Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
if even one person avoids this situation from your thread than your pain was at least not in vain and you can at least feel good you may have saved others from this mistake..
Unfortunately this happens a lot and has happened to others in the forum. They often had other sources of income but the possible death of the spouse with the pension will be a major hit.
MMOB to the rescue again. Is it possible she is getting the death benefit paid out over x months and when gone it will be gone?
Just saw this post. No, death benefits are paid to spouses of deceased employees, not deceased annuitants. Survivors of annuitants receive whatever benefits the retiree elected to provide at the time of his retirement. The OP is receiving a minimal annuity - enough to cover health insurance premiums - because that is what her husband elected to provide.
Normally when one retires on pension one can chose from several options. Pensioners life expectancy; pensioner and spouse or reduced once pension dies. The pay out depends on expectancy.Pensioner lifetime only pays most; then reduced survivor less and then full survivor is least. Sounds like he chose reduced spouse payment.
It is likely that the OP signed off on the pension selection her deceased husband made but did not understand what it meant. Unfortunately, that means that she agreed to it and will not be able to effect any change with or without a lawyer.
It is likely that the OP signed off on the pension selection her deceased husband made but did not understand what it meant. Unfortunately, that means that she agreed to it and will not be able to effect any change with or without a lawyer.
No, that's most likely not true. As I noted in my very first response on this thread, if the OP's husband was under the older Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), the OP would have received written notification that her husband made this choice, but would not have had any opportunity to agree or disagree with his election. It is only under the newer Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS) that spouses have the right to agree or disagree with the employee's proposed election of survivor benefits and must sign a form agreeing to accept a reduced survivor's pension. Under FERS, which is only in effect for federal employees first hired on or after January 1, 1984, she would have actually had to agree to the lesser pension and sign off on the form. Based on the OP's statement that her husband worked for the post office for 30 years and had been retired for some time, I'm pretty confident that he was under CSRS and not FERS.
My husband retired from the military. While in the military he was married. He elected, at that time, for his first wife to receive 100% of his annuity ... which translates to 55% of the annuity base amount. He paid a monthly fee for the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). He was required to pay at least 360 months toward the coverage and turn a certain age before this SBP fee was paid in full.
When his wife died, the sbp charges terminated as he no longer had a survivor to receive the benefit. His gross monthly check did not change. The net amount of the check changed because the sbp charges were no longer being deducted. Several years later we met and married and he elected for his second wife to receive 100% of his annuity... which still translates to 55% of the annuity base amount. At that time the sbp fees resumed and he was given credit for years paid in the past. However, he still has to meet a total of 360 months of payment and turn a certain age. Once he reaches that age and has paid all 360 months, the sbp charges will stop but the sbp coverage will remain active.
In effect, we are purchasing the 55% annuity for me through the sbp charges for 360 months.
One of my neighbors retired from 35 years at the post office...
He elected to take the maximum benefit and bought term life insurance to provide for his wife if he were to pass first.
As it turned out... his wife passed two years after he retired and he lived another 19 years... was able to keep his home and his lifestyle with the full retirement... it would not have been possible had he opted for the spousal benefit.
...if the OP's husband was under the older Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), the OP would have received written notification that her husband made this choice...
Actually, the rules for spousal consent are identical under both CSRS and FERS. To leave less than the maximum survivor annuity (CSRS-55%, FERS-50%) requires signed and notorized consent by the spouse. You might be thinking of Thrift Savings Plan withdrawals which for CSRS gives a spouse notification but for FERS requires spouse's consent.
Actually, the rules for spousal consent are identical under both CSRS and FERS. To leave less than the maximum survivor annuity (CSRS-55%, FERS-50%) requires signed and notorized consent by the spouse. You might be thinking of Thrift Savings Plan withdrawals which for CSRS gives a spouse notification but for FERS requires spouse's consent.
Thank you. I was pretty sure I remembered that from my CSRS retirement briefings. I do not have a spouse, so I didn't pay terribly close attention to survivor provisions, but I did recall something about the spouse having to sign off on no survivor annuity. Thanks for confirming my recollection.
Unfortunately, there is nothing the OP can do at this time. Under the federal retirement system, the retiree has several options with regard to providing a survivor's benefit. He can leave zero; a full pension, which equates to 55% of his under the old CSRS or 50% under FERS; a "minimal" pension which enables the spouse to keep health insurance benefits; or, a he can designate a specific percentage amount up to the maximum. It appears that the OP's husband chose the minimal amount (or something close). That decision is irrevocable.
Under the older CSRS, the OP would have received written notification that her husband made this choice. If he was under FERS, she would have actually had to agree to the lesser pension and sign off on the form.
When I was conducting federal retirement seminars, I used to counsel employees to provide the maximum survivor's benefit. To do otherwise was penny wise and pound foolish.
This is mostly correct, and I don't want to give you false hope but the info about written notification is backwards.
Under CSRS the written notification called spousal consent is required. If the PO is correct, there should be a Form SF2801-2 in their file(also in your husbands retirement paperwork if he kept it), that contains your signature along with a notary public(or other authorized official).
Your signature on that form indicates you agreed to him giving you a reduced spousal annuity.
Do you remember if you signed something like that? Is it at all possible that he forged your signature even if only to save time or not bother you?
If you don't remember signing look for this form or ask them to send you a copy.
If you signed it, I don't think theres anything you can do.
Still, with so much at stake, many attorney's will give you a free consultation and if you can find one familiar with federal retirement it might not hurt.
Did your husband work anywhere before the PO or ever have a second job? If so, check with Social Security to see if you are entitled to anything.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
