The Fiduciary Spectator
“Do you find out how the pitcher is throwing by asking the fan in the stands or the batter who was in the batter’s box.”
Attorney Firms continue to be spectators in a sport that requires experience to win. It is clear by the allegations:
“…. accuses them of self-dealing to promote the firm’s mutual fund business and maximize profits at the expense of the plan and its participants.”
“…. accused of forcing its employees into expensive, poorly performing mutual funds….”
“…. caused participants to pay recordkeeping and administrative fees that were multiples of the market rate available for the same services.”
If ERISA of 1974 established standards of conduct and requirements for disclosures why do law firms continue to base their allegations on outcomes instead of breaches of behavior?
Before filing a case where there may be Fiduciary Breaches, Law Firms ought to seek a “batter” who has Subject Matter Expertise in:
. Portfolio/Wealth Management techniques/analytics . Financial Technology; providing visible evidence of methodology
Breaches in trust are not the same as contractual breaches though the DOL seems to be trying to appease the culture via the BICE.
Until Attorney Firms seek help from those who have the skill sets to uncover the required portfolio and oversight methodologies before the filing, they will continue to be but a spectator in this sport.