Jump to content

Plan name (slightly) incorrect


Recommended Posts

I am reviewing a DRO and the plan name is slightly incorrect.

The name of the plan is ABC, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan

It is listed in the order as ABC, Inc. Profit Sharing Plan

The plan was once known as PSP, but we added a 401(k) feature for 2013 and changed the name.

This doesn't seem material, as it is quite obvious to which plan the order refers--the participant has no other retirement plans.

The EOB says that when a name or address is misstated, the plan administrator should "supplement the order rather than reject it..."

How do you supplement an order? Does it go back tot he judge? Just noted in the file? Do I write something to everyone such as: the name of the plan in the order should be xxxxxx.

Your thought are appreciated.

QKA, QPA, CPC, ERPA

Two wrongs don't make a right, but three rights make a left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the DRO is otherwise OK, I'd note in the letter that tells the parties that the DRO is qualified that the plan is now known as ABC, Inc. 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan, and leave it at that.

If there is another reason to send the DRO back to the judge, I'd have the name corrected along with the other correction(s).

(This is my thought on how I'd handle it. I am not an attorney.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd handle this one the same way as GMK. The only time I'd go further on a plan name error is if it's so wrong that one can't tell which plan it's for (such as putting in the name of the recordkeeper/TPA in place of the plan) or if the sponsor has multiple plans and the DRO isn't precise enough to determine which plan(s) are affected by the order. Even then, a stipulation to the order stating the correct plan name that's signed by both parties and notarized might be enough to get there without going back to court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stay away from extra-judicial input on determination of matters required to be included in domestic relations orders. The plan administrator can determine that an inexact title refers to the plan, but the individuals do not get to agree on anything and the plan administrator should not seek agreement or stipulation. The courts are very forgiving about what "clearly specifiy" means; it is up to the judgment of the plan adinistrator. A "supplement" to the order is really an interpretation of the order that is expressed by the administrator in the notice of qualification. Examples above are feasible. Another example: "The order applies to the Plan."

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
×
×
  • Create New...