
Document checklist falls short in retirement fund withdrawal dispute
The Tribunal found that evidence of tax non-residence must be assessed against the legislation, with clear reasons given when it is considered insufficient.

The Tribunal found that evidence of tax non-residence must be assessed against the legislation, with clear reasons given when it is considered insufficient.

The Tribunal says the Adjudicator shifted the evidentiary goalpost over three determinations and passively accepted uncorroborated allegations.

The draft guidelines set out how witnesses may be called and material obtained during complaint investigations.

The Adjudicator orders a fresh investigation after finding that the fund had not adequately verified an alleged cohabiting partner’s claim.

Retirement funds are expected to submit fuller, better-documented complaints when pursuing employers over unpaid contributions and missing contribution schedules.

Continuous cohabitation and joint bank accounts are relevant but not decisive when trustees assess whether a claimant was a permanent life partner.

The fund’s calculation was found reasonable by an independent actuary, but the OPFA held that the rules did not authorise the conversion method.

From 6 August, administration agreements and outsourcing arrangements must comply with the last deferred provisions of Conduct Standard 2 of 2025.

The ruling found sufficient prima facie evidence for withholding but did not determine whether Karabo Ramela committed fraud or caused the claimed losses.

The decision clarifies when prior civil proceedings may prevent the Pension Funds Adjudicator from investigating a complaint over withheld benefits.

Late-payment interest now accounts for almost half of arrears, suggesting unpaid contributions are remaining outstanding for longer.

Although the retirement fund misapplied section 37C, the OPFA found the same outcome was equitable after applying the Constitutional Court’s guidance.

The retirement fund was not entitled to pay the benefit into the estate because it only learned of the member’s death more than a year later.

The deputy adjudicator finds the ‘freeze’ clause the fund relied on is tied to its DB rules and can’t be used to block a DC member’s savings withdrawal.

The Adjudicator conflated jurisdiction with enforcement and overlooked the potential personal-liability provisions in the PFA.

The Tribunal says membership could end only in accordance with the fund’s rules, and WhatsApp exchanges did not amount to a valid withdrawal.

Nearly nine years after the claim was lodged, the fund still could not confirm whether the benefit had been allocated or paid.