Jump to content

Paid Terminated Employee Twice


Guest Mike Spickard
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Mike Spickard

Hypothetical - A terminated participant (MM) was paid out his DC vested balance in 1997. Client signed off on payment in 1997. Client changed TPA's and Trustees. In the confusion of transferring, new TPA never received information that MM was already paid out, so they set up a beginning balance based upon last ending balance. MM was paid out again in 2000. Client signed off on second payment in 2000. Error was discovered in 2001 and client sues new TPA for instructing client to pay MM again after he had been paid. MM went bankrupt in 2001.

No evidence was produced that new TPA knew about prior payment to MM. Any thoughts on what to do if this hypothetical situation should ever occur? Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest b2kates

It appears that client never reviewed its own payment history.

why did it take 3 years for second payout? and is client also the trustee, should have been liable for not reviewing distribution history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How, hypothetically speaking, did the hypothetical TPA reconcile the hypothetical assets to the hypothetical account balances that hypothetically include the hypothetical participant that was hypothetically paid out twice?

...but then again, What Do I Know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mike Spickard

In the hypothetical balance-forward environment, hypo client was asked to provide contributions, distributions and trust balance information. The rest was hypothetically "plugged" and hypothetical trust statements were not provided to TPA that showed the hypothetical payments being made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have hypothetically seen the opposite occur: a client changes TPA firms and notifies the new hypothetical TPA firm that a participant was paid out but that the hypothetical prior TPA had those records. The hypothetical release form is either in possession of the prior TPA or the amount was hypothetically less than $3,500.

Your post points out the problem with posting an hypothetical question, in that simple modification of facts yields a different conclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mike Spickard

"simple modification of facts yields a different conclusion" - Hmmm, I hadn't thought of that before. Thanks for the cogent observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...