Bettendorf woman says state wants late veterans assets


Barb Ickes

Sarah Miller received a letter from the state of Iowa asking for $277,186.96 to pay medical expenses left by her long-time companion, Vietnam veteran Roger Lennon. They shared ownership in the rental home in the background that helped pay his expenses at a veterans facility in Marshalltown, Iowa. (Jeff Cook/Quad-City Times)


Woman faces hefty bill for veteran's care
Woman faces hefty bill for veteran's care
Sarah Miller is dealing with a $277,000 bill for the care of her longtime partner at a local veteran's hospital.



Two tours in Vietnam.

A Purple Heart.

A welding accident.

A wheelchair.

Death at 61.

A bill for $277,186.96.

Two months after Roger Lennon died, the woman who took care of him for more than a dozen years got a bill in the mail. The state of Iowa said the Bettendorf veteran owes almost $300,000 for the medical care he received in the state-run veterans home.

"I called them and said, 'Is this a joke?'" Sarah Miller said. "Who has that kind of money? And I was with Roger every time he was signed into the Iowa Veterans Home in Marshalltown. They never said anything about billing him after he passed."

The spokesman for the Iowa Department of Human Services, which runs Medicaid for the state, said Lennon should have known the state would pursue any remaining assets after his death.

"Everybody who gets Medicaid is told this is a government program for which we will be expecting repayment," DHS spokesman Roger Munns said. "It's not fair for taxpayers - you and me - to pay if there are assets.

"It's not draconian. It's not meant to be cruel."

But that's not how Miller sees it.

'He went through hell'

Roger Lennon was shot in Vietnam.

In 1990, he was badly injured in a welding explosion in Bettendorf. After brain surgery, his ability to move changed dramatically. Most of the time, he was in a wheelchair.

"He could walk some with a quad cane, but he needed care," said Miller, his companion of 20 years. "He went through hell."

When he was awarded a modest settlement from the explosion, Lennon invested part of it. He and Miller put their money together to buy two rental properties, using the income as a retirement investment.

When Lennon lived - off and on - at the Veterans Home in Marshalltown, whatever money he made went to the state. He turned over his half of the rental income, $350, along with his veteran's benefits to the home in Marshalltown.

Meanwhile, Miller took care of the two properties they owned together. Now, she said, the state is demanding half of their value after Lennon's death on March 31.

"For the seven years Roger was in and out of Marshalltown, the houses were my expense," she said. "I paid the property taxes, put in the septic system the county required a few years ago, and I put in a new furnace in one.

"None of those expenses, including the taxes, are necessary expenses, according to the state. The only so-called legitimate expense was the funeral. They want half the value of the houses. It doesn't matter how much I saved the state for the 13 years I took care of him."

One of the homes is valued at $42,920, she said, and the other is worth about $35,000. Both are in Bettendorf.

The letter from DHS, indicating a debt of $277,186.96 begins, "We have been informed of the death of the above person, and we wish to express our sincere condolences."

The third paragraph, highlighted in bold, states, "This debt must be, and can only be, paid from anything that the individual owned or had an interest in at the time of death."

Does she owe, or doesn't she?

Munns said Miller "misinterpreted" letters from and phone calls with state officials.

"It's obvious that the woman has misunderstood the state's claim," he said last week. "There was no instruction, for example, for her to sell her duplexes."

Neither of the homes is a duplex.

Miller said she called the phone number on a letter from DHS and was transferred to an attorney for the state.

"He's the one who told me I couldn't use property taxes as a legitimate deduction," she said. "He didn't really say I had to sell the properties, but I have to give them half of what the properties are worth.

"I don't have that kind of cash available. It's not that much, but I don't have it. How could you have that kind of cash laying around?"

Munns said the state will regard Miller as Lennon's widow, classifying her as his common-law wife because of the number of years they spent together.

"She'll be contacted by the state (asset) recovery people," he said. "She's scheduled to be called sometime next week. They'll determine what her case will be."

But Miller said the state officials she has talked to already have told her what will happen: She will be required to come up with about $40,000 to pay for a veteran's health care that the veteran believed was a benefit he had earned.

"I was told to send them the money next week," Miller said. "People should know what the state is doing. Poor Roger was so proud that he was a veteran, and the veterans were taking care of him. He was very proud of his military service. People should be outraged."


http://www.qctimes.com/news/local/article_421e3cf6-6900-11de-b675-001cc4c002e0.html

I do believe it's true that when you are on Medicaid, your assets are liquidated prior to the government taking over your care and expenses.  If only her name had been on the deeds they probably couldn't be touched.  She may have to sell one of the properties, but can continue to live in the other. I imagine a lien will remain on the property and it will become the government's when she passes on.  Just my guess.

 

G-O-V-E-R-N-M-E-N-T....That's the key word and should be a clue as to the problem!

The language of priorities is the religion of Socialism.....Aneurin Bevan

G-O-V-E-R-N-M-E-N-T....That's the key word and should be a clue as to the problem!

Are you saying a private healthcare provider wouldn't have sought payment?

I'm not up on the rules, but my guess is that there's some maximum threshold of assets one can have and still be eligible for Medicaid, but in the case of a primary residence they'll defer it while you still live ...

So are you saying that the government should just provide free healthcare regardless of what your assets are and never seek to recoup any of the cost?

So are you saying that the government should just provide free healthcare regardless of what your assets are and never seek to recoup any of the cost



for a Veteran who risked his life in protection of our liberty?

probably the only exception....
but if you feel that way...when socialized medicine takes effect....do you believe all assets should be seized until the poor have repaid their medical costs provided by the government?

for a Veteran who risked his life in protection of our liberty?
probably the only exception....

So anyone who has ever served in the military should receive unlimited free healthcare - even for non-combat related health issues - regardless of what assets they own? Have you thought about what this major new entitlement program would cost?


but if you feel that way...when socialized medicine takes effect....do you believe all assets should be seized until the poor have repaid their medical costs provided by the government?

I'm not for driving people into bankruptcy, but I'm also not for letting people shield an arbitrarily large amount of assets whilst receiving government-funded healthcare.

Is the State of Iowa one of the few that still recognize "Common Law Marriage?" Or are they just pulling this one out of their hat and hanging the lady? If the State of Iowa does not recognize "common law" for any other purpose, then she has a case against them ... and a good one, I might add.

Arizona recognizes common law and it took us several years and a lot of outlay by the attorney on behalf of the widow to prove common law marriage. By the time we were through, there wasn't a great deal left of the Estate (she had been living on it during the entire battle) and the attorney was in the hole by several 10's of thousands of dollars in fees and costs. The widow received several policies that had been held in abeyance since the death of her husband and the attorney didn't take a dime! But the point is ... Arizona recognizes common law marriage and it took us years to prove the issue ... if Iowa doesn't recognize common law marriage on a routine basis, then the State doesn't have a leg to stand on! If they do recognize common law marriage on a routine basis, then there is still a court battle to be had as to (a) whether it was a common law marriage and (b) whether the State, if it is not a common law marriage, has the right to the assets.





Take care.
Blessed Be.
Alice

"Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed frequently and for the same reason." From the movie, "Man of the Year"

Alice: Here's what I found at FindLaw:

Iowa. A common law marriage is established in Iowa by the parties' intent and agreement to be married, their continuous cohabitation, and their public declarations that they are husband and wife.

Iowa. A common law marriage is established in Iowa by the parties' intent and agreement to be married, their continuous cohabitation, and their public declarations that they are husband and wife.

   Sounds like Texas.  I went through this when involved in settling the estate of an old friend.  They cohabitated, but many witnesses were ready and willing to state that he *never* referred to her as his wife.  Along with his meticulous seperation of their finances, living expenses, etc. assorted lawyers on both sides agreed that the woman had no chance to go with common law.

gus.

 

I don't believe they will ask her to sell anything to satisfy his debt.  Their only intent is to put their name on the list of debtors in the eventuality of her either dying or selling the assets.  It is a fact that you have to pay debts like this back if you have assets.  That's how life is....now let's all jump on that government health care program so we can all be like her...yay! 

BTW - private insurance can't take your stuff.  They can sue you for the money you owe them...they can put it on your credit report...but they can't take YOUR STUFF., 

~~life isn't about how to survive the storm but how to dance in the rain~~

When the character of a man is not clear to you, look at his friends.
Japanese Proverb

BTW - private insurance can't take your stuff. They can sue you for the money you owe them...they can put it on your credit report...but they can't take YOUR STUFF.,

Ummm ... I don't know about you, but every insurance I've ever had took their money up front. If you don't pay your premium, you simply aren't insured. So I'm not sure what "they can't take your stuff" is supposed to mean.