Full Version: NYCERS QDRO OR DRO?
Is it possible to be ordered by the court to designate your soon to be ex-spouse to be the sole beneficiary of your retirement plan even if you were employeed prior to marriage and during marriage she got her bachalors degree in phsycology, she chooses not to work while I put my life on the line everyday as an officer.? help
Polling this question is not relevant. Do you have an attorney?
The determinaton of what assets of the marital estate may be transferred to a spouse is determined by the divorce laws of each state. You need to consult with a qualified attorney for the answer.
im new to the site- the poll was a mistake. sorry.
yes i have an attorney.
the qdro is not written by the attorney but a pension consultant. the pension plan states only one beneficiary can be named. they figure the amount for the ex to be the majuska vs. majuska percentage which mine is half of 14yrs(married) divided by total years employed. currently I am at 23yrs. by the ex beign the benefiaciary upon my retirement - (once i am in pay mode) she would get a raise once i die. shes entitled to 30% of my monthly allowance upon my death she would get 50% of my allowance thats 20% shes not entitled to.(not marital) i want to leave that to my niece or any other family member i want to choose. once i sign the agreement it cannot be changed. once i choose a beneficiary with the plan IT cannot be changed. how is this fair and equitable distribution.? has anyone had this problem that can shed some light?
i have sent the qdro back three times for re-draft but im not in agreements with my death benefit part of the qdro. help.
yes i have an attorney.
the qdro is not written by the attorney but a pension consultant. the pension plan states only one beneficiary can be named. they figure the amount for the ex to be the majuska vs. majuska percentage which mine is half of 14yrs(married) divided by total years employed. currently I am at 23yrs. by the ex beign the benefiaciary upon my retirement - (once i am in pay mode) she would get a raise once i die. shes entitled to 30% of my monthly allowance upon my death she would get 50% of my allowance thats 20% shes not entitled to.(not marital) i want to leave that to my niece or any other family member i want to choose. once i sign the agreement it cannot be changed. once i choose a beneficiary with the plan IT cannot be changed. how is this fair and equitable distribution.? has anyone had this problem that can shed some light?
i have sent the qdro back three times for re-draft but im not in agreements with my death benefit part of the qdro. help.
Yes, several of us have had experience that would be of assistance. That is why we are united in advising you to take this up with your attorney. If you don't get this corrected now through the DRO, you will be stuck with a result you won't like.
thanks all for directing me to my lawyer, that was of no use to me. Everyone that has retained a lawyer must have experienced some sort of frustration of unfairness within the law. My lawyer could only advise me of the law and as they pertain to pensions. I am presistant and unwilling to give up my percentage to a money hurry spouse, with this disagreement - the spouse and i decided to let the judge decide our fate instead of going through a long trial. therefore i had my lawyer plead my case/concerns in regards to my benefits/death benefit and the opposite councel argued that the spouse should get all the benefit. The end result was to my favor- i know get to choose a benefiaciary for my portion. lawyers dont always have the answers - every case is unique. I am glad i went against the grain.
Got the right result. Right?
Please explain why your lawyer was no use to you. You wrote that your lawyer argued your position and the result was was what you wanted.
As a final note, I'm glad you're not my client.
QUOTE (TGeer @ Oct 12 2005, 03:35 PM) 
As a final note, I'm glad you're not my client.
Im glad your not my lawyer.
The reply I received from this forum was of no use to me.
You are of no use.
Go drain someone else with bad advise.
QUOTE (TGeer @ Oct 8 2005, 05:02 PM)
Got the right result. Right?
Suppose a couple were married 20 years and the wife didn't work. They get a divorce after 20 years and the man continues to work another 10 years. Per majuska/majuska she is entitled to a percentage of his retirement during the years of marriage.
Now because pensions increase most during the last few years of service is she only entitled to the "earlier" value of the pension and not the portion that increased towards the end?
Just to pick a number the first 20 years it might have been worth lets say $200,000 if I had left the company at that time.
But if I work 10 more years the total worth might be $500,000.
If the her percentage is 50% does she get $200,000 times .50 = $100,000? ....... and I get $400,000?
QUOTE (ewick @ Nov 4 2007, 11:56 PM)
QUOTE (TGeer @ Oct 8 2005, 05:02 PM)
Got the right result. Right?
Suppose a couple were married 20 years and the wife didn't work. They get a divorce after 20 years and the man continues to work another 10 years. Per majuska/majuska she is entitled to a percentage of his retirement during the years of marriage. she is entitled to half of the twenty years. It is figured as a percentage so the longer you stay working the greater the percentage on your side, she still will receive an increase but minimal. One thing to consider is the fact that they will be the beneficiary to your retirement unless otherwise stated, consider your beneficiary options pre- and post- retirement. You can leave your portion of the pension in the event of your demise to someone other than the person you are divorcing.
Quick example of my situation. I put in 5 years prior to marriage- divorced after 14yrs- I am still on the job. They are entitled to half of fourteen years only, the formula is years of marriage divided by half divided by total years of service. so had i retired at 20 years they would get....14/2/20=35% of my pension currently I'm at 25yrs...so...14/2/25=28%
Now because pensions increase most during the last few years of service is she only entitled to the "earlier" value of the pension and not the portion that increased towards the end? the formula is figured from the total.
Just to pick a number the first 20 years it might have been worth lets say $200,000 if I had left the company at that time. 20/2/20 = 50% continue to work another 10 then its....20/2/30=33%
But if I work 10 more years the total worth might be $500,000. Depending what pension you have ERISA or NON ERISA determines what your soon to be ex is entitled to. Look up the meaning of ERISA/NON ERISA to determine what type of pension you own.
If the her percentage is 50% does she get $200,000 times .50 = $100,000? ....... and I get $400,000?I'm not understanding this question.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.