Deceased estate advice

[The_Mowgs]

I need a bit of advice, or someone that knows about RA's regarding the following scenario;

Man and wife divorces and wife is awarded the man's RA by the court. The wife completes the forms to become the "owner" of the RA and sends it to the company where its at.

The company never changes the details of the RA and the years go by without anyone knowing about this.

The ex wife passes away without touching the RA and everything is left to her children. The children notices that the RA was never carried over to mom but the dad says he will still give them the full RA as thats what the court ordered all those years back and it was the moms wish to leave it to the children.

Contact is made with the company where the RA is at and they get the ball rolling and says they will pay it out to the father.

After a couple of months the company comes back and says they will pay one third of the value and the rest will be paid monthly to the father when he retires which is in 10 or so years.

Does this sound correct or is there something weird going on here?

P.S. The company is not a fly by night place if that matters

Thanks

 

[AlmightyBender]

:/ sounds like a bunch of nonsense. I would get in touch with the Pension Funds Adjudicator http://www.pfa.org.za/ as there sounds like some very serious negligence on the pension fund company's side. Also if a negligent financial advisor is involved you can contact the Financial Service Ombud http://www.faisombud.co.za/

The fund is trying to get out of paying a death benefit due to the father being alive so they want to pay it as a pension, where what should have happened if they had not been negligent was a death benefit towards the mom's dependents. Good luck and fight for your rights.

 

[The_Mowgs]

:/ sounds like a bunch of nonsense. I would get in touch with the Pension Funds Adjudicator http://www.pfa.org.za/ as there sounds like some very serious negligence on the pension fund company's side. Also if a negligent financial advisor is involved you can contact the Financial Service Ombud http://www.faisombud.co.za/

The fund is trying to get out of paying a death benefit due to the father being alive so they want to pay it as a pension, where what should have happened if they had not been negligent was a death benefit towards the mom's dependents. Good luck and fight for your rights.

After the mother passed away they said they not paying anything as she passed away and now they have this story about only paying a third.

 

[krono9]

RA usually pay out 1/3 in cash/lumpsum.. and the balance must be reinvested..... seeing it was never transferred from your fathers name on their system.. I wont blame them for paying it out etc and reinvesting on his name... Someone should of checked up if details were changed...

 

[The_Mowgs]

RA usually pay out 1/3 in cash/lumpsum.. and the balance must be reinvested..... seeing it was never transferred from your fathers name on their system.. I wont blame them for paying it out etc and reinvesting on his name... Someone should of checked up if details were changed...

Thanks.

So would you say what they are doing is normal?

 

[AlmightyBender]

Thanks.

So would you say what they are doing is normal?

Maybe, maybe not. The pension fund adjudicator will decide that.

 

[Celine]

to be quite honest, what i think the fund is doing is quite correct. the RA was awarded to the wife only by a court of law. she has now passed on, this does not mean that the RA must now be passed on to the children. the RA belongs to the husband by right. he is the rightful owner of the RA. the mere fact that the wife did not follow through with the paper work is her fault and there is no one else to blame here. the husband now has every right to claim this RA in full. what gives these children the right to lay claim to something that is not theirs. the court only awarded it to the wife because of the divorce.

 

[ld13]

the husband now has every right to claim this RA in full. what gives these children the right to lay claim to something that is not theirs. the court only awarded it to the wife because of the divorce.

The court awarded the RA to the wife. The wife died and left everything to the kids. The kids are now entitled by law to that RA. But the RA is in the name of father and he is ~55 I assume so they are legally only allowed to pay out a lump sum of 1/3 of the total RA.

 

[The_Mowgs]

to be quite honest, what i think the fund is doing is quite correct. the RA was awarded to the wife only by a court of law. she has now passed on, this does not mean that the RA must now be passed on to the children. the RA belongs to the husband by right. he is the rightful owner of the RA. the mere fact that the wife did not follow through with the paper work is her fault and there is no one else to blame here. the husband now has every right to claim this RA in full. what gives these children the right to lay claim to something that is not theirs. the court only awarded it to the wife because of the divorce.

The children are not laying claim to the RA. The father decided to give it to them.

 

[The_Mowgs]

The court awarded the RA to the wife. The wife died and left everything to the kids. The kids are now entitled by law to that RA. But the RA is in the name of father and he is ~55 I assume so they are legally only allowed to pay out a lump sum of 1/3 of the total RA.

Thanks. Just for interests sake. Why do they only pay out one third lump sum? Is it because people wasted their money and then sat with a problem of having no more money?

 

[AlmightyBender]

Thanks. Just for interests sake. Why do they only pay out one third lump sum? Is it because people wasted their money and then sat with a problem of having no more money?

Indeed. Most people do very stupid things if you give them a bunch of money all in one go.

to be quite honest, what i think the fund is doing is quite correct. the RA was awarded to the wife only by a court of law. she has now passed on, this does not mean that the RA must now be passed on to the children. the RA belongs to the husband by right. he is the rightful owner of the RA. the mere fact that the wife did not follow through with the paper work is her fault and there is no one else to blame here. the husband now has every right to claim this RA in full. what gives these children the right to lay claim to something that is not theirs. the court only awarded it to the wife because of the divorce.

Well that depends who was negligent during the request to transfer into the wife's name. If it was the RA company then the funds can be paid without the 1/3rd restriction (I think) and a proper trust can be set up in their name.

 

[The_Mowgs]

Just found out now that the mom did not sign one of the papers and was never informed by the RA company and her lawyer.

The cildren wanted to pay off their study loans with the money but oh well. Thanks for the info and advice.