The insurer’s use of a pooled bank account also suggested an ERISA prohibited transaction because it made Plan A’s interests adverse to those of Plan B……………
“The court concluded that the insurer’s cross-plan offsetting practices resulted in a transaction involving a party with interests adverse to those of the participants in Plan B, in violation of ERISA Section 406(b)(2)…. In the court’s view, the insurer’s use of a pooled bank account also suggested an ERISA prohibited transaction because it made Plan A’s interests adverse to those of Plan B. ” [Lutz Surgical Partners PLLC v. Aetna, Inc., No. 15-2595 (D.N.J. Jun. 21, 2021)] MORE >>
Thomson Reuters Practical Law
