- A woman admitted she falsely claimed to be the deceased’s girlfriend in a bid linked to his pension payout.
- She told the Adjudicator a friend promised her quick money if she signed the affidavit.
- The fund’s R2 million death benefit distribution was set aside and a fresh investigation ordered.
A woman who claimed a share of a dead man’s pension payout later admitted that she had never met him, triggering a ruling by the Pension Funds Adjudicator that has thrown a R2 million death benefit distribution into disarray.
Adjudicator Lebogang Mogashoa set aside the distribution decision of the Becsa Provident Fund after finding that the fund had failed to properly investigate whether the woman was in fact the deceased’s cohabiting partner and financially dependent on him.
The complaint was brought by the deceased’s mother after her son died on 29 August 2022. A death benefit of R2 069 241.89 became available for distribution after tax deductions and interest were taken into account.
Family receives less than approved
The fund’s board resolved on 18 April 2024 to allocate 30% of the benefit to each of the deceased’s parents and his sister, and 10% to the alleged cohabiting partner. Each family beneficiary was supposed to receive R543 913.19.
However, when payments were made, each received only R512 399.19. The family challenged the calculation and argued that after SARS deductions, a larger amount remained available for distribution.
After further engagement, including direct enquiries with SARS, the fund paid an additional R325 180.14, amounting to R108 393.38 for each of the three family beneficiaries. The family nevertheless maintained that a further R85 841.28 remained outstanding.
The alleged girlfriend claim
The fund said part of the benefit had been allocated to a woman it regarded as the deceased’s cohabiting partner. The deceased’s mother rejected that claim and said she was willing to provide witnesses, including people who had lived with the deceased and close friends, to show that no cohabiting relationship existed.
The fund relied on affidavits from the woman, who claimed she had lived with the deceased and was financially dependent on him, as well as supporting affidavits from a landlord and a friend. It also argued that the mother lived in North West while the deceased lived in Middelburg and therefore could not have direct knowledge of his living arrangements.
Woman later admits claim was false
Faced with conflicting versions, Adjudicator Mogashoa joined the alleged cohabiting partner to the proceedings and requested her response. She later admitted that she had never met the deceased and had never been in a relationship with him.
According to the determination, she told the Adjudicator that she had been approached by a friend who promised that she could make quick money connected to a sick man in hospital.
She said the friend asked her to sign an affidavit stating that she was the deceased’s girlfriend and to provide copies of her identity document and benefit statement. The woman said she complied but never received any money.
After receiving her response, the fund informed the Adjudicator on 18 November 2025 that it would refer the matter to its internal audit department because the case appeared to involve possible fraud and criminality.
Adjudicator criticises fund’s investigation
In his determination, Adjudicator Mogashoa said the purpose of section 37C of the Pension Funds Act is to protect people who were financially dependent on the deceased during his lifetime.
He said the fund accepted the alleged cohabiting partner as a dependent by merely relying on affidavits without taking adequate steps to verify the information therein.
He added that this matter is a classic example of the dangers of blindly relying on an affidavit without employing any other reasonable methods to verify and authenticate the allegations therein.
The Adjudicator found that the board had failed to properly investigate the matter and that the fund had to be held accountable for failing to ensure that the benefit was paid to the correct beneficiaries.
Fresh investigation ordered
Adjudicator Mogashoa set aside the board’s decision regarding the distribution of the death benefit.
He ordered the fund to conduct a fresh investigation, identify the deceased’s beneficiaries taking into account the findings of the determination, and thereafter allocate and distribute the benefit accordingly.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
