Prudential, Cigna in $35 million 401(k) suit settlement

If deal stands, would mark another win for Schlichter

Jun 25, 2013 @ 4:46 am

By Darla Mercado

Prudential Retirement Insurance and Annuity Co. and Cigna Corp. have agreed to pay $35 million to settle a class action in which Cigna workers claimed their 401(k) fees were too high and that the plan engaged in self-dealing at the expense of its workers.

The deal ends six years of litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois. In 2007, a trio of Cigna 401(k) participants, Kim Nolte, Sherry Lewis and Theresa Mitchell, filed suit against the two companies.

The women claimed that the fees charged to the Cigna plan were “unreasonable and excessive,” and they alleged the company participated in self-dealing and prohibited transactions, thus violating their fiduciary duty to the participants. All individuals and beneficiaries with an account in the Cigna 401(k) plan between April 1, 1999 and May 31 are members of the settlement class.

Prudential spokesman Bob DeFillippo declined to comment, as did Joe Mondy, a spokesman for Cigna.

For now, the $35 million award is a preliminary settlement. The proposed settlement memorandum that's been filed with the court shows that defendants continue to deny the participants' claims.

The deal marks another win for Jerome Schlichter, senior partner at Schlichter Board & Denton LLP, who has tackled other plan sponsors in a number of 401(k) lawsuits, winning settlements for participants in plans at Caterpillar Inc., Bechtel Corp. and Kraft Foods Global Inc. He also is the plaintiff's attorney in the ongoing case against Ameriprise Financial Inc., filed by participants in the company's own 401(k).

These cases, along with fee disclosure regulations from the Labor Department, are going to push plan sponsors into action, industry observers said.

“It's going to force people to be duly diligent: If you're using proprietary funds, you better have a damn good reason for it,” said attorney Marcia Wagner of the Wagner Law Group, who specializes in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. “You'd think that companies would fix that when they realized things aren't done that way anymore.”

“This is a window into how things were [at retirement plans in the past] and how they won't be again,” Ms. Wagner added. “People need to understand why the tort bar is so powerful.”

In their original complaint, the three women alleged that while workers had some 22 investment options to choose from — all of which were slugged Cigna “separate accounts” — the lion's share of funds, a total of 65% of plan assets, went into the firm's Fixed Income Fund and the Cigna Company Stock Fund. The fixed income fund was described to workers as a “group fixed annuity contract” that paid interest on amounts into the fund and guaranteed payments of the amounts deposited there, as well as accumulated interest.

Not only was the fixed income fund the plan's default investment option, but Cigna also required that half of the matching contributions it provided to workers be invested in the Cigna Stock Fund, according to the suit. It was only in 2005 that participants were permitted to transfer those matching contributions and their earnings out of the company's stock fund, the plaintiffs noted. Prior to that, they could only move the money if their employment with Cigna was terminated or if the participant hit age 55.

Cigna's Retirement Business, comprised of smaller subsidiaries and affiliates, acted as the investment manager, record keeper and service provider to the company's own retirement plan, the plaintiffs said. The company 401(k) plan held more than $2 billion in assets, and most of that money was overseen by Cigna's Retirement Business, according to the suit.

“This is a serious breach of fiduciary duty,” the plaintiffs wrote in the lawsuit. “It subjected the plan and its participants to the unreasonable and imprudent dangers of undiversified investing. In the 401(k) context, this lack of diversification is even more perilous.”

On top of that, Cigna allegedly reaped fees for the services it provided to its own plan: Since 1999, the company hasn't disclose its hard-dollar payments and allegedly made “hidden revenue-sharing transfers” to pay its service providers, according to the suit.

The participants also claim that Cigna reaped a large profit when it sold its Retirement Business to Prudential Retirement Insurance and Annuity Co. in 2004.

Under that deal, $18 billion in total assets under management — including more than $2.1 billion from Cigna's 401(k) — went to Prudential. Cigna scored an after-tax gain of $809 million from the sale of its retirement business, plaintiffs claimed.


What do you think?

View comments

Upcoming event

Sep 24


Diversity & Inclusion Awards

Attend an event celebrating diversity and inclusion as well as recognizing those who are leading the financial services profession in this important endeavor. Join InvestmentNews, as we strive to raise awareness, educate and inspire an... Learn more

Most watched


Young professionals see lots of opportunity to reinvent the advice experience

Members of the 2019 InvestmentNews class of 40 Under 40 have strategies to overcome the challenges of being young in a mature industry.


Young advisers envision a radically different business in five years

Fintech and sustainable investing are two factors being watched closely by some of the 2019 class of InvestmentNews' 40 Under 40.

Latest news & opinion

Vermont establishes restitution fund for victims of investment fraud

Portion of settlements with financial perpetrators would supply the pool.

10 IBDs with the most variable annuity revenue

Although the popularity of VAs has declined in recent years, some independent broker-dealers still do a good business in them.

Target-date fund design may be wrong for retirees

Researchers suggest the funds don't adequately hedge against sequence-of-returns risk in retirement.

InvestmentNews' 2019 class of 40 Under 40

Our 40 Under 40 project, now in its sixth year, highlights young talent in the financial advice industry. These individuals illustrate the tremendous potential of those coming up in the profession. These stories will surprise, entertain, educate and inspire.

New Jersey fiduciary rule: Pressure leads to public hearing, comment deadline extension

Industry push results in chance to air grievances on July 17 and another month to present objections.


Hi! Glad you're here and we hope you like all the great work we do here at InvestmentNews. But what we do is expensive and is funded in part by our sponsors. So won't you show our sponsors a little love by whitelisting It'll help us continue to serve you.

Yes, show me how to whitelist

Ad blocker detected. Please whitelist us or give premium a try.


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print