The Truth About Consumer Legal Funding: Empowering Victims, Not Exploiting Them

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s recent article, “Lifting the Shadows: Restating the Case for Reforming Third-Party Litigation Funding (TPLF)”, presents an inaccurate and unfair portrayal of an entire industry that, for countless injured Americans, serves as their only lifeline in times of crisis.

It is important to distinguish between litigation funding and consumer legal funding, two entirely different practices that should not be treated as one and the same.

Consumer Legal Funding Is About People, Not Profit

Litigation funding often involves large-scale investors, hedge funds, or foreign entities backing complex commercial cases for financial gain or strategic influence. Consumer Legal Funding, on the other hand, is about helping individuals who have suffered personal injuries, medical malpractice, or other serious hardships and who are struggling to meet their basic living expenses while waiting for their cases to resolve.

Our clients are not corporations or institutions. They are mothers, fathers, workers, and accident victims who suddenly find themselves unable to work, with mounting medical bills and no income to support themselves or their families. When they turn to us, it is not because they are looking to invest in a lawsuit, it is because they need help paying rent, buying food, and keeping their lives afloat until justice is served.

Consumer Legal Funding Gives Injured Victims the Ability to Withstand Pressure and Obtain Fair Settlements

One of the greatest injustices in the legal system is the financial pressure that forces plaintiffs to accept the first settlement offer they receive, even when it is far below the value of their claim. Insurance companies know this and routinely exploit it. Plaintiff funding helps level that imbalance by providing clients the financial breathing room to withstand those tactics and allow their attorneys the time needed to pursue fair, full compensation.

In many cases, clients who were once ready to settle quickly out of desperation were instead able to wait, fight for what they deserved, and ultimately achieve settlements that were several times higher than the initial offers. This is the real-world impact of responsible funding: it protects clients’ rights and promotes true access to justice.

Ethical and Responsible Practices Are the Core of What We Do

Like any industry, there are always a few bad actors. However, responsible companies like ours operate with the highest level of integrity and transparency.

We never overfund clients. We carefully evaluate each case and limit advances to a conservative percentage of the expected recovery, typically around 25 percent or less. We always discuss all available options with our clients and encourage them to pursue any alternative sources of assistance before taking an advance, because we understand that these advances should only be used when truly necessary.

We maintain open communication with both clients and their attorneys, ensuring that everyone understands the terms, repayment structure, and implications from the start. We do not interfere with legal decisions, case strategy, or settlement discussions. Those decisions remain entirely between the client and their attorney. Our sole focus is to help clients get through an extremely difficult period without financial ruin.

Profit Does Not Equal Exploitation

We are proud of the work we do and make no apology for operating a business that must sustain itself to continue helping people. Every legitimate business charges for its services, and plaintiff funding is no different. The key question is whether those services are fair, transparent, and truly beneficial to those we serve.

Our pricing structure reflects the substantial risk we undertake. If a client loses their case, we lose our investment entirely. We assume 100 percent of the risk, and we do so because we believe in the principle of access to justice. We ensure our terms are clear, our fees are disclosed, and our clients understand exactly what to expect. Profit in this context is not exploitation, it is the mechanism that allows us to continue providing essential financial support to those in need.

The Human Side of Plaintiff Funding

The Chamber’s article relies heavily on examples involving corporate litigation and foreign influence, which have nothing to do with consumer-based plaintiff funding. The individuals we serve are not engaged in international commercial disputes or billion-dollar antitrust battles. They are people facing hardship, pain, and loss.

If the critics of our industry truly wish to understand the impact of plaintiff funding, they should speak directly with the people we have helped. They would hear from the single mother who kept her home because of a small advance, from the injured worker who could afford therapy to return to his job, and from the countless victims who, because of our assistance, could reject unfair settlements and wait for justice.

Not one of them would describe what we do as a “sham.”

A Call for Balanced Reform, Not Blanket Condemnation

We support transparency and accountability. We believe there should be clear standards to distinguish between corporate litigation finance and consumer plaintiff funding, because they are entirely different in purpose and impact. The call for reform should not be about shutting down a system that protects vulnerable people, but about ensuring that it is conducted ethically and responsibly across the board.

At its core, plaintiff funding is about humanity. It is about ensuring that injured and financially struggling plaintiffs are not forced to surrender their right to justice simply because they cannot afford to wait. Until the day comes when every injured person can financially endure the long road to settlement or trial, plaintiff funding will remain not a threat to justice, but a vital part of it.