Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Pension - Social Security
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-18-2017, 09:16 AM
MetsMan MetsMan is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 322
Default MetLife Discloses Pension Bungle -- WSJ

http://news.morningstar.com/all/dow-...ungle-wsj.aspx

Sounds like this is related to perhaps not finding, or waiting to be contacted by, spouses / beneficiaries who would be owed a benefit after the death of the original Plan member.

Potentially will catch out other insurers with older policies. But any repercussions for pension plan administration itself, as there is likely varying degrees of administrative efficiency from plan to plan?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-18-2017, 10:22 AM
DiscreteAndDiscreet DiscreteAndDiscreet is offline
Member
AAA
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 466
Default

PBGC’s missing participants program has $69m liability for 24,000 participants. That figure seems much more reasonable to me than the analyst estimates in the article. Missing participants are either dead with a next of kin being unaware of the opportunity to make a claim or the participant is alive but is essentially living off the grid. Setting aside the likelihood the benefits will remain unclaimed, these selection criteria translate to a lower life expectancy.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-21-2017, 05:07 PM
campbell's Avatar
campbell campbell is offline
Mary Pat Campbell
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: NY
Studying for duolingo and coursera
Favorite beer: Murphy's Irish Stout
Posts: 82,934
Blog Entries: 6
Default

https://www.ai-cio.com/news/ny-mass-...paid-pensions/

Quote:
NY, Mass. Investigate MetLife over Unpaid Pensions
MetLife says it is fully committed to rectifying the situation.
Spoiler:
Insurance provider MetLife is under investigation by New York and Massachusetts regulators due to its inability to pay thousands of pensions because it cannot locate the beneficiaries.

MetLife reported Saturday that it is in the process of locating approximately 30,000 retirees owed less than an average $150 per month in annuity benefits. The regulators then began to crack down on the New York-based insurer Monday.

MetLife CEO John Hele said the affected retirees, which represent less than 5% of the company’s 600,000 annuity beneficiaries, “have moved jobs, relocated, or otherwise could not be located,” during a Friday conference call with financial analysts, USA Today reports.

“When we realized this was a significant issue, we launched an effort to do three things: figure out what happened, strengthen our processes so that we do a better job locating retirees, and promptly pay anyone we find–as we always do,” MetLife representatives told CIO in a statement regarding the matter. “We are implementing enhanced techniques within MetLife’s Retirement and Income Solutions business to better locate and promptly pay any group annuitant who may be entitled to benefits.”

In response, Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin and New York Department of Financial Services Superintendent Maria Vullo are also looking into the situation to secure the owed payments to the retirees.

While Galvin wrote to MetLife in hopes to uncover more information regarding the situation as well as obtain a list of the affected retirees and MetLife’s repayment plans, Vullo’s agency is conducting a separate review to make sure the benefits are paid.

“Retirees cannot afford to have glitches with their pension checks,” Galvin said in a statement.

MetLife agreed to fully cooperate with regulators, citing a need for a new way to find retirees with owed benefits.

“What used to be standard protocol for finding retirees who are owed benefits is no longer sufficient,” MetLife said. “While it is still difficult to track everyone down, we have not been as aggressive as we could have been.”

The company will provide an update on the situation in early 2018, when MetLife reports its fourth-quarter earnings. MetLife warned that the problem “may be material to our results of operations.”

“We are deeply disappointed that we fell short of our own high standards,” MetLife said. “Our customers deserve better. We are committed to making this right for our customers. We found the issue, we self-reported it, and we are committed to doing better.”


__________________
It's STUMP

LinkedIn Profile
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-31-2017, 08:44 PM
Loner's Avatar
Loner Loner is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Third Half
Posts: 45,051
Default

Huh, MetLife has been after me for some money owed my father, who died in 1991 at 62. I haven't gathered the documentation yet partly because I very strongly suspect it's a pittance, as I distinctly remember helping my mother to roll over a lump sum benefit to an IRA a few years later.
__________________
2012 AO Rap Battle Champion
Co-Legend of the Water Cooler(TM)
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-03-2018, 05:21 PM
sail648 sail648 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 43
Default Accumulating at Actuarial equivalence can be lucrative

I have heard of folks denigrate these old small benefits. Don't be so certain about that. An example illustrates my point:

Suppose a family member had a $100/month pension that should have started when he turned 65 in 1994. Further suppose the plan/contract has a 7% and 1983 GAM Unisex mortality actuarial equivalence basis.

The plan administrator or insurer loses track of them and has no idea until today that they lived to 80 years old and died in 2009. They were not married in that time period so the plan/annuity contract should have paid them a single life annuity.

The family member's estate should have the right to demand the present value of the $100/month paid from 1994 to 2009 with interest up to the settlement date at the actuarial equivalence rate under the plan/contract.

I get an accumulated value of something like $60,000 payable to the estate if it is still open.

That ain't nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-04-2018, 09:20 AM
echo echo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 852
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sail648 View Post
I get an accumulated value of something like $60,000 payable to the estate if it is still open.

That ain't nothing.
That's 0.46 Stormy's. (1 Stormy = $130k)
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-09-2018, 09:20 PM
Loner's Avatar
Loner Loner is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: The Third Half
Posts: 45,051
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sail648 View Post
I have heard of folks denigrate these old small benefits. Don't be so certain about that. An example illustrates my point:

Suppose a family member had a $100/month pension that should have started when he turned 65 in 1994. Further suppose the plan/contract has a 7% and 1983 GAM Unisex mortality actuarial equivalence basis.

The plan administrator or insurer loses track of them and has no idea until today that they lived to 80 years old and died in 2009. They were not married in that time period so the plan/annuity contract should have paid them a single life annuity.

The family member's estate should have the right to demand the present value of the $100/month paid from 1994 to 2009 with interest up to the settlement date at the actuarial equivalence rate under the plan/contract.

I get an accumulated value of something like $60,000 payable to the estate if it is still open.

That ain't nothing.
Yes but the numbers in my father's case wouldn't be anything like that. My mother died less than ten years after he did and she was a few years younger.
__________________
2012 AO Rap Battle Champion
Co-Legend of the Water Cooler(TM)
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.16287 seconds with 11 queries