When a retirement plan error surfaces, the first reaction is almost always the same: finger-pointing. The sponsor looks to the advisor. The advisor looks to the TPA. The TPA looks to the recordkeeper. And somewhere in the background, everyone is quietly hoping the problem just goes away.
It rarely does.
From a provider perspective, the most dangerous assumption is that responsibility will naturally land where it “belongs.” ERISA doesn’t work that way. Responsibility is determined by facts, conduct, and documentation—not by job titles or marketing labels.
Late deposits, eligibility failures, forfeiture misapplications, and missed amendments usually don’t happen because one party acted maliciously. They happen because everyone assumed someone else was handling it. Providers often discover too late that they were copied on enough emails, answered enough questions, or “helped out” just enough to be pulled into the mess.
What sponsors want is clarity. What providers need are boundaries. Engagement agreements, service matrices, and onboarding documentation matter far more than most providers admit. Courts and regulators look at what you actually did, not what your contract said you didn’t do.
The uncomfortable truth is that providers who pride themselves on being “full service” often create their own exposure. Helping is fine. Owning the problem—intentionally or not—is not.
Providers who survive these situations best aren’t the loudest defenders. They’re the ones who can calmly point to contemporaneous documentation and say, “Here’s what we did—and here’s what we didn’t.”
