I had to pay the premium for both of my daughters
Incase of their death , their mother gets the money if something
Happens to one of them
I also had to have health insurance on them
I was not required to have a policy on myself for their benefit
I only had to pay for this policy as long as i am paying
Childsupport
If you paid the insurance company directly, then your name is somewhere on that policy. Why can’t they at least tell you who the policy was made out for?
I am waiting for them to return my call
I am just worried that if they messed up
I may get into trouble for not following the
Divorce paperwork
I think you misunderstood the section of the divorce decree you quoted above. As I read it, it’s the standard condition guaranteeing child support in the event something happened to you. Maybe that’s not what was purchased, but I’m pretty sure that’s what was intended. In any case, since no one died, I would worry about it.
That was very much how I read it, too.
That’s how I read it, too. It’s to make sure the child support doesn’t completely evaporate if dad kicks. It’s pretty standard.
But that means he still needs to insure his own life as long as the OP is paying for the younger kid. That should be the worry point, if we’re reading this properly. Based on that wording, I don’t think the kids need to be insured at all (life insurance, that is), and I don’t know why anyone would think it important in a divorce decree to have them insured.
I agree. That’s a fairly typical provision in divorce decrees in my state.
From the language OP quoted above, it looks like the children are the beneficiaries of the policy and the mother is their trustee.
Sometimes separation agreements have a clause where the insured assigns their rights in the policy to another party. This is done so that one spouse doesn’t have to go through her ex-spouse to get information on the insurance policy. The insured just sends the money and doesn’t have access to the policy. That may be the reason the OP can’t get info on his policy.
I don’t know why the OP thinks his children’s lives are the lives being insured.
And 08roadglide, what did you mean when you said “lately i notice i only get info on one child” in your opening post? Who are you getting info from?
I wonder if these are endowment policies - that would be significant when the policies mature and the children try to collect.
Thats not good , her and her idiot att told me it was supposed
To be on the children , and the whole time it was supposed
To be on me ? I have another year left till my daughter turns 19
Now i could get in hot water for screwing that up
How much trouble could i get into ? Jail time ? Fine ? 
All because i couldnt afford a attorney at the time , great
Dude, it’s not likely the attorney told you they needed the children insured. This is REALLY standard stuff, and his client is most benefited by you being insured, not the children.
Are you sure that’s what policy is, the one you’re paying for? Sounds like you aren’t in control of the details here yet, if this is legit. Anyway, if we’re reading this right, and you are not insured as prescribed, get a policy if you can now. No damages have occurred so far, on account of you lived! No harm, no foul, at least as far as monetary damage. Get an attorney now, how about that for a start?
That is exactly what her attorney had on some paperwork she sent ( Both myself and my new wife thought it seemed kind of odd ) , So i did what they said they wanted , all the paperwork had to be returned to her attorney once it was completed for their approval, Then the divorce was finalized and i got the divorce paperwork .
the children are the one’s insured , I did all the paperwork with a agent , they each have 100,000.00 life insurance policy on each of them payable to their mother only
Can you answer the question I asked earlier? What did you mean when you said “lately i notice i only get info on one child”? Where is this info coming from?
As for getting in trouble for leaving out one child from the policy, it’s going to depend on what the agreement says. If it says that you should have insured your own life, you’ll only get in trouble if you die before the children turn 18. Your ex-wife will have to sue your estate to get the money.
If your agreement says to insure your children, then you’ll only get in trouble if one of the children dies uninsured. Your ex-spouse can then sue you for the $100,000 she should have received if the deceased child’s life insurance policy was in effect.
You can also get sued now for not following the agreement now. However, once you get sued, you’ll have a chance to correct your mistake by insuring the child that’s not insured.
Therefore, I wouldn’t worry about anything unless either you or one of your children dies, or unless someone sues you.
If this is really bothering you, you should go see an attorney for about an hour with your agreement. It’ll cost you around $300, but you should get some peace of mind over this.
I am confused about this as well. I thought that we usually insure the parents of dependent children, so that the children will have some resources just in case a parent dies. I Both parents should have life insurance on their own lives. Kids or kids custodians should be the beneficiaries. If custodial parent dies, the non custodial parent will use the resource to raise and support the child. vice versa. I am unclear why you would ever need to carry life insurance on your kids, particularly now grown. Perhaps something very small to cover final expenses. A parent however is not relying on kids to provide form them. right? It sounds like you are o.k. I would however go back and reexamine your agreement. Perhaps it needs to be modified. It seems like the agreement should have been that you carry life insurance on your life, not on your child’s.
I think that the OP is kind of confused because much of this doesn’t make a lot of sense.
You remarried before the divorce was final?
Assuming this scenario is for real it sounds like you completely misinterpreted what you were supposed to do and signed the kids up with benefit policies instead of yourself. I’m guessing your wife misunderstood the policies as well or did not look at them closely nor did her attorney, and you have been paying for these incorrectly set up policies for 8 years.
You can terminate the kid’s policy and move it to yourself for the remaining months left until the youngest turns 18. I don’t think you need to see or pay an attorney to make this happen unless the language of the divorce decree is still confusing to you.
If your ex-wife is insanely litigious and is looking for an excuse to punish you I’m not sure rattling the insurance cage is the best way to go. As no one has noticed anything to date is and very unlikely to unless you rattle the cage you can keep the single kids policy in effect until it expires. If everyone is as oblivious as you have indicated it will likely go unnoticed.
FWIW a life insurance policy on you as an adult male over 40 will likely require a health exam and may cost a lot more than a kids policy.
No one is going to sue you or make trouble. No one died, no one was damaged by the mistake. Ypu probably saved a lot of money on insurance, its cheap for kids. Now go get yourself a $100,000 policy for the kid under 18. Cancel it when he or she turns 18.