2014-00160420-CU-PT

In Re: Peachtree Settlement Funding LLC

Nature of Proceeding: Petition for Approval for Transfer of Structured Settlement Payment

Filed By: Eason, Matthew R.
This petition for approval of transfer of structured settlement payment rights was
originally set for hearing on 4/24/2014 but was continued to this date to permit the filing
of a supplemental declaration by Mr. Moyer. The Court has received and considered
this supplemental declaration and now issues the following tentative ruling on this
matter.

The petition for approval of transfer of structured settlement payment rights is DENIED
because the Court is unable to conclude that the proposed transfer is in Mr. Moyer’s
best interest as required by Insurance Code §10139.5.

Mr. Moyer, a 48 year old married man with two minor children, seeks to transfer
structured settlement rights to 21 quarterly payments of $1,462 due from January 2015
through January 2020 and equaling more than $30,700 with a present value of roughly
$28,591, in exchange for a lump sum payment of $18,178, representing an effective
interest rate of 18.34%. It appears that the transfer proposed here will, if approved, be
Mr. Moyer’s first transfer of his rights to future structured settlement payments.

Mr. Moyer previously stated that he intends to use the proceeds to pay off the loan on
his tow truck but he failed to provide the Court with the balance of that loan or any
documentation relating to that loan. His supplemental declaration now avers that the
balance on the (non-purchase money) lien against his tow truck is “approximately
$6,000,” with a monthly loan payment of roughly $505 and an annual percentage rate
of 101%.

The supplemental declaration for the first time discloses that Mr. Moyer intends to use
the balance of the $18,000 proceeds from this proposed transfer to install a concrete
driveway for $6,000, finish his enclosed patio for roughly $5,000 and pay past due
utility bills totaling nearly $450.

Mr. Moyer now indicates his monthly income as a tow truck driver is “approximately
$1,100,” although he may earn “a couple hundred extra per month” doing “side work”
towing. The supplemental declaration also discloses that Mr. Moyer wife is employed
and earns roughly $600 per month.

Despite the household’s total monthly income of approximately $1,700, the
supplemental declaration indicates Mr. Moyer’s monthly rent is $900. Aside from
being more than half the monthly income, Mr. Moyers states that utilities are $285, cell
phones for the family are another $380, and the cable TV/Internet fees are $127 each
month. Thus, the total monthly expenses (excluding food, gas and other expenses)
consume all but $8 of the $1,700 his typical monthly household income.

While it is apparent that Mr. Moyer is currently experiencing a “financial hardship,” this
Court cannot find that spending roughly $11,000 to improve property which he does
not own but merely rents is in his best interest. This is particularly true given that Mr.
Moyer’s household’s income cannot cover all monthly expenses when food and gas
are included and that he is already past due on a number of his expenses. Moreover,
since it is unlikely that the proposed transfer will alleviate what is sure to be an ongoing
monthly financial deficit unless and until Mr. Moyer becomes more financially
responsible, the transfer proposed here will not be in his best interest as required by
Insurance Code §10139.5.

For the foregoing reasons, the present petition is denied. However, the Court will
entertain a new, different and verified petition on Mr. Moyer’s behalf provided it
sufficiently demonstrates the proceeds from the proposed transfer will be used for
purposes that satisfy Insurance Code §10139.5’s requirement of being in his best
interest.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required.
(Code Civ. Proc. §1019.5; CRC Rule 3.1312.)