Shared Materials Library

2015 National Training - NEPAP Fact Sheets by Emily Brown on Financial Planning (Includes: Finding a Financial Planner; Leaving Former Employer with 401k Plan; Hardship Withdrawals and Loans; Getting the Most Out of Your 401k; Differences between DB and DC plans; Understanding Specialized Language of Retirement Plans)

2015 National Training, Nuts & Bolts Session - NEPAP Sample Closeout Letter to Client Asking for Donation

2015 National Training - Presentation by David Godofsky on Actuarial Principles for Pension Attorneys. Follows up the previous year's training on actuarial principles.

2015 National Training - NEPAP Letter to Phyllis Borzi on Recoupment (11/19/2013)

2015 National Training Materials by Richard Shea and Jason Levy (Covington & Shea) - Leveraging Amara Remedies during Claims and Appeals

2015 National Training - Presentation: Navigating OPM: Challenges and Solutions.
Denise Clark, Founder, Clark Law Group
John Hatton, Deputy Legislative Director, National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association
Richard Loeb, Adjunct Law Professor, University of Baltimore Law School
Includes: Slides; Western States OPM Case; and Two OPM Court Cases (Linton v OPM & Thomas v OPM)

2015 National Training Presentation by :
Debra Golding, Consumer and Compliance Outreach & Education, EBSA
Jean Bracken, Senior Technical Advisor, Office of Outreach, Education and Assistance, EBSA

This was a claim letter arguing that client should be paid a retroactive lump sum, and not have her benefit adjusted actuarially, due to a benefit start date after Normal Retirement Age. We argued that the actuarial adjustment could constitute a forfeiture. Argument was successful.

Plan was not properly crediting client's service. Plan used "elapsed time" method for counting years of service. Under this method, if client leaves work due to a temporary situation, e.g. disability or layoff, plan is required to give client additional one year credit from last date employed.

Client's DB pension plan terminated as a standard termination and annuities were purchased with John Hancock. All plan documents indicated that cNormal retirement Age for unreduced benefit was age 62. When the insurance company issued the annuity certificate, it mis-stated the NRA as age 65, which caused client to delay applying until he turned 65. When he found documents indicating heis benefit should have started at age 62, the insurer told him it wouldn't pay retro because he had failed to apply at age 62. We filed a claim alleging that insurer's actions constituted a forfeiture, and that John Hancock would be unjustly enriched by the failure to pay benefits back to the age 62 start date.