We Don't Get Paid Until You Hit Your Threshold. Here's Why We Can Afford That Bet.

You already know the moment. The matter is at 54 percent completion. The administrator's last status report reads like a goodbye letter. "We've completed our outreach cycle. Attached please find the final activity summary." Meanwhile, the settlement agreement says 80 percent. And suddenly, getting from 54 to 80 is your problem, on your dime, after you already paid $22 a head for the half that was easy.

I built GroupSettle because that moment should not exist. And the way we made sure it doesn't is simple, even if it sounds strange coming from a vendor: we don't get paid until you hit your number.

The Bet, Stated Plainly

GroupSettle charges a flat $11.99 per signed claimant. But the invoice doesn't arrive when we send the first text or when the first document gets signed. It arrives when the matter crosses the release threshold in your settlement agreement. 75 percent, 80 percent, 85 percent, whatever the number is. Miss it, and you owe us zero.

That means our incentive is identical to yours. Not aligned in some brochure-copy sense. Identical. If you don't get paid, we don't get paid. Full stop.

No other claims administrator in this space prices that way. And for good reason: most of them can't afford to.

Why They Can't (and We Can)

Legacy administrators were built for class actions. Their infrastructure is a patchwork: one vendor for SMS, another for e-signature, another for voice, another for KYC, another for disbursement. Each vendor charges its own margin. Stack five margins on top of operational overhead, and you arrive at $20 to $25 per claimant. At that cost structure, betting your entire fee on completion would be reckless. One stalled matter and you're underwater.

GroupSettle is a division of Send It By Text. We built the communication infrastructure, the document signing engine, the AI voice layer, and the AI super agent that handles claimant customer service over email and text. We didn't license those pieces. We own them. That means our marginal cost to run a high-touch completion campaign is a fraction of what a legacy provider pays just to turn the lights on.

So when we bet the fee on the outcome, we're not being reckless. We're doing math that only works when you own the stack top to bottom.

Running at Cost, on Purpose

Owning the technology does something else that matters. It lets us run the engine at or near cost. We don't need to mark up five vendor invoices to make the model work. We don't need to pad the per-claimant rate to cover licensing fees we can't control. The $11.99 is not a loss leader designed to hook you and upsell later. It is a real price made possible by a real cost structure.

Less than half of what legacy providers charge. And on contingency. Those two facts sound like they should contradict each other, but they don't, because the cost base is fundamentally different.

The 50 Percent Cliff Is a Design Problem

Here is the part that connects all of this. Legacy administrators stall at roughly 50 percent completion because their model was designed for class actions, where "send the notice and wait" is the entire scope of work. Mass arbitration doesn't work that way. Getting a claimant to sign a release, upload a document, and confirm their information requires persistence: multiple channels, multiple touches, follow-up when they ghost, answers when they call with questions at 11 p.m.

GroupSettle treats completion like a funnel. Native document signing happens inside the same session as claimant onboarding, not through a separate vendor portal. SMS and email campaigns run in coordinated sequences. When a claimant stalls, the AI super agent handles their questions over text and email (it resolves north of 80 percent of inquiries without a human). And for the true holdouts, AI voice outreach picks up the phone and closes the gap.

In the matters we run, we see roughly 50 percent more effectiveness on completion compared to what legacy providers deliver. That isn't because we try harder. It's because our technology was built for this specific problem, and theirs was adapted from a different one.

The Contingency Is the Proof

Any vendor can tell you they'll get to your threshold. The question is whether they'll put their own revenue behind that claim. We do. Every matter, every time.

That's not confidence for its own sake. It's the logical endpoint of owning the tech, running at cost, and building a completion engine instead of a notification service. When your cost base is low enough and your system is effective enough, betting on the outcome isn't brave. It's just good business.

And for the firm on the other side of the table, it means something that used to be unthinkable in this category: a claims administrator whose fee depends on doing the thing you actually hired them to do.