by kayrenee411 » Fri Oct 08, 2010 02:11 pm
My husband and I just separated. However, he's still on my insurance. Is there a way that I can take him off of my plan. He has open enrollment coming up at his job in November. But who's to say that he's going to enroll?
Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 05:30 am Post Subject:
If your plan is employer-sponsored covering 20 or more employees, it is subject to ERISA and HIPAA provisions. If your husband has been covered under your employer's plan for 18 months or more, he is entitled to enroll in his employer's group health plan without having to wait for open enrollment, and would not be subject to any preexisting condition exclusions.
If you are "legally" separated (evidenced by a family court petition for the same), you may drop him from the coverage (unless your court order requires you to maintain his coverage until your divorce is final), but you must inform your employer's benefits person of your separation, and your husband would be entitled to continue his dependent coverage under COBRA for up to 36 months by paying up to 102% of the premium to your employer. He will have 60 days following termination to elect continuation under COBRA.
Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 06:58 am Post Subject:
unless your court order requires you to maintain his coverage until your divorce is final
I always thought that one's coverage would be maintained till the divorce is final. I'm still wondering under what circumstances it would go any other way. Max, you're surely the one to help explain it.
Posted: Sat Oct 09, 2010 07:41 am Post Subject:
Because some states, like California, grant a separation several months prior to a final divorce decree, in the separation order, there CAN be instructions such as (husband defendant, wife plaintiff):
"The defendant shall not hypothecate any community property assets."
"The defendant shall make all payments on plaintiff's life insurance policy."
"The defendant shall name the plaintiff the irrevocable beneficiary of his life insurance policy."
"The defendant shall assign ownership of his life insurance policy to plaintiff."
This is not to say that there WILL be any such order(s) from the judge, but at the time of a separation, if the judge believes one party will try to gain an advantage over the other when it comes to property rights or values, he/she can act in a manner that seeks to protect the other party's interest in that property.
So if a judge believed that the husband would lapse a life insurance policy through non-payment of premium or name someone else the beneficiary, he can order the husband to do any of the things listed above. At the time of a final order, he can reverse his decision or determine the benefit in favor of the wife as part of her settlement of the assets of the marriage.
It's all dependent on how creative one's attorney is, and when the attorney chooses to press his or her case. Rather than permit the wife to be named the irrevocable beneficiary, a good attorney would simply request the absolute assignment of the policy from the husband as owner to the wife as the new owner. Whether the wife keeps the policy in force or not, would then be up to her.
Add your comment