leveling the playing field between the impecunious injured party and the wealthy insurer with time, money and lawyers at their disposal.

The social benefits of litigation are clearly in good alignment with investing in those activities that have a positive impact on society, even if imperfect.  As strong as the ESG characteristics are in the commercial legal finance markets, they are even stronger in the PSA market because the impact is measurable and directly impacts an individual’s life.  All one has to do is review some of the industry testimonials to understand the impact this form of financing can have on one’s life, and there are tens of thousands of examples of this impact occurring on a yearly basis.

As investors consider the headline risk, they should also give weight to the ESG benefits of the asset class.

PSA Today

While many facets of the PSA market look similar today to what they were at inception, underneath the exterior is a tale of two worlds. From a competitive perspective, there is a segment of the market that has clearly positioned themselves as market leaders and have achieved a level of scale and efficiency that has allowed them to tap into the most conservative and sophisticated levels of capital, in part due to an overall low risk profile and in part due to being strong operators.

From a regulatory perspective, this industry will likely be regulated at the state level and that regulation is well underway. I would expect by the end of this decade a majority of states will have some form of regulation or guidance in place and by the end of next decade most, if not all, will.

From a competitive perspective, we are now seeing some level of consolidation as some of the larger players are starting to acquire competitors either to bulk up their own operations or to expand into adjacent markets like medical receivables/liens.  Regulatory standards will force all market participants to behave appropriately and will generally raise the standards in the market for the benefit of funders and consumers.

From a funding perspective, we will continue to see larger funders tap the securitization market for relatively inexpensive financing, or to align themselves with captive sources of financing from institutional investors.  In other words, as much as the industry has changed in the last two decades, we should expect to see a similar level of change going forward, but we should never lose sight of the end consumer and the benefits it brings to their lives. After all, someone needs to counter the vast resources of the insurance companies, which left unchecked, will silently inflict damage upon individuals and their families.

Slingshot Insights 

I have often wondered why institutional investors quickly dismissed the consumer legal finance asset class solely due to headline and regulatory risk.  I came to the conclusion that the benefits of diversification are significant in legal finance, and so this factor alone makes consumer legal finance very attractive.  Digging beneath the surface you will find an industry that is predicated on social justice (hence, strong ESG characteristics), and while there has and continues to be some bad actors in the industry, there has been a clear bifurcation in the market with the ‘best-in-class’ performers having achieved a level of sophistication and size that has garnered interest from institutional capital as evidenced by the large number of securitizations that have taken place over the last few years (7 by US Claims alone).  This market has yet to experience significant consolidation, and recent interest rate increases have likely had a negative impact on smaller funders’ earnings and cashflow, which may present an impetus to accelerate consolidation in the sector.

As always, I welcome your comments and counter-points to those raised in this article.

 Edward Truant is the founder of Slingshot Capital Inc. and an investor in the consumer and commercial legal finance industry.  Slingshot Capital inc. is involved in the origination and design of unique opportunities in legal finance markets, globally, investing with and alongside institutional investors.

Disclosure: An entity controlled by the author is an investor in the consumer legal finance sector.

Consumer

View All

Rockpoint Legal Funding Shines at Consumer Attorneys of California Annual Convention

By Harry Moran |

Rockpoint Legal Funding proudly participated in the annual conference hosted by the Consumer Attorneys of California (CAOC), showcasing its commitment to supporting legal professionals and their clients. As the only funding company endorsed by CAOC, Rockpoint Legal Funding leveraged this premier event to connect with new and prospective partners reinforcing its position as a trusted funder within California's legal community.

The CAOC is a prestigious network of attorneys dedicated to protecting the rights of California consumers. Each year, the organization hosts its annual convention, bringing together some of the brightest legal minds and innovators in the industry. For Rockpoint Legal Funding, this event was an invaluable opportunity to demonstrate its unwavering dedication to empowering attorneys and their clients through tailored legal funding solutions.

During the convention, Rockpoint operated a booth where team members engaged with attendees, offering insights into the company's services and how they benefit both legal professionals and consumers seeking justice. From new attorneys looking for funding solutions to established firms aiming to streamline their case workflows, Rockpoint provided personalized advice and showcased its comprehensive suite of legal funding options.

"Rockpoint is proud to partner with the Consumer Attorneys of California. We take a lot of pride in serving the attorneys and their clients of this prestigious organization," said Ramtin Ghaneeian, Founding Partner of Rockpoint Legal Funding. His statement highlights the company's commitment to strengthening its collaboration with CAOC and continuing to support its mission of safeguarding the rights of California consumers.

President of Rockpoint Legal Funding, Maz Ghorban, emphasized the value of building strong relationships at events like this, stating, "It's a privilege to connect with our law firm partners at the CAOC convention each year while ensuring our values align with protecting California consumers through legal recourse."

Rockpoint's presence at the CAOC annual convention underscores its dedication to fostering meaningful connections within the legal community. By being the only CAOC-endorsed funding company, Rockpoint reinforces its credibility and reliability in the legal funding landscape. This endorsement is a testament to Rockpoint's shared vision with CAOC in championing consumer rights and providing critical support to those navigating the justice system.

For attorneys and law firms, Rockpoint Legal Funding offers a variety of non-recourse funding solutions, ensuring clients have the financial support they need during ongoing litigation. This commitment aligns perfectly with CAOC's mission to advocate for justice and fairness for California consumers.

As Rockpoint continues to deepen its relationships with legal professionals, events like the CAOC annual convention remain a cornerstone of its outreach efforts. The company looks forward to future collaborations and furthering its impact within the legal community.

For more information about Rockpoint Legal Funding and its services, visit Rockpointlegalfunding.com or call (855) 582-9200.

About Rockpoint Legal Funding

Rockpoint Legal Funding is a leading provider of non-recourse legal funding solutions, serving attorneys and their clients with unparalleled expertise and care. With a mission to empower justice and support favorable case outcomes, Rockpoint is committed to providing financial assistance during critical times, ensuring no one is denied access to legal recourse due to financial constraints.

Express Legal Funding Launches Custom-Designed Website Redesign

By Aaron Winston |

The following was contributed by Aaron R. Winston, Strategy Director of Express Legal Funding.

Express Legal Funding, a nationally recognized pre-settlement funding company, is proud to announce the launch of its completely redesigned website. Built on a fully custom WordPress theme, the new website reflects the company’s commitment to innovation, usability, and educating clients through high-quality resources.

Custom-Built for an Exceptional Experience

Unlike generic templates, Express Legal Funding's new site is crafted from the ground up to provide a tailored experience for its users. The custom theme ensures superior functionality, faster load times, and an optimized design that serves both plaintiffs and attorneys. Key elements were developed to improve user engagement and make essential resources more accessible.

Highlighting the Blog: A Resource Hub for Legal Education

One of the standout features of the new site is the expanded and enhanced blog section. The blog serves as a comprehensive resource hub, offering expert insights, step-by-step guides, and practical advice for personal injury plaintiffs and attorneys. Articles are carefully curated and optimized for clarity, ensuring visitors gain valuable knowledge about legal funding and related topics.

Recent posts include:

Aaron Winston, Strategy Director at Express Legal Funding, shared, “Our blog has become an indispensable tool for helping consumers make informed legal and financial decisions. With the redesign, we’ve elevated it to a new level, blending visually engaging content with highly relevant information.”

Key Features of the Redesigned Website:

  • Custom Theme Development: Tailored design and functionality to meet the unique needs of Express Legal Funding’s clients and partners.
  • Interactive Case-Type Summaries: A dynamic widget allows visitors to explore various case types and their funding options in detail.
  • Responsive Design: Built with mobile-first principles, ensuring a seamless experience across all devices.
  • Enhanced Blog: A centralized platform for high-quality, SEO-optimized content that provides actionable insights and legal education.
  • Transparent Pricing Comparison: A detailed section highlights how Express Legal Funding’s rates outperform competitors, reinforcing its commitment to affordability and fairness.

A Commitment to Transparency and User Empowerment

The new website demonstrates Express Legal Funding’s dedication to educating and empowering its audience. Each feature is designed with transparency and ease of use in mind, ensuring that clients have the tools and information they need to make confident decisions about pre-settlement funding.

“Our custom redesign reflects who we are as a company—dedicated, transparent, and forward-thinking innovators,” said Winston. “We’re excited to share our new look and continue to be a trusted resource for personal injury plaintiffs and attorneys.”

Visit the New Website Today

The newly redesigned website is now live at ExpressLegalFunding.com. Explore the updated features and discover how Express Legal Funding continues to bridge the gap between lawsuits and settlements through affordability, transparency, and client-centric services.


About Express Legal Funding:

Express Legal Funding is a pre-settlement funding company based in Plano, Texas, offering financial support to plaintiffs during their legal battles. With an emphasis on education, affordability, and transparency, the company empowers clients to cover essential living expenses while pursuing fair settlements.

Legal-Bay Announces Judge’s Intent to Upend $38MM Sex Abuse Valuation in New Hampshire YDC Case

Legal-Bay, The Pre Settlement Funding Company, announced today that a New Hampshire court has just tossed out an initial $38 million award in favor of a paltry $475k payout even the presiding judge is calling "an unconscionable miscarriage of justice."

Plaintiff David Meehan originally filed suit for the 100+ sexual abuse violations he suffered as a minor at a youth detention center in the 1990s. It turns out, he wasn't the only victim. The case has garnered tremendous headlines for the egregious abuses inflicted upon underage boys and girls at that facility for years. As the whistleblower, Meehan was in a unique position to help subsequent victims who came forward with their own claims of abuse, the first of many to testify. One can only imagine the bravery it must have taken to recount in graphic detail the sexual misconduct he endured as a minor. While the case played out online and through the media, the opinion that mattered most was the jury's; they found Meehan credible enough to award him $38 million, citing personal injury and punitive damages.

However, the jury instructions were not clear, and a technicality has now ensued: According to the verdict sheet, the jurors only listed "1 incident" on the jury form returned to the court after deliberations. Meehan's lawyers, Rus Rilee and David Vicinanzo, had argued off the record that there needed to be more clarity to jurors, but to no avail. State law dictates that $475K is the cap per incident.

After hearing of the state's assertion that the verdict was going to be revised down to $475k, several jurors reached out to Rilee to explain themselves regarding the misunderstanding and their intentions. They felt horrible about the lowered settlement amount and expressed how misinformed they were about the jury instructions in the case. Even the judge in a post-trial order felt the weight of the evidence reflected more than purely a lone incident. (Jurors have clarified post-trial that they meant one ongoing incident of PTSD from the abuse, and not one instance of the abuse itself, because clearly, they all believed his account of how he'd been raped multiple times on numerous occasions.)  

Chris Janish, CEO of Legal Bay, commented, "Legal-Bay has been one of the only companies who has been funding YDC cases since the start. So, with full disclosure, it is without question that we have a vested interest in seeing the plaintiffs prevail. However, aside from our personal belief in the veracity of the claims made, this new verdict is one of the gravest civil injustices our company has witnessed in almost twenty years of doing business. David Meehan was the first to report the abuse and win his case at trial, and now others stand to reap more from his courageous efforts than he will. We understand the state's motivation to protect its taxpayers to some extent, but something just seems amiss here. We are optimistic that the civil justice system and politicians who support their local constituents will work out a more reasonable resolution whether through the courts or otherwise. And we hope that not only Meehan, but all the victims will get justice for the atrocities that occurred in the youth detention centers of New Hampshire and across the nation. That seems to be lost on the defense team and state's position throughout all this, which is disappointing."

If you're a lawyer or plaintiff involved in an active sexual abuse lawsuit of any kind and need an immediate cash advance against an impending lawsuit settlement, please visit Legal-Bay HERE or call toll-free at 877.571.0405.

Legal Bay reports that the New Hampshire YDC litigation has over 1400 cases filed to date. When Legal Bay began funding early on—when no other company would—there were just eight plaintiffs. The company says the other victims have David Meehan and Rus Rilee to thank for their courage to take on the state in what has become one of the most egregious criminal and civil violations of children's rights in U.S. History. 

Whatever the ultimate resolution, YDC cases in N.H. look to be winding down. But that is not the situation in many other litigations nationwide. There are tens of thousands of plaintiffs awaiting justice in many youth detention center cases across the country, as well as other similar litigations that will take time to resolve. Some of them include Mac Hall and foster home sex abuse cases in Los Angeles, CA, southern California clergy cases, New York and New Jersey Catholic Diocese church lawsuits, Boy Scouts of America sexual abuse cases, sex abuse at youth correctional facilities, at sports facilities, and by coaches, camp counselors, teachers, and sadly, many more.

YDC is not an isolated problem. Childhood sexual abuse litigations all over the country are emerging, and the psychological damage caused by so many is beyond what everyday society can even comprehend. Legal Bay is at the forefront of each and every one of these litigations, doing their best to support the victims to get their lives back in order and help them receive justice.

If you're a lawyer or plaintiff involved in an active sexual abuse lawsuit of any kind and need an immediate cash advance against an impending lawsuit settlement, please visit Legal-Bay HERE or call toll-free at 877.571.0405.

Settlement amounts for sex abuse survivors vary widely, and appeals are almost immediately filed, holding up payouts indefinitely. Commercial litigation funding is available while plaintiffs wait out a verdict on appeal, and large pre-settlement funding can be obtained while the verdicts go through the appellate process. 

In larger cases involving organizations like the Catholic Church or Boy Scouts of America, settlements could be in the $100K settlement amount range for even the worst abuses. In cases with smaller class actions or mass torts (less than 50 people), settlement ranges for the highest level of sex abuses can be between $500K and $5MM. 

Legal Bay's loan for settlement funding programs are designed to provide immediate cash in advance of a plaintiff's anticipated monetary award. While it's common to refer to these legal funding requests as settlement loans, loans for settlements, lawsuit loans, loans for lawsuits, etc., the "lawsuit loan" funds are, in fact, non-recourse. That means there's no risk when it comes to loans in lawsuit settlements because there is no obligation to repay the money if the recipient loses their case. Therefore, terms like settlement loan, loans for lawsuit, loans on settlement, or lawsuit loan funds don't necessarily apply, as the "loan on lawsuit" isn't really a loan at all, but rather a stress-free cash advance.

Legal-Bay is known to many as the best legal funding company in the industry for their helpful and knowledgeable staff, and one of the best lawsuit loan companies overall for their low rates and quick turnaround, sometimes within 24-48 hours once all documents have been received.

Amber Cardillo, Legal-Bay's Head of Sex Abuse Funding commented, "We understand the different sex abuse litigations throughout the country better than any other funding company in the industry. Unfortunately, each one is different, and settlement values are based on many factors. We try to work with each victim compassionately and get them the help they need. We welcome all to call and try even if their church is in bankruptcy or if they have been denied additional funding by other companies." 

To apply right now for a loan settlement program, please visit the company's website HERE or call toll-free at: 877.571.0405 where agents are standing by to answer any questions.