Millions of Australians will have no say in who inherits their super

Millions of Australians are at risk of their superannuation being distributed against their wishes, as a significant majority have not made binding nominations for who should inherit their funds upon death. Brooke Allan's experience highlights this issue, where her uncle's super fund, Cbus, awarded his entire $130,000 payout to his estranged son, despite the uncle having listed his nieces on a death benefit nomination form.

“

It's not about the money, it's about the request of someone who is deceased.

Ms. Allan expressed her distress, stating, "It's not about the money, it's about the request of someone who is deceased." She questioned the purpose of nominations if companies disregard them. While Cbus acted within legal parameters, the case underscores the complexities of superannuation payouts when multiple family members make claims.

Superannuation funds act as trustees and have the discretion to decide beneficiaries, meaning nominations are not always legally binding. This discretion can lead to outcomes that contradict the deceased's stated wishes. The situation is exacerbated by a lack of proactive communication from super funds regarding the importance of binding nominations.

“

Why do we bother nominating anyone and why do we bother putting our wishes down … if these companies are not going to abide by them?

New research from Super Consumers Australia reveals a critical gap in financial planning, with an estimated 15.5 million Australians lacking a binding death benefit nomination. A survey of 5,000 individuals found that 67% had not been contacted by their fund about making such a nomination, and only 10% had one in place. This leaves a vast number of people vulnerable to their superannuation being distributed without their explicit consent.

“

Funds have been doing a very poor job of letting peo