Louisiana House Bill HB75

Louisiana 2014 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/14
• Refer: 3/10/14
• Report Pass: 3/31/14
• Engrossed: 4/8/14
• Refer: 4/9/14
• Report Pass: 5/12/14
• Refer: 5/14/14

Caption

Requires court order be provided to the Firefighters' Retirement System before the system can seize or garnish benefits of a member (RE NO IMPACT APV)

Impact

The key impact of HB 75 is on how retirement benefits can be managed in relation to legal claims such as child support or restitution for felony offenses. Previously, retirement benefits could be subject to garnishment in these cases without a formalized procedure of verifying the court order. By mandating that FRS must receive certified orders, the bill ensures that retirees have assurance regarding their benefits while also integrating a formal legal framework to adjudicate garnishment requests.

Summary

House Bill 75 introduces a requirement that the Firefighters' Retirement System (FRS) must receive a certified copy of a court order or judgment before any retirement benefits can be garnished or seized from former members or retirees. The bill clarifies the procedural steps that the retirement system must follow to ensure that benefits are protected until a valid court order is received. This proposed law aims to provide additional safeguards for retirees and beneficiaries, preventing any premature or unauthorized garnishment of retirement funds.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 75 appears to be generally supportive, particularly among those concerned with protecting retirees' benefits. There is recognition of the need for oversight in handling garnishment and the requirement of a formal court order is seen as a protective measure. Stakeholders, including advocacy groups for retirees, have expressed approval of the bill, emphasizing its role in safeguarding the rights and benefits of those who have served in the firefighting profession.

Contention

While the bill seems to have broad support, some may still raise concerns about the implications for creditors awaiting garnished funds. There is a need to address potential delays in fulfilling financial obligations under court orders as a result of the requirement for certified documentation. Nevertheless, proponents argue that the protection of retirement benefits outweighs these concerns, reflecting a balance between creditors' rights and retirees' security.