# Should I sue?



## Thound (Jan 20, 2013)

I work for a major company that everyone in America knows about. When I hired in, I hired in on the old pension plan. 2 years later they offered a " new " pension plan that we could opt into. Under the old plan, if I died my wife would not get my pension, and under the new one she would get it. Now the major issue, under the new plan I would lose well over a 100K in pension, but I went with the new plan to make sure my wife would get what ever pension I had. I have just recently found out that the changed the rule, and the old plan now has full survivorship just like the new plan. My pension would have doubled this year because I turned 55. Of course you can sue anybody for anything, but could I actually win?


----------



## 225985 (Dec 29, 2015)

So they didn't take anything away from you. They just made the other choice better. You have no case. Pension rules can change.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Consult with a lawyer who handles this kind of case.


----------



## Andy1001 (Jun 29, 2016)

If you were given the choice to stay on your old plan OR opt out and join the new plan you have no case.You made the decision with the information you thought was correct at the time, it was not your employers fault that the rules changed.This was common years ago,in some areas it was called widows and orphans where a pension would go to a surviving spouse and/or children until they came of age.If a man wasn't married and had no children then he could either pay less into the pension or else have a larger pension or lump sum at sixty five.
If you feel strongly that you were given the wrong information then there are ways of having an independent overview of the situation,but to go the legal route will take years and the pension or investment company will fight you all the way.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

Good luck! Any Podunk lawyer you might be able to afford would be drastically outgunned by the slew of corporate attorneys your pension plan would deploy to defend their theft. Corporations have decades of experience learning how to screw the man on the street. You would just be wasting your money. You would be better off to figure out how to invest it your self than turn it over to these shills to squander as they see fit (usually on glitzy office towers, laid out offices, generous salaries and benefit packages for themselves).
I am sure you could find someone to represent you. They would probably charge you on an hourly rate or require some extreme retainer to do so, because even they know they would be wasting their time.


----------



## Haiku (Apr 9, 2014)

Won't it depend on what was actually disclosed and what you signed when you migrated to the new plan? Obviously only an attorney can answer this. I assume your potential damages would only be the value difference between the two plans.


----------



## Marc878 (Aug 26, 2015)

Id see HR first.


----------



## Diana7 (Apr 19, 2016)

It may well end up costing so much in legal fees that you loose out. 
I hate the whole suing culture so I wouldnt do it.


----------



## SuperConfusedHusband (Mar 19, 2017)

Thound said:


> I work for a major company that everyone in America knows about. When I hired in, I hired in on the old pension plan. 2 years later they offered a " new " pension plan that we could opt into. Under the old plan, if I died my wife would not get my pension, and under the new one she would get it. Now the major issue, under the new plan I would lose well over a 100K in pension, but I went with the new plan to make sure my wife would get what ever pension I had. I have just recently found out that the changed the rule, and the old plan now has full survivorship just like the new plan. My pension would have doubled this year because I turned 55. Of course you can sue anybody for anything, but could I actually win?


You would have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the ONLY reason why you chose the new plan was because of survivorship being implemented in your new plan. 
If you and others can prove that, it might actually turn in a fraud case (very appealing to lawyers).
If you can prove that, then you can have a chance to win an out of court settlement.
Litigate this in court alone might cost you the entire 100K, in my opinion not worth it but its worth suing and pushing for a mediation or settlement. 

Are there others that did the same thing? It would be interesting to know if a bunch of you can build a case together, it will have a bigger validity in court, and a bigger power when suing forcing your employer to reconsider litigation but settle.

Good Luck!


----------



## Haiku (Apr 9, 2014)

SuperConfusedHusband said:


> You would have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the ONLY reason why you chose the new plan was because of survivorship being implemented in your new plan.
> If you and others can prove that, it might actually turn in a fraud case (very appealing to lawyers).
> If you can prove that, then you can have a chance to win an out of court settlement.
> Litigate this in court alone might cost you the entire 100K, in my opinion not worth it but its worth suing and pushing for a mediation or settlement.
> ...


Not to be pedant but it's an important difference the civil standard is preponderance not reasonable doubt.


----------



## Thound (Jan 20, 2013)

Marc878 said:


> Id see HR first.


Tried that already. All I got was too bad so sad loser. HAHAHAHA


----------



## Thound (Jan 20, 2013)

May get together with others in the same boat and maybe filing a class action suit.


----------



## Thound (Jan 20, 2013)

SuperConfusedHusband said:


> You would have to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that the ONLY reason why you chose the new plan was because of survivorship being implemented in your new plan.
> If you and others can prove that, it might actually turn in a fraud case (very appealing to lawyers).
> If you can prove that, then you can have a chance to win an out of court settlement.
> Litigate this in court alone might cost you the entire 100K, in my opinion not worth it but its worth suing and pushing for a mediation or settlement.
> ...


New plan was less money. The ONLY advantage was survivorship.


----------



## Vinnydee (Jan 4, 2016)

I am familiar with pensions and if I understand you correctly, you are not losing money. When you take a policy that has survivor benefits, they payout is not going to be based on your life expectancy but rather that of the longest survivor which is usually the way. So they calculate the payout based on your wife's life expectancy which in general is a few years longer than a males. They they are also doubling their odds that their policyholder live more than expected since there is now two of you. Look at the benefit paid over your wife's life expectancy, not yours. 

Are you basing your $100,000 loss on your life expectancy or some other way? Usually you go to an actuarial table and see your life expectancy and then add up how much you will be paid until then. Then look up your wife's life expectancy and calculate what will be paid out based on your life and then the additional years she will collect. As I said two doubles the odds that one of you will live longer than your life expectancy so that is factored in too.

Asd far as suing you do not have a snowball in hell's chance of winning or even finding a lawyer to take the case unless you pay him for his hours. He will end up the winner though. On private pensions, they can legally change them or even end them. If a company does not have enough money to fund them, they can end them or sometimes they lose a lot because they invest the pension fund into the Stock Market. If you company goes under, odds are that you lose your pension. That is why I dislike company pensions and have a 401K instead. No matter what, I still will have my money. My 401K fund choice is insured so the worst that can happen is that I lose my interest for that year.


----------



## SuperConfusedHusband (Mar 19, 2017)

Thound said:


> New plan was less money. The ONLY advantage was survivorship.


Make a bunch of phonecalls and see if others want to file with you.
You should point that out the your lawyer, make him/her make a comparison of the two plans. If the only difference was survivorship...you might have a case


----------



## Chris Taylor (Jul 22, 2010)

Thound said:


> May get together with others in the same boat and maybe filing a class action suit.


This. If the company is as big as you say then there has to be others similarly situated.


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

When was this choice made? 

Unless it was a LONG time ago it sounds like you either don't have the facts straight or were misinformed at the start. I say that because ERISA has been around a long time and I think the survivor thing is a requirement.

Pension lawyer, consultation. Take the plan docs...


----------

