Skip to content

A legal lost and found: proposed rules for New Brunswick’s Unclaimed Property Act now published

Christopher Marr, TEP and Michael Forestell

As detailed in our previous update , in March 2020 New Brunswick implemented the Unclaimed Property Act (“Act”), with the intention that the New Brunswick Financial and Consumer Services Commission (“FCNB”) would use its authority under the Act to develop new regulatory rules for the administration of unclaimed monetary property. This came to pass on October 21, 2021 when the FCNB provided notice that it had adopted two rules under the Act; the General Rule and the Fees Rule (collectively, the “Rules”). FCNB expects the regime to come into force on January 1, 2022, with the first reporting period occurring in January 2023.

Administrators of wound-up pension plans should pay particular attention to the adoption of the Rules, as they will, when in force, provide a more efficient way to dispose of unclaimed benefits owed to unlocatable members. At this time, the regime only applies to the assets of wound-up pension plans subject to New Brunswick law, which means that ongoing pension plans and pension plans in certain federally-regulated industries will not be affected. It is also noteworthy that plan administrators will be exempted from obligations under the new regime if the total fair market value of the property held is below $1,000.

When is property considered unclaimed?

The Rules state that, in most cases, monetary property will be presumed unclaimed if the apparent owner does not claim from or notify the property holder of their right or interest in the property for three years. The Rules also provide that once the director, appointed by the FCNB (“Director”), has received any unclaimed property, it will be added to the online public inventory for unclaimed property, which the Director will maintain. With respect to pension benefits, the three-year period begins when the wind-up report is approved. This period ends if the beneficiary explicitly indicates their interest in the benefit, or on the occurrence of other events, such as the administrator of a wound-up plan successfully delivering a statement to the apparent beneficiary, or the apparent beneficiary logging into an online account relating to the funds.

Rights and duties of administrators

The Rules also set out several rights and duties of holders of unclaimed property, including administrators of wound-up pension plans. Several examples are as follows:

  1. Property holders must try to notify the apparent owner or beneficiary of property by mail or email, if they have any of the owner’s addresses on record, prior to transferring the property to the Director. With respect to wound-up pension plans, this attempt must take place during, or near, the last quarter of the year of the third anniversary of the wind-up;
  2. Anyone holding unclaimed property on December 31 of any year, has ninety days from that date to submit the property to the Director, with a report that details information about the property and its apparent owner. Property holders can apply to deliver the property before the three-year period has lapsed, which requires the payment of an application fee;
  3. The Director has the authority to demand delivery of unclaimed property, backed by certain investigatory powers, in case property holders fail to cooperate. There are also provisions for late delivery with the Director’s permission and payment of an application fee;
  4. Interest fees on late transfers may apply, up to a $1,000 maximum; and
  5. Delivering unclaimed property to the Director in compliance with the Act discharges the holder from all liability in respect of the property.

General

Though the Rules are being adopted, the Canadian Association of Pension Supervisory Authorities’ 2019 Guideline on Searching for Unlocatable Members remains a valuable resource for plan administrators to consult, as it suggests best practices that remain valuable under the Rules. For example, it advises that administrators should periodically remind plan participants to update their contact information if it changes.

How the Rules will be implemented, or what the practice will look like under this regime is still unknown, but soon to be seen. Of particular interest is whether the Rules will ever be amended to include assets of active pension plans, which has been discussed. As always, time will tell.


This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Pensions and Benefits group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: “Lien”-ing Towards Efficiency: Upcoming Amendments to the Builders’ Lien Act

June 29, 2017

By Brian Tabor, QC and Colin Piercey Bill 81 and Bill 15, receiving Royal Assent in 2013 and 2014 respectively, are due to take effect this month. On June 30, 2017, amendments to the Builders’…

Read More

Weeding Through New Brunswick’s Latest Cannabis Recommendations

June 26, 2017

New Brunswick continues to be a thought leader in the field of regulation of recreational cannabis and provides us with a first look at what the provincial regulation of recreational cannabis might look like. New…

Read More

Client Update: Elk Valley Decision – SCC Finds that Enforcement of “No Free Accident” Rule in Workplace Drug and Alcohol Policy Does Not Violate Human Rights Legislation

June 23, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Richard Jordan In Stewart v. Elk Valley Coal Corporation, 2017 SCC 30, a six-judge majority of the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) confirmed a Tribunal decision which concluded that the dismissal of an…

Read More

Client Update: The Grass is Always Greener in the Other Jurisdiction – Provincial Acts and Regulations under the Cannabis Act

June 22, 2017

By Kevin Landry New Brunswick’s Working Group on the Legalization of Cannabis released an interim report on June 20, 2017. It is a huge step forward in the legalization process and the first official look at how legalization…

Read More

Client Update: Cannabis Act regulations – now we are really getting into the weeds!

June 15, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Kevin Landry As we explained in The Cannabis Act- Getting into the Weeds, the Cannabis Act introduces a regulatory regime for recreational marijuana in Canada. The regime promises to be complex. The details of legalization will be…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a lobbyist in New Brunswick

June 15, 2017

On April 1, 2017, the New Brunswick Lobbyists’ Registration Act was proclaimed into force (the “Act”), requiring active professional consultant or in-house lobbyists to register and file returns with the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of New…

Read More

How much is too much?: Disclosure in multiple accident litigation in English v House, 2017 NLTD(G) 93

June 14, 2017

Joe Thorne and Jessica Habet How far can an insurer dig into the Plaintiff’s history to defend a claim? And how much information is an insurer entitled to have in order to do so? In English v.…

Read More

Client Update: Court of Appeal confirms accounting firms may take on multiple mandates for the same company

June 14, 2017

Neil Jacobs, QC, Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal recently confirmed that accounting/auditing firms may take on several mandates in respect of companies that may or do become insolvent in Wabush Hotel Limited…

Read More

Negligence claims in paper-only independent medical examinations: Rubens v Sansome, 2017 NLCA 32

June 13, 2017

Joe Thorne and Brandon Gillespie An independent medical examination (“IME”) is a useful tool for insurers. An IME is an objective assessment of the claimant’s condition for the purpose of evaluating coverage and compensation. Where a…

Read More

Client Update: Mental injury? Expert diagnosis not required

June 12, 2017

On June 2, 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Saadati v. Moorhead, 2017 SCC 28, clarifying the evidence needed to establish mental injury. Neither expert evidence nor a diagnosed psychiatric illness…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top