B-166528, APR. 21, 1969
Highlights
WHERE HE WAS EMPLOYED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. BEFORE THE DATE HIS TRANSFER WAS TO HAVE BECOME EFFECTIVE. HE WAS ACCIDENTLY KILLED. KIEFFER WAS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE EXPENSES INVOLVED IN THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE. WAS NOT DIVORCED. WE HAVE HELD THAT AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE INCIDENT TO SEPARATION OR OTHERWISE DOES NOT DIVEST THE WIFE OF HER RIGHT TO MONEY DUE HER HUSBAND AT THE TIME OF HIS DEATH IN THE ABSENCE OF THE DESIGNATION OF SOME OTHER PERSON TO RECEIVE SUCH AMOUNTS UNDER 5 U.S.C. 5582. THEN THE CLAIM OF THE FATHER SHOULD BE DISALLOWED AND THE AMOUNT HELD FOR CLAIM BY THE PERSON WHO WAS DESIGNATED THE BENEFICIARY OR IF NONE FOR THE WIDOW AS THE CASE MAY BE.
B-166528, APR. 21, 1969
TO MISS KATHRYN M. LOOSE:
WE REFER TO YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 25, 1969, CONCERNING THE CLAIM OF MR. JOHN E. KIEFFER FOR PAYMENT OF THE EXPENSES INCURRED BY HIS LATE SON, RICHARD A. KIEFFER, INCIDENT TO THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE IN THE AREA OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN, WHERE HE WAS EMPLOYED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, IN ANTICIPATION OF HIS TRANSFER FROM THAT AREA TO A POSITION WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE IN WASHINGTON, D.C.
THE FACTS PRESENTED SHOW THAT RICHARD A. KIEFFER HAD RECEIVED AN OFFER OF TRANSFER TO THE POSITION IN WASHINGTON, D.C., IN EARLY OCTOBER 1968; THAT HE ORALLY ACCEPTED THAT TRANSFER; THAT HE SUBSEQUENTLY CONTRACTED FOR AND CLOSED THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE IN THE DETROIT AREA; BUT THAT, BEFORE THE DATE HIS TRANSFER WAS TO HAVE BECOME EFFECTIVE--NOVEMBER 17, 1968--HE WAS ACCIDENTLY KILLED.
ON THE BASIS OF THE FACTS PRESENTED, WE BELIEVE THAT RICHARD A. KIEFFER WAS ENTITLED TO REIMBURSEMENT OF THE EXPENSES INVOLVED IN THE SALE OF HIS RESIDENCE. THEREFORE, THE AMOUNT OTHERWISE DUE INCIDENT TO THE SALE OF THE RESIDENCE MAY PROPERLY BE PAID TO THE RIGHTFUL BENEFICIARY OF MONEY DUE THE DECEASED EMPLOYEE AS PROVIDED FOR IN 5 U.S.C. 5581-5583. SEE ESPECIALLY 5 U.S.C. 5581 (2) (B).
THE CLAIMANT HAS FURNISHED EVIDENCE OF THE FACT THAT THE DECEASED, ALTHOUGH SEPARATED FROM HIS WIFE, WAS NOT DIVORCED. WE HAVE HELD THAT AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE INCIDENT TO SEPARATION OR OTHERWISE DOES NOT DIVEST THE WIFE OF HER RIGHT TO MONEY DUE HER HUSBAND AT THE TIME OF HIS DEATH IN THE ABSENCE OF THE DESIGNATION OF SOME OTHER PERSON TO RECEIVE SUCH AMOUNTS UNDER 5 U.S.C. 5582. B 147358, JANUARY 8, 1962, COPY ENCLOSED. IN VIEW THEREOF, INFORMATION SHOULD BE OBTAINED FROM THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE AS TO WHETHER THE DECEDENT HAD PROPERLY DESIGNATED HIS FATHER AS HIS BENEFICIARY TO RECEIVE AMOUNTS DUE HIM FROM THE UNITED STATES UPON HIS DEATH. IF NOT, THEN THE CLAIM OF THE FATHER SHOULD BE DISALLOWED AND THE AMOUNT HELD FOR CLAIM BY THE PERSON WHO WAS DESIGNATED THE BENEFICIARY OR IF NONE FOR THE WIDOW AS THE CASE MAY BE.