September 7, 2010

			BY FAX TO 202-326-4001 AND BY REGULAR MAIL
Charles Korb
Manager, Processing & Technical Assistance Branch
Standard Termination Compliance Division
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
1200 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC   20005-4026

	Re:	Julia F, XXX				Soc. Sec. No. XXX-XX-2280
		99 Suncrest Rd.			D/O/B:
		Norwalk, CT 06854

Terminated vested participant in T-Bar/ Data Switch Corporation Pension Plan,  PBGC Case No. 11321000

Dear Mr. Korb:

	Please be advised that Julia F. XXX  has requested the assistance of the New England Pension Assistance Project with respect to the issue of payment of pension benefits due her  pursuant to the defined benefit plan sponsored by T-Bar, Inc/ Data Switch Corporation. This letter is a claim for guaranteed benefits due her pursuant to this terminated plan.

Statement of Facts

	Julia F. XX worked for T-Bar/Data Switch in Wilton, Connecticut, from approximately 1974 through 1983.  Following her separation from employment, she received a letter from DataSwitch informing her that the T-Bar Retirement Benefits Plan was going to be terminated, that “all of your benefits are intact... and your accrued benefits are safeguarded by law”.   A copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit 1.

	The T-Bar Retirement Benefits Plan was terminated on December 1, 1988 as a “standard termination”.  Ms. XXX received a letter in April 1990, telling her that DataSwitch had purchased annuities for deferred vested participants through United Pacific Life Insurance Company.  See copy of this letter attached as Exhibit 2.  

	We were informed by the PBGC in June of 2010 that United Pacific Life Insurance Company had merged with Genworth Financial.  By letter dated June 29, 2010, Genworth Financial confirmed that it held an annuity contract for the terminated plan, but that no annuity was purchased in Julia XXX’s name.  See copy of this letter enclosed as Exhibits 3. 
	
	Ms. XXX  has not received benefits in any form from this terminated plan to date.  See her Affidavit, enclosed as Exhibit 4.  See also copies of her 1988, 1989, and 1990 tax returns, copies attached as Exhibits 5, 6, and 7.  These tax returns show that Ms. XXX received no pension distribution in any of those years.

Argument

	Ms. XXX was clearly entitled to a deferred vested pension pursuant to the T-Bar Retirement Benefit Plan.  Exhibit 1 clearly documents this entitlement.  As noted above, Ms. XXX left the employ of T-Bar/DataSwitch in late 1983.  There would have been no reason for the plan to send her a notice in 1988 about proposed termination of the plan unless she was a deferred vested participant.  Moreover, her dates of service would indicate that she would have accrued 10 years of vesting service,  The benefits payable pursuant to this plan are guaranteed by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation whether the plan is terminated as a “standard termination” or a “distress termination”.

	Ms. XXX has been informed that, although Genworth Financial holds the annuity contract for payment of the retirement benefits of this terminated plan, no benefit was purchased in her name.  It would appear, then, that she was improperly omitted from the annuity purchase.

	It is clear that Ms.XXX did not receive the benefit as a lump sum distribution as evidenced by her Affidavit and by the tax returns submitted as Exhibits 5, 6, and 7.  

	ERISA §4041 outlines the procedure for the standard termination of a single employer plan.  The PBGC’s certification of a final distribution of assets does not affect PBGC’s obligation under Section 4022 to guarantee the payment of all nonforfeitable benefits.  In Advisory Opinion 91-1, the General Counsel concludes that the “PBGC remains liable to insure the payment of guaranteed benefits ... if the plan administrator has not made a proper distribution”.  Examples provided of such improper distributions include the omission of a participant from the distribution.  Therefore, based upon the advisory opinion, the PBGC must provide benefits to a vested participant on whose behalf an annuity was not purchased, through error or omission.  Ms.XXX is clearly one such participant. 

Conclusion

	As the evidence included herein and outlined above shows, Julia F. XXX is entitled to pension benefits pursuant to the T-Bar Retirement Benefits Plan which was terminated as a standard termination. She has never received the benefits in question and appears to have been omitted when annuities were purchased to pay deferred vested benefits.  As these are benefits guaranteed by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation pursuant to ERISA, we hereby request that the PBGC pay the benefits to which Ms. XXX is clearly entitled.

	Please feel free to call either of us at the number above if you need any further information.  Please direct any written response to us at: New England Pension Assistance Project, Gerontology Institute, 100 Morrissey Blvd., Boston, MA 02125.  Thank you for your attention to this matter.

								Sincerely,

								Jeanne M. Medeiros, Esq.

								Mollie Feeney
								Pension Counselor
Enclosures