Although the court dismissed claims regarding risky investments in TDFs and participant fee disclosure failures, Verizon still faces a charge regarding an underperforming investment.
Tag: Participant Lawsuits
Participants of the of the Delta Family-Care Savings Plan sued Fidelity entities regarding excessive fees charged for the plan’s advice offering as well as its self-directed brokerage account (SDBA) option.
Participants in GE's 401(k) plan allege the company retained proprietary investments in the plan, even when they were imprudent, in order to earn revenue.
A participant says a plan with more than $157 million in assets has the bargaining power to negotiate lower fees for administration and plan investments.
A federal judge dismissed a consolidated case against Wells Fargo's 401(k) plan fiduciaries.
They are focusing on their fiduciary responsibilities by moving to lower-cost investment options.
The case had challenged multiple recordkeepers, multiple investment options and the use of retail share class funds.
A participant accuses the firm of failing to prudently monitor and assess investment options for the plan.
A court used plain language of the ESOP plan document to show the plan administrator's failure to implement participants diversification elections was "arbitrary and capricious."
Both parties together filed some 1,000 pages of paperwork, which the court declined to consider in denying the employer's motion to dismiss, in which it argued its plan administration practices fit within established norms.
The lawsuit alleges that Voya charged the plan “an unreasonable asset-based fee of between 0.67% and 1.86% of the net assets invested in the various mutual funds offered as investment options.”
Defendants pursued an “exceptionally imprudent investment strategy” with respect to a significant portion of the DST System retirement plan’s assets, plaintiffs claim, resulting in up to $100 million in avoidable losses.
A review of fiduciary governance and the liability insurance policy can help 403(b) plan sponsors steer clear of the litigation whirlwind hampering the industry today.
The text of the decision to grant class certification, while only representing an interim step in this ERISA challenge, offers important insight into what it takes to prove commonality, typicality and numerosity.
Similar to the settlement agreement regarding the Ascension plan, the agreement includes provisions that mimic the provisions of ERISA.
The case is a consolidation of two lawsuits alleging BB&T breached ERISA by favoring its own proprietary investment options and recordkeeping services in its retirement plans at the expense of performance.
A federal district court judge only moved forward certain claims of breaches of fiduciary duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).
The complaint suggests the companies engaged in “Tammany-like” collusion to steer assets into more favorable investments; both providers have issued strong denials and requests for summary judgement.
The complaint suggests plan officials ceded discretion to a provider to add any mutual fund it wished, “regardless of whether the funds were duplicative of other options, had high costs, or were performing poorly.”
The lawsuit accuses a number of major banks of improper collusion to protect their shares of the securities lending marketplace.