Common Law Marriage Spouse bennifits

[darkfluid]

What is the name of your state? Texas

I recently took a position with the NJ based company that is owned by a washington state based company. My primary residence will remain in Texas and I will be working out of country.

They have denied my common-law wifes health insurance bennefits. I tried explaining texas common law marriage, but they insist on a marriage certificate. Below is thier explanation:

*censored* is an ASO client, and therefore defines who is eligible for coverage under their plan(s). *censored* has taken a standard approach to defining who is eligible for coverage to include and eligible dependent, their spouse, and dependent children. Spouse includes through marriage. Dependent children include those children through birth, legal adoption placement for adoption, legal guardianship, court or administrative order. *censored* has not extended coverage to common law spouses, or domestic partners (same or opposite sex).
*censored* administers the eligibility and benefits of the *censored* plans, for *censored*. *censored* does not make the determination of who is or is not covered.

I didn't think this was legal. We have the same rights in Texas as a normal married couple, and in addition we should have rights as a normal married couple in any other state (and should not be considered any differently). Is this correct? What should I do? She needs insurance and I leave in a week.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Texas doesn't have common law marriages, it recognizes what are called informal marriages, something not cited in the above communication and which should be recognized in the other states under what is termed full faith and credit something that is determined under federal statutes as opposed to being determined by the employer, they may recognize more than the federal or state standards, not less, in fact Washington state doesn't have common law mariages but recognizes what are called a meretricious or marital relationship https://forum.freeadvice.com/showthread.php?t=263882 is a thread with some case law.

However since you are about to leave the country why don't you just get married? If you were to separate in the future, you would still require a divorce.

 

[darkfluid]

I would prefer not to have to go through the process. I'm not even aware of what is required and I may have to ship out tomorrow or the next day. Plus I didn't want to have to go through the expense if I could simply write a letter to the company stating something and have them comply.

Matt

 

[darkfluid]

Just found out they are Missouri based not Washington, should make no difference though.

Matt

 

[BelizeBreeze]

It makes no difference where the company is based. They have the right to establish requirements for their covered insured and your 'wife' does not meet these requirements.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

You waited to the last minute.

You can register your informal marriage:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/docs/FA/content/htm/fa.001.00.000002.00.htm

FAMILY CODE

CHAPTER 2. THE MARRIAGE RELATIONSHIP

SUBCHAPTER A. APPLICATION FOR MARRIAGE LICENSE
§ 2.401. PROOF OF INFORMAL MARRIAGE. (a) In a
judicial, administrative, or other proceeding, the marriage of a
man and woman may be proved by evidence that:
(1) a declaration of their marriage has been signed as
provided by this subchapter; or
(2) the man and woman agreed to be married and after
the agreement they lived together in this state as husband and wife
and there represented to others that they were married.
(b) If a proceeding in which a marriage is to be proved as
provided by Subsection (a)(2) is not commenced before the second
anniversary of the date on which the parties separated and ceased
living together, it is rebuttably presumed that the parties did not
enter into an agreement to be married.
(c) A person under 18 years of age may not:
(1) be a party to an informal marriage; or
(2) execute a declaration of informal marriage under
Section 2.402.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, § 1, eff. April 17, 1997.
Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1362, § 1, eff. Sept. 1,
1997.


§ 2.402. DECLARATION AND REGISTRATION OF INFORMAL
MARRIAGE. (a) A declaration of informal marriage must be signed
on a form prescribed by the bureau of vital statistics and provided
by the county clerk. Each party to the declaration shall provide
the information required in the form.
(b) The declaration form must contain:
(1) a heading entitled "Declaration and Registration
of Informal Marriage, ___________ County, Texas";
(2) spaces for each party's full name, including the
woman's maiden surname, address, date of birth, place of birth,
including city, county, and state, and social security number, if
any;
(3) a space for indicating the type of document
tendered by each party as proof of age and identity;
(4) printed boxes for each party to check "true" or
"false" in response to the following statement: "The other party is
not related to me as:
(A) an ancestor or descendant, by blood or
adoption;
(B) a brother or sister, of the whole or half
blood or by adoption;
(C) a parent's brother or sister, of the whole or
half blood or by adoption; or
(D) a son or daughter of a brother or sister, of
the whole or half blood or by adoption.";
(5) a printed declaration and oath reading: "I
SOLEMNLY SWEAR (OR AFFIRM) THAT WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, ARE MARRIED TO
EACH OTHER BY VIRTUE OF THE FOLLOWING FACTS: ON OR ABOUT (DATE) WE
AGREED TO BE MARRIED, AND AFTER THAT DATE WE LIVED TOGETHER AS
HUSBAND AND WIFE AND IN THIS STATE WE REPRESENTED TO OTHERS THAT WE
WERE MARRIED. SINCE THE DATE OF MARRIAGE TO THE OTHER PARTY I HAVE
NOT BEEN MARRIED TO ANY OTHER PERSON. THIS DECLARATION IS TRUE AND
THE INFORMATION IN IT WHICH I HAVE GIVEN IS CORRECT.";
(6) spaces immediately below the printed declaration
and oath for the parties' signatures; and
(7) a certificate of the county clerk that the parties
made the declaration and oath and the place and date it was made.
(c) Repealed by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1362, § 4, eff.
Sept. 1, 1997.

Added by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 7, § 1, eff. April 17, 1997.
Amended by Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1362, § 4, eff. Sept. 1,

 

[darkfluid]

Well, not by choice, I just got my employee packet for benefits Monday, and I've never had a problem with benefits before (I have always worked for Texas based companies). The entire hiring process has been very sloppy, I just got word of my denial the day I posted. Too late for me now.

Thanks for your help.