I wonder, instead of going to the ACA Exchange for coverage, why they didn’t look to enroll in group health coverage with their respective employers. Of course it could be that both of their employers are very, very small companies that don’t provide and aren’t required to provide any health insurance benefits or their employer’s plan’s open enrollment does not open at January 1 (some employer group health plans operate and renew on a fiscal year basis such as on July 1 or September 1 and not on a calendar year basis) or their employer’s plans really suck and would be even more expensive that what they got quoted on the exchange.
But I have to wonder why this option and explanation of why that was not an option, was left out of her letter.
Yes, the coverage was private before January 1. After, her problems came with the law, not the insurance company. She was seeking a subsidy from the government, and the 'government' was telling her that the child did not qualify.
My neighbor told me the company she works for is going to pay employees to find their own coverage this year. They couldn’t deal with all of the nuances of the law. With the $300 they are getting a month, she said she will still be out of pocket $10,000 before insurance will start paying.
Some small company plans are very expensive because the average age of the employees is high. There was a poster here on FR who was asking for advice for young daughter who working her first job and didn’t want to buy the expensive job provided insurance. I told the woman that the girl didn’t have to, that she could buy very inexpensive insurance privately.