Kate Informed
Kate Objective

The opinions and views reflected in the articles posted do not necessarily reflect the views of Hager Strategic. Links to these news features are not part of www.hagerstrategic.com . The owners of these external sites own the intellectual property rights to the material on the linked sites. While Hager Strategic cannot certify the accuracy of the material published on the linked site, we make every effort to post links only to websites and news sources we find reliable and trustworthy.

NEWS - DC Assets Withdrawn Fraudulently not Forfeited

December 5, 2012 – A retirement plan particicipant’s claim to benefits was not forfeited when the plan paid is account to his ex-wife, a court ruled.

The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with a district court’s finding that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s (ERISA’s) nonforfeitability provisions cannot be interpreted to mean that the plan must act as “insurer against any and all wrongful actions by third parties.” The plan paid the benefits according to its procedures and plan terms, and rightfully determined it should not pay the benefits twice because of William Foster’s failure to comply with his obligations to ensure the plan had his correct address. The plan had sent a new PIN for accessing his account to the address it had on file.

The appellate court concluded that “nonforfeitable” does not mean “guaranteed,” and that the plain language of the law says “it is the claim to the benefit, rather than the benefit itself, that must be ‘unconditional’ and ‘legally enforceable against the plan.’” Foster’s claim to his benefits was “unconditional” insofar as it was not conditioned upon any further employment or action on his part. He was fully vested and the plan did not attempt to impose any impermissible conditions on Foster’s right to claim benefits.

The court found that the employer and plan did nothing wrong. The decision to process account withdrawals was based on receipt of a procedurally sound request. According to the court’s opinion, Foster was fully informed of how the plan would allow him access to his money, and that someone with the correct User ID and PIN would be treated as the legal participant for purposes of processing withdrawals.

Click on the external link below to review the entire article:

http://www.plansponsor.com/DC_Assets_Withdrawn_Fraudulently_Not_Forfeited.aspx