life insurance and divorce

[rufusbuford]

What is the name of your state? colorado my brother passed away,his life ins.,named his ex as beneficary.they were divorced 2x's on the same marriage,in the decree ,the ex agreed she had no interest in his estate,nor make future claims against it ,as to his 401k,pension plan,and stock investments,yet now he's deceased is doing just that.his employer's human resources dept.(one person imparticular) has been in contact with ex since day he died,yet no contact with his only child from prev. marriage,nor myself,court apptd.rep.of estate.my attempts for info.as to his stocks,ins.,pension plan, etc.are ignored and hampered by this person from human resrces.my job as executor of estate has been made impossible for me to fulfill,and only added to the grief over loss of brother ,what recourse do i have against this person, and to get the info needed for probate court,there was no will,yet his ex said he left her everything,i think she was paid life ins.

 

[Dandy Don]

How much was the life insurance policy worth?

Do you live in the same city or county as your brother did?

Unfortunately, your brother made the mistake of not contacting the insurance company to inform them about changing the beneficiary, so there may not be much you can do to get the insurance money, but you have an excellent chance of being able to get most of the remaining assets (pension plan, 401K, stock and investments) since you are the legal personal representative.

If you have received your letters testamentary from the probate court (the official document naming you personal representative which you should have received shortly after you filed to open up the probate), then there is no excuse for the human resources official to stall in giving you information. If you can afford to hire a probate attorney or business law attorney to help advise you in getting the estate probated, then you should do so (you may want to interview 4 or 5 attorneys until you find one you are comfortable with and if you explain the particular circumstances of your case, one of them might be sympathetic enough to give you a reduced rate or do it on a pro bono "free" basis).

The 401K and pension plan have guidelines that must be followed strictly in how they are handled--sometimes the spouse is predetermined to get a certain portion, but as personal representative of the estate, you have every right to demand information on how these assets are being handled, so you should not let the human resources person give you the brush off so quickly--you should contact the president/manager of the company to complain about how you are being treated and perhaps then the information you want would be provided.

You may need the negotiating/enforcement/persuasive power of an attorney to represent you in dealing with this human resources official, since he/she would not be so inclined to ignore you and would be more forthcoming in providing information if an attorney called. You even might be more effective if you could visit the company and talk to the human resources official yourself, in person.

The divorce decree and the ex-wife's status as a divorcee will by law prevent her from being able to get access to some of the assets, and you might also need the attorney's assistance to guide you through the process of examining the law and the divorce decree to decide exactly what she is able to get and what she IS NOT able to get from the estate.

DANDY DON IN OKLAHOMA ([email protected])

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My response:

Watch this, Dandy - -

Writer, was the life insurance policy "private" or was it through his employer?

IAAL

 

[rufusbuford]

the insurance was through

the insurance was through his employer , and years ago,he had mentioned there were two policies ,one for wife(ex now),and one for his son ,the amount of sons he had said ,was 60 thousand,which,by the way happens to be right around the amount of one policy we did finally get info on(not from the human resources dept.,from insurer) but that policy #starts with GL and my brother had deductions from pay listed as Supp, EE Life
SuppDep. Life,and Supp.Spse Life. General (GL) & Supplemental(Supp) are my assumptions correct as to the differances?the exes, was as i remember him saying ,3 and one half x's the sons by the way i have letters of administration from court and human rsres.dept has had them since i got them i also have atty.& he too was ignored ,by same ,any info we try to get ,we don't & each time we get responses from ex on questions,the answer changes the whole thing has been one lie after another,and my bad thoughts, are getting worse each time answers change. i wonder why the lies if alls legit!

 

[rufusbuford]

one county over

dandy dan, i live in the neighboring county ,the one right next to his county.

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

"the insurance was through his employer . . ."


======================================


My response:

Okay, that's what I needed to know. First, insurance beneficiary proceeds do NOT become part of a decedent's estate. Such funds bypass the decedent's estate, and are paid directly to the named beneficiary. This is "contractual" in nature and, by virtue of the contract, the insurance company is merely fulfilling the contract.

Second, his ex wife will be able to take from the policy because he failed to change his beneficiary.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA") was enacted to establish employee benefit plan regulation as a matter of exclusive federal concern. [Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. Dedeaux (1987) 481 U.S. 41, 46, 107 S.Ct. 1549, 1552]

Except for state laws regulating banking, securities or insurance, ERISA "shall supersede any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan." [ERISA § 514(a); 29 USCA § 1144(a) (emphasis added)]
State laws "regulating insurance" are expressly exempted from ERISA preemption. [ERISA § 514(b); 29 USCA § 1144(b)(2) (A)]

In the U.S. Supreme Court case of Egelhoff v. Egelhoff (2001) 532 U.S. 141, 146-149, 121 S.Ct. 1322, 1327-1328, the Court stated that the "statute automatically revoking spouse as beneficiary of nonprobate assets upon divorce was preempted by ERISA to extent it applies to ERISA plans (here, employer-provided life insurance policy)".

Thus, where an employee designates his or her spouse as beneficiary of an employer-provided (and hence, ERISA-governed) group life insurance policy, and the parties thereafter divorce without changing beneficiary designations, the now former (nonemployee) spouse is entitled to the policy proceeds when the participant dies despite a state statute automatically revoking designation of a spouse as beneficiary of nonprobate assets upon divorce. [Egelhoff v. Egelhoff, supra, 532 U.S. at 146-150, 121 S.Ct. at 1327-1329]

IAAL

 

[rufusbuford]

iaal

ok,now what if the decedent, had made an update to his personal information with employer,(not sure what info was updated,we can't get info from humanr resrces dept.} and at the time the update was made he was on investigational meds. and his coworkers and immediate suprvsr.have all said he wasn't in his right mind on said meds,this is a long story some of which i 'd rather discuss privately there are quite a number of things going on that are qustionable and possibly illegal involving real estate and charges leveled that might have been for the sole purpose of collecting all owned by him remember 2divorces for the same marriage? i wuold like to fill you in on all that's going on and the red flags that i think there are going up continually,,privately???

 

[Dandy Don]

How would the co-workers and supervisor be able to say conclusively that he wasn't in his right mind on the "investigational" medications--and why would their opinion be needed about this anyway? It sounds like company is trying to cover up something. Even if he was on medication he still had the right the make a beneficiary change. Only thing that would be questionable is if someone else influenced him to make them the designated beneficiary.

Something is wrong if they are not being forthcoming in providing you or your attorney with information.

 

[rufusbuford]

not sure

i thought so too! only thing is how to find out ,when information channels to me are blocked by the one in human resources .it seems ,this person has quite a bit of pull, or quite a story. it only makes my wanting to know ,so intense i can't sleep , or think of anything else but, getting to the truth to it all! i would think it was noone elses business to make such a common thing as settling an estate of a loved one ,such an utterly impossible task.i shouldn't have to deal with this persons #*&# on top of our loss,i wonder if i'll ever get my time to grieve properly, instead of stupid games ,by people educated beyond their intelligece! i'm taking your advice and contacting the pres. of co. and then maybe his higher ups at the parent co. also,just so they are all aware of this persons actions. thank you again ,like i said you're a great group of people to take time to do all you do.thank you.

 

[Daringdeb]

How much was the life insurance policy worth?

Do you live in the same city or county as your brother did?

Unfortunately, your brother made the mistake of not contacting the insurance company to inform them about changing the beneficiary, so there may not be much you can do to get the insurance money, but you have an excellent chance of being able to get most of the remaining assets (pension plan, 401K, stock and investments) since you are the legal personal representative.

If you have received your letters testamentary from the probate court (the official document naming you personal representative which you should have received shortly after you filed to open up the probate), then there is no excuse for the human resources official to stall in giving you information. If you can afford to hire a probate attorney or business law attorney to help advise you in getting the estate probated, then you should do so (you may want to interview 4 or 5 attorneys until you find one you are comfortable with and if you explain the particular circumstances of your case, one of them might be sympathetic enough to give you a reduced rate or do it on a pro bono "free" basis).

The 401K and pension plan have guidelines that must be followed strictly in how they are handled--sometimes the spouse is predetermined to get a certain portion, but as personal representative of the estate, you have every right to demand information on how these assets are being handled, so you should not let the human resources person give you the brush off so quickly--you should contact the president/manager of the company to complain about how you are being treated and perhaps then the information you want would be provided.

You may need the negotiating/enforcement/persuasive power of an attorney to represent you in dealing with this human resources official, since he/she would not be so inclined to ignore you and would be more forthcoming in providing information if an attorney called. You even might be more effective if you could visit the company and talk to the human resources official yourself, in person.

The divorce decree and the ex-wife's status as a divorcee will by law prevent her from being able to get access to some of the assets, and you might also need the attorney's assistance to guide you through the process of examining the law and the divorce decree to decide exactly what she is able to get and what she IS NOT able to get from the estate.

DANDY DON IN OKLAHOMA ([email protected])

 

[Daringdeb]

I know from my experience that there is a court rule in Colorado that states that an ex-spouse must be either redesignated on a life policy or that the divorce decree must have a clause stating that the ex-spouse shall remain as beneficiary after the divorce. I was unable to collect on a policy for my ex-husband. There are court rules that a lot of people are unaware of, including my divorce attorney. If the proceeds were paid to the ex, It would seem that the law was overlooked or ignored. You would think that a life insurance company would have some liabilty in notifying
a policy holder of state rules or laws that apply to the policy in question. I would be really interested in knowing if proceeds were paid to the ex-spouse.

Daringdeb
Colorado

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

I know from my experience that there is a court rule in Colorado that states that an ex-spouse must be either redesignated on a life policy or that the divorce decree must have a clause stating that the ex-spouse shall remain as beneficiary after the divorce. I was unable to collect on a policy for my ex-husband. There are court rules that a lot of people are unaware of, including my divorce attorney. If the proceeds were paid to the ex, It would seem that the law was overlooked or ignored. You would think that a life insurance company would have some liabilty in notifying
a policy holder of state rules or laws that apply to the policy in question. I would be really interested in knowing if proceeds were paid to the ex-spouse.

Daringdeb
Colorado

My response:

Apparently, as a result of your distress, you're not getting it.

If you had read, and UNDERSTOOD what I wrote to you, you wouldn't have asked the above question. So, let me repeat what I wrote to you, and please, read it slowly and make sure you understand it - -

"In the U.S. Supreme Court case of Egelhoff v. Egelhoff (2001) 532 U.S. 141, 146-149, 121 S.Ct. 1322, 1327-1328, the Court stated that the "statute automatically revoking spouse as beneficiary of nonprobate assets upon divorce was preempted by ERISA to extent it applies to ERISA plans (here, employer-provided life insurance policy)".

"Thus, where an employee designates his or her spouse as beneficiary of an employer-provided (and hence, ERISA-governed) group life insurance policy, and the parties thereafter divorce without changing beneficiary designations, the now former (nonemployee) spouse is entitled to the policy proceeds when the participant dies despite a state statute automatically revoking designation of a spouse as beneficiary of nonprobate assets upon divorce. [Egelhoff v. Egelhoff, supra, 532 U.S. at 146-150, 121 S.Ct. at 1327-1329]"

IAAL

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

My further response:

And, I'll bet dollars to dimes that your divorce from your previous husband occurred prior to 2001 - - right?

You see, that's the year the aforementioned U.S. Supreme Court case was decided. Prior to that, and after your divorce, State law prevailed on this issue. No more, though. Not since the above case was decided.

IAAL

 

[Daringdeb]

To IAAL,

Excuse my infraction. I leapt before I looked. It could be my distress. I relize now after "rereading" your reply that the policy was through an employer.
In my case it was a policy issued through Met Life. And no I was not divorced prior to 2001. My divorce was final 01/2001. It doesn't much matter in my case as the policy was not through my ex's employer anyway. I promise to be more informed on any other replys I might submitt.

Daringdeb

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

To IAAL,

Excuse my infraction. I leapt before I looked. It could be my distress. I relize now after "rereading" your reply that the policy was through an employer.
In my case it was a policy issued through Met Life. And no I was not divorced prior to 2001. My divorce was final 01/2001. It doesn't much matter in my case as the policy was not through my ex's employer anyway. I promise to be more informed on any other replys I might submitt.

Daringdeb

My response:

That's okay. I understand you're under pressure and, I'm sure, still reeling from the aftermath of your husband's death.

However, I trust that you now understand the reason why you're not going to get the money from your deceased husband's employment insurance policy.

Right about now, however, you'd probably like to dig him up, grab him by the collar, and just SLUG the hell out of him.

IAAL