If you are in a suit or facing a lawsuit, you should know how to select portfolio servicing lawsuit funding from a reputable company. This type of settlement funding is not for everyone, but for those that are in financial distress, it may be a viable solution.
In Esperanza Corral v. Select Prose Inc., Case No. 10-cv-01991 (E.D. Cal. 2020), the plaintiff sought legal fees and lost wages from the defendants after they defaulted on a loan agreement. The defendant’s attorney, who was responsible for handling legal issues related to the loan, had failed to properly prepare and file a complaint against the plaintiff. On appeal, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendant. The Court of Appeal further held that, absent this type of error, an award of fees and/or wage loss would violate the defendants’ right of due process.
At this point, Esperanza Corral is not likely to receive a large cash advance. However, she can retain a portfolio servicing company to assist her in selecting a payment option from a group of similar companies that can be found online. A portfolio servicing company works with various debt collections agencies and private equity firms. For each case, the portfolio servicing company will work with its clients to develop a loan with terms and conditions tailored to the particular facts of that case. The portfolio servicing company then prepares and submits a complaint to the debt collection agency in a timely manner.
Because Esperanza Corral sought to collect money owed for an amount less than the amount owed, the Court of Appeal found that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the judgment to the defendant. The court concluded that the defendants had provided sufficient evidence to support their argument that they were entitled to the judgment. Additionally, the defendant failed to show that it would be unduly burdensome to them to pay the full amount of the judgment, so the judgment did not exceed the plaintiff’s ability to repay the loan.
The Court of Appeal stated that there were several reasons why it could conclude that the plaintiffs’ claims against Select Prose were likely to succeed. First, the evidence showed that the defendants knew or reasonably should have known, that they would fail to meet their monthly obligations; the defendants did not provide sufficient evidence to show that they were unable to pay the debt within the specified time period of time; and they did not provide evidence that they had exhausted all reasonable efforts to negotiate new terms. with the plaintiff failed to produce evidence to indicate that it would be difficult for them to repay the debt.
The Court of Appeal further held that the fact that the plaintiff’s attorney was no longer involved in her case indicated that her attorney may not have been able to handle the case competently. The Court of Appeal determined that Esperanza Corral lacked standing to bring a case on behalf of the plaintiff because the attorney had failed to pursue the case after the original lawsuit was filed, despite the plaintiff’s continued assistance.
Esperanza Corral’s lawsuit could have been defeated if she had retained a portfolio servicing attorney at that time, but she may have been better served by taking care of the claim herself through a third party. Instead, she chose to move forward with her legal counsel and obtain the best possible settlement with Select Prose.
If you are in need of settlement funding, do not ignore the advice of a servicing portfolio service. because the company will not only save you from losing your lawsuit, but you may also save yourself from financial hardship in the future. Remember that litigation financing can be your best defense against the claims you make in a lawsuit, so make sure that you are using this option carefully.