Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 JULY 2018

Record-Keeper Defeats Second Round Of Robo-Adviser Fee Litigation

Proskauer Rose LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Contributor
Proskauer Rose LLP

Proskauer Rose LLP

Firm Overview Proskauer is an elite global law firm with more than 900 lawyers across key financial...

View firm profile
Explore more from Proskauer Rose LLP

As we reported here, record-keepers for large 401(k) plans have thus far been successful in defending ERISA fiduciary-breach litigation over investment advice powered by Financial Engines.

United StatesEmployment and HR

As we reported here, record-keepers for large 401(k) plans have thus far been successful in defending ERISA fiduciary-breach litigation over investment advice powered by Financial Engines. These lawsuits generally claim that fees collected by record-keepers for investment advice were unreasonably high because the fees exceeded the amount actually paid to Financial Engines. Plaintiffs in Chendes v. Xerox HR Solutions, LLC were given a second chance to plead their claims, this time alleging that the defendant record-keeper was a fiduciary because it "used its influence" as the plan's record-keeper to force the plan sponsor to engage Financial Engines—primarily by refusing to use any other investment adviser—and therefore exercised de facto control over the plan's retention of Financial Engines. The court rejected the argument that constraining the plan's service provider choices amounted to de facto control since the plan had other alternatives to choose from (such as

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from