• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Back child support & death

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

2travisgirls

Junior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NC

I currently live in NC & the NCP lives in VA. He currently owes $54k in back support. He just served a 90 day sentence for non-payment. He is doing everything he possibly can to get out of paying. If something happens & he dies, I know I will not see any of the bakc support that he owes as he has no assets whatsoever. I'm trying to find out what my options are so that I can recoup some of this money if he does die. Can I file a motion for the judge to require him to carry life insurance with both my children as beneficiaries? But who's to say that he will pay the premiums? What other choices do I have? Can I get a policy on him? Thanks for any help!!
 


mistoffolees

Senior Member
What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NC

I currently live in NC & the NCP lives in VA. He currently owes $54k in back support. He just served a 90 day sentence for non-payment. He is doing everything he possibly can to get out of paying. If something happens & he dies, I know I will not see any of the bakc support that he owes as he has no assets whatsoever. I'm trying to find out what my options are so that I can recoup some of this money if he does die. Can I file a motion for the judge to require him to carry life insurance with both my children as beneficiaries? But who's to say that he will pay the premiums? What other choices do I have? Can I get a policy on him? Thanks for any help!!
It is not uncommon for the court to order someone to carry life insurance - if it's done at the time of the original court order. It's much less likely for it to be added later.

Someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you CAN buy a policy on ex's life, but it would be limited to the amount of money he owes you - that's the amount of your insurable interest:
Can I buy a policy on someone else's life? What is an "insurable interest"?

However, it would require ex's cooperation since the insurance company will probably want to do a physical and blood work. I'm not sure if the court will ORDER him to cooperate or not.
 

nextwife

Senior Member
Is he physically insurable? No red flags? No drugs, maladies, etc?

I DID buy life insurance on my daughter's father at the time we became parents together, and pay and maintain it. Because I own it, no beneficiary change can be made, and I needn't worry about him ever accidentally allowing a lapse. I think you are wise to consider it, more women should be proactive about getting and maintaining life policies on their child's other parents and on their spouses, themselves etc. To me THAT is more essential for my child than a laundry list of extra curriculars.
 

2travisgirls

Junior Member
I believe he is physically insurable. I'm not sure he'd be willing to sign anything though. MAybe I will call around & see what info I can get regarding this. Thanks for your help.
 

mistoffolees

Senior Member
I believe he is physically insurable. I'm not sure he'd be willing to sign anything though. MAybe I will call around & see what info I can get regarding this. Thanks for your help.
The question you should be asking is whether the court is likely to order him to cooperate. You are certainly able to get an insurance policy in his name if the insurance company will provide it. It's just that they may require blood tests and/or a physical in order to do that. Judges do not like to force anyone to submit to medical testing against their will, so that's going to be the challenge.

I would guess that if you can find a company which would insure him without testing, the odds of getting the court to allow it are pretty good. For example, there are many group policies which do not require exams. Many employers offer this type of policy as well as many professional organizations. Since it would require nothing more than his signature, there's little downside to the court ordering him to sign.

I would also contact some insurers to see what their procedures are in your state. They may have a standard procedure for something like this. They can also tell you what he would be required to do for you to get a policy. The less intrusive it is, the easier it will be for the court to require it.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
The question you should be asking is whether the court is likely to order him to cooperate. You are certainly able to get an insurance policy in his name if the insurance company will provide it. It's just that they may require blood tests and/or a physical in order to do that. Judges do not like to force anyone to submit to medical testing against their will, so that's going to be the challenge.

I would guess that if you can find a company which would insure him without testing, the odds of getting the court to allow it are pretty good. For example, there are many group policies which do not require exams. Many employers offer this type of policy as well as many professional organizations. Since it would require nothing more than his signature, there's little downside to the court ordering him to sign.

I would also contact some insurers to see what their procedures are in your state. They may have a standard procedure for something like this. They can also tell you what he would be required to do for you to get a policy. The less intrusive it is, the easier it will be for the court to require it.
Whether or not physical exams are required depends upon the age of the person being insured, and the amount of insurance being purchased, and the term involved.

For example, someone in their 20's might be able to purchase 100k of 5 year term life insurance without a physcial exam, but maybe only 50k for a 20 year term. Someone in their 60's might not be able to purchase more than about 5k without an exam, no matter what the term.

If dad is in his 30's it might be possible to purchase 50k without an exam.
 

mistoffolees

Senior Member
Whether or not physical exams are required depends upon the age of the person being insured, and the amount of insurance being purchased, and the term involved.

For example, someone in their 20's might be able to purchase 100k of 5 year term life insurance without a physcial exam, but maybe only 50k for a 20 year term. Someone in their 60's might not be able to purchase more than about 5k without an exam, no matter what the term.

If dad is in his 30's it might be possible to purchase 50k without an exam.
It's also going to depend on the company - which is why I suggested that she contact some insurers to find out what they require.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top