Definitely ask for a refund. Let us know what they say.
Actually I have somewhat of a counterexample to those who say you can’t get your money back. My case is a little complicated. I was getting health insurance through my wife’s work policy, although she had retired years before. When she turned 65 and went on Medicare, her coverage on that policy ended. She and I were led to believe that my coverage also ended at that time, so I got a new policy with a new company. About 5 months later, I learned that my coverage on her old policy was actually still intact. I talked to the agent I had used to get the new policy, and he somehow got me a partial refund of the premiums I had paid on the new unnecessary policy.
This is clearly a different case, and I think that the fact that I had double coverage was a key factor in getting the refund. Personally I don’t think the OP has any chance of getting a refund in his case.
Legal advice is best suited to IMHO.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
SlackerInc Wifesname is not a person eligible for spousal coverage, because it’s not the actual spouse. So the insurer could not have intended to cover that (fictional) person.
SlackerInc Wifesname is not the correct NAME for the spouse, but they clearly intended to cover the actual spouse. An argument like “we intended to cover her spouse, but not this spouse but instead some other spouse who just happened to have the same SSN and birthdate” isn’t likely to be successful, IMHO. Further, generally speaking you can use any name you like absent intent to defraud, so a showing that SlackerInc Wifesname is in fact fictional is unlikely to be successful, at least in my state, particularly when there is a real person who is the lawful spouse and has the designated SSN. What evidence would you present to show that SlackerInc Wifesname is a name assumed for purposes of fraud?
I still don’t think you guys actually disagree with each other on the substance. Looks like a case of misinterpretation.
Yes, SlackerInc (Actualname) gets it - I am saying that he would have been covered had there been a dispute, because it is clear that he is the person who the parties intended to cover.
Just to be safe though, was there other evidence of who you were - i.e., your Social Security # on the policy? If so, I don’t see any way you could lose in court or come up short in an insurance dispute based off of mistaken identity.
Yes.
Whether or not you actually used the coverage is immaterial the same as trying to get money back from a car insurance company because you didn’t hit anyone. The insurance was clearly meant for you and they never denied a claim due to the name being wrong. Trying to go back now and get the money back because you gave them the wrong name, why didn’t you correct it when the insurance card showed up, seems dishonest and possibly fraudulent.
:smack: Whoa, hold on. Lotta disinformation there:
(1) I was never saying “I want my money back because I didn’t use it”. I haven’t used my car insurance, ever, but I know the safety net was there in case I needed it, and that’s the point. My question was whether I did in fact have that health insurance safety net during that time, and I’m convinced by the answers here that I did. Furthermore, I only noted that I never used it because that’s why in the 14 months I had it, I never learned they had the wrong name. Which leads to:
(2) I/we did not “give them the wrong name”. There is zero chance either of us wrote my name down with my wife’s last name.
(3) If any “insurance card showed up”, I don’t know about it. I don’t have one in my wallet, and I don’t remember ever seeing one. (Which, come to think of it, is in itself a problem.)
(4) So, due to these above points: where’s the dishonesty? Neither my wife nor I knew there was any discrepancy until a couple days ago. My thought was that if they would not have covered me in an expensive emergency due to not having the correct name, then I shouldn’t have to pay for non-coverage. I am, again, satisfied at this point that they would have covered me, therefore I am not seeking to get money back.
Okay?
New developments:
–Apparently the insurer did not and will not issue a card in my name. They sent my wife two cards in her name, and I’m supposed to carry one of them. Seems a little weird, but OK.
–Now they are asking her to prove she is my “guardian”. They just can’t seem to wrap their heads around the idea that we could be legally married yet have different names, without hyphenation or anything. Good grief. :smack:
On the first point. This is common. Our insurance through Anthem, only issues cards in the name of the employee. Dependents and spouses use the card of the employee, as it is all covered under the employee’s relationship to the employer.
On the second point, you should be listed as spouse, not a dependent.
Well, maybe. Some employer plans only offer spousal coverage if the spouse is a dependent.